Massive Assault Official Forum
   
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 8:51 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:52 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
[quote="heihojin"][I had only reached the rank of Major under the old system, and had played no one of a higher rank than Lieutenant. ]

Really does not have anything to do with this thread but I am curious, why did you never play anyone above Lieutenant--even when you reached Major?

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:59 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Posts: 209
Karma: 8

Location: Australia
I am back to the game after three month break. Appart from the great game itself - where skill the only factor (yes bad SA's can hurt - but only if your opponent has the skill to use his own SA's properly) a major part of my addicition lies in trying to climb the ranking system.

Where the old system was aimed at the top end of the ladder - with the top 50 or so players competing for rank and status, and the top 50 players would actually have been, with perhaps 1 or 2 anomilies, the top 50 players in skill.

Now I look at the ladder, and I have jumped from 24th (Major) to 12th. This is not so bad as I had previously been as high as 8th - and that was through hard fought battles vs the top 10 players. ie Tiger and his Clan and the New World Order (you know who you are). THere are former captains and sergeant who are above me? I know I can beat them even with bad SA's. Doesn't make sense. Also The former No.1 Player - CptX - is now 280th.... and a Sergeant. Totally unrealistic.

My high ranking is now purely due to my compulsive nature and the fact that I have ammassed soooo many games. (Still - no one comes close to the likes of Tiger)

MY QUESTION TO THE DEVELOPERS:
This thread shows an overwhelming dislike to the new ranking system. I know that only the hard core players actually get on this forum - and all the noobies probably like the new system. So........ the question is : Will you:

1. Address the problem by implementing a 2 tiered system?
OR
2. Are you coming up with and even better solution that will make everone happy.
OR
3. Are you going to ignore your diehard players/fans and hope this problem goes away.


I love this game - and will play regardless - but I really think this is a step backwards for the game. I hope you will consider a solution that suits everyone.

RAVERMEISTER


PS - Think of it this way - In the army - do you automatically become a General just for being in the army for 20 years - or are only those with skill AND experience promoted throught the ranks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:10 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:52 pm
Posts: 29
Karma: 0
storm440 wrote:
Really does not have anything to do with this thread but I am curious, why did you never play anyone above Lieutenant--even when you reached Major?

I simply hadn't gotten around to it yet. I have a healthy respect for others' familiarity with the various maps, and so I was targeting my public challenges toward specific ranks to give me progressively more challenging opposition. I've only been in 38 games to date.

Now, of course, I have even less of a basis for measuring my opposition...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:18 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
ravermeister wrote:
1. Address the problem by implementing a 2 tiered system?
OR
2. Are you coming up with and even better solution that will make everone happy.
OR
3. Are you going to ignore your diehard players/fans and hope this problem goes away.


The Massive Assault team already answered this: They are going to use a two tier system, with the old and the new side by side. Unfortunately their comment got buried in this topic.

The relavent comment:

Vic wrote:
MAN2 will be using the combination of systems. The Game Server is keeping all the logs, so it is always possible to re-calculate any type of rating at any time.

You can call the new system's points "Experience Points". Yes, the more you play, the more points you get. That's the definition of experience. And simultaneously, there will be GLYCO-based rating with certain limitations and corrections, which we have not yet finalized. That GLYCO-based rating will kick in (but using all the previous data from the log) in about a month. Soon we'll post the proposed modifications and you'll have a chance to discuss them.
So, for those of you, who don't believe "Experience Points" - there will be another column giving you GLYCO-based points, like you are doing now.

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:45 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Posts: 209
Karma: 8

Location: Australia
First - thanks for Mealstrom for pointing out Vic's comments.

Second - Sorry to the Dev's for spotting it in the first place.

Third - A question on exacly how it will work.

Will the Glycko system be used to calculate RANK.

I believe that the lower half of the ranks should be through experience. (Up to say Captain or lower).

Then if you want to get any higher - you have to not only have the experience to get Captain - then you also must be skilled enought to move beyond (ie ALL games count - and with the experince people have earned to get to captain - GLICKO will actually be more accurate).

So - ONLY people with enough Experinece to get to Captain can become Majors and above.

This will not only enhance the game for new player - it stops new players getting a high ranking too quickly (ie it lets Glicko get a good sample size before counting it towards ranking).

Is this what is intended - OR will the Ranks still be purely based on experience?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:22 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
ravermeister wrote:
Then if you want to get any higher - you have to not only have the experience to get Captain - then you also must be skilled enought to move beyond (ie ALL games count - and with the experince people have earned to get to captain - GLICKO will actually be more accurate).


That is a dang good idea. People will get enough games with enough advancement opportunities to get their feet under them before being thrown into the fire for the higher ranks. It could even be that they only see the experience rating up to that point, and afterwards see their glicko rating as well.

If we add an option for each game that specifies whether a game is rated or unrated, we then have a system that meets the needs of all three player groups laid out by Vic:

1) New players get into the game and see immediate progress as their experience level moves up.

2) Established players (one who have reached the cutoff point, be it captain or whatever) will then be introduced to the skill based rating, and see how their future games start affecting their progress.

3) Hardcore players get to see how they stack up against everyone else by mostly using the skill rating, but still have encouragement to play more games so that they can achieve the minimum experience for the next rank, while making sure they keep winning so they don't lose that hard-fought rank.

If we give an experience boost for playing unrated games with new players, hardcore and established players will be encouraged to mentor new players without the fear of their skill rating to be affected by an unexpected loss to a new player they are trying to play easy on. (IE, unrated games still give you experience, but don't affect your skill rating)

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:50 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
Maelstrom wrote:
If we give an experience boost for playing unrated games with new players, hardcore and established players will be encouraged to mentor new players without the fear of their skill rating to be affected by an unexpected loss to a new player they are trying to play easy on. (IE, unrated games still give you experience, but don't affect your skill rating)


one of the best ideas yet :wink:

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:18 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:43 pm
Posts: 245
Karma: 0

Location: ITA
hi,
will, new ranking sistem, consider about old MAN's players career??

_________________
DIES IRAE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:58 pm 
Offline
Levy

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 4
Karma: 0
Why in a new patch a limit of glasses 5000!??? Why have not left as was in the old version!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:06 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
I know that you speak at least one more language than i do so do not think i am being critical but i do not understand what you meant by "glasses 5000"

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:47 pm 
Offline
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 290
Karma: 0

Location: Wargaming.net
Russian equivalents of English words "points" and "glasses" (spectacles) sound the same :-) 5000 очков.
5000 points became 5000 glasses. Great!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:03 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
thanks Art!

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Some adjustments to the rating system
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 12:38 pm 
Offline
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:53 am
Posts: 259
Karma: 0
Greetings!

It is nice to see that the changes to rating system has not been ignored by all you guys and that you keep posting your feedback on this very essential topic :)

We have started some perfection of the new system and the first thing we modified is the bonus awarded for defeating strong opponents. So now defeating Major or Colonel brings you 3-5 times more points then for defeating newbie.

Besides, the new ranks are being gained faster by beginners - so now you reach Lieutenant rank at 4000 points.

Below is the table (changes highlighted yellow):
Image

Another important update is the End Turn Ratio which gives some % out of victory bonus depending on the turn you end the game. The main idea is to avoid giving huge bonus for 'easy victory' - when your opponent just doesn't bother to make his turns and you get complete victory bonus on Turn 0. You can download the full file with % ratio for all the planets at:
http://www.massiveassaultnetwork.com/do ... _Ratio.xls

The changes are affective starting from now and apply to all the new games. Thanks for your support!

Best Regards,
Nick.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some adjustments to the rating system
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 1:42 pm 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:52 pm
Posts: 29
Karma: 0
Why, why, WHY do you not ask for our feedback before doing things like this?

Nick_WN wrote:
We have started some perfection of the new system and the first thing we modified is the bonus awarded for defeating strong opponents. So now defeating Major or Colonel brings you 3-5 times more points then for defeating newbie.

Rank is no longer an indication of a player's strength. The same player whom I mentioned in a previous post, the Major with a penchant for playing the A.I., is now ranked a Colonel. I believe that I, a newly-promoted Sergeant (and former Major), am a heavy favorite to win against him given that I have handily beaten him in two successive games on the same map. So with this new system I have even more incentive for repeatedly challenging him over and over again, right?

I don't understand the purpose of awarding extra victory points based upon either player's rank. Rank is no longer an indication of skill. The officer ranks are now infested with A.I.-stomping players, and that trend will only continue.

Quote:
Another important update is the End Turn Ratio which gives some % out of victory bonus depending on the turn you end the game. The main idea is to avoid giving huge bonus for 'easy victory' - when your opponent just doesn't bother to make his turns and you get complete victory bonus on Turn 0.

I don't understand this at all. Is it not enough that my opponent already has incentive to surrender a disadvantageous position against me on the first turn? With this new "upgrade," you are now punishing me for him surrendering on the first turn!

I understand that you want to remove incentive for players to collude and take turns surrendering to each other in an effort to pump up each other's score. This is not the way to do it. The way to do it is to implement a penalty for surrendering.

Finally, I hope that this "upgrade" to the ranking system is not intended to replace the skill-based rankings that Vic promised us.


Last edited by heihojin on Fri Apr 06, 2007 7:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 7:18 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Posts: 209
Karma: 8

Location: Australia
Just to clarify the new points system being worked on....

Will the Marshall be the most experienced player ?
OR
Will the Marshall be the player with the highest skill?

(I believe it should be the 2nd)


Just my personal opinion - If you can't beat the likes of Tiger, CptX, Storm440, Morn, Placid, Pitor, Aghepu, (and all the rest of the top players - sorry for any notable ommissions) - then you don't deserve the higher rankings (above Major). By that I mean - there should be NO way of getting a high rank by just beating the AI and lower ranked players.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:29 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 4:52 pm
Posts: 29
Karma: 0
Tiger wrote:
If players didn't use 'surrender' when they could get points and had really bad situation, why now they should do it without any bonus?

I've held off on replying further on this until the new system was implemented. It's important to note that opponents need not explicitly surrender; they may simply forfeit by allowing time to run out.

I won one match by such a forfeit yesterday, when my non-Trial opponent failed to play his turn within the 7-day time limit. The game was only on the second turn. Granted this is only one example, but it is anomalous in my limited experience for non-Trial players to forfeit under such circumstances.

I would like also like to point out that under the new "upgraded" ranking system, I receive a whopping 7.5% of my victory points from my opponent's forfeiture in this fashion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:17 am 
Offline
Supreme Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:40 pm
Posts: 1980
Karma: 6

Location: Moscow, Russia
heihojin wrote:
Tiger wrote:
If players didn't use 'surrender' when they could get points and had really bad situation, why now they should do it without any bonus?

I've held off on replying further on this until the new system was implemented. It's important to note that opponents need not explicitly surrender; they may simply forfeit by allowing time to run out.

I won one match by such a forfeit yesterday, when my non-Trial opponent failed to play his turn within the 7-day time limit. The game was only on the second turn. Granted this is only one example, but it is anomalous in my limited experience for non-Trial players to forfeit under such circumstances.

I would like also like to point out that under the new "upgraded" ranking system, I receive a whopping 7.5% of my victory points from my opponent's forfeiture in this fashion.


If your opponent have subscription, better write to him message before finish by time-limit. Perhaps, he just couldn't play last days. New rules about 0 points for victory on turn #0 was added mainly for mentors, because of many trial player don't play any turn in the battle (they don't play after creating profile).

_________________
Massive Assault Clan "Tiger's Galactic Empire"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:24 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 39
Karma: 0

Location: Russia
I would like to draw smb.'s attention on medals system. I think it must rewards quality of playing. May be in this case we can find all information about player by taking a look on his record.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:35 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
started a new post with this but i thought it also belonged in this post as well------
Got the email about being able to transfer our old alais from MAN and i am wondering why this was done? Has it been decided that all players of the original series will be given free membership into the new man2? It makes no sense that i can now play as 1_storm440 as a captain and only about 800 points from major, with about 150 wins--all transfered from the old series while if i use the alais i have been playing all of my man2 games with i am still a lieutenent and 1800 points away from captain. One of the good things about playing man2 was that everyone started from the same point--0. Why should players from the old series be given this free pass up the ranks? As an example, there are now 3 "Marshal Tiger" two comming from his old MAN profile. What does any of our old profiles have to do with MAN2? The dev's have talked about making the game better for the newbees, how does brings hundreds or thousands of profiles of players, some who have never played a MAN2 game, over and inserting them in the higher ranks?

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:11 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:58 am
Posts: 34
Karma: 0

Location: Kansas , USA
Under the previous ranking system, a trial player could rise no higher than lieutenant, which is still the case. But I surmise that when message was displayed saying you have reached the rank of major or colonel if a subscription player, meant that if I became a paying player, I would automatically be assigned the new rank. As it stands now, at 5000 points I would still be a LT, so where is the incentive? I have around 5 time is up victories tht I haven't finished, thinking I'd use them if I lost points, but seems points aren't lost once a trial player reaches 5000 points. I guess that being a trial player has no incentive once reaching 5000, even though my playing aided the developement of the game, all crashes were sent to MS , which must have helped get rid of many bugs in the game. Would be nice to get a break on the sub. price after playing almost since the beginning of MAN2. The game is great, but one thing that has held me back from paying, is that my intrest is in clan wars, what is happening in that area of the game? regards.

_________________
That's what learning is, after all; not whether we lose the game, but how we lose and how we've changed because of it and what we take away from it that we never had before, to apply to other games. Losing, in a curious way, is winning.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y