Forum
Ladder Feedback
Created 19th October 2009 @ 22:02
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 14 15 16 ... 24 Next »
Apparently follower gets double points in these next two weeks however it’s not in the ETF2L maplist as far as I’m aware. Could someone clarify this? :)
cp_follower does indeed get double points :) It’s there to be played if you want to play it, if not – don’t worry about it.
The idea behind maps with extra points is that some of the less popular maps have a chance to be played. It’s to encourage teams to break out of their shell a little.
Hope that was more sensible ;)
Apparently follower gets double points in these next two weeks however it’s not in the ETF2L maplist as far as I’m aware. Could someone clarify this? :)
cp_follower does indeed get double points :) It’s there to be played if you want to play it, if not – don’t worry about it.
The idea behind maps with extra points is that some of the less popular maps have a chance to be played. It’s to encourage teams to break out of their shell a little.
Hope that was more sensible ;)
Yes, thank you D2M. I mean “l2p” nub :)
imo its stupid if both teams can get points for the same match.
its wrong because this could lead to agreements
e.g. http://etf2l.org/matches/15288/
if one team gets points, the other should lose (best: the same amount) of points
ofc this would lead to changes in motw (map of the week) system
imo its stupid if both teams can get points for the same match.
its wrong because this could lead to agreements
e.g. http://etf2l.org/matches/15288/
if one team gets points, the other should lose (best: the same amount) of points
ofc this would lead to changes in motw (map of the week) system
Both teams won a map, and both teams got points from it because they were on a similar level of points at the start of the match. If you need a full explanation of the mathematics behind the ladder system, please talk to ST8. He’ll happily explain them to you.
Points are worked out on a per map basis, not an overall scoreline. This reflects a much fairer result at the end of a match.
I think it can be explained by the fact that the losing team (didn’t check link, cba) performed better than expected, and therefore should get a higher ELO rating than it’s original value, despite losing
whyw e still can get penality for rejecting challanges?
I think it can be explained by the fact that the losing team (didn’t check link, cba) performed better than expected, and therefore should get a higher ELO rating than it’s original value, despite losing
the ELO system usually works like this:
it calcs the x% a team should win to earn points,
if it does x or better it gets points AND the other teams loses the same amount of points
and vice versa
here both teams got some points, one +8 and the other +5
which is not even near the ELO system
(because the absolute is no the same and there is no minus)
I think it can be explained by the fact that the losing team (didn’t check link, cba) performed better than expected, and therefore should get a higher ELO rating than it’s original value, despite losing
the ELO system usually works like this:
it calcs the x% a team should win to earn points,
if it does x or better it gets points AND the other teams loses the same amount of points
and vice versa
here both teams got some points, one +8 and the other +5
which is not even near the ELO system
(because the absolute is no the same and there is no minus)
Take each map as an individual match and then the points gained by both teams is the score difference
challenge map list needs some tweaks:
– cp_obscure_alpha->cp_obscure_b4
– missing cp_wildmire_b2
maybe more i’m lazy to check :D
cheers
Please Allow all new weapons (with a limit of 1 for all soldier weapons) in the ladder so we can actually test these things, without having to play meaningless PCW’s
It seems someting happened with the engine. At least that’s what I have instead of a direct challenge to a team several positions above – an open challenge with some errors shown on the screenshot.
http://www.picamatic.com/view/6319740_proof/
—
Update: please remove this http://etf2l.org/matches/15439/ challenge as we were not going to play ladder with this team.
Gas13 – Can you please contact an admin on IRC (Quakenet) in #etf2l
To request an admin please type: !admin
Need to talk to you about the above :)
[18:37] well d2m, the admin who spoke to you, isn’t here at the moment
[18:38] well it seems he wasn’t going to talk to me directly
[18:38] and i don’t know what he wanted to say to you
[18:38] heh ok
[18:39] I’ll leave a message for him, and i’ll make sure he’ll get in touch with you
[18:39] ok, thanks
Also that’s what I see after clicking Challenge icon – http://www.picamatic.com/view/6321237_Untitled-1/ Tested on 2 computers with different browsers (IE8, FF).
When I try to create a challenge either by selecting Challenge from the dashboard and selecting Challenge from the competition drop down or by clicking the challenge icon next to the team on the ladder standings page.
The Team and Map drop downs are not populated with any data.
Also can I request a filter for open challenges so that you can limit the teams that can accept your open challenges to those that are slightly close to your position on the ladder i.e. The bottom 20 for us ;)
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 14 15 16 ... 24 Next »