dempa

So helpfull from you dempa! Please keep the trolling out from this forum. Yes I have seen your trolls at the FA forum. If you could have taken a little moment to think, we could have instructed you to do your own changes against ETPub. We could have then reviewed them and seen if they are any worth. Even give the possibility to join our team if you had shown us that you can do good additions without messing up the code. However, even if you would have the skills, which I doubt based on the crap you talk so much, you have no such chance anymore because of your personality.

 

How am I trolling this forum? I haven't said a single thing in this thread that I would classify as a troll post, I've only written valuable information.

 

I only trolled the F|A forums after they decided to openly make fun of me rather than listen to my suggestion. If they cannot take me seriously, I cannot possibly take them seriously.

Isn't SilentMod closed source?

I found out something interesting regarding the algorithm. However if you are as intelligent as you say you are hell, you should be able to notice it as well.

ABBA is better all the times when there is an even number of players, but if the number is odd ABAB is better in most cases (not all, it's like 97%)

 

an example with 15 players (I multiplied all ratings by 100):

 

set of 15 ratings:

[47, 70, 100, 108, 148, 182, 210, 221, 245, 251, 269, 298, 334, 383, 386]

 

ABAB

team1 [386, 334, 269, 245, 210, 148, 100, 47]

team2 [383, 298, 251, 221, 182, 108, 70]

total average: 216, axis: 217, allies: 216, diff:1

 

ABBA

team1 [386, 298, 269, 221, 210, 108, 100]

team2 [383, 334, 251, 245, 182, 148, 70, 47]

total average: 216, axis: 227, allies: 207, diff:19

 

You also assumed K/D is a measure of player skill, according to what I've seen it doesn't always work properly.

 

It was supposed to be a sort of ELO but if it hasn't been changed from when I saw it, I think it's a very dubious algorithm. It doesn't take many factors into account (weapons for example, I think old etpub took that into account, then you have backshooting, crossfire, etc.etc.) and once you have a low rating it's very hard to improve it even if you play better, while people who get high scores in lame ways don't go down...

 

You can only compare averages if each team has the same number of players. If they don't, you compare sums:

 

ABAB

1: 1739

2: 1513

diff: 226

 

ABBA

1: 1592

2: 1660

diff: 68

 

Substantially more fair.

 

With ABAB, the team with 'A' will always have a greater sum than B. With ABBA, it is completely variable. I'm not sure if it would be difficult to implement, but you could always compare sums, and set the higher summed team to be axis.

hrm how about implementing kills and wins based shuffle based on past 2 games?

 

First their would be shuffle based on kills.

 

i.e.

Player A (30 kills) vs Player B (28 kills)

Player C (26 Kills) vs Player D (27 kills)

 

Then it checks the win probability... aka if player A has won last 2 map and player B has won 1 map... then we move Player A to last loosing team and player B to winning team...

 

This way every 2 maps their can be auto shuffle.. and after each auto shuffle.. it makes sure that player doesn't end up in loosing team for more then 2 times in a row. Let's be realistic.. no one likes to be in loosing team forever. This way newbies don't get slaughtered all the maps and after every 2 maps they can be put with winning players.

 

We are not including here deaths.. cos for me.. K/D can be useless .. Ex: If a player Y kills 10 players and dies 2 time in 15 mins map..and if Player Z kills 30 players and dies 24 times...I would prefer player Z in my team rather then player Y ... cos player Z has more kills. Skills matter on 1 vs 1 game or scrims but on public servers.. I need someone who can kill more players in my team so engineers can do obj.. or let's say who is more active on field rather then camping..

 

And then auto lock of teams for next 1/4th time of map so players can fuck up shuffle which they normally do after auto shuffle ...and go back to winning team and make things more worse again.

 

It's a good idea, but too much variability. The method I suggests takes into account the fact that some players do slay omnibots at night. Your method would rank those players far greater than someone with more skill but less kills, as his last two maps may have been against actual players.

For this to make sense, we have to assume what I have noticed about the current k/d system:

• K/D does not reflect Kills per Death, but acts more as a ranking system for a player's effectiveness relating to kills.
  

The K/D of the player that (kills you/you killed) also affects your k/d's change:

• The lower the K/D of the player you killed, the less your K/D increases and the less their K/D decreases.
  
• The higher the K/D of the player you killed, the more your K/D increases and the more their K/D decreases.
  

• The longer you've played (not necessarily xp, since that can reset), the harder for the k/d to change in either direction.
  

When you first join, your k/d is at 1.000. As you play, it slowly approaches a number, which is a fairly accurate measure of your "effectiveness as far as kills"

 

 

Now that we have that out of the way, we can assume that averaging the k/d's is a way to analyze overall skill, assuming each team has equal number of members. Since that can't happen with an odd number of players, we remove the dividing by number of players, and instead compare sums of each team's K/D.

=================================================================================================================================================

I will try to explain this without being too mathematical in my explanation so that the concept will be easy to understand.

 

(We will do a more realistic example later on, but for now, let's use a basic example to show the concept)

 

Let's assume we have 10 players. For simplicity sake, we'll say each players has the respective k/d of {1.0, 2.0, 3.0 ...}

 

As it works now, teams are arranged by alternating the skill onto each team:

 

Team 1: 10, 8, 6, 4, 2

Team 2: 9, 7, 5, 3, 1

 

We can represent this as "ABAB..." arrangement.

 

If we sum each team, we get:

 

Team 1: 10+8+6+4+2 = 30

Team 2: 9 + 7 + 5 + 3 + 1= 25

 

Diff: 5

 

That's a pretty substantial difference. Let's average them since each team has 5 players:

 

Team1: 30/5 = 6

Team 2: 25/5 = 5

 

Diff: 1

 

====-=-=-====

The method by which I believe will work more effectively is using an ABBAABBA... arrangement.

 

Team 1: 10, 7, 6, 3, 2

Team 2: 9, 8, 5, 4, 1

 

If we sum, we get:

 

Team 1: 10+7+6+3+2 = 28

Team 2: 9+8+5+4+1 = 27

 

Diff: 1

 

We can average these, since there are an equal number of players per team:

 

28/5 = 5.6

27/5 = 5.4

 

Diff: 0.2

 

 

ABAB ABBA

 

5 > 1

1 > 0.2

Looks much closer to me.

 

 

 

 

More realistic example:

 

For this, I recorded the k/d's of players on Hardcore at the time of me writing this.

 

14 players:

 

3.826

3.613

3.002

2.641

2.454

1.881

1.697

1.480

1.280

1.185

1.125

1.113

0.587

0.390

 

With how current shuffling works (ABAB), the sums are:

 

Team 1: 13.971 Ave: 2.00

Team 2: 12.303 Ave: 1.75

 

Diff: 1.668

Ave Diff: .25

 

With ABBA..., the sums are:

 

Team 1: 13.381 Ave: 1.91

Team 2: 12.893 Ave: 1.84

 

Diff: 0.488

Ave Diff: 0.07

 

ABAB ABBA

1.668 > 0.488

.25 > 0.07

 

Yet again, ABBA is more effective at balancing teams. If you have any examples in which you believe ABAB is more effective, by all means post it here.