Author Topic: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim  (Read 7878 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zagibu

  • cRPG President
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1436
  • Infamy: 228
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2014, 12:09:31 am »
+3
Kinda like "If player spawns with anything in his butt slot, he is gay"

What about poop? Poop is a valid un-gay thing to have in your butt slot.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 Why am I beswung by sharpe and pointed utensyls?

Offline Macropus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1668
  • Infamy: 296
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Macropus
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2014, 11:03:35 pm »
+1
What about poop? Poop is a valid un-gay thing to have in your butt slot.
So is poop better than gays then?

Offline Elindor

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1178
  • Infamy: 158
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Caelitus mihi vires
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Order of the Holy Guard
  • Game nicks: Elindor
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #32 on: February 27, 2014, 11:38:45 pm »
+1
What about poop? Poop is a valid un-gay thing to have in your butt slot.

> "If player spawns with [other player] in his butt slot, he is gay"

Fixed.
Elindor, Archon of the Holy Guard
Holy Guard Thread :HERE
Banner Shop : HERE // Map Thread : HERE

Offline San

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1456
  • Infamy: 143
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • 1/Sympathy = Divide By Zero
    • View Profile
    • My youtube Brawl videos
  • Faction: Chaos
  • Game nicks: San_of_Chaos
  • IRC nick: San
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #33 on: February 27, 2014, 11:50:24 pm »
+5
Well.. At least the topic is staying bumped.

Offline Jona

  • Balancer
  • *
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 376
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop
  • OG Agi Whore
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Hounds of Chulainn
  • Game nicks: Jona, Siegafried
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #34 on: February 28, 2014, 11:43:08 am »
+1
Anything that works, right?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


"I'll have my lance aimed at Jona's knees and he'll jump up, run up my lance and kill me." -Dalfador

Offline Vanthor

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 62
  • Infamy: 3
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Literally
  • Game nicks: Literally_Vanthor,Literally_Locke
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #35 on: February 28, 2014, 08:31:45 pm »
+8
Sorry for the long time between posts, been busy with work and such.


Although I can't help but feel the energy functions working at odds with each other, but as you said before, perhaps some simulations with past data can shed light on how well it would work. I don't fully understand how the values for mean and variance of the Gaussian for TrueSkill would work for warband, but it sounds nice if we could get something working. I think average score per round is a good placeholder before something more complicated is used.


The energy functions are somewhat at odds with each other, but the key is to use them to come up with a best case compromise. As for TrueSkill, its the best algorithm I know of for rating players in games like this (Although it takes it a long time for a game like warband) so I suggested it. I agree that average score per round would be a good placeholder for the time being. A TrueSkill implementation would be way better.

Do you still have intentions of modifying the script yourself, Vanthor?  :wink:

Currently working on it. I've just never worked with anything quite so unique as the "M&B scripting language". I'm thinking of quickly revamping the "cf_crpg_autobalance_get_level" function in the current balancer, as i'm pretty sure its the root cause of the weirdness in the auto-balancing.

It puts way too much stock in a players level (1 level ~= to 33.33 points). This matters quite a bit in the auto-balance after the first round.

What I'm currently doing:
  • Reading through the current auto-balancer code - Done
  • Gathering data & getting  (Thanks sniger for all the screenshots of match end scoreboards) - 20%
  • Porting the current auto balancer algorithm to something I can test (I want to make sure the new one isn't worse. Also helps me understand old code)- 10%
  • Write a new auto-balancer in something I can test
  • Port new auto-balancer to M&B scripting language.



Offline Jona

  • Balancer
  • *
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 376
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop
  • OG Agi Whore
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Hounds of Chulainn
  • Game nicks: Jona, Siegafried
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #36 on: February 28, 2014, 11:32:03 pm »
+3
(click to show/hide)

If you can pull this off, you may be the greatest hero crpg has ever known. Best of luck!
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


"I'll have my lance aimed at Jona's knees and he'll jump up, run up my lance and kill me." -Dalfador

Offline Tydeus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1422
  • Infamy: 351
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Item re-unbalance guy
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Tydeus
  • IRC nick: Tydeus
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #37 on: March 01, 2014, 12:55:17 am »
+2
What I'm currently doing:
  • Reading through the current auto-balancer code - Done
  • Gathering data & getting  (Thanks sniger for all the screenshots of match end scoreboards) - 20%
  • Porting the current auto balancer algorithm to something I can test (I want to make sure the new one isn't worse. Also helps me understand old code)- 10%
  • Write a new auto-balancer in something I can test
  • Port new auto-balancer to M&B scripting language.

If you're looking at scoreboards, and the relation between player score and their k:d ratio, it might help to know exactly how score is calculated. Although I'm still in the middle of reworking it to more accurately reflect a player's contributions to his team's effort, the following should still be useful.

Current system:

- take the final damage dealt as the base score amount
- cap it by what HP the enemy has left
- if the hit kills the enemy player, add 30
- if not a kill but final damage >= 1, add 5
- if it is a horse and has a rider, reduce to 2/3
- if it is a horse without a rider, set to 0
- if the victim agent and attacker agents are on the same team, multiply by -2, if they're the same agent(you damage yourself), multiply by -1
- cap the hit player's offset between 75 and 125
- multiply score * victim's offset
- divide score by 100
- give this score to the one who did the damage
- multiply score by 1/3
- give to everyone within 2.5m that is an enemy of the victim(including those who died up to 5 seconds prior)
- finally, the scoreboard duplicates a player's score divides that number by 15 and rounds down. (So you can deal 9 damage to someone with a 100% offset, not see a change on the scoreboard, yet still get properly rewarded for it).

A player's offset is calculated by...

- finding the average score gained in the previous round for all players that spawned
- finding the average score for the whole map
- get the player's previous round score gained
- get the player's total score
- multiply both by 100
- divide the player's previous round score gained by the average score gained in the previous round
- divide the player's total score by the total score average
- take whichever is higher as the offset

I didn't want things to get out of hand with the offset, so I chose rather restrictive limitations on it. Several people on any given map tend to have 2 to 4 times the average player's score, so rather than having them literally worth 4 times as much score, thereby making them a target for everyone else on the server, I chose a rather low cap. Might change this in the future, but I haven't exactly had any feedback on it.

On a sidenote, we all idle the mount&blade-crpg irc channel on QuakeNet, so if you have any questions, feel free to hop in and ask anytime.

Edot: Also, a player's Score Offset is set to 100 when entering the server and after a map change.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 01:14:01 am by Tydeus »
chadz> i wouldnt mind seeing some penis on my character

Offline Vanthor

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 62
  • Infamy: 3
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Literally
  • Game nicks: Literally_Vanthor,Literally_Locke
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #38 on: March 01, 2014, 04:02:04 pm »
+2
Thanks Tydeus, that's useful information to have.

Offline Vanthor

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 62
  • Infamy: 3
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Literally
  • Game nicks: Literally_Vanthor,Literally_Locke
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #39 on: March 01, 2014, 04:15:10 pm »
+1
whoops
« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 04:32:10 pm by Vanthor »

Offline Elindor

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1178
  • Infamy: 158
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Caelitus mihi vires
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Order of the Holy Guard
  • Game nicks: Elindor
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #40 on: March 01, 2014, 05:48:25 pm »
+3
I officially love Vanthor, Tydeus, San, and Jona (when he's not killing me with hiltslashing polearms) and all the rest of you in this thread.

This is *** HUGE *** (cannot stress enough) for cRPG and I think we're all frequenting this thread because we all realize that.

@Vanthor - For those of us not as code inclined - What can we do to help??
Do you need screenshots?  What are you looking for?  Do you need testers eventually?  Im sure anyone in this thread would love to help this come to fruition if it helps the balancer system even a little bit.

Good work!
Elindor, Archon of the Holy Guard
Holy Guard Thread :HERE
Banner Shop : HERE // Map Thread : HERE

Offline Tydeus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1422
  • Infamy: 351
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Item re-unbalance guy
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Tydeus
  • IRC nick: Tydeus
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #41 on: March 01, 2014, 06:19:38 pm »
+2
I officially love Vanthor, Tydeus, San, and Jona (when he's not killing me with hiltslashing polearms) and all the rest of you in this thread.

This is *** HUGE *** (cannot stress enough) for cRPG and I think we're all frequenting this thread because we all realize that.

@Vanthor - For those of us not as code inclined - What can we do to help??
Do you need screenshots?  What are you looking for?  Do you need testers eventually?  Im sure anyone in this thread would love to help this come to fruition if it helps the balancer system even a little bit.

Good work!
If he makes the appropriate changes, I can host a cRPG server that would allow us to test the system(you will all lag though, my internet isn't very good and I live in Louisiana).
chadz> i wouldnt mind seeing some penis on my character

Offline Rico

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1021
  • Infamy: 158
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Rico, Mila
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #42 on: March 01, 2014, 07:49:17 pm »
+1
Moral of the story is that the fame weights level too much, and overall K/D far too little.

Seems problematic. Apply this to Arbalest users:

Code: [Select]
Level:           27

Strength:        15
Agility:         24

Skill to attr:   14

Weapon Master:    8

Crossbow:       180
using cRPG NewGen calc

This build for level 27 has maximum accuracy on the Arbalest. Damage is fixed anyways, so you could say this is perfect for shooting.

Now the Arbalest user goes highlevel and hits level 35:

Code: [Select]
Level:           35

Strength:        15
Agility:         30

Skill to attr:   10

Power Strike:     5
Shield:           1
Athletics:       10
Weapon Master:   10

Onehanded:      110
Crossbow:       180
using cRPG NewGen calc

With this build, the survivability is slightly higher in case something goes wrong: Run away, annoy others with short sword. It's still perfect for shooting, since the core part is the same at level 27. Even with additional speed and power strike, an arbalest user does not behave differently from before. Take cover, come out to shoot, take cover. Since highlevel Arbalest users will still get their kills mostly from shooting, the impact on the scoreboard is overall nearly the same, but the balance system seems to think they play much much better at lvl 35 compared to lvl 27.

My suggestion would be to adjust the balance system in a way that performance counts more than the level does. Even if our arbalest user was level 50 and had 400 wpf in crossbow, the accuracy would be the same as lvl 27. Because crossbow acc is hardcapped, you see more highlevel archers than crossbowers, and that's why people demand archer nerfs more often than crossbow nerfs, by the way.

Don't misunderstand this as a *buff crossbow* post, I just try to explain that there is not much of a difference for arbalest users between level 27 and higher levels, and the balance system should take this into account.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2014, 08:06:21 pm by Panuru »
Streaming cRPG, Supreme Commander and Age of Empires II on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/HeavenTV

Offline Rico

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1021
  • Infamy: 158
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Rico, Mila
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #43 on: March 01, 2014, 07:59:18 pm »
+1
Well and the ballistas on Siege make peasants perform better than they would according to the system, and people who go 3 levels higher to go 2h/pole hybrid for instance are also overrated balance-wise.
Streaming cRPG, Supreme Commander and Age of Empires II on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/HeavenTV

Offline Elindor

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1178
  • Infamy: 158
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Caelitus mihi vires
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Order of the Holy Guard
  • Game nicks: Elindor
Re: Proposed change to team-balance algorithim
« Reply #44 on: March 02, 2014, 07:15:35 am »
+1
These are good points Panaru, but any change for the better is good - even if it's not perfect.  Of course level matters, but it shouldn't matter more than how someone is performing at the moment.

What I'm hoping we can do away with are the obvious and gratuitous imbalances of teams that result in just absolute steamrolls....and you look at the scoreboard and go "wtf??? is the autobalancer just trolling us?"

(click to show/hide)
Elindor, Archon of the Holy Guard
Holy Guard Thread :HERE
Banner Shop : HERE // Map Thread : HERE