Loading...
Name:    Password:    (Forgot password / username? / Create an account)
Forum index  > News   >

PlayerJuggler disabled


Post comment


26 posts, 1320 views
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


Because poll shows that most players wish to either wait for SpringLobby support (which is nowhere to be seen) or to push forward with more advanced matchmaking, system is put offline for now.

You wont be moved to available games so pay more attention to stuff :)

+0 / -0
NLrankNapoleonMrPingu
32 months ago
I laughed pretty hard at that picture.
+0 / -0
MYrankSoldierjseah
32 months ago
Despite my occasional irritation at juggler, and having to reset priorities, and being chucked out games that were about to start, and...

Ok, despite my actual greviances about juggler, I still think juggler was a good idea. The only thing was that it should have been an opt-in "find me a game" matchmaking system rather than an opt-out one.

Oh and that leaving 20% of people using the wrong lobby out of the picture is bad.
+0 / -0
GBrankDudeLoh[KoCN]
32 months ago
I approve of this change -nod-
+0 / -0
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


Jseah problem is this - if you got a game that can only start with 8 people and 9 people join what then?

Who would enable it who would sacrifice? Point of the system is to be all for all so it splits the game into two .. which also causes most of complaints.
+0 / -0
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


The poll is here ..

Player Juggler (the matchmaking system that can move you from game to game) suffers from incomplete SpringLobby support. What to do now?

Keep the system as is, it's good at putting people together in games 17% (49) 17%
Disable the system until SpringLobby support, moves are annoying 51% (146) 51%
Improve the system to proper matchmaking "click to find a battle" and after few minutes battle starts. (Breaks SpringLobby support - loses 20% people) 32% (93) 32%
-----(Total votes: 288)-----


just for the reference and to showoff new forum feature :-)
+0 / -0
USrankAdminAntelope
32 months ago

Donator star
The goal of the system should be to put people in a similar room. NOT to enforce where people should go after they have already found a room.

Once you've got a room full of people, so what? Who cares what happens after that? If it's designed to be 4v4 and an extra joins, we can wait a minute for it to balance out (or !forcestart the game as is!).

No one is mad at juggler for trying to make new games. People are pissed because it moves them out of GAMES THEY ARE ALREADY IN.

I say, once a room has enough people for a game, just let those people be. Chances are, you're not going to make them happy by unexpectedly moving them.
+0 / -0
MYrankSoldierjseah
32 months ago
Well, firstly, if a game has 9ppl and it's a 4v4 game, then anyone who has activated "find me a game" gets moved out if a game can be found. 9th player stays in if no game can be found among other ppl who have clicked "find me a game", do send a warning in this case.

Only one gets moved out (random among equal considerations, but elo matching will often favour one), the rest keep their game.
Exceptions:
9 ppl is odd and thus 1, 3 or 5 ppl (if so many have clicked "find a game") could be moved out to leave an even number behind. (note that 7 cannot be moved since that would turn it into 1v1)
Prefer to move as little ppl as possible. Movement should be disfavoured over game preferences.

If none have clicked "find a game", send a periodic warning in the chat that they have too many ppl and can't start. Let the players work out who should click "find a game" or maybe someone will spec.


Obviously, if someone sits in a small teams room without clicking "find a game", don't move him. But do move other people into that room if a small team game can be made with him.
If multiple unmovable people in separate small teams exist at equal considerations, then pick one randomly. (elo match will often favour one set over others)
+0 / -0
AUrankSoldier[V]Crutch
32 months ago
Antelope has is spot on.
I like the idea of the juggler but getting booted when i'm in a room waiting for a game to start doesnt sit well with me,
Or worse being transfered while im in a active game to a 1v1 room

I hope it comes back when there are more people to juggle
+0 / -0
CArankAdminPxtl
32 months ago
Well, at least it built me a few FFAs before it went down, so hard to get FFAs going otherwise.
+0 / -0
USrankDude[rks]N2maniac
32 months ago
Define "nowhere in sight" for juggler support for springlobby...
+0 / -0
DErankDudeMaltbeer
32 months ago
Good riddance!

+0 / -0
AUrankAdminSaktoth
32 months ago

Donator star
I liked juggler. I loved seeing 3 4v4 games going at once. I loved seeing a big game and 2 1v1's going. It made me realise people aren't playing these massive clusterfuck 8v8 games because they want to, but because thats where the other people are.
+0 / -0
AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
32 months ago

Donator star
If a reduced juggler with a propper "Play now" button is added I would still want small teamgame handling. Maybe the small teamgame host should autosplit players if it reaches a size of 9.
+0 / -0
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


Basically unless you move people who are already in room juggler wont work..

You always have people who want to play in room ..
If you press "find me a game" it does nothing because you are likely to be only one who does that .. or it moves you as a single person to empty game..

Power of juggler was in the ability to shuffle all people at once to create more optimal layout... to consider stuff like who is actually playing, what priorities are, what elo is.

"Find a game" button is useless.. anyone can click on multiplayer and see what games are there to pick one..

Think more bout it ..
Only such system makes sense .. we had "finde me a game" button in the past it wasnt used, it was useless.
+0 / -0
DErankDudeAhira
32 months ago

Donator star
True, Licho, that you currently can actively look for other rooms, e.g. when your room os too full, but to my experience having to do one click or several is sometimes what makes the big difference.

I would like to have the 'find me game' button, but moreover I also would like to see the other rooms in parallel to the chat in the room. With the current option i can either see the chat of the room I am in on the full screen or see the other rooms with only 5 (or so lines) of the chat, which is to little to follow the chat (for me).

How aboout the following: Always display 4-5 rooms which are looking for player (based on the number of players in relative to the goal (1 person in 1v1, 2-3 persons in small teams...). This way all you need to do is hover over the rooms to see who is in (which I consider important) and have to do only one click if you want to change...perhaps with a 'find ma game' buttoen right next to it, if I am undecided, that would be the 'perfect' solution for me.

Can the current display in the lobby be actually changed to that kind of view already?

I have no idea on how much effort this would be to implement. And I also have no idea, if others might also would like this approach?


+0 / -0
SErankDudeThat80sJanitor
32 months ago
Sorry about this, but I'm going to have to go M. Bison on these news.
+0 / -0
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


The system never was for "finding" games.. it was for finding partners to make games!

We dont need "find a game" button.
Anything even less ambitious than juggler is imo waste of effort.
+0 / -0
DErankDudebhaktivedanta
32 months ago
I am happy it is disabled. One of my main problems was that i was moved into games with ppl i did not know. I dont know about you guys, but when i choose a game, i am looking for players that i know are good teammates and fun to play with. juggler inherently neglects the community aspect of the game. think about it: you are called by some friends to join a party at somebody's place. the taxi drives by, you can allready see some friends chatting in front of the building. but as the driver sees there are too many ppl allready on the street, he fails to stop and drops you out somebody else's party. Oo
+0 / -0
MYrankSoldierjseah
32 months ago
The "find me a game" button only works when there are enough ppl to form games from those who have clicked it. So, I suppose the problem stems from not having enough players.
+0 / -0
USrankNewbie[I]amNot[null]Bla1
32 months ago
I dun wanna be dog juggled by scary human looking bot...
+0 / -0
CHrankSoldierFirepluk
32 months ago

Donator star
Oh Licho[OK] thanks you very much :) Im happy that i will not be juggled anymore. For me it was the most annoying and useless part of ZK.
I know that you have spent a lot of time to code it and test, but currently i dont see way how it can work and dont be mess.
P.S. and sorry me for raging at you, it was just my stupid anger.
P.P.S btw after you banned me ban system was improved, it's fun :) but however chat ban on client side is SO LOL.
+0 / -0
USrankNewbieZag
32 months ago
What if you left juggler prefs the way they are and had a "Join queue" button and it would immediately put you into the "Waiting Queue" server (a server that would never start) or you could manually join the server, then the juggler would move only the people in the game to other servers, or create a new server and move some of the people from the "queue" server to the new server.
+0 / -0
CZrankAdminLicho
32 months ago


Thats basically how it was except that every battle room with star was "queue" room
+0 / -0
NLrankNapoleonMrPingu
32 months ago
I miss game Juggler already :(, I did vote for the button thing, but I didn't really intend to have it removed. Can't we have a vote on wether to have it disabled?

+0 / -0
USrankNewbieZag
32 months ago
CZrankAdminLicho I understand, but the one thing I disliked about it was that it would move me out of games that could start and out of games that were close to being able to start. My suggestion would reduce functionality, but it would get rid of the major problem, moving people out of games they wanted to be in. It would be close to how the original worked, but have the "Find a game" type functionality too (and hopefully not have a special function that wouldn't work with Spring Lobby).
+0 / -0

Post comment