Jump to content

[Update] Introducing: RenStats-powered Team Balancing


Suspiria
 Share

Recommended Posts


Differences of RenStats-powered balancing compared to snapshot post-match shuffling
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effect 1:
RenStats-powered balancing: Equalizes opportunity (=> fair play)
Snapshot post-match shuffling: Equalizes outcome (=> stalemates)

Effect 2:
Snapshot shuffling algorithm:
Newbies that perform exceptionally well this one match, are immediately put into the weaker team next match (=> punished)
Pro's that start fooling around, are immediately put into the stronger team next match (=> comforted)

RenStats-powered balancing:
Newbies that perform exceptionally well this one match, are still put in a stronger team next match (=> rewarded)
Pro's that are just fooling around, are a serious liability to their team as they are expected to perform as usual (=> stimulated)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Characteristics of RSpTB:
- Works in realtime while players enter the server
- Prevents unintentional team stacking
- Helps after intentional team stacking
- Balances opportunity instead of equalizing outcome
- More rewarding for newbies
- More stimulating for pro's
- Configurable subfactors and balancer sensitivity
- No forced hotswapping
- Abuse-resistant

Subfactors: General Experience, Teamplay, Renegade-X Skill, Commander Skill, Combat Skill
Formula: see screenshot

Come on in!
Have a look at the machinery: Rx_TeamBalancer.uc, DefaultRenegadeX.ini

Comes bundled with the RenStats server and the new Access Control system.

Server code available to developers, on request.
RenStats server URL available to trusted server admins.

Yours truly
- DugeHick


p.s. Hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes here.
I was told by a server admin that noone was currently working on balancing and I like to surprise people.

RenStats_Service.png

Rx_TeamBalancer_1.png

 

RS_TeamBalancer_v0.9.rar

Edited by DugeHick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest once upon the time

First I have to apologize because I'm not a native English speaking person and I have problems understanding the whole post.
I formulate a question and then (if I should have understood it correctly) write my thoughts about it.
If I have misunderstood, I ask for correction.


1. Steam?
Answer:
Looks like the Steam would be compulsive, is not at all my thing and I can imagine that some do not want this.


2. Does that mean the new good player should join a better team in the next match? "Pro" as motivation (bad match before) too?

RenStats-powered balancing:
Newbies that perform exceptionally well this one match, are still putting in a strong team next match (=> rewarded)
Pro's that are just fooling around, they are expected to perform as usual (=> stimulated)

About screenshot:
1. Measuring experience in win and loose is unfortunately no yardstick. At times when there are hardly any online games, it's pretty easy to win.


2. Commander skill:
There are some who play for fun and do not want to be commander at all and are still good team players.


3. KDR:
mmhhh, when ppl prefers to play assist chars (hottie or whatever
in this direction) is their KDR usually not very high, but very team useful.
4. Combat skills:
no idea how to really measure that without coping with lots of data.

What I write sounds to you probably very against your proposal, but is not meant.
First of all, I have really problems to follow your remarks and secondly, my remarks are just for thought.
I think it's good that you not only think about it but also show direct suggestions.
I hope Google translate was not so wild in translation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it doesn't require Steam and went solely on the previous match stats every time, that'd still make it really useful as intended without having to create a backlog of every players' ability. Match-by-match basis team balancing could work quite nicely too 

If it isn't compulsory for players to use Steam for this to work that's awesome! 

If its a match-by-match basis as well as pre-existing steamuser stats, that's doubly-awesome 

 

Edit: I don't see how total wins/losses should factor into an individual player in an team game as far as team balancing goes, 100 wins to 20 losses doesn't necessarily mean a player is really good but instead that they were fortunate enough to be on the winning side. The players score, infantry kills, vehicle kills, building kills, successful beacons & commander wins = Basing balance on each individual players' successes is probably an better formula for balance 

Actual games won/lost and deaths really don't need to factor into balance, basically.

Edited by Madkill40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your input!

On 5/1/2019 at 1:34 PM, SilentKnight said:

1. Steam?
Answer:
Looks like the Steam would be compulsive, is not at all my thing and I can imagine that some do not want this.

Exactly the opposite, actually. We won't need Steam ID's anymore.
Can still use Steam, but it's not necessary for access control and RenStats.

Quote

2. Does that mean the new good player should join a better team in the next match? "Pro" as motivation (bad match before) too?

Yes that's why I called it Commander skill and not Team skill. I think the RenScore comes a little bit closer to Team skill.

Quote

About screenshot:
1. Measuring experience in win and loose is unfortunately no yardstick. At times when there are hardly any online games, it's pretty easy to win.

Yep! That's why it's only a small part of the equation.
I didn't want to ignore it because I do think there's a difference between 5 and 3000 matches.

Quote

3. KDR:
mmhhh, when ppl prefers to play assist chars (hottie or whatever
in this direction) is their KDR usually not very high, but very team useful.

True story. This is where the RenScore factor picks up.

Quote

4. Combat skills:
no idea how to really measure that without coping with lots of data.

I think KDR is quite indicative of one's one-on-one combat skill, isn't it?

I love what you write.
It's good to have an extra set of eyes here and there. Thanks again!

(Google Translate did just fine. )

Edited by DugeHick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2019 at 10:44 PM, Madkill40 said:

If it doesn't require Steam and went solely on the previous match stats every time, that'd still make it really useful as intended without having to create a backlog of every players' ability. Match-by-match basis team balancing could work quite nicely too 

If it isn't compulsory for players to use Steam for this to work that's awesome! 

If its a match-by-match basis as well as pre-existing steamuser stats, that's doubly-awesome 

 

Edit: I don't see how total wins/losses should factor into an individual player in an team game as far as team balancing goes, 100 wins to 20 losses doesn't necessarily mean a player is really good but instead that they were fortunate enough to be on the winning side. The players score, infantry kills, vehicle kills, building kills, successful beacons & commander wins = Basing balance on each individual players' successes is probably an better formula for balance 

Actual games won/lost and deaths really don't need to factor into balance, basically.

Hmm thing with match-by-match (=snapshot), is that it's going to be balanced tóó perfectly.
It's going to create an equal outcome continuously.
It's going to try to ensure that all matches end up a tie. (=stalemate)

I don't think we want that.
I think we want to allow those natural fluctuations of players performing better or worse at different times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DugeHick said:

is that it's going to be balanced tóó perfectly.
It's going to create an equal outcome continuously.
It's going to try to ensure that all matches end up a tie. (=stalemate)

VP prevents stalemates.
Map choice decide stalemates.

If there is an Stalemate on ANY map which does not have AGT/Obby then it is typically an interesting game (or overcrowded) 

If balance somehow splits teams perfectly that every player is playing at 100% or the same range throughout their counter-balanced rivals I'd be more impressed with this than anything else for at least 5 minutes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...