Substitutions

[evilarsenal]

In ladder, when someone dc's, there should be a vote to randomly pick (or those who are still active, don't know how hard that is for programmers) to take the 12th spot!

This would be great.... thanks....

[Woofy]

That seems like it would be tough, since they would need to be the same rating, and then another problem in figuring out how ratings would be effected for players who come into play in different circumstances (player jumps in on team losing 5-0, or winning). Sounds cool though!

[Fartface]

5v5 games would be infinitely better than this.

[Aki1024]

Another solution that ties up more players is starting the game with a sub per team. Alas, these changes are not simple changes.

[evilarsenal]

Originally Posted by Fartface

5v5 games would be infinitely better than this.

what if someone disconnected? my point isnt about 6v6...gg you lost

a vote should be allowed, just like custom_stop, but a random person is taken depending on who said yes in the vote, and everyone can vote, but the people playing are automatically excluded

[Fartface]

There are thousands of reasons why this could never work but I'll just list a few...

1) Person who disconnects comes back, sees his place is taken by someone else and loses points without being able to play
2) random selection chooses someone to play who is not ready or willing to do so, and then their rating is affected even if they don't play
3) say its 5-2 or the like, and the team with 2 gets their spec substitute without the spec wanting to do so, and then the spec is pretty much locked in to losing points no matter what they do (same goes for winning points)

It's a creative idea to be sure but quite frankly 5v5 games will always be better :]

[Slender]

Fart is right but what Aki suggested could (slightly) work, as long as the sub who joins in, in case of, gets the same rating, it seems like a viable option.

[Aki1024]

Originally Posted by Fartface

1) Person who disconnects comes back, sees his place is taken by someone else and loses points without being able to play

odf. The leaver's spot probably can't be taken for about a minute to give them time to return. Another option is to allow the original to return to their team. This is dangerous in TBD for how the respawn system works. imo, if they were gone for over a minute, their spot is gone.

Originally Posted by Fartface

2) random selection chooses someone to play who is not ready or willing to do so, and then their rating is affected even if they don't play

A system to do this could choose to only pick someone who said "yes" to the sub request vote. It could even ignore the "by x%" and still run when only 1 person said yes. (note that custom_stop could this custom group too, counting only players in the game. Just needs to be implemented.)

Originally Posted by Fartface

3) say its 5-2 or the like, and the team with 2 gets their spec substitute without the spec wanting to do so, and then the spec is pretty much locked in to losing points no matter what they do (same goes for winning points)

This is a two part problem. The first, they didn't want to join is handled in #2's solution. The second is motivation to join a losing game.

Perhaps it is (highScore-TotalScore)/(lowScore-TotalScore) is the base percent change upon winning if the higher score is the team you are joining, and percent change upon losing if the lower score. Then the other % change is the 1-Other%. For example, (5-6)/(2-6) = 25% behind team's lose % change and ahead team's win % change, and 1-(5-6)/(2-6) = 75% ahead team's lose change % and behind team's win % change. Again, these values could be halved.

A refute point may focus on if the system uses the new person's rating or the old person's rating. The solution toward this needs to focus on the rating difference of the two players, even to the point that the system may not allow the sub if their points is too much change (as the system wouldn't have allowed the game to start in such a scenario).

This almost makes me think /vote surrender should be allowed, where the server only counts votes from the vote starting side.

Originally Posted by Fartface

It's a creative idea to be sure but quite frankly 5v5 games will always be better :]

I agree that keeping 5v5 is easier, and with how quick the action is for the game, its harder to make such votes fit into game play.

Originally Posted by Fartface

There are thousands of reasons why this could never work but I'll just list a few...

I like solving problems. Either list more or refute my claims. ^.^

Originally Posted by SlenderMan

Fart is right but what Aki suggested could (slightly) work, as long as the sub who joins in, in case of, gets the same rating, it seems like a viable option.

What I dislike about the idea is being forced to watch a game that I likely won't get to play in. wtb function to choose if you are willing to be a sub or not >D more scope creep gogogo >.>

[evilarsenal]

yea i hope this can be implemented, although the competitive scene isn't getting much change, just like altitude... which is why it is dying ;[

no innovation :[, or lack of greater innovations or the people to invest their time

[Ingbo]

Originally Posted by evilarsenal

yea i hope this can be implemented, although the competitive scene isn't getting much change, just like altitude... which is why it is dying ;[

no innovation :[, or lack of greater innovations or the people to invest their time

every game has a lifespan doesnt matter how much they invent or how much they keep up with balance, just the way the gaming industry is setup. just like i grew tired of broodwar eventually i also grew tired of altitude, has nothing to do with the game, but after playing x1000 hours its just not as interesting anymore.