Ratings

 _HERACLES_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 10 June 2010
Posts:4335
Posted 26 October 2011 - 9:30 am
why should voobly make people quit CBA this way????they can say dont play cba maps ..u play cba u get ban....if this is the way voobly wants to do..
really....this notion of QUIT PLAYING CBA PLAY DIFFERENT MAPS is very stupid IMO............just like quit ARABIA play othr maps..goddam it.. XD
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 Ruby_Weapon_4


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 8 November 2007
Posts:35
Posted 26 October 2011 - 9:37 am
You don't seem to understand Heracles. CBA is a menace. I believe and many others do, that it has destroyed this game. First of all. If everyone just plays one scenario it hurts the game as a whole in terms of variety. CBA is not for everyone. Many hate it. Old players come and see everyone playing CBA and they're pretty much like: wtf!!! There used to be many many scenarios that many people played but now this simply isn't the case. So if you can't come back and play your favorite map of old there isn't much incentive.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Voobly wouldn't do that. You play CBA you get banned sounds ridiculous. A much better option to encourage more variety is to temporarily disable the rating system of CBA. Just for a couple hours at a time or a day or so just to see what happens.

No matter what if some new rating system is adopted or if they get rid of rates all together it'll still have to go through some sort of trial period like what I suggested with temporarily making CBA unrated.
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 [ViCiouS]TheAussieOne


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 19 September 2010
Posts:5311
Posted 26 October 2011 - 9:45 am
There's so many dilemmas involved with whatever decision you choose to take.

1. Ratings are used (and meant to be used...) by people to differentiate the best from the worst. It's to feed our egos as everybody enjoys being complimented, whether it be from others or from themselves, regardless of the means used to gain the compliment (meaning people with a high rating enjoy being recognised for this, whether they cheated or gained it legit will not bother them).

As we know, many people abusing this rating system ruin the effect the ladder should have and could have. Reaslitically, the ladders should only rate 1v1 games, as it's easier to police point trading and 1v1 will account for the individuals total skill and ability to win the game, opposed to teaming a friend of a higher level and being carried to a higher rating level without proving themselves.

2. CBA is addictive for players. Age of Empires is a terribly hard game to pick up for the newer players. Rm has been revolutionised over and over into specific strategies (21/23 pop feud, then drush+ca in huns war arabia) that the outcome of games is usually based on micro, macro and map and games are generally finished before Imperial (1v1s). Your average 1500 rm player would be at an 1800 level on Zone due to the dramatic increase in skill overall in the community over the last decade.

Hence, newer players choose to play something where they have a chance in winning. The map needs to be easy, hence CBA TG with random civs is their option. Players can be given a great civ that counters all enemy civs and win a game for their team (in a noobs game obviously...), which boosts their ego and makes them feel good about playing the game. I view CBA as the poker varient for AoC.

Do not get me wrong, CBA has been played so damn much and figures such as Geen have brought the skill level to a respectable level, which has gone on to be improved upon once again ever since through clans such as Eot_ and 7th. However, whether people choose to acknowledge it or not, CBA is the easiest map in AoC to learn and pick up (bigger community and skill ranges opposed to bloods/euro/RCB being more closed off communities where people are known for their skill abilities and unknowns are generally ignored).

3. Other map communities in CS are generally closed off. I know in Europe community, I hate wasting my time playing against inferior players, as I enjoy the challenge of strategising and countering strategies. No other map in CS really offers this for me. It is ironic as I was once the inferior player who had to learn through greats such as Uni and Denn, and now I can act arrogantly because I'm @ a high enough level in the map to try many different things successfully.

It's the same attitude shared in Bloods. I will not waste my time teaming a random "noob"only to be frustrated because they do not understand the game-play of a certain map, and these "noobs" generally refuse to learn and take on advice, as the maps are much harder than CBA. ****, I've written countless guides, taught countless players and advocated for CS for so long, yet it hasn't had the impact I've hoped for. All thanks to CBA.

4. Rating resets will piss off a lot of people and potentially cause many problems with Voobly. Whether or not people abused their rating, they still spent time getting to that point, and would be angry to lose it all.

The only way I can see this approach being successful is to store an old ladder system where people's highest rating achieved are recorded and compared to each other

e.g. If I reached 2306 in CBA before the ladder reset, and it's the highest rating ever achieved in CBA legit, it would be recorded on the historical ladder, beating the previous rating held by YucatanMan of 2301. The top 100 ever would be kept on the ladder. Those who don't break the 100 would have their highest rating achieved recorded on their profile.

This way, players can still view what they worked hard to achieve, and people will be encouraged to play more often to beat that mark they achieved. A combination of this approach and a forced 1v1 style of play could potentially make these ladder systems far more accurate, more competitive and most importantly, more enjoyable.

If people are enjoying their time at Voobly, they are more likely to donate and support Voobly. Voobly need to approach this issue professionally and not act in haste.

5. Realistically, cash tournaments are the only means of encouraging fair play and skillful play. You may ask how? People need to register for the tournament, which would have certain rule settings that the player has to accept. The donator would then have power over the rules, and can forge a set of rules which enbcourage fair play (such as no camping or abusing map faults or whatever). Players would be forced to practice against a variety of players to adapt to the enjoyable play in order to win the prize on offer.

The effect created is competitve and skillful games. People must adapt, as money speaks louder than actions (trust me, it does). This change encourages fair play in general public games, leaving a lasting effect.

Look at WCL, and how much the players practiced and the quality of the games produced. It was truly remarkable. I'm sure CS could potentially be provided with similar tournaments if it wasn't such a mockey of AoC at times through people's actions.

6. Some people use ratings as a guideline for what game to join (CBA 17++, CBA 1650++ etc). This is only in CBA most of the time. It's bull**** that people say it's for a fairer game. ALL of the CBA community stack their teams and play against lower rated/skilled players 90% of the time to increase their rating. It is an easy way to achieve a high rating. It's a disgusting habit for the game, and isn't an accurate reflection.

However, we do it because we enjoy playing with people we know and people's skills we can trust in to achieve the win we desire. We do not play to lose, unless we are playing to learn. But what is there to learn in random civ CBA TG? Very, very little. Hence why I believe any argument a respected player in CBA can produce is absolute crap.

I may seem biased, but it's logical thought. As far as I am concerned, CS is stuck in a sorry state at a point where it can potentially over-take Rm in popularity and gain a bigger and better reputation, however we are on course to continue the bad and abusive reputation we continue to recieve from Zone.

7. A decay system. How often do we see players/clans sit on a rating they've achieved to only sit there and refuse to play other players through fear of losing this rating and recognition that comes along with it. A decay system forces games to be played to stay at the level they wish to be at. It forces players to be active.

8. Less rated maps. Players are abusing unknown and less played maps to gain high ratings. King of Towers was never played, and now a few people discovered the ideal strategy which rarely fails, hence achieving a 1900-2000 rating in that field without proving it in other maps of that field. Same goes for bloods.

Yes, I am ranting, but these are the general issues we face. Save me the "too long, didnt read'" smartass remarks.
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 [I3acI]B


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 22 August 2011
Posts:3085
Posted 26 October 2011 - 9:55 am
Nice post sir.

More or less sums up everything I've said here and in the other thread.
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 Tic@voobly


Group: Senior Directors
Join Date: n/a
Posts:5999
Posted 26 October 2011 - 10:09 am
Excellent post!
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 Tic@voobly


Group: Senior Directors
Join Date: n/a
Posts:5999
Posted 26 October 2011 - 10:11 am
I liked the part in the novel where Anna Karenina jumps in front of a train.

Always has to be one - deleted
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 [XceL]Donnie


Group: Gold Membership
Join Date: 9 December 2008
Posts:5719
Posted 26 October 2011 - 10:26 am
whats the point of deleting it if you quoted it in your post ;lol
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 Tic@voobly


Group: Senior Directors
Join Date: n/a
Posts:5999
Posted 26 October 2011 - 10:58 am
whats the point of deleting it if you quoted it in your post ;lol

Made me feel better - k?
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 [ViCiouS]H00dluM


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 29 June 2007
Posts:898
Posted 26 October 2011 - 11:03 am
msn game zone didn't have rates, yet had 3 CS rooms filled with 2000 players. We were able to get by because people within the communities all knew one another... clan tags also had a big role in whether some one was allowed to play. You earned your spot in the game.

Instead of remembering the clan or name, ppl use rate now i guess
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 neonlongdong


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 25 October 2011
Posts:2
Posted 26 October 2011 - 11:13 am
Yes remove rating or change it to be fair, rating dosn't mean anything here . From my experience playing cba 50% of my games are lost from players dropping and teams being uneven and when you have random civs aswell as people dropping for what ever reason its a joke to have a rating and dosn't prove if your good or not from a unaccurate rating system and then you get your high rating players for eg. my last cba hero game who i wont name got towered in hes base instead of losing 5-3 points decided to lag game out not only did he drop and rejoin the game twice the game ended up getting stuck on the continue screen from lag spam no doubt coming from a s1l3nt player was pretty cheap probly dose it every game hes losing to keep hes points up im sure theres lot more of you rating ****s that try to do this to keep up your rating and get around the system i know all about this cos i used to do it on zone , unless you can make the rating system 99% accurate it's just going to ruin most games fun and we dont need it, only sugestion and where i could see it working is if you make it you dont lose points if u leave game with in 5 mins yeh sure lot will leave with the hole random civ thing but it would be a fairer system or you could make a player system where you just have a player rating as in bad or good bad meaning you have been reported for whatever reason and players will know not to play with you ...and or just have a rating system for clan wars that dont have random civs , keep stats whatever but even then how accurate are stats going to be really .
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 BF_Basse


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 13 April 2009
Posts:558
Posted 26 October 2011 - 11:14 am
Rambit wrote:
More people playing at voobly than ever before.
More people playing the game than ever before (spread over all clients).

Just don't see how it could be called a dying game with those stats.

Sure ratings differentiate us from GR, but in my opinion in a bad way. Majority of the players I have talked to from there don't like voobly because of the ratings. I think if ratings were not in the equasion voobly would be the hands down best client.

That is basically why I made this topic. I came to the same conclusion and thought its just a bit silly.
I would definitely try out Voobly if the CS ratings were removed. In Voobly, it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to find a game that isn't CBA. There are a few other maps like TD's or RCB's hosted rarely, they often fill up quite fast though.

The game is constantly growing, and most "oldies" hates CBA, while most "newbies" loves it. Oldies hates it because the community ruined it, and the newbies loves it because it's so easy to play. I mean, even my friends who played for their first time almost won against me on 1v1 CBA, and I have been playing CS on GR since 2009/2010.

I've never liked CBA, though I like CBA-styled games. I played a lot of CB's though, RCB and Mini CB and such before. But they got quite repetive. Now I hardly ever see new maps hosted (neither here or on GR). It's mostly CBA hosted on both clients. Sure there are some nice maps hosted sometimes, but the main difference I notice between GR and Voobly is that on GR, I can host almost any map on GR and it gets filled, or at least enough people to have a good game. It took 20 minutes on Voobly to even get 1 player to join my room. But then I already gave up on Voobly. I tried several different maps, and nothing but CBA rooms got filled during that time.
_HERACLES_ wrote:
the notion tha cba is an easy map is very vague.....it was designed to be tough.....at least the map makers say so.....moreover.......europe tends to RM skills.........which is the reason it is assigned to alternative ratings........

on a simple thought...if the ratings are removed..ill quit everytime i get a bad civ...........
quitting will become a bigger problem in non rated games....
You know that the creator(s) of CBA are still unknown, and CBA was made to be easy, and not tough. Also, you're one of them who ruined this game.
Rambit wrote:
I think there will always be a way to play unfair, no matter how hard we try.

Removing them has failed, because we listen to everyone cry and bring them back. Like I have said before, I acknowledge people will be upset at first, but I think in the long run they would be better off.
I don't think removing ratings is the only way, but apparently the easiest way to get rid of this obsession for CBA and all the point-whoring. There's so many great maps out there that has just been forgotten because today CS equals CBA...

I also agree on everything RagingHippo and Rambit has stated so far in this thread.
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 neonlongdong


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 25 October 2011
Posts:2
Posted 26 October 2011 - 11:28 am
very true
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 _HERACLES_


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 10 June 2010
Posts:4335
Posted 26 October 2011 - 2:14 pm
the castle blood automatic came frm the map CBF......

and for all the people who say cba is an easy map........easy to learn and stuff..................
basically the hardest map i feel is HEROFEST......which is completely a personal opinion...and CBA comes next to it if not THE NEXT......
The mapmakers would knw that CBAv8 has got over 1000 triggers which is far higher than most maps........the triggers and game mechanism is wht matters in the world of CS as far as i knw.....
for the record SMOSH,khans are one of the easiest maps i have ever seen....

and why would CBA be the only map to be taken of the RATED chart??????is it bcoz maximum of the community plays it??or are the othr map players JEALOUS?
just a thought
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 Ruby_Weapon_4


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 8 November 2007
Posts:35
Posted 26 October 2011 - 2:29 pm
Trigger number does not equal difficulty. Not sure what you mean by game mechanism. If you mean layout CBA isn't too complex. Hero Fest is no where near the hardest. Where's the variety in strategy? All you do is build build build + try to kill the other players villies. Same strategy is more or less used by all. If you really need to ask why CBA should be unrated after reading this thread I worry for you and it furthers others arguments even more.
Link | Válasz | Idézet
 BF_Basse


Group: Standard Membership
Join Date: 13 April 2009
Posts:558
Posted 26 October 2011 - 2:54 pm
_HERACLES_ wrote:
the castle blood automatic came frm the map CBF......

and for all the people who say cba is an easy map........easy to learn and stuff..................
basically the hardest map i feel is HEROFEST......which is completely a personal opinion...and CBA comes next to it if not THE NEXT......
The mapmakers would knw that CBAv8 has got over 1000 triggers which is far higher than most maps........the triggers and game mechanism is wht matters in the world of CS as far as i knw.....
for the record SMOSH,khans are one of the easiest maps i have ever seen....

and why would CBA be the only map to be taken of the RATED chart??????is it bcoz maximum of the community plays it??or are the othr map players JEALOUS?
just a thought

Most of my maps have way over 1000 triggers, does that make them all that great? Not at all. I am only happy with like 3-4 maps with 1000+ triggers, the rest were just waste of time and effort :P


Link | Válasz | Idézet
1234567[8]9101112131415161718192021»
Displaying 106 - 120 out of 404 posts
Ugrás:
6 User(s) are reading this topic (in the past 30 minutes)
0 members, 6 guests

Dân số hiện tại:
RCB Gold 2013 v4 (20 Người chơi)
Word Association (9 Người chơi)
Ratings (6 Người chơi)
Top all round (5 Người chơi)
Photos of Voobly Players (3 Người chơi)
Half Life 2 (2 Người chơi)
Chủ đề tích cực nhất tuần qua: