Suggestion for ?go base

[foobarz]

It's not just new people that ruin games either, it's older players who suck at certain key ships (javs/terr are good example) but _think_ they're good, and if they captain will put themselves in those ships. I have a kind of blacklist running, where I won't make the people on that list captain unless no one else asks for cap.

It's getting to be pretty long I'm finding out....

The problem with bad captains isn't so much the newness, it's the disregard for picking a "good team" in exchange for "OMG LEMME CAP SO I CAN JAV!".

Exactly. You're already trying to choose good captains. So why not have a bot to assist you choose good ones?

[foobarz]

That's what I'm talking about. People shouldn't be complaining about this, because most of the time hardly anyone asks to cap in the first place so we're forced to give cap to anyone that shows any hint of life.

Well, why not use this tool when there are 40 people in base and 8 who want to cap, rather than using it when there are 16 people in base and 2 who want to cap? It doesn't have to be automatic. I'm just saying it should exist.

[foobarz]

Problem with making a captain rating system in ?go base is that it will become very very competitive. Caps will only pick good people, so they have a better chance of upping their rank. So when will the newbs play? they have to play SOMEtime right?

The rating doesn't have to be public, but a captain who loses every game 10:00 - 1:00 shouldn't be allowed to cap, period. Maybe the rating system could automatically have old games expired so that after a long time they are given a chance again (i.e. maybe they cap and lose 5 games 10:00-1:00 but then in three months their rating is neutral again so they can cap).

I'm willing to write a formula is anyone is willing to implement it.

[Stabwound]

I believe posting 9 replies in a row constitutes spamming, even though you were saying something different and relevent in each post.

[Kolar]

The rating system wouldn't disbar people from capping but it would let the staffer decide on picking someone who javs all the time or has to do a lot of subs/changes during the game because they didn't check for afkers before !ready.

Everyone could start off with a certain number of points:

2500 for example, a limit on the number would be something like 5000 points.

Then the win or losses will effect the game greatly example:

100 points either way

Bonus points if the enemy never touches the flag, 30-50 points

Sub/changes could mean 5 points

Other scores of the team could effect how much more points are awarded but it doesn't have to, which means a new player could play and not do so well but help the team win and still not effect this. Basicly this would be a ladder open to everyone to see and a tool for all staff/bot powered person to use.


In response to Aggravate:

The game is already competitive and new players don't really get to play because the caps want to win so I don't see this changing anything. If someone wants to play ?go base they can wait and try like everyone else and eventually they will get to play regularly much like this system, it doesn't mean you'll never cap it just means that it will have an effect on how much you get to cap like the unoffical system most people have when getting to know the ?go base players and applying that to their line ups. Competitiveness isn't always something negitive. This had a great number of positive effects on the game one of them being that people will be more readily to pick a good line up and make it an intresting and fun match.

[Zerzera]

If a person with bot powers chooses an afk cap, you don't need to kill the game, you have the power to setcap someone else right? That shouldn't be too hard.

There shouldn't be afk people in ?go base! The fact that there are, pisses me off. There is an option that allows you to stay on notplaying untill you turn it off, no matter how many games are played in a row.
I can't believe there had to be made an option like that. I'd rather see people getting banned for short periods. Unless you going to punish people for ruining the gameplay of ?go base, some aren't going to give a shit.
But as long as there are still people going afk without turning !notplaying on, I am sticking to this way of setting captains.

I get tired of repeating arguments, I even wonder if you read the arguments, but if you set someone captain that didn't ask for it (and I think I am around more than you, and started base enough to know what I am talking about) people sometimes start to pass around captain, because nobody wants to cap anymore.

[Zerzera]

That rating system sucks, because even if you set two die-hard captains, there is a big chance of the game to be totally uneven. I am sure Mythrandir can spew out a load of statistics that prove this.
And what do you do when you just picked 4 Disoblige members and when the game starts they decide to have a TWD-game? And even worse, there is 4 people in spectator, but only 2 people aren't total newbies. And when you sub them in they appear to be afk.
There goes your cool rating that doesn't match reality. And what are mods supposed to do with that ratings anyway? Do they have to compare all ratings of people that ask to get captain and pick the person with the highest rating?
That takes time and would result in some sort of caps monopoly. And if I don't like someone as captain, I could screw him over by leaving or lose the game for him.
It's cool that you want ?go base to be perfect, but it will not be.

[RabbitRapist]

The problem isnt about some people being new, or some people being vets. It's about staff/bot-people not setting even caps.

Personally I don't cap anymore because I win every time, there are others who do the same.

For example if you're gonna make azn_twat_44 a cap, make uber_dick_45 the other cap.

[Kolar]

Well Zerz the caps aren't the problem the people picking them are. So if they had some extented info I think it would help. I'm not saying it would be perfect or would work but you can't just say completely no to the idea. If it doesn't help then staff can remove it or make it purely public for people to have fun with. What i'm say is that the things people do (a lot of negitive things that does effect the game, I.E picking wb/jav for themselves, screwing around with cloaks ect ect) would count against their score, then a person could look at that or go more into it and see the ave of theses things and compare it to other easily.

This isn't making ?go base perfect either but at least it's an attempt to make it more even and fun for the people and easier for the staff members, because I don't know about you but it's getting tiring to watch the same people cap, wb themselves and then do nothing for 15 mins. I've played and watched games where self centered people do this just to play what they want and not care about the game or the people playing it (well fucking new flash a 3 wb line up isn't going to get you past a cram maybe the staffers should see the people doing this kind of crap).

[Stabwound]

If people complain about having the same caps over and over, then they need to volunteer to cap, themselves. End of discussion.

[Zerzera]

the people picking them are

lol? That's really stupid. Unlike wbduel and javduel, base has alot of die-hard basers that have the ability to start a game. I don't know where you got this idea from.
Maybe you look at the games and see they are uneven alot of times. Well that isn't going to change unless you have squad v squad or something. When you put 8 random players against 8 other random players, there is a big chance that one will have chemistry, and the other not. Wich will result in a very uneven game. Maybe we should have a chemistrybot, that holds a record of wich players work well together.

[Zerzera]

the people picking them are

lol? That's really stupid. Unlike wbduel and javduel, base has alot of die-hard basers that have the ability to start a game, instead of a summoned staffer that knows nothing about the base-community. I don't know where you got this idea from.
Maybe you look at the games and see they are uneven alot of times. Well that isn't going to change unless you have squad v squad or something. When you put 8 random players against 8 other random players, there is a big chance that one will have chemistry, and the other not. Wich will result in a very uneven game. Maybe we should have a chemistrybot, that holds a record of wich players work well together.

[Kolar]

Sigh... Zerz you're missing the point of this forum. This isn't where we shoot down ideas and call people idiots. It's an idea, an odd one at that. If you're taking this personally because you do have bot powers on Matchbotr4 then really piss off, this is 'Suggestion for ?go base' and it looks like a decent idea for cleaning it up. I have no problem with staffers or their picking caps, most of them do good, some don't. I'm not trying to single any of them out, this is purely to enhance the game.

Now when you pick people randomly without caring like when people spam cap in team chat, you don't get even caps, games and you get uncaring caps who just screw up the game intentionally. Those people shouldn't cap.

[Pio]

When i captain i try to pick atleast 2 newbies. And you'd be suprised most of the time my team wins with 2+ newbies vs "known" players.

[Diakka]

It's really annoying when ?go base results in lopsided games, either because one of the captains doesn't know how to pick teams or if they just say "cap" so they can jav or terr (and they suck at it).

I think it should be recorded who is the captain picking teams and the score of each game, so that people who consistantly pick losing teams will be unable to pick teams. There could perhaps be some sort of rating system, with the ratings viewable before the game to assist the mod who's choosing captains, to ensure that captains are of equal caliber, and that there won't be one captain whose teams always win with the other whose teams always lose.

Just a thought, to prevent all those 10:00 - 0:01 games caused by newb captains.

That is a pretty good idea. But I don't think there are to many newbie captains that staffers set to cap. I mean there are some newb captains that get to cap sometimes but not to much that we need to do all that recording and stuff. But I do think it is a good idea. :up: