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

Post edit history

B1403384 23 on Comet Catcher Redux v3.1 (Multiplayer)

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
7/9/2022 2:07:47 PMDErankBrackman before revert after revert
7/9/2022 1:38:52 PMDErankBrackman before revert after revert
7/9/2022 1:33:33 PMDErankBrackman before revert after revert
Before After
1 Actually it's not exponential but a Binomial coefficient (N choose floor(N/2))/(2 - N mod 2). 1 Actually it's not exponential but a Binomial coefficient (N choose floor(N/2))/(2 - N mod 2).
2 \n 2 \n
3 [url=https://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/228529#228529]I also found another hint that standard deviation difference minimization is already applied.[/url]
4 \n
3 [q]If I remember the code correctly, the "empty" player is assumed to have rating equal to the average rating of all players in the room.[/q]Rather the average of all players in their team.[q]Perhaps it should count for less than that. I am not sure if anybody has run the numbers to figure that out.[/q]@DeinFreund [url=https://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/229540#229540]has run the numbers and they show that the bigger team has an advantage.[/url] A better way to consider uneven teams has not been demonstrated yet but more can be done on that. I have the theory that the rating of players who tend to get 2nd coms is distorted to compensate the misconsideration on average. Maybe this is even the reason that the highest casual ratings are smaller than the highest competitive ratings. 5 [q]If I remember the code correctly, the "empty" player is assumed to have rating equal to the average rating of all players in the room.[/q]Rather the average of all players in their team.[q]Perhaps it should count for less than that. I am not sure if anybody has run the numbers to figure that out.[/q]@DeinFreund [url=https://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/229540#229540]has run the numbers and they show that the bigger team has an advantage.[/url] A better way to consider uneven teams has not been demonstrated yet but more can be done on that. I have the theory that the rating of players who tend to get 2nd coms is distorted to compensate the misconsideration on average. Maybe this is even the reason that the highest casual ratings are smaller than the highest competitive ratings.