Spring RTS Engine

licho, that method isnt exactly clear, nor would it be preferable, but please enlighten me.

Well I thought its preferable method .. it's using infolog.txt .. if you redirect output from spring you will recieve what normally goes to infolog and you can parse it..
Springie does it this way.

ah, sounds simple.

Yeah it is!

Check this file from springie method ProcessLogLine .. really no big deal ..

https://springrts.com/svn/spring/trunk/ ... /Spring.cs

.NET / C# is win :D

Maybe its time for me to start poking around Springie now that I know teh .NET :O

I have a proposal for a new rank system, too!

What abount dropping the whole concept of ranks?

->Instead of having a rank symbol, create a link to players statistics!

For example win/loss ratio, overall ingame time, com losses, destroyed units etc.

Negative aspect: More traffic, space needed for storing informations.

And when you want to add limitation for joining players you could say, only player with a w/l-ration of lower or greater than x%.
The w/l-ratio could be replaced through any other stat.

I think thats much cooler than ranks...

E:
On this profile page you could make the possibility to link an image and/or add a few lines of text.

That would be cool!

Rank is a way of encapsulating all that.

true, but ranks do not say anything at all about the player, unless you change the complete thing, which defines which player gets which rank.

So, my proposal abrogates the overall rating, which says atm Star -> very experienced player etc.

Caradhras wrote: And when you want to add limitation for joining players you could say, only player with a w/l-ration of lower or greater than x%.
The w/l-ratio could be replaced through any other stat.

[...]

That would be cool!

Nah, that wouldn't be cool because people will try to play versus lower player to win and increase their w/l ratio..

With rank, you can for exemple say that loosing versus a better play don't make you loose points, so, your are encouraged to play versus better player.

Torrasque wrote:

Caradhras wrote: And when you want to add limitation for joining players you could say, only player with a w/l-ration of lower or greater than x%.
The w/l-ratio could be replaced through any other stat.

[...]

That would be cool!

Nah, that wouldn't be cool because people will try to play versus lower player to win and increase their w/l ratio..

With rank, you can for exemple say that loosing versus a better play don't make you loose points, so, your are encouraged to play versus better player.

Ok, thats true!
Another possibility:
Through winning games, player earn victory points.
But the harvest for a victory varys by the the way your opponent has a better or worse statistic.
If you have 50 points and win against a 70points player, so you could get 5 points, if you beat a 5 point player, you only get maybe 1/8point.

But to keep this clear, the points should stagnate at some point (your skill).

You know what I mean?
Someone should create a shiny algorithm and this could work.

Just simple ranks as we have them now are boring.

You realize that 1v1 ranking systems have been created and perfected over many decades?


It's the ultimate form of OOP reusability - use something from IRL that you know works... reinventing the wheel serves only limited utility.

this thread is something like w/l -> elo -> w/l -> elo -> w/l -> elo......

I dont know what OOP means, but agree with you that the time and effort for doing this is to high compared to its "utility"

But 1v1 ratings mean nothing real, not for the forms of play most enjoy.

I'd take a team of pro 1v1ers over a team of pro team players any day of the week

And that is all well and good, but the ratings, while reliable, will never be valid in enough situations to be worth implementing.

base it off the leveling up system in pokemon

I signed on with the Spring League group to bring multi-mod support and ensure we had a rating system that wouldn't effect the experience directly, but rather through a social vein, much like clans do.

I cannot and will not support a competitive measure which excludes individuals who do not score well on an arbitrary scale, and I will form an alternative system if such a ladder is adopted. Maybe I'm looking at the picture from the outside, but I have a lot of analytical skills which I can bring to bear on it.

Why do people want to turn everything into stats-whoring-fests?

If you implement win/loss rating since you think this is a good measure of skill... how will you keep people from abusing this system? Such as going on two accounts at the same time and boosting his stats? Or shady dealings like stacking teams and everything that's not playing honest matches. It's simply not worth it for the miniscule "benefit".

I do endorse competetive play, but not in this way. The player base is way too small as well, something like a tournament and clan matches feel much more appropriate to compare spring 3-p33n..

lame people aside, skill rating would help finding people closer to your skill level so that the game is more enjoyable

no system will protect us from people who turn off their modems not to see a "you lost" screen, or attach some random taged string to pretend they belong to a clan