Online Lobby — Horn of the Abyss / HOTA

baratorch

10/28/2019 2:37 PM UTC

Auto-translated

The K coefficient in the rating calculation formula before October 28th was as follows:

K = 60 * map_width_in_cells / XL_width;
if there is a Dungeon, then K = K * 1.5;

Now it is as follows.

if it's a mirror map, then K = 60.0;
else
{
	K = 20.0 * map_width_in_cells / XL_width;
	if there is a Dungeon, then K = K * 1.5;
	if K > 30.0, then K = 30.0;
}
if tournament rules are enabled, then K = K * 1.5;

Therefore:
mirror map with rules: K = 90;
XL+U with rules: K = 45;
Jebus cross with rules: K = 30;
G + U without rules: K = 30;

Your comments and suggestions.

HoMM 3 HD:

последняя версия - 5.0 RC96 (19.09.2020)

последнее видео: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u70wC0DJ7I8

полное подробное описание

o1dboy79

10/28/2019 3:00 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Let's have G+U with tournament rules for 5 months!

ICQ 694248141

In reply to o1dboy79

Dirty_Player

10/28/2019 3:03 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Isn't that a bit too much for a mirror? Or is it mt_G+U?

socola

10/28/2019 3:47 PM UTC

Auto-translated

The two-fold difference between Mirror and XL+U is inadequate. From my point of view, it is correct that Mirror should award more, but the difference should not be so huge.
And among Mirrors, there should be some gradation. Awarding the same amount of rating for a random MT Jebus Cross and a skillful h3dm2 is not right.

In reply to socola

Dirty_Player

10/28/2019 5:34 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I was just thinking. It would be interesting if, every month (or at some other interval), we gave an increased rating bonus for different map templates. This would encourage people to play different templates, rather than the same ones over and over again (but that's just a thought).

In reply to Dirty_Player

socola

10/28/2019 5:37 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

I was just thinking. It would be interesting if each month (or at some other interval), an increased rating bonus was given for different map templates. This would encourage people to play different templates, rather than the same ones over and over (but I'm not sure).

+
This would revive interest in templates like diamond, mini-nosty, and other similar ones, which are hardly played at all now for some reason.

Grando

10/28/2019 5:51 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Firstly, a mirror is nothing more than another correction factor!!!
We just finished playing a Quickshot tournament in the SOD, without any hardcore players, maybe that's why the "consultants" weren't aware.
There were mirrored S-templates. It's clearly a mistake to equate them to tournament L or XL mirrors like h3dm1, 2.1.1, or Antares.

But, for example, a correction factor of 1.5 for a mirror could be quite adequate.
I'll think about it for a while and maybe I'll formulate it better.

Also, there was criticism of Antares in tournaments because, as the size increased to XL, a well-chosen direction could sometimes immediately determine the outcome of the game.
That is, there was a suspicion that with the increase in size to XL, the value of mirroring decreased, as it became completely unrealistic to scout everything quickly enough. But I don't have enough skill to draw conclusions about that.

https://www.twitch.tv/grando__

Grando

10/28/2019 6:03 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Secondly, yes. The idea put forward by socola – that separate, well-tested, and established tournament templates could deserve an additional bonus coefficient for increased skill level – is a good one. But this is something that the players in the top 10 or 20 should definitely consider.

https://www.twitch.tv/grando__

In reply to Dirty_Player

Pridu

11/1/2019 6:44 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

I was just thinking. It would be interesting if each month (or at some other interval), an increased rating bonus was given for different templates. This would encourage people to play different templates, rather than the same ones over and over (but I'm not sure).

Great idea.

Baratorch, when is the rating reset?

BISHOP

11/1/2019 11:11 PM UTC

Auto-translated

baratorch

Therefore:
Mirror map with rules: K = 90;
XL+U with rules: K = 45;
Jebus cross with rules: K = 30;
G + U without rules: K = 30;

Your comments and suggestions.

I don't understand the discrimination between maps with rules and without.
The formula, corrected in this way, will simply reduce the number of games that could have been more in G+U.
The value for the mirror map is unjustifiably high.
I suggest introducing a coefficient that depends on the game time on the map.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYZ8Pk6yWouZ-0nQSdYXBlg
ютуб канал

ЯR

11/2/2019 9:59 AM UTC

Auto-translated

In my opinion, we should create only 2 types of maps: one for small maps and another for all other maps. This way, everyone can play what they like.

=Lizard=

11/2/2019 10:02 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I fully support the new coefficients and would like to express my personal gratitude to Baratortch. This system will very soon lead to a much more adequate and stable top 5-10 lobby. Players who rely on luck and grind should not be on equal footing with pro players. p.s. Are you seriously suggesting that increasing the coefficient for rating when playing on templates will revive interest in them? What does interest have to do with inflating the rating? When well-known and very skilled players told me over voice chat that they "simply enjoy this format," I sincerely laughed to myself. Because it's a LIE.

http://ru.twitch.tv/lizard_wt

In reply to =Lizard=

BISHOP

11/2/2019 8:12 PM UTC

Auto-translated

=Lizard=

I fully support the new coefficients and express my personal gratitude to Baratortch. This system will very soon lead to a much more adequate and stable top 5-10 lobby. Players who rely on luck and low-effort strategies should not be on equal footing with pro players.

p.s. Reviving interest in templates by increasing the coefficient for rating when playing on them??? Are you serious??? What does interest have to do with inflating the rating? When well-known and very skilled players told me on G+U that "I just like this format" - I sincerely laughed inwardly. Because it's a LIE.

Kostya, today you watched Gomunguls vs Kexibq2134; the game lasted from lunch until late evening. After the victory, Vitalik received +6, but if they had played a mirror match that lasted a maximum of 5 hours, he would have received 18.
Do you think that's fair?

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYZ8Pk6yWouZ-0nQSdYXBlg
ютуб канал

HellLighT

11/3/2019 4:31 AM UTC

Auto-translated

The odds for the mirror match are extremely high, so high that newer players won't play it in ranked matches against higher-ranked opponents, fearing they'll lose, or they might not play it at all. I understand that the G+u format with its rules has been equated to the Xel+u format; if that's the case, then the odds should be at least slightly higher... That would be logical.

In reply to BISHOP

=Lizard=

11/3/2019 6:57 AM UTC

Auto-translated

BISHOP

Kostya, today you watched Gomunguls vs Kexibq2134; the game lasted from lunchtime until late evening. After the victory, Vitalik received +6, but if they had played a mirror match that lasted a maximum of 5 hours, he would have received 18.
Do you think that's fair?

The time spent on a game largely depends on the players, not on the template or other game factors. You, Vasily, will find it difficult to disagree with this. ;)

Ideally, of course, we should think about how to adjust the coefficients more accurately before the New Year. And after the release of the new version of the game, we should completely reset all ratings (save them as the result of 2019, as we did before in the VCL), and start playing the 2020 year from scratch in the lobby, using a new, clear system for calculating ratings.

http://ru.twitch.tv/lizard_wt

Reading content in

Interface language

Posts from Online Lobby

Statistics

Library

Users Online 11 users 1300 guests

Today's Visitors 13