|
| Thread: ToH point sistem |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
posted May 18, 2007 10:51 PM |
|
Edited by cosmin at 23:01, 18 May 2007.
|
I'll add more if needed 
Joking of course!
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 11:02 PM |
|
Edited by cosmin at 23:08, 18 May 2007.
|
It is something wrong with the forum, when I edit the post it will bring a qoute at the end + the edit... could someone see what's going on?
I solved it!
It was because of the browser session (ie 7 ughhh)...
|
|
feluniozbunio
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2007 11:48 PM |
|
|
Its not that the formula is soo bad. Its quite good but it has some flaws, like no points gained for the win.
You can give many arguments for and against it but the bottom line is that when you are high in ranking and there is only a newbie available for play you feel bad about the game you are going to play (or even you dont play this game). Also, sometimes there is someone new who wants to enter toh its possible he might be a good player. Even if he is not he asks you bout game and you may be say him no but i doubt that your explanation will encourage him to further play. Those few extra points are just for better feeling. This rule would apply only for top players and i doubt that any of them would abuse this rule and become newbie hunter. This is my point. Ok thats my last post on this issue, you may not agree but this is my point of view.
|
|
vesuvius
Hero of Order
Honor Above all Else
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 02:56 AM |
|
|
again I repeat:
Quote:
anyways, you're telling me that giving a minimum of 5 points for a win instead of one will give better chance of you playing someone who might make you lose 50+ points... I doubt it.
____________
|
|
feluniozbunio
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 04:56 AM |
|
|
Actually im saying exactly this. 1 is always better than 5
If you beaten far weaker player 10-1 you would gain 50 and lose 50 instead of gaining 10 and losing 50. This is my reasoning.
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 05:19 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Actually im saying exactly this. 1 is always better than 5
If you beaten far weaker player 10-1 you would gain 50 and lose 50 instead of gaining 10 and losing 50. This is my reasoning.
And what if your score would be 10-3??
won 50 loose 150...
Now what are we gonna do?
make 15 points minimum?
what about 10-2
make it 10?
|
|
Elit
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 06:15 AM |
|
Edited by Elit at 07:13, 19 May 2007.
|
"If you play lots of games and won them, then for those games which you don't deserve points (or more then 1) you take 4. So a player that plays will win the tournament all the time."
If you are active and help new plaers to learn you deserve your 5 points or soo. Lets see what will be if lord/legionner hunt only noobies. He will get 5 points per win and loss 50+ for loss. So if he play 100 games and win 95 (450 points!!!) and loss 4-5 his gains will be zero/negative.
Maybe change point sistem is no need...just need other reward like new prizes for "n00bie teacher" or soo
Every 30/50 win games vs oponents for 1 points give new Prize.
Edit: Sorry i just wake up and make "smal" mistake in my post. From 100 games you need loss 10 not 5 to be gains almost zero.
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 06:46 AM |
|
Edited by cosmin at 07:00, 19 May 2007.
|
Quote:
He will get 5 points per win and loss 50+ for loss. So if he play 100 games and win 95 (450 points!!!) and loss 4-5 his gains will be zero/negative.
Ok let's go further!
Those 450 points are actually 470. 5 losses are 250+. (On fly calculation).
But playing for 5 points it is actually the case of 1500 rating player.
This is Legionnaire. So a player that is Legionnaire would have been equal rated with a Lord and an Emperor (since they get same reward). The penalty for loosing would have been the same because at this point you involve only the score (not the rank anymore).
So here's what you actually do: Take out the Lord and the Emperor as ranks and keep them only as names. From 1500 points and up whatever points you have you won't advance as rank but only as points.
So here's my question: (please take your time before you answer that):
WHAT'S THE POINT IN HAVING RANKINGS ANYMORE?
Let's make a plane ranking system, from 1 to whatever and yet now you may adjust the formula whatever you like.
TOH uses 2 things into this calculation:
1. The points
2. The rankings
You see and analyze only THE POINTS.
Here's your big confusion... In the past toh had a better explication of the formula they used (sounds like that):
"It is not about against who you play, BUT THE PROPORTION YOU PLAY AGAINST".
I started from there to get to the reality of this formula.
It is not a simple task. Even if i know what's going on it is still hard to explain it to you...
Until you get a pen into your own hand and cover 200 pages of calculations, then add the results into a modeling program that estimates for you the accuracy of your thoughts, you would never have a clue what you're talking about.
|
|
Elit
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 07:19 AM |
|
|
cosmin: you win 
When mathematics talk all shut up! 
P.S. btw what about 2 points for minimal win? 
|
|
vesuvius
Hero of Order
Honor Above all Else
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 07:44 AM |
|
|
there was a time actually where things were complained about in the reverse: people wanted it to be 20pts for win, 20pts for loss. There even was a 'petition' to change. This was back in homm3 season III or so. Of course, I didn't change the system, and thank god I didn't go their way.
____________
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 09:00 AM |
|
Edited by cosmin at 12:25, 19 May 2007.
|
On my last post here I'm gonna tell you something unbelivable about this formula!
TOH already limited this formula ! But they knew that and they tryed to adjust the "adjustness" .
They did it because beeing so hard to explain how it works would have created so much confuzion!
DID YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY THE FORMULA MAY DECREASE YOUR POINTS EVEN IF YOU WIN?
The feature was intentionally creted for stopping high ranking players "kill" the newbee.
Toh added the cherry to compensate that. (they took the risk because this fact is to easy to identify and strike back if needed).
So they use limitation to 0. So no matter what the points are, if at some point the formula would have done that, a function takes place and overwrites with 0.
At least now I can tell you that because I'm sure Vesuvius won't change it.
So if you can overwrite with 0 you may do it very simple with 5 as well!
So it was actually the fact that woudn't have been right to do it, not that would have been hard!
When this thing is happen?
Lord against Recruit! From here starts!
1611 lord
1000 recruit
Rn = 1611 +30 + 0.05*(1000-1611) = 1610 +30 + (-30.55) <---Rounded here -31
So Rn = 1611 +30 -31 = 1610
The Lord had 1611 points, won and losses 1 point!
This is it! Rankings are rankings, Tops are tops!
You play on Toh for Ranking system, so get use to it.
Even if in fact it is completely true what's going on, TOH already helped Lords and Emperors.(if for 0 players make such a revolt, what about -1?? WARR?).
I wish you all my best,
cos
|
|
AL_Killmore
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 01:31 PM |
|
|
So, your point is that the point system should not be readjusted again because it was already adjusted in the past ?
In simple words you are telling that it is forbidden for every player with more than 1500 points to play a newbie (1000 points or less)?
No matter the result of the game - he cannot win. He can only lose. And for you, this is "right"?
Yet you tell that actually there IS a minimum set in the formula and it's 0 (zero).
My question is: Ok then, why not this minimum be set to 1 (one) point, or 2 (two)? What's the big difference? Nobody will be able to become a lord by killing newbies - i can tell that for sure. So the ratings of the really good players won't be spoiled by 20-30 dead recruits, and still they will have some micro-reward for playing new players and teaching them the pro-ways of Heroes. Without such micro reward the lords will just stay on their heights refusing to play with the newbies.
IMHO zero points for a win is bad. No matter how "good" is the formula, it still can be improved. My vote is for one or two points minimum, not zero! It's true that there's no difference at all. But 100 games against new players will be 100-200 points  Not bad And if someone get jealous - there's an opportunity for a little "sabotage"  So the game can only become more interesting  And making the game more interesting - this is a good thing to do !
|
|
betruger
Known Hero
empowered mind
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 03:39 PM |
|
|
|
Right, Ves, you're saying that there is 1 minimum point per win, but that's not true. I played games where I got 0 points for win. All I'm saying is that it'd be nice to get at least something for the win.
|
|
Jinxer
Legendary Hero
*****
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 05:55 PM |
|
|
Why would a LORD or EMPEROR want or desire to play a newbie???? Its nobodies fault but your own that your that good...play other Lords and Legionairres or Barons even.. There is no amount of boredom that would suggest that you would have to play a newbie? Would crushing a newbie eliviate your boredom?
All I hear is how much whining Jinxer does.... and now I see all the top players whining because they cant exploit the newbies and recruits lol... Leave the little guys alone and quit giving them losses and they will grow to higher ranks so you can have more people to play.
I played a new recruit couple game about a month ago...and I beat him so bad, it was like playing the computer. And didnt get but 1 or 2 points outta 2 games, and that player I havent seen back since. My guess is he got discouraged and quit playing... so I dont think Emperors killing recruits is good for activity anyways.
|
|
Elit
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 09:52 PM |
|
|
|
You are not right Jinxer. Every 1 deserve reward for his win nv are this will be 1-2-3 points or more. Now if you have over 1600 points you are STUPID if you playing with nobies. Because you only can loss and win noting. Why i need to loss 2-4h from my time to teach new player and risk my points? Its better just do not play. Other important stufs is new players want to try vs good to see difference...but they cant get this chance because all high rank players are not stupid to play for zero points per win. Minimal points per win can help for up activity and more games. Are you serius think some 1 can expolit sistem and get 100 wins vs nobies? Chek again how many games have most high rank players. Most are under 100 and they are active. How some 1 can find 100 games vs nobies?
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 19, 2007 11:46 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So, your point is that the point system should not be readjusted again because it was already adjusted in the past ?
In simple words you are telling that it is forbidden for every player with more than 1500 points to play a newbie (1000 points or less)?
No matter the result of the game - he cannot win. He can only lose. And for you, this is "right"?
Hi.
You already done here 2 mistakes:
1. Adjusted in the past - Yes it has been adjusted AT THE VERY BEGGINING (and is working this way ever since), but this adjustment won't let you kill newbee if you would like to do it. So the adjustment is ONLY THEORETICAL, practical you would support punishment if you do it (see cherry description).
The "cherry" is sitting there waiting for the oportunity to take action! Try and kill 15 newbee in a row, (from Lord ranks) and you might experince that!
2. Forbidden? No (1500 are 1580 actually, read the calculations below, 1000 + 580 to get the maximum points you may have to still earn 1 point -> + the roundings you get 1599).
Would have been "forbidden" if the formula woudn't have had the 0 limitation. I guess if you would loose points on win report you would have done that by yourself!
Like this is not forbidden! Even if you don't know how it works, and you kill a newbee it won't apply the penalty you deserve! You escape with your points. All of them!
|
|
feluniozbunio
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2007 11:42 AM |
|
|
|
Cosim at first i thought u were joking but now i can see that you are not. Please stop this nonsense with points deduction for the win. We should be happy that theres 0 limitation? Give me a break.
|
|
cosmin
Known Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2007 12:03 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Cosim at first i thought u were joking but now i can see that you are not. Please stop this nonsense with points deduction for the win. We should be happy that theres 0 limitation? Give me a break.
Well what can I say? Sounds like I swould hide somewhere because I've dared to respond and explaine what you should have understood by yourself.
Nonsense is something that has no fundament, not something mathematical explained. I'll give you a break not because is not true what I'm saying (and I thought that a subject is open to get to a solution, or to understand what you can't see), but because it is crystal clear how much you try (and want) to understand...
peace.
|
|
feluniozbunio
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2007 12:11 PM |
|
|
|
Thats right, i refuse to understand 0 points for the win and for sure im not happy about the fact that i dont get minus points for the win. For the time being i just wont be playing with people too low in ranking, thats all.
|
|
AL_Killmore
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted May 20, 2007 04:25 PM |
|
|
Cosmin, your calculations are somehow wrong. I was still a baron when i played a game agains a new player and i got 0 points for the win.
Another thing: I still dont see why i "deserve punishment" when i play a game against a new player ? Why the hell should i be happy if i can "escape with my points" ???
There are many new players that log in ToH and after few games (if any) just walk away. Jinxer says that i can scare them. What was that for ? If someone is such a rabbit and a coward that can't handle few loses - why should we want him in ToH anyway ???
In my opinion it's better to have some games (for a minimal reward, if it's a win) before the newbie walk away (if he wants to) instead of not playing at all (because higher ranked players will have a lose-lose situation).
|
|
|
|
