Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Loch

  1. I don't think we necessarily need a formula yet - but let's look at what everyone can contribute to, so we have a better understanding of how the game works. For instance, in Halo CTF, what's the most important stat? Some might say KA/G, some would say flag caps. But what about deaths/game? IMO deaths are potentially more important in CTF than kills, but you might make the opposite argument fairly easily too. I want to spark a discussion about which stats matter the most, so that we can start working on those formulas.
  2. What's really interesting is that once you've generalized stats like this, you can now compare players from different games. "Who was the best player out of anyone who played Halo 1, 2, 3, 4?" Or even "Who is better: Pistola at Halo 4 or Nadeshot at Ghosts?"
  3. Seeing this topic prompted me to think about how we really perceive pro players. Our judgements are based on experience and what we've seen players accomplish. This has historically been an accurate enough way of judging players (how'd they place at X tournament(s)?) However it rarely, if ever, tells the whole story. I'm sure some of you have read the book/seen the movie Moneyball, or perhaps you've heard the story of how sabermetrics became crucial to the hiring process for major baseball teams. For those that are unaware, sabermetrics is the name for baseball statistics. The story goes that scouts from MLB used to base their judgements on how they perceived a player to perform. Votes for new players were done by a panel of experts who were all basically just chipping in their opinions on who they think are good players. These guys knew their stuff, but their opinions weren't based on any hard calculations. Kinda sounds like the predictions made by well know folks in eSports, no? So what is WAR? Wins Above Replacement is just one of the stats that's referenced frequently in baseball when talking about the effectiveness of a given player, and it goes a little something like this: WAR is the number of wins a player contributes to a team relative to the number of wins a replacement player would contribute - or more simply: how many more wins will this player give us vs. another player? WAR is calculated using A LOT of numbers and prior statistics, and there's a number of ways of calculating it. Here's an example of one: As you can see, Fangraphs (the company that came up with this calculation) is relying on other statistics as well to come up with a player's WAR. So the whole point of WAR is to figure out what makes a player contribute wins to a team. My question to you guys is, what makes a Halo player contribute wins to a team? Can we work out some sort of WAR statistic? It would be really interesting to be able to compare amateurs against pros in a way that allows us to question who is really a pro. I think there's obviously a lot of considerations here, including the gametype and other environmental factors. Maybe we can break this down by gametype? What do you guys think?
  5. I got access to the Atlas data back in the Reach days - was able to get a live feed of players positions updating. I wanted to make a coaching app that would tell you important stuff like weapon times and when your team mates were out of position or when the other team picked up a weapon. Alas, it wasn't meant to be. (Reach sucked too much for me to care)
  6. Call of Duty community hates change almost as much as the Halo community. If this game does anything innovative it'll be shit on by the community. The difference between CoD and Halo though is that the community will continue to play it regardless.
  7. FYI IronGaming and AGL were planning to team up before AGL got flushed down the toilet.
  8. You're not serious are you? It's called running a business. The key word there being "running" - without a popular game, things don't run too well.
  9. Thanks for venting in this thread but if you used your inferencing skills you'd realize that wasn't the point of this thread.
  10. It would be difficult to keep track of each games varying gametypes but I suppose you could find community leaders for each game to keep track of that stuff. I was initially going to leave it at "Just agree on a gametype and play" as a less strict way of doing everything, but I'm sure that could also attract cheaters. Host issues will be resolved going forward with Xbox One with the help of dedicated servers, but regardless for matchmaking the host will always be chosen at random by matchmaking "X will host the match"
  11. I promise you won't be climbing any latters. Skill levels (and therefore matchmaking) will be based on the Trueskill rating system, which means 1-50 for any game that can be played on the site.
  12. I'm in the process of working on a website that will allow you to challenge other players to 1v1 matches. The end game for me would be to become the defacto standard for 1v1 ratings and something that would be used commonly enough for players to replace the phrase "1v1 me" with "1v1 me on [sitename]". For games that support it, the players' stats would be tracked from their games and the site would develop a record with various stats across many games for individuals. Games without a way to keep track of stats like that would simply be based on an honour system. I have the ability to incorporate a matchmaking system similar to what you see in online games such that you'd enter a lobby, pick a game and playlist to play, and the site would find someone of a similar skill for you to play against. I think I'd like the site to behave similar to twitter with regards to the social aspect, and much better than any other solution in terms of finding matches for players to play. I'm pretty far into development but I'd like to get an idea of what you guys think so far. Also I'd love to hear suggestions or ideas for features that may be interesting to incorporate. Cheers
  13. No need to bash 343i here folks. Simple change to the way the API has to be logged in to. It's the equivalent of a link breaking on a website because the developer moved a file. It's a little more complicated than that but long story short, the CSR sites were expecting to find something at a URL which had changed but this is extremely trivial to change on the CSR site's side of things. Edit: I didn't notice you are now required to login for all data - this is something I expected to see from the start. HaloTracker at least will be unaffected AFAIK.
  14. Took Halo 3 something like 3 years to get to that price right? But yeah you're right.
  15. I don't necessarily think those are bad games to model after, but it's not like 343i is comprised of a bunch of Halo 2 fan boys.
  16. Ghandi's a loud minority - he has his opinion about what HE thinks the game should be, which for the most part sounds like a rehashed version of Halo:CE/H2. Doesn't feel to me like he'd conduct himself well enough in a team environment where his opinion isn't necessarily the most important. Sorry guys/Ghandi, just my opinion though.
  17. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you can do both, but how you score in each case has changed.
  18. Following this article: http://www.certainaffinity.com/buzz/ricochet-game-type-labels/ created by CA, it's possible to create goals that can only be scored in by running the ball in, and likewise with throwing. So do you think Ricochet would be better if there were goals that could be thrown into, but just have them placed above the ground - or even in an entirely separate place from the run-in zone? Personally I think if there were places separate from the main run-in zone that required a bit of skill to throw the ball into, this might mitigate the complaints people have about the "randomness" of throw-ins. Personally I don't think it's random, but this to me is a good compromise for people who still want to be able to throw the ball in for points. Thoughts?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.