Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Title: [A] Teams All Welcome (32p)
Host: Nobody
Game version: Zero-K 1.10.8.0
Engine version: 105.1.1-841-g099e9d0
Battle ID: 1457964
Started: 19 months ago
Duration: 16 minutes
Players: 21
Bots: False
Mission: False
Rating: Casual
Watch Replay Now
Manual download

Team 1 Won!
Chance of victory: 49.6%
XP gained: 61
NLranknr1_rANDY_FAN
FRrankHelwor
USrankbbar97
USrankchaplol
SErankfaffnir
DErankfxrs
USrankDenzenDazo
ESrankmoepmoep
PLrankMrSiara
RUrankkol
ITrankEskilo
Team 2 Lost
Chance of victory: 50.4%
XP gained: 54
GBrankSab died in 16 minutes
GBrankmushroomraider died in 16 minutes
DErankdunno died in 11 minutes
USrankUnLuky died in 16 minutes
MYrankHougo died in 16 minutes
USrankMongoShades died in 16 minutes
UArankinf died in 16 minutes
USrankBraveBushCamper died in 16 minutes
USranknukeover9000 died in 16 minutes
GBrankPebbles died in 16 minutes




Preview
Filter:    Player:  
sort
19 months ago
I don't understand this balancing at all lol
+0 / -0
This was the first team game of ITrankEskilo. Before the game, their "ladder rating" was 1100 and the actual "current rating" 1500. After the game, "ladder rating" was 1126 and "current rating" was 1513. Additionally, the other players' ratings changed a bit due to the game. AFAIK, the balancer uses "ladder rating" before the game instead of actual rating.

"Ladder rating" has many strange deviations from the actual rating. That it starts at 1100 instead of 1500 is one of the few deviations that makes some sense: You want to balance a new player as below average but the actual rating average has to be kept at 1500 if a new player joins. This could be solved by an anti deflation mechanism: If a new player joins, their actual rating could start at 1100 and the ratings of all other players would be shifted up to keep the average at 1500. Then, ladder rating could be removed. The same mechanism can be used to prevent rating inflation if a player leaves.
+2 / -0