Ideas and suggestions. — Horn of the Abyss / HOTA

Dirty_Player

6 years ago

Auto-translated

Xocenk

I entered the formula provided by Sav, calculated the lobby rating, and created a table.

Well, by the way, the difference between XL+U and G+U isn't as big as I thought. It's around 1.75. It turns out that you also get a lot for XL+U)))) So, it's not that bad. Still, the risk of losing to a weaker player (with a lower rating) is always present.

Dirty_Player

In my opinion, the coefficient shouldn't increase after XL+U, or it should increase very slightly. (for example, if you get +20 for a win on XL+U, then you get around +30 on G+U).

Grando

6 years ago

Auto-translated

If reason ever prevails, could it then also equate h3dm to XL+U?

HellLighT

6 years ago

Auto-translated

I've already shared my thoughts; there's definitely a problem, and it needs to be addressed. Anyone who doesn't see the problem either isn't playing or hasn't played at a high rank. I see the solution as quite simple: the game itself, using the G+U template, should be long and challenging, but the lack of tournament rules ruins everything. The amount of rating points awarded for a victory without the tournament rules checkbox should be reduced by 2-3 times. The same should be done for custom-made templates (arenas, etc.), otherwise, there's a risk that people will start creating them specifically for G+U and reach the top ranks in just 10+ games.
P.S. Another thought: the game could be well-balanced without rules if joining games required payment.

In reply to HellLighT

LuckyF

6 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

I've already expressed my thoughts; there's definitely a problem, and it needs to be addressed. Anyone who doesn't see the problem either doesn't play (or hasn't played at a high rank). I see the solution as quite simple: the game itself, using the G+U template, should be long and challenging, but the lack of tournament rules ruins everything. The amount of rating points awarded for a victory should be reduced by 2 (or 3) times when the "tournament rules" option is not enabled. The same should be done for custom-made templates (arenas, etc.), otherwise, there's a risk that people will start creating G+U templates and reach the top in just 10+ games.
P.S. Another thought: the game could be well-balanced without rules if joining games required payment.

There's an excellent (and, most importantly, simple) solution: just remove all coefficients for all templates, and arenas are not really "Heroes" at all; there shouldn't even be a rating system for them.

In reply to HellLighT

BISHOP

6 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

I have already voiced my thoughts, the problem definitely exists and it needs to be solved, anyone who doesn't see the problem is not playing (has not played at a high rating), I see the solution as quite simple, the game itself on the G+U template should indeed be long and tense, but everything is ruined by the absence of tournament rules; the amount of rating for a win without the tournament rules checkbox should be reduced by 2(3) times, the same should be done for custom templates (arenas, etc.), otherwise before you know it, people will start crafting them on G+U and breaking into the top in 10+ games.
p.s. just thinking out loud, the game could be decently balanced without rules if joins were only for money.

But why should a game with the tournament rules checkbox be worth 2-3 times more rating? After all, when you create funky maps on Jebus Cross for the most part, you're not playing a tournament. And someone might want to have fun in a full-scale brawl. How is your option better, other than the game being faster and more dynamic?

HellLighT

6 years ago

Auto-translated

Jebb is a fast-paced game, but the odds on it are quite low. Vasya, don't pretend to be clueless; the fact that you enjoy "having fun," as you yourself wrote, only confirms that it's nonsense. Fun is about enjoyment, not playing for a rating.

In reply to HellLighT

BISHOP

6 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

Jeb is a fast-paced game, but the odds on it are quite low. Vasya, don't pretend to be stupid. The fact that you enjoy "having fun," as you yourself wrote, only confirms that it's nonsense. Fun is about having a good time, not playing for a rating.

Jeb is also fun, and I wrote about that too. As for the rating, it's a motivation for me to play.

HellLighT

6 years ago

Auto-translated

What's fun for you isn't fun for others, that's quite a strange conclusion; why don't you play Jebus Cross without rules then?
p.s. I won't continue this topic further, just unnecessary spam in the thread.

=Lizard=

6 years ago

Auto-translated

At some point, I agree with Anton)). Although I myself succumb to the system and sometimes play G+U, simply because many strong players now want to play it when they meet... As Ivan said to me: "It's time to stop this")). It's like quitting smoking.

2Dirty: the probability of losing a classic HL+U with the rules (like 6LM) to a weak opponent is definitely lower than losing to him in G+U. Anyone can join with one hero and get a bunch of free dragons (because that's a real skill!).

In reply to LuckyF

Sav

6 years ago

Auto-translated

LuckyF

There's a great (and most importantly, simple) solution: just remove all coefficients for all templates, and arenas are not really "Heroes" matches; there shouldn't be a rating for them.

Here, it's one of two things: either there are no coefficients, and the reward for an arena or M200 match is the same as for an XL+U match. Or, the coefficients already exist in some form (and it's impossible to distinguish an arena from a non-arena match using automated means, so the filtering must occur based on other criteria).

The idea of reducing the coefficient in games without rules seems reasonable and quite simple to me.

Grando

6 years ago

Auto-translated

The coefficients must be in place. They should be based on three parameters, in descending order of priority:
1) The quality of the template in terms of "skill over randomness" (expert assessment by top players; for example, the 20th-anniversary tournament where Mirror matches and 6LM10A were more popular than UG, and even more popular than the very popular JC).
2) The length of the game (this should be a factor, but it shouldn't have an excessive impact; we need to find reasonable numbers using our brains).
3) The size of the template, if the first point hasn't already established a clear preference (but without stupid – I can't think of a better word – imbalances like today's UG or, conversely, M-decks that last for 5 weeks and end with scores around 7 points).
And the weight of each subsequent parameter's influence on the rating should be significantly lower overall. That's the idea.

Everything needs to be tested to see how it works in specific (and, most importantly, borderline) situations. Ideally, we should recalculate everything retroactively after a preliminary warning.
The last few months have been irrevocably wasted (from a rational point of view) due to the abuse of UG.

------

Another idea for the first point: separate the ranked pool of templates and calculate a separate rating for it, similar to Hearthstone's "Standard" mode.
And include "games without rules" / random templates in the overall "Wild" rating (in the case of Heroes, this would include all games, which is essentially what we have now, with the caveat that the current system has issues with head-to-head matchups).
But this requires a more careful implementation and a dedicated team of reasonable experts to add templates to the pool, so that the system doesn't become stagnant.

zoog

6 years ago

Auto-translated

I missed it – what was wrong with the game time coefficient? For example, with a granularity of 1 week.

In reply to zoog

korovka1987

6 years ago

Auto-translated

Good afternoon. Is it possible to disable redrawing on the M200 at the program level? (when playing on the highest difficulty without trading for color). Similar to how it's done with hit/run. So that when buying on the first day of the week, it's not possible to attack an opponent (unless you remove/delete the units that were added on that day). Half of the players play with it, the other half without it. Sometimes there is confusion if it is not agreed upon with the opponent in advance.