01.05.2015 - 12:18
Profile page-Information section needs to account percentage/ratio of our respective win:lose stats. As the majority or which as I assume tends to evaluate--people. Player performance is reflected on the aforementioned strata right? Include the games abandoned percentage on the info section as well. Whaddya say?
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
01.05.2015 - 14:30
Hm... well... you can already see the amount of games you've played and the ones you won... isn't that all you need?
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
01.05.2015 - 16:05
Idk, helps us be more lazy, so we don't have to do math. I support laziness .... Ahahahaaa
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
01.05.2015 - 21:17
This. Hahaha
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
02.05.2015 - 10:59
For obvious reasons, you're more likely to win 3v3 games than you are to win 6 player free-for-alls. Win-loss ratio is not a decent indicator of player capabilities.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
02.05.2015 - 17:44
Not completely true. Even if it's a team game, if you lose, that counts as a loss no matter what happens to the rest of your team.
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
02.05.2015 - 22:09
You're still more likely to win that compared to a 6-player free-for-all. Any reasonably competent player can hold up a 20%~40% win ratio playing 3v3s. He'd be lucky to have a 10% playing large free-for-all scenarios.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 02:12
What if it directly shows in the profile? It would help not wasting time on getting the calculator. Support!
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 04:53
The level in 3v3 isn't the same as in ffa usually, but it would be nice to have some indicator of skill. Maybe something a bit more complicated. Like win ratio divided by the number of player and a define value for the team game.
---- You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing, and using a timing which the enemy does not expect. Miyamoto Musashi
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 05:02
This FFA scenarios usually end up in big ally endings... so yeah, it's not that hard either, just survive long enough to be asked by other 8 players for ally end.
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 05:02
Oh come on, 900 games, 300 won games, do you need calculator for that??? you guys really need to check your basic maths.
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 05:07
There should be one without abbandoning games included! Because most of the people have like above 50%.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 08:22
Why not just a simple formula? Say, in each game, call n the total number of players and v the number of winning players. If you lose the game, you receive zero points and your functional game count goes up by (v/n). If you win the game, you receive (1 - v/n) points and your functional game count goes up by the same. Then you just simply sum up the number of points, sum up the functional game count, divide one by the other and you get your win:loss ratio. That way, winning solo in a 20-player game counts for a heck of a lot more than ally ending with 19 players still standing. As it, by the way, should.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 08:23
But you get my point. Some games have a higher proportion of winners than others.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 08:39
Good idea
---- You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing, and using a timing which the enemy does not expect. Miyamoto Musashi
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 09:07
Ok then master, show us the mathematical way and let it be!
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 09:12
That algorithm is understandable to anyone who took 6th grade math. Okay, at least anyone who passed 6th grade math. Seriously...
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 10:10
lol my joke would be understandable even to a 1st grade student Yeah, seriously Haha you need training when it comes to understand sarcasm, irony and humor ANYWAY, support !!!
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 10:41
I've been trained to type sixty words a minute, not bloody well understand jokes. To each his own!
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 10:51
That's actually not so impressive having in mind that my mom can type 110-150 per minute Get better at those fucking jokes, it might actually help you grow up and not be bullyed around
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 10:52
150 words a minute on the cell? I'm impressed. I can barely make 150 on my laptop. Also, me bullied? What is this joke? I stay out of everybody's way, and they stay out of mine. Our school is very nice that way.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 11:05
the heck? No, I meant computer! What else would it be?? Who competes in the cell?? Anyway I can beat you on the cell The joke? Not a joke, just a suggestion to improve personal relationships by saying that you descibe your school as an autist hospital.
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 11:34
What if it's 1537 won and 2333 played? It's just not subtraction. Takes time and so ya.
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 11:35
I suck at math, thats why i use calculator but im too lazy to open a new tab.
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 12:40
Just by looking at it I can aproximate it's close to 65%. EDIT: OMFG, it's actually 65.88% by calculator I used no trick, simple quick calculation and approximation!
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 12:42
Close to? What if it's perfect? Would be good.
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 12:45
If you guys want such a posh addition, ok, fine. But I don't know what advantage gives you to know the perfectly exact percentage of won games XD
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 12:56
Just looks good. Yahoooo! I guess I am the first one to beat you in a debate. XD
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
03.05.2015 - 13:46
You haven't beaten me and this is no debate I just quited from talking with a guy that doesn't know to calculate percentage by just looking at a couple of numbers, not worth the effort hahaha anyway, I guess the percentage thingy won't hurt anyone right??
---- Don't ever look down on someone unless you're helping him up. Don't ever treat someone else the way you wouldn't want others to treat you. We're all people.
Lade...
Lade...
|
Bist du dir sicher?