Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

!predict is wrong! - New Prediction System for Teams

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
10/5/2015 7:49:37 PMSkasi before revert after revert
10/5/2015 7:48:37 PMSkasi before revert after revert
10/5/2015 7:48:00 PMSkasi before revert after revert
Before After
1 [quote]It has been shown that calculating "elo sums" by n*(average elo) is better for uneven teams than calculating real elo sums.[/quote] 1 [quote]It has been shown that calculating "elo sums" by n*(average elo) is better for uneven teams than calculating real elo sums.[/quote]
2 Did you take into account the fact that some weeks ago resource distribution was changed? If I remember correct ( high elo) players with two commanders used to receive a two-player-income. This is no longer true ( unless the playerlist happened to show numbers far off for other reasons like reclaim/. . . ) . 2 Did you take into account the fact that some weeks ago resource distribution was changed? If I remember correct ( high elo) players with two commanders used to receive a two-player-income ( or at least personal metal from the second commander) . This is no longer true ( unless the playerlist happened to show numbers far off for other reasons like reclaim/. . . ) .
3 \n 3 \n
4 Also, have you tested counting players with two commanders twice? As in 2000+1000=3000 elo team vs 1500+1500+1500=4500, here the 2000 elo player counts twice, resulting in a 5000 elo team. Again, this might no longer be as accurate in newer ZK replays as it might've been with older replay data. 4 Also, have you tested counting players with two commanders twice? As in 2000+1000=3000 elo team vs 1500+1500+1500=4500, here the 2000 elo player counts twice, resulting in a 5000 elo team. Again, this might no longer be as accurate in newer ZK replays as it might've been with older replay data.