| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: General Forums :: Server: Fish Tank Classic |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| [poll] Team Balance | ||
| This topic is now closed |
| Author | Post | ||
| BuBBLe GooSe |
|
||
The Original MilfHunter
Registered Member #163
Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 02:24PMPosts: 1592 |
AwsedreswA wrote ... TK/FF is off the subject. Having a vote to change that is a lot harder (admin intervention helps) takes more than one attentive guy otherwise. Nope. Punishing repeat TK offenders is a job of the admins, same as balancing teams. "One attentive guy" with admin privs can remedy the situation unless you are admitting that you didn't punish TKers much like you didn't balance teams. You can make votes these futile votes until you are blue in the face, the fact is that you don't pay for anything . AwsedreswA wrote ... However you guys say that switching one person can balance teams, that can be done without admin, by the free will of "good sport" players. Sometimes players on a stacked team are too ignorant to swap themselves, thats why admin tools such as Mani were created. Swapping one person can change the balance of teams. Some 'good sports' will swap themselves sure, but you can't expect that out of everyone so that is why swapping is a function of the admin plugin. AwsedreswA wrote ... Personally, if you can't handle losing 4 rounds straight, I dont want you on my team. You're a pussy if you call unfair teams that soon. This is coming from the person who suggested having 16 day proposals. Doing things your way leads to not getting anything done at all. I have no idea where Kremit came up with 4 rounds. (Ironically enough, in my last point this figure may come in handy) Waiting 20, 30, 40, rounds to 'gauge' what needs to be done will leave you with an empty server. Is swapping a player after a few continual rounds of pwnage too hard to comprehend? What's the difficulty? The new plugin makes it so that they don't die if they are alive, hence there is no actual negative effect. AwsedreswA wrote ... That right there is weak kung fu, I thought you were stronger than that. I'm sure many people will agree that my admining was effective in many aspects. Very funny kicking me when I said you had weak kung fu, funny. Practice your Kung-Fu on the sidelines sugar. YOU admitted that your admining was ineffective and like I mentioned, you were fired for not doing your job. What are you trying to prove? AwsedreswA wrote ... The poll was meant to see how many people play the game a certain way, how does that blow? Biased: You wanna take a poll, start with a clear-cut question and 2 objective answers. Swaying the wording of the responses to promote a favorable outcome to back your assertions only shows that you are fixing to make some Cabernet in your mouth. You are very crafty when it comes to finding ways to make whine. AwsedreswA wrote ... AP said.... Who said there would be? Got Logic? Its a proven fact that stacked teams = players leave. We have been through this discussion in the past, around springtime. This is why teambalance became a priority and hence, the connection count tells the rest. Catch up on the posts... -[link]- & -[link]- & -[link]- & even, -[link]- AwsedreswA wrote ... Pocky, admin efforts to balance teams are excessive. Prove it wrong. Support the test and see how many non-FT members ask for teams to be balanced. Excessive and unnecessary are two different things. Prove that "admin efforts to balance teams are excessive." You think balance is excessive and unnecessary? You want to test your assumptions, YOU rent a server and tell us how it went. NON FT PLAYERS ASK FOR CASH! IF YOU READ THE CHAT YOU WOULD SEE THAT! THEY ALSO SAY "STACKED" AND "TEAMS" AND OFTEN TIMES USE DIRECT ADMIN CHAT TO NOTIFY THE ADMINS OF SUCH!!!! YOU ARE IGNORANT AND OBLIVIOUS!!! AwsedreswA wrote ... Vote system is off the subject. Oh and Goose 'I got owned in the last thread,' I thought that responses to the thread were divided. I guess you were looking at what you wanted to. I started a new thread beacuse that shit had 3 pages full of retort and excerpts of other people's posts. The division was between people who were informed VS those who had no clue what was going on. I place more value on the opinions of people in the know as opposed to opinions of 'once-a-year' players. (Sorry Emer, but seriously) It takes 3+ pages of people repeating themselves before you can see that you are wrong. There wouldn't be so much retort if you acknowledeged the opinions of others. But nooo, you gotta live in a little bubble and think that everyone has to pay attention to what you post and you are too superior to acknowledge what other people write. THAT is why there are over 3 pages, because YOU are fuckin ignorant. The point about the way I replied 5 times to your voting system shows a clear corelation between that, and why there are 3+ pages of retort. The common denominator is YOU and YOUR brash ignorance/arrogance/stupidity. AwsedreswA wrote ... I put this to you Goose, prove admin action to team balancing is beneficial and reveal the pitfalls of its absence by supporting my proposed test of no admin action to balance teams. I support your test so long as it is not done on FTC. I support your decision to rent your own server and run it as you see fit. I await your results. Errr, I tried a mini-version of your 'test' earlier tonight with you on the opposite team. Allow me to dig up the specifics in the console I copy/pasted.... Ah yes. I was a T, u were a CT. T's were getting owned significantly. A player left and opened up a spot on T. I gave T's cash, we still lost. So I... (ADMIN) [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:.: swapped player Fasdad HATES CT SIDE to team T... Fasdad HATES CT SIDE : oh it always works for me... [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : sad... The swap lead to T's winning. I subtly replied... *DEAD* [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : c *DEAD* [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : c? Use that as a control to show the way that teambalance, when properly used, works just fine. We continue playing for some time and now the T side has some momentum and the CT's are getting beat down. I refrained from giving the CT's money to test the results of no admin interference. Both Narf and Awse were on CT so I figured, meh, they don't want cash anyways...(Dalton = CT, btw) Dalton (Pain Don't Hurt) : could use some MONEY though [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : give T more money [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : u mean CTs are poor [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : how does it feel not to get cash? Dalton (Pain Don't Hurt) : I'm broke [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : blame it on Awse, he doesnt want CTs to have cash [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : taste good? But, after a few more rounds of T pwnage on the CTs, Narf left and I didn't want that trend to continue so I gave in and gave CT's cash. (Except Awse, I made it a point to drop '@setcash awse 2500 or 2800 or even 0' after sufficient time passed for him to buy weapons, because he doesn't want to benefit from the $$$ so I approximated how much a losing player would get and gave that to him abruptly after the rest of his side got cash) It sorta helped, but CT's were still sliding. No admin interference only leads to unhappy players in an uncompetative setting... (ADMIN) [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:.: swapped player LOLOL to team CT (ADMIN) [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:.: swapped player KooterTicklin to team T Oops, pow, surprise, that seemed to do the trick. Awse, in clear frustration that I was owning him in the face with his own 'test', said... [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : this server is fucked up (ADMIN) [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:.: nope, just u @cexec awse quit [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] connected *DEAD* [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : what did I do [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : what [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : well (ADMIN) [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. to ([FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5]) : u said "this server is fucked up" *DEAD* [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : bullshit [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : and.... (TO ADMIN) [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5]: what was your point again goose? *DEAD* [FT] AwsedreswA [F7L5] : I guess the absence of your point is better than you making one [FT].:BuBBLe GooSe:. : pfft, u dont read forum posts and clearly ur too lazy to read ingame chat too, fine I did my best to ignore him, but he was persistent. In about an hour I managed to put your theory to the test, and I used you and your losing team as the lab rats. I'm always 2 steps ahead of you Awse...
I plan on using YOUR own argument, assertions and theories to show that balancing teams is better than allowing stacked teams. I will be using YOUR data and YOUR assertions to put an end to this shit. AwsedreswA wrote ... Thanks for the link, that does corroborate my theory. Not a very stong correlation, but there none the less. T wins more even in spite of CT being joined more. AND... AwsedreswA wrote ... And what I was getting at with the data, that unbalance is natural in the game. I don't know how to get a measurement of team skill per team win. So I went with those that had more than 200 hours to get a sample that would include both good and bad teams, so it wouldn't be pointless from the lack of more complex data. OK, lets assume all of Awse's assumptions are correct. Lets say that T's win more often than CT's. Lets say that this inbalance is natural to the game. Lets say that both Alex's and Awse's data support this claim. Lets say that camping is favorable to rushing and lets say that the T's have this advantage. Heck, I'll even help your argument out a bit by pointing out that the AK costs less, and is superior to the M4. Lets say that all of the good players intentionally join the T side. Ok, taking all of this into account, the T's must win 60% more of the time than the CT's right? No? 40%, 30%,20%?? Still no? The T's surely have to win 10% more of the time than the CTs do. Nope. -[link]- Shows that Ts Won 123,773 times compared to the CT's 118,234, a difference of 5539 rounds or 4.5%. A number of conclusions can be drawn from this... 1. Teambalance is working because the difference is only 4.5% given that EVERY factor is working against the CT's. Without the efforts of admins, the difference should be much higher. 2. Out of 100 rounds, the T's will win 4.5% more of the time compared to the CT's. Hence, balance is necessary to compensate for the 'natural imbalance' as a whole. Why are you still in opposition to balancing teams and avoiding stackage when balancing is only compensating for map imbalance? 3. How many continual rounds of losing will it take to empty out the server? Certainly 4 to 5 rounds straight may clear out a few, but guess what, after that many rounds of straight pwnage, cash/health/swap could prevent more pwnage thus keeping players on and playing. Do you want people to leave or were you just to lazy to do anything about it? 4. With the data showing that T's are more likely to win, why not promote a competative and fun server by helping to even the natural imbalance by swapping over a good player? Your assumptions support the need for balance measures. By opposing balancing measures, you are promoting stacking. Promoting stacking means that you don't care if people leave the server and you don't care about having a fun and competative environment. (Without players, there won't be anybody to drink your whine.) If that is the case, you should never have been made admin to begin with. I'm done here, its stupid to favor stacking over fair teams. Awse was rightfully relieved of his duties. Stop crying and trying to show that the methodology was flawed and that somehow absolves you of the things you neglected to do. That is a fruitless pursuit and all of the sour grapes are in your mouth. As you so eloquently put it, you can sit on that and rotate, I'm sure it will help with the fermentation process. The next time you post, make me some Merlot. Once more... Bubble Goose sez: Keep chewing on those sour grapes, because all thats coming out of your mouth is whine. Edited Sat Nov 11 2006, 12:43PM |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| aborted fetus |
|
||
The All-Cum Diet
Registered Member #47
Joined: Mon Dec 05 2005, 04:55PMPosts: 1888 |
You know, I think Goose put it best: Awse, if you want to try out your little team balance theory, do it on your own server. If you rent a server, I'm sure the FT community will allow you to make it a part of Fish Tank. Then, when you are server op on your own server, you can test all the little theories you want and come to the same conclusions we already have. Awse, you will not use FTC as a testing ground for your whimsical thoeries; especially when we already know what the answer will be. That will not happen. At this point, Awse, you ought to just drop it. We are not going to test your little theory. Awse, before you post again, just keep reading the former sentence in bold. Read and reread it until you realize that it has become pointless to continue down this road. No matter how many dfferent ways you attempt to reword your statements, the end result will always be the same: we are keeping team balance. Keep someting else in mind as well, tiger, you already lost your admin privs due to your actions (inactions), attitude and words. Being able to play on FTC is a privilege not a right. It is possible to lose that privilege as well due to your actions (inactions), attitude and words. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Pockyninja |
|
||
Ruler of all that is pocky
Registered Member #28
Joined: Mon Nov 28 2005, 11:17PMPosts: 704 |
AwsedreswA wrote ... Pocky, admin efforts to balance teams are excessive. Prove it wrong. Support the test and see how many non-FT members ask for teams to be balanced. I seen quite a few nonFTs ask for balance not that I could do anything if I was asked. But I get asked all the time to balance team kinda hard to do without admin all you can say is move lol. So I can tell you becouse people do ask me a lot becouse they think I sitll have admin on FTC lol. (traded it for admin on rotation bad choice no one gose there lol) I dont need to join your test becouse I see the results even while we do actively have balancing when no admins are on. I am constantly asked to make teams balanced. I solve it and if I cant solve the problem with me moving I get on xfire to find a admin. This topic seem to have little point your trying to prove that people are just whinners and that teams are never stacked. You may be right in a some instances but teams do get stacked and if a team wins for 20 round you need to change something up. I think you have some growing up to do after seeing your actions as of late and I hope you can do so. Edited Sat Nov 11 2006, 03:22PM |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Amped |
|
||
Hi
Registered Member #301
Joined: Thu Jun 15 2006, 01:55AMPosts: 888 |
Your poll question is biased toward answer B, due to the wording of the choices. Try posing a fair survey. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Omni |
|
||
terrible one
Registered Member #33
Joined: Tue Nov 29 2005, 11:50PMPosts: 1292 |
note: ive not read all the post so what i am about to say might already have been said. if so then i further enforce it. Awse, your "FTC" statistics that you quoted have both admins and non admins in them. now, i cannot speak for the non admins but i know for a fact that the admins join T (or CT) to try to balence the teams. the thing is that when an admin joins it is CT stacked and we join T. it is tnat simple. I see this idea of yours as an attempt to sabotage FTC. your points only see a fraction, a small fraction, of team balencing. goose, i regret that i did not read all of your post, it is so long. dont take it personally, i just dont have the time for it. <3 |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| AwsedreswA |
|
||
Registered Member #223
Joined: Wed Apr 26 2006, 10:53PMPosts: 126 |
Real men don't put their loss up to teams unbalanced. Homosexuals and pussies on the other hand, do. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Noname|Boom |
|
||
That one guy...
Registered Member #250
Joined: Tue May 09 2006, 11:59PMPosts: 2603 |
man up, foo. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Knightrider |
|
||
Meteor 2016
Registered Member #316
Joined: Mon Jun 26 2006, 09:14PMPosts: 3503 |
That doesnt make sense. How are you not a real man if you know that your team is losing because the other team has higher skilled players then you, and you basically have no chance in winning? Yeah, that might have been the stupidest comment Ive ever read. So in other words, you called the team that has been getting anniahlated round after round homosexuals and pussies? Thats biased, and based on an idiot's assumption. Congratulations, you made yourself look like an ass, and you've made yourself rediculed more. I dont understand why you just dont submit and admit that you are wrong, because you are wrong. It would save alot of trouble, and maybe then you wouldnt be getting on people's bad side right now. I didnt really mind, until you said something that stupid. Good luck digging your way out of this shitpile, and personally, I dont think your comming out. | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
AwsedreswA wrote ... Real men don't put their loss up to teams unbalanced. Homosexuals and pussies on the other hand, do. Real men don't troll forums just because they lose admin privileges and get permanently banned from a server in less than a week. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| aborted fetus |
|
||
|
The All-Cum Diet
Registered Member #47
Joined: Mon Dec 05 2005, 04:55PM Posts: 1888 |
aborted fetus wrote ... Keep something else in mind as well, tiger, you already lost your admin privs due to your actions (inactions), attitude and words. Being able to play on FTC is a privilege not a right. It is possible to lose that privilege as well due to your actions (inactions), attitude and words. AwsedreswA wrote ... Real men don't put their loss up to teams unbalanced. Homosexuals and pussies on the other hand, do. alexh wrote ... Real men don't troll forums just because they lose admin privileges and get permanently banned from a server in less than a week. Hey, Awse, don’t say I didn’t warn you. Ta ta, Awse With all my love, now and forever, Fetus XOXOXO |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|