CHANGE REQUEST to PUGs

  • Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!

    Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.

This looks promising!!

Keep up the good work
:cool:

The difficult thing will be how to rate obj value to. This way TNEGA obj on Siege is as worth as Warhead on Ballistic :)

I'm rather curious, how could both of these possibly be tracked with the data available?

I think he means a leader board, ie the highest Assists, the most objectives either a total or as a ratio of maps played, not what was the best assist on a map.
 
Ok, for those who haven't seen it in IRC... It's up - and I've just done a basic rip of the pug league / fraghub theme for it.

http://utassault.net/pugstats/?p=utapugrecent

Still need to sort some of the CSS out at some point, but it's certainly a start. I think we could probably cycle up to 6 or maybe even 12 months worth of stats without impacting too much on i/o and cpu, but will keep an eye on it.

There's the last few months of matches in there now, but I had to manually fix some match code fields, so some of the matches may have merged team data which isn't correct, and will cause things like reported maps played or team sizes to be incorrect - anything from now onward should be OK though.
 
Last edited:
lol damn you timo, i was always so happy that we haven't had stats anymore :hangover:

nice work tho :thumb:
 
Last edited:
Wish got 666 Sniperfrags :scared:

666-number-of-the-beast.jpg
 
There's the last few months of matches in there now, but I had to manually fix some match code fields, so some of the matches may have merged team data which isn't correct, and will cause things like reported maps played or team sizes to be incorrect - anything from now onward should be OK though.

How much of the data is not correct?
Perhaps we should make a clean reset and start over from like 2013-01 but if ppl want still keep the old stats for 2012.
What do you think? could be nice if lots of the stats is incorrect.

Keep all stats for 2012 as it is and start new from 2013-01-01.

Very nice work TIMO thanks for helping out with one of my change requests.

:)
 
Last edited:
2nd attempt at fixing the match codes... If you've hot-linked any already, they'll be invalid, but feel free to take a look to see if they look better.
 
lol it was just a suggestion no need to start making things complicated, wish i never suggested now. I will just stay out this thread i think.

Yeah I can see it being quite a lengthy discussion on how to rate objectives when talking about different maps... But I can tell you now, we already tried a few years ago, but from more of a sorting point of view I think - so the framework for it is already there.

/edit
I think I recall Eavy did something similar for in-game scoring back in the day? The whole awarding of hundreds of points for a final obj was a bit nuts in some people's point of view.
 

Attachments

  • ratings.jpg
    ratings.jpg
    96.3 KB · Views: 112
Last edited:
Lol prize

can be done

still single

no clue what to do with $


not that i have a whole lot anyway but enough to reward effort and skill in one of the greatest video games ever made


ALSO TIMO IS A GOD
 
Last edited:
Well Timo i think its way to obj biased the stats thats just my thoughts. I still think its really fun to watch stats after each game althogh i sort kills contra deaths instead of amount of obj as i think that is pointless.

I rather cover sniper on siege attack instead of getting Tnega/ front doors / and rest of cheap obj which are kinda useless. Thats my thoughts. BUT i really lke the ration kills vs deaths on people and some other stuff like efficiecny.

Real nice work

And i agree with XB. Read like 2-3 obj there and i agree with most. He pld this game so many years so so he knows the skill level it takes to get each obj. Should base obj score on his ratings instead of all obj being worht the same points.

Big thanks again for making this happen. Was nice to see stats from the 2v2 that happend last night after i went to bed. =)

Oh and i still think like twnz said in a post that we should "reset" it from 2013-01-01 as some data is corrupt from old pugs.
SAve the history tho its fun to watch.
 
I dont think we should base it on kill to death efficiency as some people don't attack and just DM and we already know who the best fraggers are, This is assault and should be weighted on objectives and assists and launching, because those are the foundations for this gameplay. In fact its too hard to actually have a rating system with so many variables. But with weighted Objectives it would be great, shame we cant weight "critical launches". Cause this is a team game too and you cant get objectives without launches!

I agree. BUT i dont think it should be weighted as it is atm Thats why i pointed this out from my first post i think its insane that TNEGA is same worth as Warhead.

BUT if thats fixed with weighted obj i agree thats what it should b based on.
 
getting charge 1 and 2 on bridge shouldnt give u as much points as getting warhead :P
charge 1 and 2 should be rate as (4) imo

also outerbase on desolate should be a (2) its just about dodging in a set that cant be stopped early and a lil bit of air steering and hoping wish isnt on the other team.
 
I think Timo meant that the visual display of some PUGs are corrupt, ie team sizes, maps played, some pugs being merged, but the individual stats and formula that makes the ranking is working as intended
 
The details within the stats is correct, the issue is that stats use a unique code so it knows which maps to group together to form a match. The stats previously werent generating this code so stats couldnt workout what maps were for which match, Timo has gone through it and done it manually.

The stats generated within each map will be correct, it 'may' just be incorrectly accumulated for a match when looking at the match details history.
 
I've been through a few random ones, and they all look correct now I've done a second run on the match codes... Any examples of broken ones still?