Bug? The 1vs1 'trade'. Does Lemondogs deserve to lose ESWC?

[novationx]

agreed!

@NADEO this happens more than u think! Game breaking bug.

[Hylis]

I opening a topic to explain some elements seen there
http://forum.maniaplanet.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=26084

As good as it is to have a precise look on the netcode, I should also warn that people playing together in two different places has to be imperfect. So, the goal is to have a perfect situation, but one that is as good as possible.

And whatever happens, keep in mind that the system is the same for both side. So, it's not "fair" or "unfair" It's more about perception of "luck" based decision in a what would be a "random" playground. But this luck is ok when linked to skill: players would say that the guy is unlucky to be shot by the rocket while he shot with the laser, but you have to keep in mind that he was anyway shot by the rocket, and so if his skill was better, he would have avoided it a little more.

Another way to think about this is to look at the top 4 of a competition and question if you have the right people there. If luck is too much there, you would often say no. And for me, so far, I have followed enough the scene to see that the best were often in the top 4. I don't say it means we should stop there, it just mean that it's enough to be played as an esport.

But thanks to future update, and solid tests, I am confident that we will reach a new step in quality.

[pksens]

Thanks for the technical response I will delve into it a little more later.

This concept:
"Another way to think about this is to look at the top 4 of a competition and question if you have the right people there. If luck is too much there, you would often say no. And for me, so far, I have followed enough the scene to see that the best were often in the top 4. I don't say it means we should stop there, it just mean that it's enough to be played as an esport."

The reason this thread/topic exists is because I make a point that the results between the top 4 are problematic as a direct consequence to some of the issues displayed. This line of thinking is just glossing over the problem.

Results function with regards to skill/experience most of the time, allowing for 'esport.' It doesn't account for the enjoyability. It's not that I want to beat that opponent 99.99% of the time, it's that I want to have clarity in doing so. Free from thinking about small issues, or small potentials. To be always rewarded when I feel I have executed a good shot on someone with a rocket or rail. All this increases the fun factor. It is a game after all, not a function for exercising skills versus results. A lot of this will occur in the subconscious. Personally, I'd have rated this as a top priority for a gaming developer over implementing new ideas or features - to have a game feel as snappy as a Quake and build on it from there.

[Hylis]

What I was saying, is that if some players call it "too much" random, I invite them to look at the top 4 that is usually in the end, and that often full of favorites. If some players say that they would like it to be less chaotic, in order to reduce the frustation of the players, like you ask, I totally agree with that. But I think that the frustation is smaller if you start first with the idea of winning, whatever is the weather or the referee are today, in your favor or not.

A strange fact is that many TM players now say that they prefer the chaotic borders in the Stadium. It's surprising, but I believe that some players really like to battle for the victory in a more chaotic environment, like if it was a little the spirit of reality. Something that makes all of this a little more like life.

But I agree, it was not important in that situation.