|
Post by Canucksoldier on Apr 2, 2006 14:32:41 GMT -5
Well I won't argue that we need the patch and the sooner the better. But there's still lots of games although the risk is that we are slowly bleeding while we wait for the patch. There's still been 450 matches reported on average friday and saturday, but time zone and time of day likely is a large factorin how many games are around at any given time. As to mods, there's lots of mods around, just nothing the MP community is using yet. Mods are always something that comes later for MP, we still haven't used up all our era start options on a regular basis yet. It's a little early to declare that MP is dead, but we do need the patch ASAP, and Firaxis knows that.
CS
|
|
|
Post by weaksauce on Apr 2, 2006 16:56:42 GMT -5
Btw I think the Guild Wars ladder system is very similar to Case's ladder system, unless they changed something in the last 7/8 months since I played. Being in a top 100 Guild was a huge think in that game lol and the ladder rankings would only show the top 1000 (thus there were more than a thousand), and each with multiple ppl since GvG (guild vs guild) games require 8 ppl on each side. Point is, the ladder system here is fairly common; its simple and meets many objectives. As far as I see, the truly good players are truly at the top almost all the time, as long as they play. Some people go really high in rank and then stop playing; but we have to allow active ppl lower down to rise, thus inactivity makes you fall in rank. I think thats a good thing. Once you'r back you'll quickly rise to your level rank. I went from 400 to 11 in 1 day after 3 weeks of inactivity. But that was because I got to play teamers with friends that had higher rankings, so there is this problem that good players down the rank may not get as much oppurtunity as for example an average player like me, based on the people they know. That said, after my return the top 10 was filled with new people I never played before, so thats a good thing I think. Thats my pros and cons of ladder. As for ladder dying, you all know what I think the reasons are . Almost everything u said on guild wars is wrong actually. The guild wars ladder does not work like case's at all. Guild Wars is based on a cumulative score -- whereby you get a maximum 45 ranking points for a win (for a very hard win) and a minimum of 1 ranking point (for an easy win). Additionally, you lose ranking points (maximum 45 for a loss against a really poorly ranked opponent and a minimum of 1 point for losing to someone who ranked much higher thank you). Players are constantly gaining/losing ranking points. Good teams can camp out their position on the ladder and not be dramatically effected, if they have a very strong win history/ranking. Cumulative scores better represent player skill. They are less subject to the whims or any particular win or loss on a given day. Being in the top 10 guilds is a big deal, the top 100 do not matter. In fact, a lot of the top 10 guilds, have copycat guilds in the top 100 that they test ideas on. In fact, I would say outside of the top 20 guilds, everyone is a noob.... but there are a lot more players than Civ4. ladder.guildwars.comtake care /weak
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 2, 2006 18:04:30 GMT -5
You are young but you will learn Being in the top 10 on the ladder means nuts, being number 1 is pretty cool, but it does depend how long you are there; any rank on the ladder is meaningless(except no1 if you can stay there consistently) anyone who's been on cases ladder for more than five minutes knows this. Oh and by the way all the other stats are meaningless too, because people reset them. Case closed(if you'll pardon the pun) Rank is a popularity contest, you get top 10 by playing amongst clan players in your own clan or preferred players(friends) no other reason. The other stats no not really the same as that, but they eventually become redundant, Case's is a complete waste of time on any statistic, given enough time. The only people who don't realise this are in the top 10 consistently and in denial, there also lying, they know full well why some of this top ten players are there,that said though consistency is key, and play in the CCC(and winning consistently) Everything else is philosophy and arm waving. and they damn well know it. Or they are damn well stupid There are lies,damn lies and statistics: Mark Twain Wise man, anyone who says any differently is a fool, and frankly sooner or later you realise this, don't play the stat game it encourages non reporters and it's a waste of time anyway. Fact is Cases doesn't work and anyone who doesn't realise this is a fool. Sorry time of the month, hmmm, I've only said this a million times(waits for Tommynt's trite reply on how statistics matter ) ah the amusement factor cannot be under estimated, you laugh and then you laugh again. Walks away tapping his stick as grasshopper looks on in bewilderment [the theme to Kung Fu plays in the background] ahhhh the wisdom lol!
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 3, 2006 1:48:21 GMT -5
You are young but you will learn Being in the top 10 on the ladder means nuts, being number 1 is pretty cool, but it does depend how long you are there; any rank on the ladder is meaningless(except no1 if you can stay there consistently) anyone who's been on cases ladder for more than five minutes knows this. Oh and by the way all the other stats are meaningless too, because people reset them. Case closed(if you'll pardon the pun) Rank is a popularity contest, you get top 10 by playing amongst clan players in your own clan or preferred players(friends) no other reason. The other stats no not really the same as that, but they eventually become redundant, Case's is a complete waste of time on any statistic, given enough time. The only people who don't realise this are in the top 10 consistently and in denial, there also lying, they know full well why some of this top ten players are there,that said though consistency is key, and play in the CCC(and winning consistently) Everything else is philosophy and arm waving. and they damn well know it. Or they are damn well stupid There are lies,damn lies and statistics: Mark Twain Wise man, anyone who says any differently is a fool, and frankly sooner or later you realise this, don't play the stat game it encourages non reporters and it's a waste of time anyway. Fact is Cases doesn't work and anyone who doesn't realise this is a fool. Sorry time of the month, hmmm, I've only said this a million times(waits for Tommynt's trite reply on how statistics matter ) ah the amusement factor cannot be under estimated, you laugh and then you laugh again. Walks away tapping his stick as grasshopper looks on in bewilderment [the theme to Kung Fu plays in the background] ahhhh the wisdom lol! I went from rank 50 to rank 11 yesterday in one game! I sure must have learned a whole lot really fast! Honestly, I think the biggest stopgap toward the ladder having a useful set of statistics is the format of C4 multiplayer games. Team games enable hilarious rank jumping, like above, in a game where the outcome of the match by definition depends 4/5 (in a 5-player game) on the quality of your teammates and 1/5 on the quality of you. And cton games are pretty variable; you can lose a game very easily versus much, much, much weaker players by screwing up a little bit and having 2 very strong, aggressive neighbors. Those are the two big formats for ladder games, and neither of them return sensible results with this ladder system. Then again, who cares. It's still fun.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Apr 3, 2006 2:52:23 GMT -5
Well, a big difference (if not THE difference) between the Firaxis model and the Blizzard model is the money. You have to pay every month to play. You and the company seal a contract - but you can quit it whenever you like. It forces the company to provide support. Blizzard knows that if they ever lower their standards they will lose a lot of customers. Actually, i talked about games other than WoW. Everyone patches MMORPGs, after all there is a subscription model so there is nothing new here. But IIRC Diablo II and Starcraft were also patched in the last year. Guild Wars doesn't have a subscription fee as well, sales were about equal to Civ 4 sales but Guild Wars is being patched a lot, it got a free expansion and Arena.net hosts a normal servers with a client-server model instead of that Firaxis/Civ 4 peer-to-peer crap that causes all these connection issues. Also, Guild Wars has an amazing patching model. The "patches" are automatically streamed to you, and are incremental in the sense that once you've already got an update, future updates are relative to that one and thus not so massive. It's not just their patching model, it's their game engine that also is an editor for all content in their game. So when they update content, client downloads the changes. IIRC they spent about 2 years implementing it. So it will not work for Civ 4 Guild Wars also regularly do small or big updates, and not just that, those updates often reflect the demands of the community on their forums. They have even hired an employee just for community relations (everyone in Guild Wars knows her as Gaile), and she literally interacts with many of the Guild Wars websites out there. She keeps us informed, and even asks what we want, or how we prefer things to be like, and the coolest thing is, they actually do it. It makes you feel so happy. Actually, they had two community managers when i played (USA and Euro). Also, NCSoft itself manages Guild Wars in Korea so i guess they have their own employee for it (i doubt that Gaile knows Korean language). Almost everything u said on guild wars is wrong actually. The guild wars ladder does not work like case's at all. Guild Wars is based on a cumulative score -- whereby you get a maximum 45 ranking points for a win (for a very hard win) and a minimum of 1 ranking point (for an easy win). Additionally, you lose ranking points (maximum 45 for a loss against a really poorly ranked opponent and a minimum of 1 point for losing to someone who ranked much higher thank you). Players are constantly gaining/losing ranking points. Good teams can camp out their position on the ladder and not be dramatically effected, if they have a very strong win history/ranking. In other words, Guild Wars uses an Elo rating system. But this system was designed for two-player games so it's pointless to use it for Civ 4 ladder. It just will not work when we have a ctons and teamers with non-fixed teams. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_systemIt was used for chess and numerous other games and computer games (Starcraft, Warcraft III, Guild Wars ladders etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Lestat on Apr 3, 2006 5:23:45 GMT -5
Sidhe before u post crap plz go to ladder page and look statistic. 1. We have about 5 people win% which played more then 1000 game 2. we have 50 people win% which played more than 500 games.
|
|
|
Post by GERMANIA on Apr 3, 2006 9:24:15 GMT -5
Well Sidhe you showed us again at a great way that you have no idea how the ladder goes and who is good.... Skill means some thing for sure.. and there is a reason why your skill record isn't high because your aren't the best in this game witch is ok, but please don't post 100s and 100 of stupid posted with 0 meaning...
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Apr 3, 2006 10:01:16 GMT -5
If it was that way everyone d whine that i ll be n1 forever - pretty boring heh
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 3, 2006 13:38:14 GMT -5
Well Sidhe you showed us again at a great way that you have no idea how the ladder goes and who is good.... Skill means some thing for sure.. and there is a reason why your skill record isn't high because your aren't the best in this game witch is ok, but please don't post 100s and 100 of stupid posted with 0 meaning... Well I have no idea what Lestats post meant Nah your just deluded. Skill is better thank say win percentage or rank but not much. I'm surprised Germania is saying this because every single stat on the ladder ranking has been debated and destroyed in the C3c forum, obviously he's one of the minority descenters amongst the experienced players on C3c, I could post to all said links but I see someone already did that. Suffice to say I have absolutely no idea how good anyone is on the ladder unless I play them on a regular basis, the stats are worth nuts and everyone except obviously Germania knows it. If we had a proper ladder sytem that rewarded wins. I.e who you beat relative "skill", how many kills you get, how many times you got killed etc etc, dtats that can't be reset etc etc and was not about what time zone you play in and who your buddies are I might take it seriously, as it is it's a sad reflection of nothing much, and the longer it goes on and the more people, like Germania who reset there stats, just go to prove how lame and indicative of nothing the current system is? The reward for subscription is that your stats mean nothing, great idea? My stats mean nuts too, and even if my skill was 2400 I'd tell you just how worthless that is and I'd be discussing the same thing. I couldn't give a rats arse if my skill is 500 or 5000 or a damn about any of the stats, frankly the only thing I care about is enjoying myself; if you want to continue to laud what is an inadequate ranking system by all means go ahead, it's just no one will take you seriously. Check out the link someone else gave, the ladder community gave up defending cases years ago. One day we may have a better ranking system that truly reflects a players ability, until then you go on boasting about nothing and I'll enjoy playing without really caring too much about any of the statistics, anyone who's anyone knows their beyond damn lies anyway, who's good or crap is not a number it's based on experience of a player not statistics. I'd say at this moment in time considering how early it is into the game, that skill is more of an indication of whether you were a beta tester than anything. Also those people who are in clans tend to horde knowledge so this early on anyone who's amember of said clan can get a pretty good mess of wins from simply using the advice of their clan thus skill is skewed by who you know, once the in tricks and secrets are out there and the general knowledge about the game is well known then the stats will have more of an impact but by then I suspect so many players will have reset there stats that it'll be a sort of grey meaningless fudge.. Also ranking is pretty much who you play with or how often you play(this is the way the system is set up, it rewards those who play often), if you live in the US say and most of the top 10 players are their and your a known "face" then you can get into and stay in the top ten and who knows even make number one, if your like poor old whats his face and you live in China good luck making it into the top 50. win percentage means nothing, particularly if a player can reset his stats or has. There are some win percentages that are genuine, problem is as time goes by how can you tell? Look at tourneys won, who's won what and how often, if someone can stay at no1 and consistently be up there, especially if they are in the wrong time zone(whatever that is currently) or social outcasts. These are the players to note, everything else is stat mongering and arm waving, hot air and bluster. Hey I'm not saying this because I want to piss you off, hell I had the same sort of ideas about stats when I first joined, but after a year or so of being told by various experienced players that they are worth s**t I just kind of releneted in the end and had to agree, particularly when you look at some of the cogent arguments against them on the C3c ladder. In the end it comes down to whether you want to use them as an extremly rough guide, or you want to delude yourself into thinking that they are truly indicative of a player; your choice I guess....
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Apr 3, 2006 14:52:08 GMT -5
sidhe as germ said - repaeting something 100 times in every thread dont make it true.
do u copy paste that stuff?
|
|
|
Post by salqadri on Apr 3, 2006 19:37:49 GMT -5
Its too long to even begin reading.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on Apr 3, 2006 20:07:51 GMT -5
SIX PARAGRAPHS?!!?! THAT'S LIKE 4 MINUTES OF READING, f**k YOU SIDHE ALSO CLEARLY IT WAS A C/P JOB BECAUSE NOBODY CAN WRITE THAT MUCH AND SPELL ALL THE WORDS RIGHT edit: ;D
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Apr 4, 2006 4:20:29 GMT -5
If it was that way everyone d whine that i ll be n1 forever - pretty boring heh lol or at least until the 2nd expansion comes and you're treated like Mo D or Lord Phan as washed-up has-beens ;D
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Apr 4, 2006 4:22:13 GMT -5
Errrrrrrrrm
nothing personal guys.. Mo D and LP are respected legendary members of C3C... I just meant that someone better and/or memorable always comes along later
But then again.... who really cares as long as you have fun
|
|
|
Post by GERMANIA on Apr 4, 2006 6:06:13 GMT -5
Well Sidhe you showed us again at a great way that you have no idea how the ladder goes and who is good.... Skill means some thing for sure.. and there is a reason why your skill record isn't high because your aren't the best in this game witch is ok, but please don't post 100s and 100 of stupid posted with 0 meaning... My stats mean nuts too, and even if my skill was 2400 I'd tell you just how worthless that is and I'd be discussing the same thing. Well yes skill would mean nothing would you make it but the thing is you wont make it and i doubt you even break 2000 ore 1900 ore even 1800.. well you make 1800 if you get a good rng in tamers, but really.. skills mean some thing for sure not all i agree like players islandia his skill record is less then how good he really is but still better then most of the ladders... So believe it ore not sidhe it means some thing just sigh of all your posted with 0 meaning!!!!
|
|
arma
Settler
Posts: 20
|
Post by arma on Apr 4, 2006 7:21:27 GMT -5
I agree with Sidhe completely, and my skill rating for AU_Armageddon was 1962 until the 5v5 teamer where you quit 5 turns in. My new name is already 1840 or so and would be higher but of course 4 people already failed to report in from my winning an 8 player and 10 player two days ago. Of course, several teamers and it would plummet into 1600's due to 50/50 teamer win rate, obliterated any lingering value of the stats into garbled nonsense. Doesn't matter as today was last straw for me. 8 players in lobby. 8... 25 at same moment online playing just my 4 year old NWN server alone . And to rub salt in, a bad peer in the one game up. So instead of playing I spent 15 minutes trying figure who the hell I was supposed to e-mail about the unreports, so they could get their meaningless 2 day ban (which is exactly why unreporting for anyone who doens't play daily seems the best bet, mostly get away with it cos people cbf chasing it). Frustrated doing this homework feeling task, it struck me. What the hell am I doing? This isn't fun. Bad ladder and all the points I made in first post are one thing - and not a good thing, but compounded with lack of players and no support for bad peer mess, and no enforcement at all so that the winners reward is they get homework figuring out and e-mailing tossers - too ludicrous. Tried a last ladder game but lost heart and cbf trying anymore. Uninstalled Civ4 and withdrew ladder. Will have another look at state of affairs when x-pac comes out. Though will rip it instead of buy this time since it is apparently required to make the actual game playable. Another unknown top 10 player whithers away (started mashing at end turn, felt lame but halved my military requirements ). On bright side, no-one will miss me. But as you say here, whatever. GL HF.
|
|
arma
Settler
Posts: 20
|
Post by arma on Apr 4, 2006 7:27:33 GMT -5
P.S. just remembered I forgot to report everyone in that last game I mentioned before withdrawing when I quit and uninstalled. Irony for ya.
|
|
|
Post by GERMANIA on Apr 4, 2006 7:41:35 GMT -5
who cares
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Apr 4, 2006 12:38:31 GMT -5
Or I could break 2000 if I was a beta tester and when I started playing I already had six months to 2 years game experience under my belt, or the day I started I got loads of advice via my clan from said beta testers, pah you guys are so full of it and you know it, atm skill is a RNG stat dependant on who you know and how much info they imparted to you, Is it any real surprise that the clan players have higher than average RNG's even the supposedly weaker players, go live in fantasy land. You can play an Epic and pick up 1800 skill just by winning every bench mark. None of the stats are worth spitting on and anyone who disagrees is just deluding himself. Also if you play 2 teamers with the top rankers which you win by no real skill of your own you can break 1800. This is all just random and nothing you can say makes any difference,all the stats are either redundant given enough time, particularly your own win streak Germania, or manipulatable. Everyone except it seems Tommy and you already know this. I happen to play alot of ancients, none of my clan play them consistently or didn't the last time I played about a month or so ago, I'm on my own, hey whoever said I was the best player? At least I don't claim that all the extra advice I get via my clan makes me a good player atm, that's just lame. give it 2 years and then I might just might concede that skill has a point, but only if all the players reset there skill at that point. Cut and paste it's called a spell checker I also type at 60 wpm. Next we shall have a presentation of how Fried could of got a 100 win streak without being a beta tester and how in fact skill bares no relation to experience. Stats are at best a very very rough guide, at worst meaninglessly manipulated prole fodder. How long it takes to realise is proportional to the numbers of players who tell you to shut up because stat A means nuts.
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Apr 4, 2006 14:17:43 GMT -5
Sidhe beta testers advantage is well and truly over. Looking at the list at the back of the manual none of them even hardly play ladder games. In fact going down the list i can see 3 active beta testers and about 15 inactive ones And very very few beta testers in the all time highest skill. Im not saying skill is really meaningful, but what you write is somewhat flawed, but nothing new there. To get skill over 2000 you have to be a good player, maybe not brilliant but good. This is why, beacuse when you have a high 1900 skill you probally have a decent streak of decent players, then for the skill rating to jump past about 1975 you must play good players or it will jump at snail rate, even if you play teamers you will, more then likely be a captian, if you not that good the imbalance in captians will make sure your skill rating drops quickly. So to get a skill rating over 2000 means you are atleast "good". But current skill is very meaningless i dont think anyone can argue with that.
|
|