Introducing: The Altitude Ladder

[Esoteric]

Oh, and plea for new maps aside, explodets still could probably use a small nerf. Rocket explosion radius and mine knockback might be reasonable places to look.

[nobodyhome]

I think now the main problem is in thermo, who was already somewhat imba before the patch (but overshadowed by remote) but then got an additional buff.

[Evan20000]

I think part of the reason maps like Asteroids are so well liked is that every plane/perk is viable on them. That, and the nice background.

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by Evan20000

I think part of the reason maps like Asteroids are so well liked is that every plane/perk is viable on them. That, and the nice background.

I think Asteroids is so well liked because Mirandas can sit back in their base and shoot people through the cracks in the rocks thereby eliminating the need to even expose themselves for even the mircosecond it usually takes to pop out shoot and reverse.

[Pieface]

I for one am certainly looking forward to a day when teams are balanced automatically and the map is chosen randomly so we get more game variety. Hopefully such a day will appear sooner rather than later *hint hint*.

[nobodyhome]

Originally Posted by Pieface

I for one am certainly looking forward to a day when teams are balanced automatically and the map is chosen randomly so we get more game variety. Hopefully such a day will appear sooner rather than later *hint hint*.

Lemme reiterate a point I made in another thread that I feels repeating as very few people understand this yet.

Originally Posted by nobodyhome

Let me reiterate once again that we have absolutely zero control over what happens in the game, all we do is examine the logs and then report the results. Information flows entirely from the game to the ladder, not at all the other way around.

Thus under the current system it's impossible to control absolutely anything that happens in game, whether it be balancing or map picking.

[Pieface]

Yeah, I realize that you guys don't have control over what goes on in-game. I was instead referring to a comment Maimer made at some point saying that you guys were talking to the devs about one day possibly adding a couple of server commands related to team balance and random map-selection.

It's certainly something to hope for, even if it takes a while to ever become reality.

[nesnl]

I like that nobodyhome reiterated a quote in which he was reiterating. That made my day.

[nobodyhome]

Go on, why don't someone else ask me if we can autobalance in game. Then I can reiterate my reiteration of the first reiteration. I dare you.

[[Y]]

You mean the /vote balanceteams function?

[Evan20000]

Originally Posted by nobodyhome

Thus under the current system it's impossible to control absolutely anything that happens in game, whether it be balancing or map picking.

Nobo, you should take this post, make it it's own thread and sticky it :P

[Torrent]

i've only had one game and im #79

[Sarah Palin]

Check it out, I'm now officially the worst player in Alti:

http://www.altitudeladder.net/ladder.php?sort=rank_d

from #10 to #328 in just five days! I'd like to thank my coach, and Jesus, and Bill Belicheat, and especially Mav for losing every game we play together. : D

[Evan20000]

I'm no far behind you. I don't care so much about my rank as getting some decent competative games in though.

[Sarah Palin]

Interestin stats:

"ladder A" (the official ladder): The points of the top twenty five players on the ladder by rank add up to 46470.

"ladder B": The points of the top twenty five players with the highest win percentages (who have played at least 10 games) add up to 45070.

"ladder C": The points of the top twenty five players with the most wins add up to 45027.

I was looking for some kind of correlation (specifically I suspected a correlation between A and C) but it's difficult to detect anything because B and C are so close together... which, when you think about it, seems to be more of a coincidence than anything - there's no reason for it to necessarily be so. If for example a group of very mediocre players (1500 rank) played hundreds of games they would shoot to the top of ladder C, yet bring down its point total.

If B and C ever diverge significantly it will be interesting to see if A stays closer to B (i.e., the ladder rewards high win %) or C (i.e., it rewards more games played).

[DiogenesDog]

From ELO ladders I've seen in the past, A & C are always going to be close together. As long as you're a winning player overall, playing lots of games is always going to keep you ahead. You'll just keep creeping forward, slowly but surely.

[Varonth]

Here are some matchvideos of the altitude ladder:

Laddermatch Jan-31-10 22:14
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:07 Part 1
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:07 Part 2
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:28 Part 1
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:28 Part 2

[wolf'j'max]

Originally Posted by Varonth

Here they are, the first matchvideos of the altitude ladder:

Laddermatch Jan-31-10 22:14
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:07 Part 1
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:07 Part 2
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:28 Part 1
Laddermatch Jan-31-10 23:28 Part 2

go here and watch the first 6 ladder matches O_o

[Varonth]

Originally Posted by wolf'j'max

go here and watch the first 6 ladder matches O_o

K, didn't know that.

[ufo]

Great games, u should definitely put them to some crazy German jamz or something, I've heard nothing but gold outta your country.

On a side note, I'm still procrastinating the thing i was supposed to do last night. PROCRASTINATRON POWERS ON!

[eth]

Very cool stuff man, watching now.

PROCRASTINATION POWERS ON!

e: man that first match was sick.. UFO ftw @_@

[Shiro]

Originally Posted by wolf'j'max

go here and watch the first 6 ladder matches O_o

maybe you should put it on capturemode and don't "chase" the people?

[nesnl]

The changelog for the Altitude Ladder has been updated. Please review it to familiarize yourself with the changes.

Added features: Website based autobalance based on player ratings, tracking of player diconnects from ladder games.

[Varonth]

Here are two new matches:

Laddermatch Feb-01-10 21:16
Laddermatch Feb-01-10 21:25 Part 1
Laddermatch Feb-01-10 21:25 Part 2

[nach0king]

I love how the ladder website says this:

The ladder passed 100 active players sometime last night. It is great to see people getting involved and enjoying the ladder. Make sure to let your friends know about the ladder so that the ladder will continue to grow.

... even though if you're not *on* the ladder you won't get picked for a team, no matter how long you've sat and specced. People who come in five seconds before picking start get selected instead.

It's natural that it was going to work out this way, so I'm not surprised, but the hypocrisy on the website about getting people involved to come and join in only to show up and not be allowed to play is pretty sickening.

[nobodyhome]

Originally Posted by nach0king

I love how the ladder website says this:



... even though if you're not *on* the ladder you won't get picked for a team, no matter how long you've sat and specced. People who come in five seconds before picking start get selected instead.

It's natural that it was going to work out this way, so I'm not surprised, but the hypocrisy on the website about getting people involved to come and join in only to show up and not be allowed to play is pretty sickening.

IMO they should just password the website and this thread as well, rather than getting peoples' hopes up, because if your face doesn't fit and you're not already on the ladder there is absolutely no point in trying to take part.

??

Not sure who you're trying to criticize here. The words on the website are representative of the opinions of the ladder creators (me, eth, and Maimer). Personally, whenever I see that lesser-skilled players have been sitting in the game for a long time I try to include them in the next game (by asking them to be captain, for example). I've seen other people try to include unknown players in their games too sometimes.

But our words aren't representative of the ladder population at large. We can't force people to include lesser-skilled players in their teams, especially when points are at stake. The ladder creators (the same ones who wrote the words you've quoted) have done everything in our power to try to make the ladder inclusive for everyone, including getting out an autobalance feature out within TWO WEEKS of the ladder's inception, which helps because then people don't have to worry about noobs bringing down their team because they know their team is ratings-balanced with the other team. It's not "hypocrisy" that when we say that the ladder is meant for everyone, we are honestly trying to make it to be.

But short of banning people for not including noobs (which we won't do), there is nothing else that we can do about the problem (perhaps you have some ideas to suggest). The best thing you can do to get yourself some play time is to go to some other servers and grab a group of 10 like-skilled players in which you can play ladder games amongst yourselves. There is certainly room to do so--there are 3 ladder servers and only 1-2 of them are full at any given time.

[eth]

Originally Posted by nach0king

I love how the ladder website says this:



... even though if you're not *on* the ladder you won't get picked for a team, no matter how long you've sat and specced. People who come in five seconds before picking start get selected instead.

It's natural that it was going to work out this way, so I'm not surprised, but the hypocrisy on the website about getting people involved to come and join in only to show up and not be allowed to play is pretty sickening.

IMO they should just password the website and this thread as well, rather than getting peoples' hopes up, because if your face doesn't fit and you're not already on the ladder there is absolutely no point in trying to take part.

I find it pretty absurd that you get pissed over that as "hypocrisy". We were proud to have made something that 100 players had taken part in, that's why we wrote it. Sorry, we can't IN ANY WAY control how players make their games, that's up to you players. Have your friends start a game with you or whatever, or use the autobalance feature we just made - 10 people join teams, autobalance according to website and play. One of the reasons we made autobalance in the first place was that everyone could play on reasonably balanced teams, not only those who are exceptionally skilled / well-known.

I seriously have no idea why you think we're some kinda sick organization trying to make a profit or whatever, what we want is for everyone to have fun on our ladder. If you're not having fun, leave us some suggestions for improvement and we will do our best, instead of jumping at our throats for a newspost, that isn't gonna get anybody anywhere.

[nach0king]

Well, it's got me a reply, so it's clearly a start.

As I said in my post, it is obvious that any kind of competitive ladder is going to work out this way - the best players will club together to get the best results. That is natural. But it is completely and totally incompatible with an idea that this ladder should grow.

The only way I can currently get involved is when there are 10, maybe 11 players looking for a game. Any more than that and people go into teams of well-known.

Suggestions for improvement? I don't know. I'm not a game designer. I do know that inviting new players to come to a tournament that is not designed for new players is hypocritical, though. If you agree, I'm sure you'll think of something. If you disagree, fair enough.

[nobodyhome]

Originally Posted by nach0king

Suggestions for improvement? I don't know. I'm not a game designer. I do know that inviting new players to come to a tournament that is not designed for new players is hypocritical, though. If you agree, I'm sure you'll think of something. If you disagree, fair enough.

It's not hypocritical. We want it to be for everyone, new players included. New players can simply play amongst themselves on the ladder if people tend to exclude them.

I'm not a game designer either (do I look like lam or karl to you?). I just wrote this ladder out of my own free time for the enjoyment of others. Not sure why you need to be a game designer to try to improve what is essentially a SOCIAL TENDENCIES problem rather than a game problem.

[nach0king]

Well, as I have no suggestions for improvement, I suppose my part in this conversation is over. Best of luck.

[eth]

You didn't seem to read our responses though. We're not game designers either. We're altitude fans who wanted a to make a ladder, this is why the first rating algorithm was extremely flawed, and why we didn't have autobalance in at launch. So, helping out with suggestions has nothing to do with being a "game designer". It's about being constructive.

Ladder isn't supposed to be a hard-core tournament, but as you say yourself people want the best chance of winning and thus unheard-of players are unlikely to get a spot. As I wrote in my post(and you would know this if you had bothered to read it), we implemented autobalance partly because of this. The matches I played with autobalance on yesterday turned out to be fairly great, with some skilled players and some who used reverse dumb-bombs. But it was fairly fun. I really suggest you try to get people to use the autobalance feature, I bet it'll increase your odds of playing drastically.

As for your continued "hypocrisy", we invite you to join a ladder. We don't try to sell you some kinda hair-gel that puts you in debt to your knees. Seriously, the hell is with that.

[nach0king]

I did read it. I have no response to make. Get over it.

[nobodyhome]

I've also just noticed that you went ahead and got to play a ladder game just now. Congratulations, the ladder is officially for everyone.

[nach0king]

Problem solved, then!

[Triped]

...

Out of curiosity, what happens to rankings if set A of players never plays with set B of players, and set B is much worse? Would their best player rank as high as A's best player, roughly?

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by Triped

...

Out of curiosity, what happens to rankings if set A of players never plays with set B of players, and set B is much worse? Would their best player rank as high as A's best player, roughly?

Not really sure what you are getting at, but in situations like this there is constant cross over between who plays who. This means that although I may never play you specifically, I will most likely play a lot of the same people that you play. This means that the ratings of you and I, while we have never directly faced each other, should skill somewhat represent our skill as the ratings are based off the same population of people.

To Nacho King, we are looking for ways to circumvent this exact issue in the future. We know that this problem exists and have been thinking of ways around it. We may put in a system that allows for everyone who wants to play to enter into a "pool" of potential players on the server. Then a function would be executed that would balance the teams and assign spectators based on wait time. This way, no one could be excluded. Let me know if you like this idea.

[nach0king]

Originally Posted by nesnl

To Nacho King, we are looking for ways to circumvent this exact issue in the future. We know that this problem exists and have been thinking of ways around it. We may put in a system that allows for everyone who wants to play to enter into a "pool" of potential players on the server. Then a function would be executed that would balance the teams and assign spectators based on wait time. This way, no one could be excluded. Let me know if you like this idea.

I think that is a brilliant idea, as I think the real barrier to entry here is wait time. Some doylum above indicated that because I had played one ladder match there was no issue here; he presumably didn't know how long I'd waited for it.

I would love to see such a feature introduced, if only on one or two of the ladder servers.

Thank you for your response.

[eth]

Even a thank you can be a **** you.

Impressive!

[andy]

first: thank you for all your tough work.
second: this ladder thing is amazing!
third: keep it up, your improving it every day, its awesome.

if you need help with servers im GMT+1 and available for moderating your servers..

[Jayfourke]

I'd like to make a point about people from the ladder jumping in to other servers and advertising/shouting/spamming/frothing at the mouth to join their precious ladder games.

Quit it, it's bloody annoying. Earlier, Andy invaded a perfectly good match in official #3, dragged a bunch of players, and totally ruined the fun of the ongoing game.

Keep your soliciting to PMs, please (they're easier to ignore). I'll play ladder as and when I damn well please, not just to make up numbers.

tyvm, kthxbai.