Balancing the matchup. Is it going to work this time?

[gohliz.9283]

What is known, the alliance system, will give us new balancing.

Some critical thoughts:

 

Balancing will be about this, as is known by now: 

A+B+C=(defined number)

 

Exp.  A=Alliances, B=Guilds, C=Solo Players.

 

So it could look like this A+A+B+B+B+C=(defined number)    

They will also be weighted depending on playtime. To weight in this example, we use the range 0-1.

 

Theoretical this would look like this (A*0.5)+ (A*0.6)+(B*0.7)+ (B*0.9)+(B*0.4)+(C*0.5)= (defined number).

Here we can see the first flaw, the equation is already so complicated that the (defined number) cannot be reached exactly, we will have to go for near (defined number).

 

 

This flaw is not so bad, you can tolerate it, but there is a second much bigger  Problem.  The calculation of the numbers A, B, and C.

How in my opinion you would have to calculate the number A:

A= x+(y-z)

 

Here, x is the number of players with only 1 account,  y is the number of players with 2 and more accounts and z is the number of players with 2 accounts who are not going to play in this alliance in this matchup. 

 

B and C, similar cal.

 

Conclusion: As neither x, y and z can be determined safely, even with account linking, switching teams in a locked matchup will be possible and the balancing forfeit. PPl. will get more accounts instead of transferring servers. 

 

 

Now comes the agenda: If balancing is not going to work perfectly anyway, why not make bigger alliances for better communities?

 

I have posted a poll below this post. Despite my, in my opinion, whitey arguments, feel free to vote in which ever way you like. 😉

 

Hind thoughts:

 (We only have the numbers known accounts and known linked accounts to work with, this is not sufficient in my opinion)

(And yes this can be loosely covered by weighting but not remedied in my opinion.)

 

 

PS: pls do not write me questions on the mathematics, use Google or YouTube tutorials. If you find mistakes, feel free to correct me in a forum appropriate manner, THX.😄  

[(defined number) can vary from example to example in order to get a usable result, I think ^^]

 

[Xenesis.6389]

 

Read up that thread, there's links posted about world restructuring and alliances. Play times may be weighted to certain factors, commanding was mentioned as one. They probably won't release the other factors as that could just lead to players gaming the system.

 

 

 

Quote

 

Q. What is the deal with this Player Score, Value, Evaluation etc?

There has been a lot of discussion about the player “evaluation.” We already use play hours to determine population status of a world and when we refer to player value or evaluation or score we are talking about play hours with some kind of scalar adjustment. With this system, moving people around every two months we would like to track a few more things that can help us distribute players more effectively.

One thing we are looking at tracking is commanding. Commanders are a big part of WvW no matter if your prefer scouting, roaming, running with a havoc squad or the zerg. Commanders are not the only piece to the WvW puzzle but they are a big piece. We would use commander time and squad sizes to determine a scaler to that commander players play time. For example, these are not the real values but I am not even a full cup of coffee in so for my sake I am going to make the math easy, PlayerA, PlayerB and PlayerC all play for roughly 100 hours a week. PlayerA commands smaller havoc squads, PlayerB is a PUG zerg commander, and PlayerC does not command.

For all the time a commander is commanding squads let us say of more than two and less than size ten we’ll count those hours at a one and a half times multiplier and higher than ten we’ll count it at two times. If Player A were always commanding, in the small squad range, while playing their time, adjusted hours would be 150 hours. If PlayerB were always commanding, in the large squad range, while playing, their adjusted hours would be 200. Since Player C did not command their hours, remain the same at 100. Doing this can help us get more even matches. WvW is not completely a number of bodies game. A hundred veteran players will always beat a hundred casual players.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[Mabi black.1824]

12 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

 

Read up that thread, there's links posted about world restructuring and alliances. Play times may be weighted to certain factors, commanding was mentioned as one. They probably won't release the other factors as that could just lead to players gaming the system.

 

 

 

 

hi xenesis,

I read the other day this that you sent me really interesting and thank you.

but this confirms my reasoning. all players are weighed differently in reference to time, as well as other parameters such as the command.

rightly we will never get identical teams in the number of players.

my suggestion was to prioritize the algorithm to create identical teams in number, and compensate for the variables time, commander, time zone etc etc on war points (just because they are variables with a time auto correction every 60 minutes)

 

but this topic is on another place. here another very interesting aspect is raised about how we are going to build teams.

players with multiple accounts. I share the reasoning that has been made here. in affection could affect or could be intentionally manipulated the system. I don't have the faintest idea how it could be solved.