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

Post edit history

32-player TAW is not good for Zero-K

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
9/2/2025 1:19:18 PMPTrankraaar before revert after revert
Before After
1 what I did on MF was make casualRating = competitiveRating + casualOffset 1 what I did on MF was make casualRating = competitiveRating + casualOffset
2 \n 2 \n
3 win/loss on casual battles just adds +/- ( or some small flat amount) to the casualOffset. 3 win/loss on casual battles just adds +/- 1 ( or some small flat amount) to the casualOffset.
4 \n 4 \n
5 Something like this might push grindy "how high can I reach?" people from TAW to the 1v1/teams matchmaker then back to TAW and other casual rooms to unwind on low stakes games (still not zero). 5 Something like this might push grindy "how high can I reach?" people from TAW to the 1v1/teams matchmaker then back to TAW and other casual rooms to unwind on low stakes games (still not zero).
6 \n 6 \n
7 \n 7 \n
8 Atm stakes are low only if the number of players is relatively high. Casual status of the room itself could also be factored in. 8 Atm stakes are low only if the number of players is relatively high. Casual status of the room itself could also be factored in.