| 1 |
[quote]The original balance would make:
|
1 |
[quote]The original balance would make:
|
| 2 |
1800 + 1100 + 1400 = 4300
|
2 |
1800 + 1100 + 1400 = 4300
|
| 3 |
1500 + 1500 + 1200 = 4200
|
3 |
1500 + 1500 + 1200 = 4200
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
But ur suggestion (If I did understand you right):
|
5 |
But ur suggestion (If I did understand you right):
|
| 6 |
1800 + 1500 + 1200
|
6 |
1800 + 1500 + 1200
|
| 7 |
1500 + 1400 + 1100
|
7 |
1500 + 1400 + 1100
|
| 8 |
But this balance is really sux [/quote]
|
8 |
But this balance is really sux [/quote]
|
| 9 |
\n
|
9 |
\n
|
| 10 |
What [b]does[/b] give much better results is pairing the highest with the lowest, again and again, until you have remaining pair - which you split between the two teams, giving the highest to the lowest total elo side and the lowest to the highest total elo side.
|
10 |
What [b]does[/b] give much better results is pairing the highest with the lowest, again and again, until you have remaining pair - which you split between the two teams, giving the highest to the lowest total elo side and the lowest to the highest total elo side.
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
eg.
|
12 |
eg.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
1800 + 1100 (+ 1400)
|
14 |
1800 + 1100 (+ 1400)
|
| 15 |
\n
|
15 |
\n
|
| 16 |
1500 + 1200 (+ 1500)
|
16 |
1500 + 1200 (+ 1500)
|
| 17 |
\n
|
17 |
\n
|
| 18 |
It gives better results than the default balance in practically every example, and will certainly result in 1000% more fun for players with ridiculous high elo who get unwinnable teams of spastics every game under the current system.
|
18 |
It gives better results than the default balance in practically every example, and will certainly result in 1000% more fun for players with ridiculous high elo who get unwinnable teams of spastics every game under the current system.
|
| 19 |
\n
|
19 |
\n
|
| 20 |
The
reason
for
this
is
that
there
is
no
linear
relationship
between
the
elo
number
and
the
player
skill,
so
simply
getting
the
two
'total
numbers'
of
each
team
to
be
equal
does
not
create
even
games.
Its
better
to
simply
rank
the
players
from
highest
to
lowest
and
assign
from
them
to
teams,
if
your
objective
is
a
fun
and
balanced
match.
I
will
repeat
this
forever.
|
20 |
The
reason
for
this
is
that
there
is
no
linear
relationship
between
the
elo
number
and
the
player
skill,
so
simply
getting
the
two
'total
numbers'
of
each
team
to
be
equal
does
not
create
even
games.
A
2500
elo
player
will
not
really
sway
a
teamgame
that
much
more
than
a
2000
elo
player
-
they
get
the
same
amount
of
resources,
which
can
only
achieve
so
much
-
but
they
will
certainly
get
a
far,
far
worse
team.
Its
better
to
simply
rank
the
players
from
highest
to
lowest
and
assign
from
them
to
teams,
if
your
objective
is
a
fun
and
balanced
match.
I
will
repeat
this
forever.
|
Alternative balance