GalacticWino

[quote quoting="post"] ELO system that strongly encourages top players to avoid each other... [/quote] This is not the fault of the ELO system IMO. It's the fault of top players (all beta testers) not having the dignity to respect the game more than their 'rank'. I'm just as competitive as the next guy, but I could never imagine placing a higher value on interwebs rankings than the honest knowledge of where I stand relative to other competitive players. It&#3

First, I want to say thanks to all the beta testers who contributed so much to a pre-release community that was vibrant and fun. Second, I would like to plea with the expert level regulars to stop using multiple accounts in ladder play. Others have commented on how this phenomenon of "avoiding other experienced players in ranked play" is detrimental. I can understand why some experts who play frequently desire to use secondary accounts if they are less likely to be paired due to ratin

On second thought, I'm not really in the right state of mind to represent team Americas right now. Please remove me as a primary player, but feel free to call on me as a reserve player if others don't step up.

Some dildo who calls himself SCHLONGER1 has won the daily with hack giving him 12 million marsbucks on sol1. Please find a way to stop this behavior in the daily challenges... kills the fun.

I have had a bunch of 4P games crashing to the lobby lately, usually just before I buy out the last player. Are those losses counted in the ladder? Is it possible someone has figured out a drop trick? Also, I had 1 4P game launch with only 3 players... not even a 4th with an AI. I hope after all this gets fixed, the ladder is reset.

I can play for team USA

Soren, I rememer the suggestion I made many months ago about a gently rising exponential price in market prices: https://forums.offworldgame.com/471254/page/1/#3587217 I noticed a couple betas back you seemed to have implemented something similar, but didnt tell us quite how it works. If we want to glance at OW prices before founding and guestimate late game prices... it would be nice to know how they grow (linearly, e

Yerand, Zultar has been standing by ready to host us (it's 3:40 pm now). If I don't see you in the next 10-20 minutes, I might hop in a FFA... but I can play any time later on today. Tomorrow afternoon is fine too if something came up.

After it locks up and you reboot the game, it usually runs sucessfully the 2nd time. I'd say it's about 50% chance of locing up right now. More annoying IMO is the fact that many wins get recorded as 1v1 wins... completely distorting the ladder. Are they putting 2 AI players in with 2 humans if there are not 4 waiting to play a FFA?

Yerand, As luck would have it... today has turned into a busy day. I will probably be able to play this evening but should not committ to anything. Since you mentioned Saturday... I will make myself available any time. You chose the time and I will be there.

Yerand, let's try for tomorrow at 15:00 EDT. Since you are hosting launch day fun anyway, I assume it won't be a big inconvenience if I can't make it. It's a bit short notice scheduling for me, so if something happens with work and I don't show, I hope you'll be ok with an alternative time.

I'm in

We have a BM with typically 5-6 offensive options and only a single defensive option. I belive we need more defensive options in the black market for a couple reasons: In 1v1, the game suffers a bit from the zero-sum nature of a trading simulation. Once one player falls behind, it is very difficult to come back. The counter-attacking nature of the goon squad can amplify this. A failed attack is doubly expensive for the attacker (wasted money on the goon AND getting counter atta

For anyone having issues with dropping out of quickmatch games during pairing, a quick uninstall / reinstall seems to have worked for me. I still get the occasional game that doesn't launch (existing bug from B9 where it just hangs saying "rendering..."), but not the new B10 bug where it just exits to the rankings screen.

In case you didn't see my comment n the 'drop it like it's hot' thread about the apparent problem with the ELO formula for FFA, I posted a link to this open source FFA algorithm: https://github.com/FigBug/Multiplayer-ELO . It has a nice working demonstration here http://elo-norsak.rhcloud.com/index.php and clear justification for his model.

[quote who="Veivi" reply="2" id="3622691"] If you value knowing your opponents and their playstyles, maybe a nice compromise could be to show all the players taking part on the loading screen so you know who's in, but masquerade everyone at the game start. That way you could still get some advantage from being are able to distinquish your opponents from each other and acting accordingly. That I could stand behind. [/quote] Like this a lot.

Your Secondary Score formula clearly needs some work here. L32 has a 14% win rate but has a higher score than me despite my 33% win rate. Even better, VirT_T outranks me by 70 points with his 0% win rate :) EDIT: How you are implementing your rating formula? Are you are submitting the results from a 4 player match to an ELO algorithm designed for 2 player games as a set of 3 independent matches (eg: player 1 beat 2, player 1 beat 3, and player 1 beat 4)? If you are using a stand

I love the convenience of 4p in the quick match queue. 4p is just enough players to be dynamically interesting, yet just few enough to allow black market attacks or hacker array plays to be fruitful. To be honest, I think the game is better with 4 than the typical fustercluck of 6-8p FFA's we get on the weekends with the expert regulars. The queue is a non-biased way of deciding who gets into a game without leaving people out intentionally. Concerns: As mentioned in

Agreed. Encouraging 4p is fine so long as it doesn't stiffle 2p, which in turn kills the active player pool. On a related note... I think it's time to stop with the multiple active betas. The fact that half the players are on different betas means again that it's hard to find an active game, killing the player pool. The developers are inadvertently killing interest in the game before it launches by killing the active player pool. I'd hate for the game to l

Blues, whether or not a heavy debt founder choses to make power on HQ 2, the risk of a short or conversely a surplus therafter is the problem. If you were counting on power to pay off debt, then those power tiles were an expensive waste when a suprlus comes. The problem is when you absolutely HAVE to pay off some debt by SOL 3-4 or spiral and lose, your economy is more prone to random event screws than someone who only has to keep upgrading to stay in the game. This risk of ruin is wh

Veivi, If you think of the starting debt vs. the relative income potential of the primo spot compared to the secondary spot in a vaccuum, there may be some equilibrium value. However, you should not discount the RISK of random events when taking on debt! If a power short, steel surplus or somthing else that hurts your ability to recover from debt only occurs 1 in 20 games, it has an impact on the viability of your debt evaluation. This is the classic risk of ruin problem

Veivi, The problem as I see it not that we can't learn to adapt to some scarcity. There are two problems with map resources being unnecesarilly scarce imo: The first problem is that it is truly a guessing game how much debt a spot is worth. You don't know what random auctions will bring. If you take on 50k in debt... and a power short event comes up on day 2, you may not be able to recover from the debt spiral. On the other hand, if you took on 40k in debt to mon

Agree with InSync. A single random auction event can turn a founding spot that you thought was worth 30k into a 20k spot. Eg: going expansive because all the iron is across a chasm and there is only 1 triple iron tile; then teleportation comes up for auction.

[quote who="Jaiwera" reply="13" id="3616582"] "30ms" is a misconception created by misplays [/quote] No, 30ms is my completely non-scientific guess at the time difference in who clicked first to found in our 2nd game. I literally watched the expansive HQ being built and thought it was my own base rather than magic's. Maybe 30ms was being too precise, but it's the right order of magnitude :)

These days I have to look at the colony too and what it is demanding. If the colony wants chems, I'm more likely to go scav sine the transition from carbon is easier. Likewise if the colony wants power, I'm inclined to go robot, since robotic power tiles are useful in other ways. More stuff to think about, supporting the idea that the debt timer should be counting much slower. I don't see any reason why it has to start ticking at 200k. This just punishes new-com