Season Over

[VAN1SH1NG]

The current season will end on March 1, which is also likely the last day for regular season matches in SL 11. Next season, at least ball, should begin on or before March 9. And moving forward there will likely only be seasons for ball. Other modes are not played enough to regularly reset ratings. If there are seasons for other modes they will be very long.

Obviously timing is not great with some players wanting to practice in ladder before SL playoffs. But I want to get the new season started before SL is over. I will have ladder running between end of this season and start of next either using current code or testing the new code. So hopefully enough will still get online to play some ladder or capts even if it won't count for anything.

Achievements will be reset, old data will not be saved. I might list the top few players somewhere on the website.

Unless I am forgetting something the only major changes planned for next season are subs, having no max ping servers with parser deciding when to force laggers to spec, and return of other modes (DB, TDM, 1DM, 1DE). There will be several smaller changes which I will list out later.

[Fartface]

Originally Posted by VAN1SH1NG

Achievements will be reset

Huh? Walt by some feat of nature has gotten >3500 achievement points and you're just gonna take them away from him?

[VAN1SH1NG]

I've mentioned multiple times before that I plan to reset achievements at end of beta. I have also not decided if achievements will be per season or permanent coming out of beta. Most likely the achievement score will be permanent although many achievements can be re-earned each season.

I have hardly touched the achievement system since first adding it. I am hoping to have the time to more fully support it starting with next season (listed on player pages, adding additional achievements throughout season, etc).

Probably the most that will happen with beta achievements is, when awards are added to player pages, give an award if the player was #1, #2, or #3 in achievement points during beta.

[sunshineduck]

how are subs going to work

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[VAN1SH1NG]

I am really not sure, its certainly messy to implement. But we really need to support subs with as many 5v5s as we have. If you have ideas post them.

The only thing I know for sure is subs will have to be obviously need to be very close in rating. Incoming subs might be rated by +/-, idk. Like if they come in and lose but have positive +/-, lose no or hardly any points. If they come in on team losing badly likely full points if win and lose only a few points if loss.

Player subbed out likely rated based on score when leaving. If losing by 2+ goals, full point loss, losing by 0 or tied = lose half points. Winning by 1 half, 2 full. Haven't put much thought into it yet.

One of the trickiest aspects is what to do if d/c player comes back. They'd get at least 20 seconds to rejoin, maybe closer to 45 by the time a sub is finished being chosen.

edit: err not sure what I was thinking when I wrote this. Leavers on winning teams will get 0 points unless it is a blowout, probably will require team to be up at least 3 points and only give them half points at most. Their team will have to go on to win for them to get the half points though.

[JWhatever]

People go afk when they are not playing. What happens if you pick an afk player as the sub? You potentially have to finish the game as a 5v5.
Would you punish that guy for being afk?

Originally Posted by VAN1SH1NG

...subs will have to be obviously need to be very close in rating.

What if that isn't possible? Everyone in game are rated 1500, there's only one spec and they are rated 3000. Or even worse (in a "normal" game), have the worst player in server disconnect, make the highest rated player step in. Of course +/- points would have to be adjusted accordingly but is it worth it to throw the balance out of the window for the sake of not having 5v5?

What you could do is cycle through every player in order. Type /1 to sub in etc.
The worst out, best in would still be plausible.


You could define a sub at the start of the game, just like we do in league games. Unless you want tactical subbings, you should make the lowest rated player of the team as the sub. This so that there wouldn't be any incentive to sub yourself out for a better player thus getting an advantage.

-J

[Aki1024]

Originally Posted by JWhatever

What happens if you pick an afk player as the sub? You potentially have to finish the game as a 5v5.
Would you punish that guy for being afk?

Every suggested system for sub that I have seen was a opt-in for the person to sub in. Only those who say they are up for joining as it is needed are in the selectable pool.

[VAN1SH1NG]

Yes, I meant when I said the subs must be very close in rating. If there are no acceptable subs no sub occurs. I'm not going to let game balance be changed significantly because of a sub.

I might not actually base it on the players rating, but on the total team ratings. Not much difference either way for ball or tbd since team ratings are always very close.

I was thinking I'd just server whisper all suitable candidates and first one to accept would be put in. I could possibly stagger it starting with the closest rated player. Server would ask the closest and then a few seconds later ask the next closest in rating. But it would still only ask those close enough in rating to be a valid sub.

[leggomyeggo]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[REDDRAGON]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[shmo55]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[Clapon]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[Mango777]

Is Shmo pro?

[leggomyeggo]

Originally Posted by Mango777

Is Shmo pro?

[Carlos98]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

[VAN1SH1NG]

I might start the season without a password which obviously will require new players to accept rules before being able to play. Certainly worried about new player spam, but I'd like to give it a try.

Alternatively I could auto move anyone who has not accepted rules to a server which lists the server rules. This would mean they would have to read and accept rules before being able to even watch ladder. Or I might only auto move players who have not accepted rules if clan vs clan is in progress and allow them to watch ladder.

[Amara]

Originally Posted by sunshineduck

also starting petition to make the password shmoispro

disregard everything, sign petition anyways

[Mango777]

How do people sign so neatly??? MS paint? GIMP?? Photoshop???

[Kafka]

Originally Posted by Mango777

How do people sign so neatly??? MS paint? GIMP?? Photoshop???

Since Amara is an artist, I'm guessing she has a Wacom tablet. All the others look like MS Paint productions.

[Bluth Frozen Bananas]

I like the idea of a no password period. Honestly, we could use more regular ladder players, and honestly, the only way they are going to get much better is (IMO) playing with the pros. People need to be challenged or they get lazy, and dojo is only up so often (not that its quality is strictly consistent in the first place, but it's better than ball_football).

Also, if lam could come up with a way to get alty up on the steam front page, even for a day or so, that would also help increase the user base a lot.

And shmoispro petition makes me laugh. Real big throwback to before I took a multi-year break

Question: will the rating change algorithm change at all? I've always felt the weight was a little too heavy on the first 5 games, especially if everyone starts a ladder season at once, and was wondering if margin-of-victory is or could be taken into account

[wolf'j'max]

Originally Posted by Amara

disregard everything, sign petition anyways

[autograph etc etc]

Are you Dutch?

[VAN1SH1NG]

Last day of the season! Season will end at midnight EST unless ladder is still going. I won't cut off ladder so if somehow it were to go all night again we could have additional another day

Assuming ladder does end today the old parser will be running for most or all of this week using the ratings from the end of the season. The points won't count towards anything though.

Feel so far behind on new parser but as soon as I can get the new team management code done everything else should be very easy. In the current parser everything for stats is based on having set tournament teams. The new parser supports players joining the game at any time. Mostly tricky for pubs since tournament only starts when the game is full and stops whenever it is no longer full. Otherwise bots would never spawn to balance teams.

Hopefully the new parser will be far enough along by the end of the week to start testing it.

[Mango777]

Thank you Vanishing for trying your best to keep ladder alive Without ladder, Altitude would be in my recycling bin! jk , why would I do that to alti -but without Altitude ladder Altitude would be so much more boring, so thank you for all you've done, and I wish you good luck in setting up a new season of ALITITUDELADDER!

[Fartface]

Mango have u ever played ladder?

[Mango777]

Duh, of course. I can't climb it though, I'm a mango.
http://altituderank.com/players/?id=...7-75be7f8a9a71

[VAN1SH1NG]

Season is over. Fart finished 1st in ball ladder. Ladder will be running most or all of the time between now and next season using the current database. However you won't be able to earn any points.

Not really any surprise, but I won't be able to get the new season started by March 9. I will have the new parser running all of that week though and be adding features daily. Then the new season will start sometime the following week after everything is finished and seems stable.

Hopefully will have the new parser up this week for some testing too.

Some of you have been asking about rules between now and next season. Because SL playoffs are starting Sunday I want to maintain a relatively competitive level of play. To do so I need to enforce most of the rules. The only rules not in effect during this time are one account/smurfing and spec chat. Constant typing and not spawning or circling will still be bannable, but you can talk while playing more than usual if you want.

[Dougie]

Thanks Van, looking forward to the new season already!

Grats to Fart for no.1!

[Brutal]

Thanks Vanishing for everything you do to help the Altitude Community! And congrats to Fart!

[VAN1SH1NG]

Update...

As much as I'd like to start using the new parser, I do not see much reason to bother trying to run any open tests on it yet. I have been able to get by quite well doing testing on my own so haven't needed additional help yet.

It is coming along nicely and I may or may not do open testing later this week. The new season should still start by the middle of next week following a couple days of testing the fully functional new parser.

If you have any achievement suggestions please post them in the old thread (http://altitudegame.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9460) or PM me. I will look back through the suggestions that were made previously.

[Bluth Frozen Bananas]

Vanishing: Where's the location for the current ratings algorithm? I can't seem to track it down...

[VAN1SH1NG]

I'm not sure and am not going to waste time looking for it.

Base rating awarded is 12. You get a bonus multiplier applied to points during first 10 games. After this you get additional points depending on how far your win % over last 40 games is from 50%. This is to help players who don't play as frequently have a chance to do well in ladder. There is some change from comparing total team ratings as well but it generally has little affect on larger teams including TBD and Ball as the team ratings should always be very close. It will be much more noticeable during the upcoming season with modes with as small as 2 players per team are added back to ladder.

I don't plan to change it too much except for needing to support players being subbed in and out of games. The bonus point gain while playing your first games of the season also needs to be improved.

Bombers & Explodets

I still am very interested in giving a handicap to players who primarily use bomber or explodet. Its not fair that they have no realistic chance to finish a season near the top. Heavies simply can't carry teams as much as lights are especially have a tough time when they don't have any top rated lights on their team.

I may have been a bit more hesitant in adding a handicap since I personally play explodet most of the time. Maybe I will add a handicap but not have it apply to myself. Feels a bit awkward to apply a handicap that would boost my own rating.

High Rated Players on Low Rated Teams

It becomes incredibly difficult for high rated players to carry terrible teams. I may also increase point game and reduce point loss in games for very high rated players playing on teams where no teammate is anywhere close to their rating. So like a 2500 player with the next highest teammate being 1200 might get some help.

[BrandonL]

About the handicaps:
There are quite a lot of games with 2/3 bombers recently. When you will put a handicap on them, the ammount of bombers might get even bigger. Also I personally think a bomber can possibly carry pretty good
About the whale: Why wouldn't it affect you? I mean, for you the chances of carrying as whale is as high as any other whale

[Fartface]

Originally Posted by VAN1SH1NG

High Rated Players on Low Rated Teams

It becomes incredibly difficult for high rated players to carry terrible teams. I may also increase point game and reduce point loss in games for very high rated players playing on teams where no teammate is anywhere close to their rating. So like a 2500 player with the next highest teammate being 1200 might get some help.

Ability to carry teammates is exactly what ladder is designed to measure. Top 2 players last season finished over 550 pts higher than 3rd, do you want to make that gap even wider?

[Slender]

Originally Posted by BrandonL

About the handicaps:
There are quite a lot of games with 2/3 bombers recently. When you will put a handicap on them, the ammount of bombers might get even bigger. Also I personally think a bomber can possibly carry pretty good

No, a bomber cannot single-handedly carry a whole team in any way. I've always pictured it something just like a really high rated player (mains randa for example) that gets like really low rated teammates and simply cannot succeed in his game. Either way, heavies are really only giving support to lights on the team for them to get a clear or gentler way to the enemy's goal while at the same time defending their own goal at any cost. In the end, the profit for those in the back making each game a little bit easier for the rest of the team has never been the same for those moving the ball constantly or scoring.

[VAN1SH1NG]

Originally Posted by Fartface

Ability to carry teammates is exactly what ladder is designed to measure. Top 2 players last season finished over 550 pts higher than 3rd, do you want to make that gap even wider?

It is attempting to reduce the requirement for high rated players to sit when game quality is very low. In ball, when the other 5 players per team are all low rated a skilled individual player becomes much less of a factor. You can't rely on anyone else to help make a play and there is no way you can play up to your rating. Not a huge deal if there is also 1 high rated player on the other team as it balances out. Still insanely hard to carry but at least you should be on the winning side closer to 50% of the time.

Maybe it would be more appropriate to help out those who are high rated when they are the only high rated player in the game, not just on their team.

This is not intended to increase the ratings of the highest rated players. It is intended to address the issue that the highest rated players are going to lose more points than they gain in low quality games during a season. I'd like to make it closer to breaking even so they can play more rather than avoid low quality games.

[REDDRAGON]

The following is a bit of a revolutionary system, but hear me out. A "TL;DR" is included at the bottom of the post for the busy reader.

First of all: Van1sh1ng, the handicap idea of yours is definitely a step in the right direction. You will forgive me, however, if I say it is insufficient. You are not wrong—merely too timid. While I am self-aware enough not to bore you with my theories on Linguistics, I will say that our self-imposed semantic dichotomy of "light" vs. "heavy" has a tendency to muddle any discussion to be had about True Balance. What I'm about to tell you may seem insultingly simple, but I'm afraid we as a community (including I) must deign to this wake-up call: there are, in fact, five planes, comprising no less than 15 red perks.

Therein resides the gist.

To refine the following discussion I will attempt to define clearly two problem areas of Ladder. A quick skim-through of the Altituderank.com webpage reveal some immediate startling discrepancies:

1. There exists not a single player in the top 32 with a win-rate below 50%.
2. The highest-ranked players of each respective red perk are attributed wildly different ratings.

Undeniably, these are problems. The ultimate goal of the Balancer and matchmaking system is, after all, to produce the conditions and supply the environment wherein every player wins half of xyr games, and to make that player's choice of red perk independent of xyr highest attainable rating.

Now for a demonstration of, and discussion about, my proposed system.

I will admit problem statement A. to be a smidgen oversimplified; one can easily see that win-rates at least approach 50% for the stated subgroup. However, this process of convergence should be sped up. The currently implemented solution is highlighted by one of Van1sh1ng's recent post:

Originally Posted by VAN1SH1NG

... After this you get additional points depending on how far your win % over last 40 games is from 50%. ...

Again, the idea fails to get at the root of the problem. The Balancer is not used nearly to its full potential. Rather than trying to walk the line of penalizing, vis-a-vis rewarding, players for infringing (accidentally or otherwise) the 20-wins-per-20-losses rule, one could easily put into effect a system that all but guarantees the rule being upheld, through active enforcement. What I mean by this is, the Balancer should not be against stacking teams occasionally to realize its expected outcomes.

To illustrate my point: Say we have players X and Y, plus change. Player X just won 20 games in a row, and during this streak, unfortunate player Y lost 20 games in a row. The Balancer should quite rightly sense impending disaster here, and to the best of its abilities (keeping in mind, of course, the win-rates of the other players) force X to lose while forcing Y to win. I do not think the reader will disagree if I say this would enhance fairness across board.

Finally yet perhaps more importantly, we have problem statement B. The suggested solution in this case is perhaps more controversial, but necessary nonetheless. I will illustrate the system thus:

Attribute each red perk in the game a "handicap coefficient" in the following manner.
Define the handicap coefficient to be 1 for some single arbitrary red perk P. The handicap coefficient for any other red perk Q is then the quotient of the highest rating attributed to a P player and the highest rating attributed to a Q player.

Example:
Fartface's most played plane in ladder is, by a significant margin, TA; Fartface is a TA player. Similarly, Sanis is a Trickster player. These two players are both the highest rated players of their respective red perks, yet Fartface's end-of-season rating is 3523, while for Sanis it is 2915. Now, set the handicap coefficient of TA as 1. The handicap coefficient of Trickster must then be 3523 / 2915, i.e. around 1.2.

Whenever the Balancer evaluates a player's rating for matchmaking purposes, it should first divide that rating with the value of the red perk coefficient of that player's most-played plane. All this would of course happen behind-the-scenes, without affecting the actual, publicly available rating of any player.

Example:
Fartface and Sanis are about to play in a ladder game, both having the identical rating of 3523. Before deciding on the final teams, the Balancer normalizes their respective ratings based on the handicap coefficient of their respective red perks. Fartface's internal rating stays at 3523, while Sanis receives the new value of 2915. (Compare this to the ratings in the previous example.)

Following the second example, it is trivial to see that had this system been in place during the previous season, Sanis would have had an end-of-season rating similar to that of Fartface's. Additionally, this system naturally extends to every red perk in the game, meaning that, with my system, red perk advantage can be completely eliminated. The reader will note that this allows the best player of every red perk to all compete for the top rank, which common sense dictates they should be able. It is after all ludicrous to assume that the best Recoiless player should be significantly better than, say, the best Flak player.

In the future, I hope green and blue perks receive similar treatment, but I'm happy to take it one step at a time.

TL;DR

• "Fix" games to keep player win-rates as close to 50% as possible for any 40-game interval.
• Attribute handicap coefficients to every red perk in the game, such that the top players of every red perk have around the same rating.

[JWhatever]

Originally Posted by REDDRAGON

Example:
Fartface and Sanis are about to play in a ladder game, both having the identical rating of 3523. Before deciding on the final teams, the Balancer normalizes their respective ratings based on the handicap coefficient of their respective red perks. Fartface's internal rating stays at 3523, while Sanis receives the new value of 2915. (Compare this to the ratings in the previous example.)

Your system should take in account possible main plane changes during the season. If some mid rated player wanted to swap their main plane after 3/4 of the season, they would still be stuck with their old main perk and handicap.

Imo the balancer should look at your previous 50 games and base your main plane on that. Or what you have most played with, whichever comes in play first.

Your system would make the top a lot tighter, but what about the midfield? If there is just one Laser or Tracker player in the whole ladder, they'd get a massive boost vs someone remotely closely rated player, who plays the plane with HC of 1.

Overall, interesting idea.

-J

[sunshineduck]

maybe the system would be better if you based it off overall +/- globally per perk instead of winrates by perk mains

[JWhatever]

Or have the handicap based on the plane, not perks.
Only TA has a drastic change in how the plane is played, dombs and acid to lesser extent. My argument is that a good player should know how to play the other red perks of their main plane effectively and that less common perks shouldn't get a "free pass" for extra rating just because no one else plays them. The handicaps even out at the top, sure, but shouldn't it be about the platform and who can use it the most effectively rather than forcing every option being equal?

Alternatively each perk would have their own HC but it would be tied to the planes highest rated perks HC, eg having the average of the two.

-J

[VAN1SH1NG]

I'd certainly consider HC per plane but not per red perk. To put it simply the problem is that the rating system greatly favors strong offense over strong defense or strong support type play.

I don't think there is a significant enough difference within the red perks of any plane to justify HC per red perk. It may be the case that a red perk simply is not as good as another red perk. I don't want to help a player out simply because they use a bad red perk better than anyone else. The rankings should still indicate who is doing the most to help their team win but reward defense/support as much as pure offense.

Bomber and explodet fall much more into the defense and support roles. Biplanes could use a small HC as their strength is again a support role. Personally I'd also argue that loopy could use a slight HC. Loopy can finish at the top of ladder but I feel it is more challenging to get there than it is for a main randa.

I'd also really like to have HC based mostly on plane used in individual games. I don't like having the team balancer take HC into account when determining teams since we don't actually know what planes will be used. If we did know it probably would be a good method. There will still be a mode added where planes will be assigned to players when creating teams. This mode will rank players per plane type (separate ratings from regular ladder where you use whatever plane you want at any time).