why isnt there a feature for the most common game?

Why isn't there a feature(like for 1x1s and team games) for the most common type of game which has more than 2 players but aren't on winbolo.net teams? I haven't really thought this through, so maybe theres some way to cheat with this.

Are you saying that you want something like this http://www.winbolo.net/showstats.php?game_type=strict&stats_type=teams for 2x2's or 3x3's or something?

What the fuck are u talking about? Could u provide some more details!??!?!?

like wen 4 ppl join a game, lock, make up teams then and there, so there not 1x1ing or playing as 2 winbolo.net teams.

Creating teams on the fly

A couple of reasons:

1. Due to the shear number of combinations possible. I asked the google calculator the number of ways to pick 4 numbers from 100. Cosidering there are over 1000 user accounts this number would be much much larger. Currently people have to go to the effort of choosing who they want to play with. (And this is only assuming 2x2's are ranked. Multiple the number if you want 2x2 and 3x3's etc)

2. How would a game with shifting teams work? How would a 3x2 work? What forumula would be used? With pre-assigned teams people know what they are getting into before they start playing.

i thought there would be some problem...
but y not just record the game and then each player on the winning team gets some number of points, and each losing player loses some number of points? The number of points won and lost could be static.

Elvis wrote:

A couple of reasons:

1. Due to the shear number of combinations possible. I asked the google calculator the number of ways to pick 4 numbers from 100. Cosidering there are over 1000 user accounts this number would be much much larger. Currently people have to go to the effort of choosing who they want to play with. (And this is only assuming 2x2's are ranked. Multiple the number if you want 2x2 and 3x3's etc)

2. How would a game with shifting teams work? How would a 3x2 work? What forumula would be used? With pre-assigned teams people know what they are getting into before they start playing.

say, do you have a way of telling whether users are active or not? besides the number of posts they make, i mean. some ppl play alot but neevr go on the forums.......

Elvis wrote:

A couple of reasons:

1. Due to the shear number of combinations possible. I asked the google calculator the number of ways to pick 4 numbers from 100. Cosidering there are over 1000 user accounts this number would be much much larger. Currently people have to go to the effort of choosing who they want to play with. (And this is only assuming 2x2's are ranked. Multiple the number if you want 2x2 and 3x3's etc)

2. How would a game with shifting teams work? How would a 3x2 work? What forumula would be used? With pre-assigned teams people know what they are getting into before they start playing.

wouldnt the number be 100 x 99 x 98 x 97 ? and come out to 94,109,400? i dont see how the number can be that big....

underdog wrote:

wouldnt the number be 100 x 99 x 98 x 97 ? and come out to 94,109,400? i dont see how the number can be that big....

No 100 x 99 x 98 ... is 100 factorial (100!) - To calculate the number of ways R items can be picked from N items in total without replacement the combinations forumla must be used. It is n! / ((n - r)! * r!)

For more information visit Ask Dr Math or view a Slide

Instead of having 2x2 or team ratings what about have multiple player rating............ It would be harder implement, but basically taking the yahoo approach. My example is how players rated that play eurche for example... The average of team is compare to the average ranking of the other team. Then when the one team beats the other team who all players either lose points are game points, it is all based on that original average of teammates scores..So if Sheeps and Matt0007 went against bluesnake and ren... Well sheeps team would get more points for winning because their team would be rated less because of the averages.

Just a thought......

The problem would be how sometimes players switch teams.......

i think pawns suggestion is plausible

ive played yahoo games and they have thousands of players play ranked team games

this would be more ibl like than tournament like though

the score of the 2x2 would be tabulated and give points to each player based on averages.

so the theoretical best 2x2 team would be the 2 people with the highest points. would these points be the same points for 1x1 or seperate? would it all be under one ranking system? i like keeping 1x1 as a seperate category personally

Not only yahoo games, but IBL ranking similarly would combine the rankings of the players on each team, and I'd vote for that.

Modify a player's ranking in this way not only for 1x1 games, but any nxn games (if such a thing can be detected). I think most of the better players end up playing more 2x2's than 1x1's so we might see more consistant and meaningful rankings. I think official 2x2's should be detectable based on something like this:

1. Only 4 (winbolo.net) players have taken bases/pills in the game.
2. Before any takes, there were (exactly) two (distinct) alliances formed among these 4 players.
3. Server was killed because all bases owned by the same team.

In general, I think all stats (pill takes, base takes, etc.) should count only if you are in an "official" game, and I'd much rather see pills/game and bases/game. Lose tank kills and any stats for open games. Maybe keep it separate for 1x1's and 2x2's (and 3x3's if possible) and see combined totals. No need to separate strict and non-strict tourny games.

My $0.02.

Fermat

Elvis wrote:

underdog wrote:

wouldnt the number be 100 x 99 x 98 x 97 ? and come out to 94,109,400? i dont see how the number can be that big....

No 100 x 99 x 98 ... is 100 factorial (100!) - To calculate the number of ways R items can be picked from N items in total without replacement the combinations forumla must be used. It is n! / ((n - r)! * r!)

For more information visit Ask Dr Math or view a Slide

Now i think the answer is (100x99x98x97)x3... i didnt use a formula, but i just used logic. maybe im just being insane

but if it was 4 people, the most games you team combinations you can have is 3. (ab vs cd, ac vs bd, ad vs bc) 100x99x98x97 tells you the number of permutations (sp?) of a group of 4 from 100. the order doesnt count. ok, i forget whether its permutaions or combinations that makes order count, but im pretty sure on this. anyways, i say its 300 million combinations or whatever (100x99x98x97)x3 comes to. not, a gazzilion million billion trillion, or whatever that other calc said.

Elvis wrote:

underdog wrote:

wouldnt the number be 100 x 99 x 98 x 97 ? and come out to 94,109,400? i dont see how the number can be that big....

No 100 x 99 x 98 ... is 100 factorial (100!) - To calculate the number of ways R items can be picked from N items in total without replacement the combinations forumla must be used. It is n! / ((n - r)! * r!)

For more information visit Ask Dr Math or view a Slide

((n!)/(n-r)!)*3? maybe? please tell if im wrong and why

<addaway> what would this topic ween on you for when you dont really play team games?
<Elvis> its the combinations forumla
<underdog> i do addboy, just not as much now. if a ranking system of tourny were to be in play, id play more

-------------------------_ Said in Mirc_ -----------------------------------------

Ud: makes a point, "IBL" , for all us older players was a real cool event (for those who didnt experience such [IBL= International Bolo League] ) I havent really made the full effort from rejoining the winbolo games and giving it a full effort to return to my original skill level (which btw wasnt that outstanding :oops: , but anyways,....) I would prolly be more willing to spend more time in games and more effort into the game if there were sumthing like ibl rankings produced. THe formula could be cominations, permutations, bullshitations w/e the point is this ranking system was fun for alot of players in the past and if produced in the past it seems only likely that it could be done again, infact : On a more serious note I would be MORE Then willing to keep track of the scores and post them, if needed!

Sincerely,
Addbot

I believe you are misquoting me addbot. I was replying to underdogs question below:

underdog wrote:

((n!)/(n-r)!)*3? maybe? please tell if im wrong and why