A Bit of Better Balancing  (Read 1181 times)

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #30 on: May 28, 2021, 21:49 »
Or that, indeed. but if somebody is swapped because of you answering the phone, when you hang up and resume action, that swapped player should arguably be swapped back too.
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #31 on: May 29, 2021, 11:40 »
The value of a kill, or a damage, can be broken into various parameters.

 - how close you are from your target. the further, bigger the value => Aim factor
 - the quality of the target you off or damage. The better player, the more value has the kill or the damage => Target dangerosity factor.
 - how close the target is from his flag post, his dropped flag, your dropped flag, your flag on its post. The closer, the higher the value of the the damage => Implication factor. (1)
 - Is the target shooting your FC? Or killing your best player?  In essence, what is the value of the targets YOUR target is shooting (or aiming, as trying to shoot at)=> Support factor.
[edit] Since writing this, i've  thought of one more general factor :  the distance from spawn. see below.

Note : "how close is the player from the flag" could be swapped by something else. In fact, what you want is to order the value of the kill for it to be the highest (for this parameter) when you kill the guy that would have reached the flag first. Perhaps looking at player vectors could be better suited to reflect the value of some relocations and movements in the map.[EDIT.. see next post. I'm working the ideas]]

After some thoughts I ended up with this. what do you think?

(1) perhaps better broken further to discriminate between [ your flag defense  and flag retrieval ]  and [trying the take their flag and preventing them from returning it], with the idea of distinguishing offense and defense. Perhaps not so useful as all the 4 categories separated instead of joined 2x2?
« Last Edit: May 30, 2021, 20:02 by Gil-galad[The REAL one] »
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #32 on: May 29, 2021, 17:45 »
If a player is equidistant of the two flags : he should have a value of 1/2  in both [damage delivered to flag defender] and [damage delivered to a flag taker] counts when the enemy kills him. whatever the position and situation of the flags (dropped or on post). Take the actual position of the flag if carried or dropped.
if the player then reaches to the enemy's flag post (flag on it), the value of the damage credited to another player that would kill him there would be maxed for [damage delivered to a flag taker] and minimized for [damage delivered to flag defender].
If he takes the enemy's flag, he keeps full value for others as [damage delivered to a flag taker] (distance to enemy flag =0).
Now, as he returns to his base, on top of that, his enemies will be credited more [damage dealt to a flag defender] as he gets almost to his flag's post.  If he is killed, the value his enemies will get for [damage delivered to flag takers] would still be full value, as the value [damage delivered to flag defender], because he is close to his own flag. He has there the fullest value of the Implication factor if killed, the two indicators being maxed.

Now the enemy being crafty go and takes his team's flag, so he can't score.  As long as he caries their flag, the one that kills him is credited with a full [damage delf to enemy flag taker], but less and less value, as the other FC rejoins his side, for the player that kills him, in the [damage delt to flag defender] count. In that situation,  that value gets to zero once the max distance is achieved (the other FC ran all the way and is waiting to score on his flag post while he had done the same).

I think this could work well. it's clearer this way. It's a nice step towards the definition of the implication factor.

[EDIT : I kept writing about killing, but I do mean damage delt to, which will not always result in death.]
« Last Edit: May 30, 2021, 11:47 by Gil-galad[The REAL one] »
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #33 on: May 29, 2021, 18:08 »
for averages calculation and variations at the end of the match, the accumulated total for every category by a player could be weighted against the value achieved by other players, to avoid the noise of the variation of the game-play rhythm that is due to the nature more or less spammy  and speedy of the maps.

[edit : or not. I'm full of doubts.]
« Last Edit: May 29, 2021, 20:42 by Gil-galad[The REAL one] »
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #34 on: May 30, 2021, 19:16 »
Other counts, credited to players? flags? that are necessary to value a flag retrieve and a flag run. We need these two three values

A. [how much away is your flag from your base] as a value between 0 and 1, to be able to attribute it to the flag retrievers. when they return a flag.

B. [how much close is their flag to your base] as a value between 0 and 1, to be able to attribute it to the flag carriers when they drop a flag. Or as fraction of it, the fraction of the path he did carry the flag if he didn't pick it on post but where it had been dropped, like was said earlier in this thread.

Inverse A and B for values for the other team.

The tactical value of a dropped flag, if A=1, B=1 (a teammate is scoring or the enemy's flag has dropped on your flag post) is there the fullest and should be credited for a flag return.
Likewise, the tactical value of a flag run lies in how close you got it to your flag post, even if your flag isn't on its post because it's there that you'll be able to score if yours would be retrieved, like B=1 (completely close to, so, in the same spot).

If the enemy's flag is (dropped or carried) on your post, but your flag is at their post, then the return of your flag should be credited full value. If your flag is on post, and you do a successful run, the run has the fullest value.

Why? because both flags are necessary to score. So, the value of a flag run or a flag retrieval should also depend on the situation of the other flag, favorable to your team or favorable to the other ; depends on the position of both flags.

If you combine A and B for their total to be equal to one (=1 cap, just a scaling of the results), and scale the A and B parameters for one cap  1= A+B. I keep banging my head around this but I'm sure it should be fairly simple to finalize the vision. the values i give would have to change to reflect this, but it's all a question of weights after that anyway. I think it's more general and precise definition of  caps and flag actions, and thus more robust,  to think of them like this.

0 of a cap is when that value reaches the fullest for the enemy, meaning he is capping. Boths flags on their post would be half a cap for both teams, in that sense - as would be both FC waiting on their flag post for their flag to be returned. like that, if your flag gets taken to the exact middle of the map while the enemy's stays on its post, it's actually 0.75 of a cap for the enemy, 0.25 for you. We could still discuss further about distances not flag post to flag post, but center of gravity (see below)  to enemy flag post, to correctly measure efforts invested in the flag carrying or returning, since it's so crucial. but it's the rough idea.



C. [is the player closer to his team's zone or the enemy team's zone] something like that. Values 0 to 1.

I also propose  to use the center of gravity of the team spawn points and team flag post to establish the team "center of gravity"(1.) as points to define where you have more or less value if killed. If the distance you are from your center is greater than from your enemy's, the damage an enemy deals on you has more value. The most value for this factor would be 1 on top of the enemy's center, to 0 on top of your center. It's a tentative to factor in the spawn points. in vctf.

That would be one more variable per player,

(1.) I mean the center of the polygon those points make in any map. Per team, or to say it again in another manner, per side. EDIT : here  perhaps a pole of inaccessibility will be useful github if so.)
« Last Edit: May 31, 2021, 15:52 by Gil-galad[The REAL one] »
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien

Gil-galad[The REAL one]

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Country: pt
Re: A Bit of Better Balancing
« Reply #35 on: May 31, 2021, 17:42 »
Reading back, I see i give a lot of though about damage delt, but it's not taking into the value for the enemies of the action I described earlier. They are valuable game for their enemy at the situations I described, but we have to reward the risk factor.  It goes like this :

The circumstantial value of where the player is set at at a given instant, and in relation to other points some of them maybe moving - the value given by those factors, when when summed, define the value of the damage the enemy deals on you. We have to consider the risk takers too, and give them something. For a flag run, how close you get to their flag post before dying should be valued too, because it's opening the way to the flag. In fact, going to the enemy flag on its post is in many maps more than 2/3 of the distance flag post to flag post. Since a flag run flag post to flag post is worth 0.5 of a cap (max), the journey to the flag is worth like a portion of it. It should be valued like this. If the flags are their flag post, the worth of a successful run should be considered like this :

(distance of the path from the spawn point to the enemy flag post) + (distance of the path flag post to flag post)  = value of the run = 0.5 of cap.

You can there find a value for caps against distance value, like how much is of a cap is one distance unit worth in the given map. This value will change for each map because maps vary. Used for flag carriers and flag retrievers matters. But also for flag takers that die before metamorphosing into the flag carrier butterfly (often a short lived condition, as we know). If one player dies by the enemy's flag even without touching it, his tentative has value, as it forced the enemy to react to him, and, with the teammates doing the same, hopefully overwhelm them. So lets reward this as a portion of the necessary travel distance to cap a flag. since we can argue that these tentative are portion of a cap that never get full, but still they're there, and those players tend to cap. Anyway, it's a way to give a balanced value for the risk of going into the enemy zone (pole of inaccessibility as seen last post.). 

Now, let's consider the situation of when the player picks it up or return it from  somewhere else, because it's dropped there. The flag hasn't all the way to travel to his flag post, it's also closer to the player's spawn points, hence costing less reaching it as well as then taking it to the flag post.

You could then use the value determined above a multiplier to compute the value in cap of a distance (not any sort of distance, just the carried or returned distances. Edit actually there's one more distance, that is the distance you are when you die, from your spawn and from the enemy 's flag post).

((Distance the dropped flag is from your flag post) + (distance the dropped flag is from your spawn)) x (the multiplier) = (value that assess how valuable is a flag run or a flag return when a flag is dropped, anywhere in the map).

Note that we decided to use a ratio for the flag travel, 0 for nothing of the way, 1 for the full way. The flag will be dropped at a proportion of 1,  and we ought to do the same for  the spawn to enemy flag post distance. Just multiply the corresponding ratio with each term in the above calculus, and you have the value.

Of course, I'm here training the idea, going for simpler cases first.

But we know that the player can still drop the flag. I'd look at the value of where he picked it, the one of where he dropped it using the calculus above, and substract the first by the last to have the value of a partial run.

One the things we can manage better, then, is when the player actually get the flag further away than it was before. In this case the right way to input in in the player stats would be a negative value, distance and the such going down in his stats, according to how much further did the flag go.

NOTE. I wrote distance as distance of the path. I wrote "spawn" as a place, but i should have used, if all agree to the idea, the pole of inaccessibility of the polygon designed by the team spawn points and the team flag post. If there's only one spawn point, then the point to be used is the middle of the segment of an imaginary line that would connect spawn point to flag post. by the shortest path (a straight line). See previous post for the pole of inaccessibility if you're not understanding what it is. I wasn't explicit for sentence simplicity's sake.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 13:48 by Gil-galad[The REAL one] »
His sword was long, his lance was keen.
His shining helm afar was seen;
the countless stars of heaven's field
were mirrored in his silver shield.

The Fall of Gil-galad - J. R. R. Tolkien