Am i the only one who thinks it doesn't make any sense to start off with 1500psr?
Especially if AB is determined based on PSR! A person who has never played, 0 games under their belt, will have the same PSR as a person who sucked it up down to say 1300, but learned and now after 100 games is back to 1500.
Both these players will have the same PSR but one is now vastly more experienced than the other! So as it stands right now PSR does not properly determine a players skill. This kind of thing throws off the AB so much!
My idea is to rework the PSR system. Instead of making it like golf, where u go +/-. Why not start at 0 and work your way up? And add PSR gain for individual accomplishments as well? This way you would gain some psr even if ur team lost but you actually played well.
So here are some ideas of how you would gain PSR:
-Team wins the game
-# of Creep/Neutral killed/denied
-# of Towers Destroyed/denied
-Double/Triple kills, etc
-Accumulated Dmg done to enemy heroes
-You hero lvl or exp per game
-Gold spent/gained per game
The only way you would lose PSR:
I think a system like this would give a true representation of a players "pub skill". It makes AB actually balanced! Doing PSR this way encourages people to play more as well as play good! Even if your team is losing you can still gain PSR. So you want to do well in each game in order to get the most PSR.
One of the best things with this is that it doesn't further penalize players for losing a game. If you lose a game, u already won't get the extra PSR for winning, so that is already a penalty. Thoughts? Anyone else think the current PSR needs changing?
*Note: I thought of this after as well. If PSR is changed and works like how i described it could also be used as a "wager" in each game.
So before the game starts a player could suggest a "psr bet", ie, 500 PSR. The winning team would gain that extra PSR from the other team! The 500 PSR would be taken from the losing team using a percentage based system. Higher psr would give more to the pot, while lower psr players put in less. The game would automatically decide the amounts. So how much you will be putting into the teams "wager" would be shown to you and before game starts all players must vote to accept the terms of the bet. Ideally i see this as something that would be great for clan vs clan games. This way you have something to put on the line!
negative numbers would ruin any formula.
Really, I think PSR should be based on KD/A(ssist)R + win/lose ratio, that's it.
PSR gains with anything except winning a game is bad, this is a team game.
Plus that thing about starting from 0, check the thread in my sig it suggests it, just in a better way.
I actually like the idea of perhaps not losing psr until you reach 1500. but i think my suggestion is still valid. i am NOT suggesting that k:d:a is the only way to gain psr.
I know HoN is a team game. My PSR system would see you gain more points for winning a game. But also gain some points based on things you accomplish per game. Depending on the heroe u choose, other ways to gain PSR could be:
amounts of heroes healed
total health healed
total disabled duration
PSR is supposed to be a Pub Skill Rating. And despite being a "team game" since PSR is used to Auto Balance public games individual skill must be taken into account. And that is my whole point. That the current PSR system doesnt truly reflect an individual players skill.
Ppl may also argue, "well you don't look at PSR anyways, you click on someones stats". Sure of course you can do that, but why have PSR then? If we had a better PSR system then we could actually rely on it to balance teams. Why not put the effort in to make it better!?
Also to the ppl that argue, "oh you'll get everyone being a stat whore". Well lets make it possible for players to gain PSR based on things like i mentioned above, healing, disabling, tanking, etc. So a Puppet Master could gain the same if not more PSR per game than a Scout.
If we have PSR gains for a wide variety of skills then it would actually encourage teamwork! Healers would want to heal their allies, Tanks want to get in a fight, if for example they gained PSR for taking more hero dmg! Players want to participate in ganks knowing that they get PSR for assists too.
Seriously, its a good system, and would work a heck of a lot better than how it is right now.
imo too advanced. doesnt have to be that complicated. What you are proposing, would increase and increase. Where, a total rubbish player have massively higher rating than another bloke, just because hes played more. So then we're into, farming rating.
it makes perfect sense that a player has a higher rating cuz they play more. if u're making a game that is what u want to encourage, that ppl play u're game more.
and if a player is truly "rubbish" then their rating still won't go up that fast, it still takes someone who plays well to earn PSR.
Seriously, farming rating!? Inevitalby you'll never have a perfect rating system. Even the current PSR system gets exploited. But i'm so surprised that ppl are missing the freaking point, that the current system is inadaquate at properly determining skill! Especially for autobalancing games.
You don't have a choice for a maybe, i had a similar idea; however, my idea didn't have the psr lowered at all, rather the system was all positive. It was similar to call of duty and the promotions. You move up as you get a kill +1, assist +1, win (time (based on 10 minute intervals starting from 1 would be 10 going down to 1) + 5), and possibly towers, but you get a tower every game, so it would throw it off. This system would allow people to understand your skill because you improve as you play the game and would balance later.
what!? FiNGERS you're statement makes no logic at all. Based on the fact that both players start off on the same basis, skill-wise. And one player plays "1000+" games, they are at the same level as someone who has played 0!? What!?
Some ppl here really make me question the basic intelligence of HoN players....
I never said dropping to 1300 then going back to 1500 makes u good, why do ppl put words in my mouth!? I said they are more experienced...sigh...
A person who has played many more games, and have improved their psr should be playing with better players, not someone who just started...really, where does this nonsense logic come from that they shouldn't?
No no no! What the heck??? Again, start off with the same skill base, lets say both players are new to HoN/DotA. If someone sucked it up but after 1000 games (way to use an exaggerated number but w/e) goes back up to 1500 and say is now at like a 3:1 K : D. Their PSR will be the same as a complete noobie who knows nothing! Now how does that AB make any sense??Both players are still bad and should be playing against one another. You seem to think someone at 1500 PSR after a 1000+ games is good? No. They aren't.
The main point still stands. The current PSR system doesn't reflect skill/experience properly and can not be used to auto-balance games. It needs to be changed.
Sorry impBloody, i couldn't make heads or tails of how your system works.
It seems to me that the entire PSR system takes a game that is extremely noob-unfriendly [like any team based game can be] and really gives those who discriminate against people trying to learn the game an edge.
I believe the PSR system works. Autobalance is fairly consistent. My friends and I had very low PSRs after just starting the game, but it didnt take long for it to even out as we got more and more points for beating players with a higher PSR. My point is PSR really does balance teams in the long run. However, my key suggestion would be that PSR be a less public number. I don't see why it has to be labelled next to each name in order for team balancing to occur. I think all we need to see is win % chance, kd, and have an autobalance. Hopefully that would create a friendlier environment for new kiddos.
I thought of a similar system, although a bit more complicated and detailed, but it was shot down and I was flamed for it incessantly.
You can take a look if you'd like, I spent quite a while tweaking it according to people's suggestions, alas it seems they'll never change it to anything other than win/loss.
Here it is:
-Killing an enemy hero (last hit) = 7 points
-Killing an enemy hero and dealing 75% or more of the dmg yourself/no assists = 10 points (basically meaning you soloed the person -- the percentage of dmg is negotiable obviously)
*Note: I still think that soloing a hero should reward more points, but only for the early/mid game, since being fed late game can lead to abuse and racking up points
For -EM games: until 15 minutes in
For non-EM games: until 25 minutes in
*After the timer, points gained would be reduced to 7
-Assisting in killing an enemy hero = 5 points
-Healing/buffing/shielding/etc. a hero who subsequently gets a kill withint 10 seconds results in an assist (+5 points)
-Healing/buffing/invising/shielding/etc. a hero that has taken damage in the last 5 seconds and is below 20% max hp results in a small assist (+2 points)
-Healing an allied hero that takes sufficient damage to die (within 15 seconds) if they had not received the heal would result in an assist (+5 points)
-Dying = -7 points (now equivalent to killing - last hit)
-Killing a creep = 0.05 point
-Denying a creep = 0.10 point
-Killing a weak neutral creep (usually the baby snotters, etc.) = 0.02 point
-Killing a medium strength neutral creep (Pretty much everything else except the two very hard camps) = 0.04 point
*Points for killing lane creeps/neutrals/denying will only be recorded until:
-EM (10 mins in)
-non-EM (20 mins in)
-Killing very strong neutral creeps = 0.05 point (These usually cannot be killed easily early on, so I think it'd be okay to record these for the duration of the game, plus it's not a huge amount of points, and there's only two camps on the standard map)
-Assisting in destroying/or last hitting a tower = 10 points
-Denying a tower = 10 points
-Assisting in killing a rax = 15 points
(Extra points would not be rewarded for last hitting the rax when other allies are near, to prevent unnecessary competition)
-Killing/assisting in killing "roshan" (forgot the name of the one in HoN) = ???# points (I have no opinion on this one, but thought it might be fun to add in)
-Being within 1000 range of an allied tower/rax while it is being attacked by enemy heroes = 1 point (this would encourage defending)
*I also figured it'd be nice to include the amount of exp/min one receives as part of the score, but am not sure what kinds of numbers to use for that - suggestions appreciated!
I strongly believe there should be separate point ratings for -EM and non-EM games, due to the amount of hero kills/deaths that usually occur in each. If the numbers are scaled to the amount of time played, -EM players will always have a higher rating. Of course this would not be necessary if a math wiz found a good formula to balance the two.
By the way, I would hope that each person's rating (on their profile) would show up as an average number for the games they've played.
So what's to stop a group of 10 friends from making a game and taking turns repeatedly killing each other's entire team?
Each Legion player would get ~25 rating from assisting in killing 5 Hellbourne players, then would take a 7 rating death hit from the Hellbourne doing the same thing.
Repeat and everyone wins, except the system.
Only change I believe should be made to the current PSR system is that there should be seperate em and normal ratings - a 1600+ em game is so drastically different to a 1600+ normal game.
Making changes like +rating for hero and creep kills is completely silly. This isn't a hero arena, things like that don't matter. What matters at the end of the game is whether or not you killed the tree, and that's what should determine PSR.
IMO the OP is right.
at present if I see someone on my team with a 1500 psr rating and 0 matches played, I usually disconnect, why ? because it's imbalanced.
someone with 1300 psr that has played 10 matches is most likely more informed and more skilled than someone completely new to the scene starting with 1500 psr and no matches played (and no idea about denies, laning, jungling, pushing, the consequences for getting killed etc etc)
in my experience the psr system works okay for the most part (it does have it's faults all systems do)
having a brand new player start with 1500 psr playing against (potentially) veteran players with 1400 - 1600 psr = game breaker. I speak from experience as when I started I actually was a complete noob and broke several games and was also kicked from several for "feeding" (I had no clue, I was completely new).
looking back I would have had a much better experience of HoN if I had started with LOW psr (like 1k or 1100) and had to work my way up instead of having to endure the multitude of insults and verbal thrashings for being totally new to the game, the community and the genre.
I see less need to rework the psr system and greater need to lower the starting psr for new accounts, rather drastically, ecspecially if S2games wants people that have not played DoTA to do more than play one game of HoN where they are treated so poorly by veteran players that they wish to quit.
new entrants into the genre require an environment free of scathing remarks from crybabies afraid to lose because of how their stats will suffer.
I completely agree with Ubiquity! When i started playing HoN, i played a few pub games and a) died a lot and b) got verbally trashed by my team. A horrible gaming experience!
Luckily i have a good group of friends that play with me and taught me pretty much everything on how to play so now i'm a half-decent player. But without them i doubt i would have continued playing this game.
My brother had the same experience, i gave him a beta key and he hated joining games and playing cuz of the other players, ppl are just rude, insulting and nasty to new players. But his starting psr (1500) did not reflect his experience.
If HoN is just trying to target DoTA players then i guess psr doesn't have to be reworked perfectly.
but if S2 wants to attract new players, then the psr needs to reflect experience and skill a lot better! So that these players are matched up properly in ab games. We can hope that the "match making" system solves some of these problems.