PDA

View Full Version : Build 1.6.21



John
03-07-2013, 02:53 PM
Build 1.6.21 Release Notes
New Features

Promotion: Rank 2 and 3 now available. Each rank gives an additional point for allocation in stats, and an upgrade to the active ability:

Warmaster: Sundering Impact with more Sundering!
Raidmaster: Stonewall with more resilience!
Bowmaster: Bird of Prey with more range!
Shieldmaster: Bring the Pain returns more pain!


Changes

Proving Grounds: Promotion cost to Rank 1 reduce to 40 renown
Mead House: Experienced unit cost reduced to 30 renown
Battle: Elo is only exchanged between parties of power 6 or above
Battle: Elo difference is used as a hard window for matchmaking. The window starts at 4 and expands by 2 per second
Battle: Tournament battles affect both your tournament rankings and your global rankings
Friend: Friend mode re-enabled!
Marketplace: Now waits until renown and/or units have arrived before closing 'Delivering' dialog
Marketplace: New Sales!
Login Streak bonus alert stops showing for the day when you have consumed all of your bonus
720p now supported as a fullscreen resolution


Known Issues:

Elo Achievements don't show up until the battle _after_ you trigger them.
Friends show as offline when they should be online
Restarting TBS:F client sometimes fixes the issue

Client Version Too Old
Restart Steam to fix the issue

General Notes:

The game always writes log files into $HOME/tbs_logs/. You can access this or email it to us for bug reporting



KNOWN WINDOWS ISSUES

Crash on startup

Reinstall the game through Steam
Reinstall the game to a different folder if the above does not work

Steam Overlay unavailable
Terrible performance in fullscreen

These are both fixed with the following steps:

Right-click the following
Choose "Settings..."
Ensure that "Enable hardware acceleration" is clicked
NOTE: This does not work with the Chrome browser


quality=high width=550 height=150 parameter=parameter_value



KNOWN MAC OS X ISSUES


The Steam Overlay functions intermittently on Mac OS X
If you load the game without the Overlay, simply restart the game and it usually appears
Crash on startup on Mac OS X
Remove the folder "/Library/Frameworks/Adobe AIR.framework". If you need to reinstall Adobe AIR, visit this link: http://get.adobe.com/air/


For previous updates, see the Patches & Updates (http://stoicstudio.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?22) section.

hovercraft
03-07-2013, 03:03 PM
Wow, thanks. I found the game couple of days ago, and I'am thoroughly impressed with what you achieved. I didn't have that much fun with this kind of a game since, well, I think "celtic legends", do you know this game?
Another question - I didn't catch your kickstarter, frankly I was somehow not convinced by art style (was I wrong) but if I would like to get on now, is there a way?

mariusmora
03-07-2013, 03:25 PM
Really cool and needed update! I like the new elo tweakings!

piotras
03-07-2013, 03:29 PM
edit: nevermind!

Gygu
03-07-2013, 03:48 PM
It seems that there is a problem with the friend mode - I cannot challenge a friend even though he is playing Saga - I cannot see him in friends list and neither he sees me.

eAZy
03-07-2013, 03:52 PM
It seems that there is a problem with the friend mode - I cannot challenge a friend even though he is playing Saga - I cannot see him in friends list and neither he sees me.

You must both have your steam profiles set to public.

Gygu
03-07-2013, 04:26 PM
Thanks for help, worked like a charm.

Yellow
03-07-2013, 05:37 PM
NICEEEEEE!!! friend match back on + Rank 2 and 3 now avanible!!! + all the extra stuff, very nice indeed. Great jobb guys!

Yojimbo
03-07-2013, 09:00 PM
I've probably missed something obvious, but is there any way of distinguishing the rank of an enemy unit?
Without knowing it could be easy to make tactical mistakes based on rank one assumptions.

netnazgul
03-08-2013, 06:10 AM
Don't know whether it's a bug, but sometimes matchmaker gives me opponents for a couple of seconds and then drops them leaving me seeking a new enemy.

Butters
03-08-2013, 06:23 AM
Build 1.6.21 Release Notes
Changes

Battle: Elo is only exchanged between parties of power 6 or above
Battle: Elo difference is used as a hard window for matchmaking. The window starts at 4 and expands by 2 per second

Apart from the issue cited in rzeznicc's thread (high elo player not getting any matches), there's something very wrong here.
I understand the intent, but it seems to me there's been an overlook that's kind of screwing everyone over right now.

So the intent is, until you get to a full team, you stay at elo 1000 and the hard window for matchmaking doesnt affect you, so you get paired with other beginners, right ?
But the problem is, at the time of update, many people were in the process of getting to their full teams, and already gained elo. They now are at maybe say 1100+ elo and 3-4 rank 1 units. Problem is, especially at a low player number times of the day like now, they'll get paired almost systematically with higher rank teams, which of course leads to a lot of frustration. The terrible thing is, they can't just start and forfeit a bunch of matches to lower their elo on purpose, because they don't have a full team so their rating cannot be modified...
I think this issues needs to be addressed ASAP. At the moment the ingame chat is full with disgruntled new(ish) players, and I can certainly understand where they are coming from.

Tirean
03-08-2013, 06:45 AM
Apart from the issue cited in rzeznicc's thread (high elo player not getting any matches), there's something very wrong here.
I understand the intent, but it seems to me there's been an overlook that's kind of screwing everyone over right now.

So the intent is, until you get to a full team, you stay at elo 1000 and the hard window for matchmaking doesnt affect you, so you get paired with other beginners, right ?
But the problem is, at the time of update, many people were in the process of getting to their full teams, and already gained elo. They now are at maybe say 1100+ elo and 3-4 rank 1 units. Problem is, especially at a low player number times of the day like now, they'll get paired almost systematically with higher rank teams, which of course leads to a lot of frustration. The terrible thing is, they can't just start and forfeit a bunch of matches to lower their elo on purpose, because they don't have a full team so their rating cannot be modified...
I think this issues needs to be addressed ASAP. At the moment the ingame chat is full with disgruntled new(ish) players, and I can certainly understand where they are coming from.

Match making still takes power of your team first, then it searches for the closest ELO match for that.

Butters
03-08-2013, 07:07 AM
Match making still takes power of your team first, then it searches for the closest ELO match for that.

Does it really ? All I hear from the in-game chat points in a different direction.
It might just be that the servers are empty atm...

Tirean
03-08-2013, 07:27 AM
Does it really ? All I hear from the in-game chat points in a different direction.
It might just be that the servers are empty atm...

Could also be something went wrong with the coding when they changed it if that is happening consistently.

Yellow
03-08-2013, 08:04 AM
One thing that i would like to see, maybe not right now, but in a near future(specially when something on this (http://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthread.php?1199-Unit-Cap-Idea-Suggestion-Request) regard is implemented, is all leaderboards to be reseted(exept the tournament ones and maybe "most games played?")...

Why? u might ask.. well, with all the changes to how matchmaking works, to the ELO system, the new rank units, and hopefully the new unit Caps that should/will be implemented, it would really make more sence if everything gets down to 0 again, so that everybody has a real chance now to make it to the top, not just as it has been until now, with 80% if not 90% of the top 20 on Most of the leaderboards specially "Win Streaks" been people:

- Using All Melle Builds.
- Exploiting new players at power 1 teams.
- Having a hugge advantage becouse of previosly playing the beta when the game came out on steam, so having it super easy vs players who had just joined.....

the combination of those 3 is how 90% of those with 50-100 win streak made it there.

DISCLAIMER:
Am not jelaus of any of them, i am myself ranked 50(+/-) on "Over all Ranking", and ranked 10(+/-) on both "Most Wins" and "Most Games Played". Sure it will be a bitt of a pity to loose what i have archived until now, but well, thats a sacrifise i am willing to take in order to have a real leaderboard based on real skills and not just on exploits of the system...

Jorgensager
03-08-2013, 09:27 AM
One thing that i would like to see is all leaderboards to be reset

This is pointless since you gain ranks by gaining ELO, and you gain ELO by beating other players. If you are among the 20 best players, it really doesn't matter if others have a headstart of 200 ELO. All you need to do is to play well consistently, and you could get up there quickly. The top ranks gain less ELO per win by the very nature of the ELO system, and beating one of them will give you a big boost, so just keep going if you want to make it into the top 20.

As the majority of players get better, stats like win/loss ratio will normalise over time.

Yellow
03-08-2013, 09:32 AM
This is pointless since you gain ranks by gaining ELO, and you gain ELO by beating other players. If you are among the 20 best players, it really doesn't matter if others have a headstart of 200 ELO. All you need to do is to play well consistently, and you could get up there quickly. The top ranks gain less ELO per win by the very nature of the ELO system, and beating one of them will give you a big boost, so just keep going if you want to make it into the top 20.

As the majority of players get better, stats like win/loss ratio will normalise over time.

U dont get to top 20 on "Wining Streak" by gaining ELO, u do it by following the 3 paths i posted, and while "Over All Ranking" and "Win/Loss Ratio" will as u said, normalise over time, "Wining Streaks" most likely won't....

And is not by any chance a question of me wanting to get to top 20, am pretty sure i can manage to do so withown the need of the leaderboard reset, as a matter of fact i am already top 10 on 2 leaderboards and top 50 on overall, its about giving everybody a chance to get there by fair play and real skills, not by exploiting game mechanics upon game release...

Jorgensager
03-08-2013, 09:35 AM
U dont get to top 20 on "Wining Streak" by gaining ELO, u do it by following the 3 paths i posted, and while "Over All Ranking" and "Win/Loss Ratio" will as u said, normalise over time, "Wining Streaks" most likely won't....

They are almost entirely dependent on the most OP strategy in the current build. I can pretty much guarantee we will see some similarly OP strategies in the future before proper balance is implemented (assuming that is possible)... How many times do you want them to reset the longest win streak boards? There's no point in having a Hall of Fame which is reset on every update.

Yellow
03-08-2013, 09:43 AM
They are almost entirely dependent on the most OP strategy in the current build. I can pretty much guarantee we will see some similarly OP strategies in the future before proper balance is implemented (assuming that is possible)... How many times do you want them to reset the longest win streak boards? There's no point in having a Hall of Fame which is reset on every update.

As i said, if u actually had read my first post u would have noticed... the resent should be a 1 time thing, and should not be implemented right now, but once "unit Caps" be added(or any alternatives to the 4x issue being OP)

Sure with the addition of new units in the future some other balance issues might arrise, but at least by that time, the chances of exploits and 100 win streaks would not be as plausible as they are now. Not to mention taht the biggest part of the community would already have a decent amount of skills and knoloadge of in-game mechanics + If units caps are indeed implemented there should not be any future issue with 4x of the same.. as such thing would not be possible in the first place.

Arnie
03-08-2013, 10:24 AM
Apart from the issue cited in rzeznicc's thread (high elo player not getting any matches), there's something very wrong here.
I understand the intent, but it seems to me there's been an overlook that's kind of screwing everyone over right now.

So the intent is, until you get to a full team, you stay at elo 1000 and the hard window for matchmaking doesnt affect you, so you get paired with other beginners, right ?
But the problem is, at the time of update, many people were in the process of getting to their full teams, and already gained elo. They now are at maybe say 1100+ elo and 3-4 rank 1 units. Problem is, especially at a low player number times of the day like now, they'll get paired almost systematically with higher rank teams, which of course leads to a lot of frustration. The terrible thing is, they can't just start and forfeit a bunch of matches to lower their elo on purpose, because they don't have a full team so their rating cannot be modified...
I think this issues needs to be addressed ASAP. At the moment the ingame chat is full with disgruntled new(ish) players, and I can certainly understand where they are coming from.

Players are still matched the same way as always:
1) Power
2) Elo
John just opened up the Elo Matching part of it to be a little longer if we cannot find you an exact match. This has had the side effect of adding an average of 7 more seconds onto finding you a match, but it should also find you better matches. So an average of 7 seconds early on could save you 15 minutes of a poor match. The "Hard Window" John refers to is for everyone. If you have a 1000 Elo Ranking then we look for someone within 4 Elo of you and then expand both higher and lower by 2 Elo per second until a match is found. We do this same calculation regardless of your Elo, newb or vet.

If you get matched with a >6 Power team but you are <6 Power then no one gets Elo. This entire design is to block people from farming new players.

*None of this has any effect on Renown gain.

*We do plan on giving bonus renown at higher power play and are now working on the exact system.

Right now, since we just added rank 2 and 3 units the air is a little thin for the high power teams (12+) because there aren't enough players yet at those ranks. But we expect there will be very soon and that situation will level out.

On closing, I feel perhaps we did not message this build correctly and players have the wrong impression of what we're doing 'under the hood' with MM. Everything we've done should HELP to find you a better match, not the reverse.

Arnie
03-08-2013, 10:26 AM
As i said, if u actually had read my first post u would have noticed... the resent should be a 1 time thing, and should not be implemented right now, but once "unit Caps" be added(or any alternatives to the 4x issue being OP)

Sure with the addition of new units in the future some other balance issues might arrise, but at least by that time, the chances of exploits and 100 win streaks would not be as plausible as they are now. Not to mention taht the biggest part of the community would already have a decent amount of skills and knoloadge of in-game mechanics + If units caps are indeed implemented there should not be any future issue with 4x of the same.. as such thing would not be possible in the first place.

Nothing to say we may not have to wipe ranking someday, specially if we change enough ways that we're calculating them. Then we'll just call that "season" done and start a new "Season". Probably record the victors of that season like we do with the Tournaments. Right now *we are not focused on any wipes...but who knows? If it makes for a more fair situation we will, of course, move in that direction. :)

Butters
03-08-2013, 10:28 AM
Edit : removed response on wipes because its unrelated to the build and well, actually does not interest me much.

Thanks Arnie for the detailed explanation of the new matchmaking.
It sounds really good. The issue is that many of the players today had an experience that is quite different from what you describe:
- High elo players (1400+) taking not 7 more seconds, but more than 5 full minutes to find a match. Without having a power of 12 or anything close. (NB : my own experience at 1400 and 6 power was relatively smooth; significantly increased wait, but not at the unbearable levels rzeznicc or others experienced)
- Many growing players complaining in the chat about being repeatedly pitted against 6 power teams when sporting only 2-3 power teams themselves. It might have been a temporary, almost-empty server moment thing, but the number of people relating the same type of experience was uncanny.

I fully support the system as you describe it (to the exception maybe of the window expansion rate), it's an elegant solution to a problem that needed to be addressed, but I'm not convinced it is working as intended.

Also, let me reiterate my concerns expressed in another thread a bit earlier :
On a more general level, I'm concerned that high elo players will only get to play with a small number of other high elo players. Since not many of them are connected at the same time, this leads to rematches and possibly playing noone but eachother for whole sessions. (just moments ago rzeznicc and I were pitted against each other for two matches in a row)
Does the matchmaking include a system to ensure variety in opponents ? If so, how does it work ?

At any rate, thanks for the update, I do have reservations regarding the matchmaking but its globally a very good one. Thanks :D

Bloodaddict
03-08-2013, 10:38 AM
I've probably missed something obvious, but is there any way of distinguishing the rank of an enemy unit?
Without knowing it could be easy to make tactical mistakes based on rank one assumptions.

Since there were basically only replies about the MM, I just would like to bring this up again. Is there a way to distinguish rank 1 from rank 2 (or 3) units? I think it makes a big difference for my movements if that BM on the other side has a range of 7 or 8...

franknarf
03-08-2013, 10:46 AM
On the unit's turn, look at the purple lightning thing at the bottom of the list of stats. That's the only way to see the rank right now, I think.

Yellow
03-08-2013, 10:51 AM
Yellow, you assume unit caps will be implemented. AFAIK it's not on the menu at this point. (I for one am against the notion. And no, I don't play a such build)

It was said by Arnie itself that the idea have been floating around for a wile. That does not means however that it will be implemented as i suggested, but most certanly 1 thing or another on that regard will be done, am tipping either max 3 of same unit class, or max 2 of same unit upgrade... those 2 are the most likely to happen. Since the majority of the community voted and agreed on those.


As I understand it your beef is with the win streaks board, which admittedly has been easier to climb at launch that it will/should be in a more "stable" environment.

We'll see if the streaks attained in these first two weeks are truly impossible to reproduce without exploiting the system in any way ; to me it very much remains to be seen, and I expect high streaks to continue to rise steadily in the future.

Yes that is my beef, and as u self recognised it is/has been much easier to climb it at launch that it will be later on.

For that same reason, once balance issues regarding OP builds are adressed + Matchmaking works a bitt better than it does right now, and the biggest part of the player-base is known with the ingame mechanics it will be way more chalangeing if not almost "imposible" to get a 100+ winning streak.

I have myself a 20 winnign streak, and am quite sure more capable players than i can get 40 or even 50 withow noob hunting or exploiting ingame mechanics, but when it goes over that numbers u start to wonder.
I have been competitive in a few strategy games, such as Napoleon Total War and Shogun Total War(easy between top 10 best players on any of them during my peek days) and played a couple more in less competitive way such as Company of Heroes, among others, but so far a single winning streak of 100 is yet to be seen in any of them.... So am quite sure that such thing on a balanced enviroment aint so easy to archive, if ever posible...


Nothing to say we may not have to wipe ranking someday, specially if we change enough ways that we're calculating them. Then we'll just call that "season" done and start a new "Season". Probably record the victors of that season like we do with the Tournaments. Right now *we are not focused on any wipes...but who knows? If it makes for a more fair situation we will, of course, move in that direction. :)

Hi Arnie:
Thanks for the reply. The reason why i suggested the wipe its becouse since yesterday i have seen a couple of threads and comments about this, such as this one (http://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthread.php?1253-Stat-Tracking-amp-Leaderboards) among others.

About ur last line, I do belive that such a wipe(a 1 time thing) on at least "Win Streaks"(wich is the less likely to normalise itself, ever) would make for a more fair situation as am sure the game will become more stable and matchmaking will work in a better way than it does right now with future updates, thus, the less things that can be exploited, the fewer the chances of 100+ win streaks to happen, making it almost imposible to advance on that ladder, at least in comparison to how easy it is right now(if following the 3 paths i explained).

Arnie
03-08-2013, 10:56 AM
Also, let me reiterate my concerns expressed in another thread a bit earlier :
Does the matchmaking include a system to ensure variety in opponents ? If so, how does it work ?


Good point, and yes, we've already discussed having a 5 minute cap on playing the same player again. This has not yet been implemented but it's on our radar.

Arnie
03-08-2013, 10:58 AM
Since there were basically only replies about the MM, I just would like to bring this up again. Is there a way to distinguish rank 1 from rank 2 (or 3) units? I think it makes a big difference for my movements if that BM on the other side has a range of 7 or 8...

Only the major banner in the lower left when they move. If you see a 3 next to their ability icon it means they're rank 3.
That's just for now though. We will soon be adding an info bar for when you click units in the field. It will show ALL their stats and from their ability stat you will know their rank. Stay tuned...

Arnie
03-08-2013, 11:03 AM
Win Streaks: I can't believe, even playing new players, someone can get 100+ win streak. But yeah we'll look into all of this, but we don't want to make changes until we see how the changes we just implemented take root. We would only wipe if we feel we're now out of the weeds on some of these issues and know we have a more fair system.
Thanks for all the feedback!

Yellow
03-08-2013, 11:09 AM
Win Streaks: I can't believe, even playing new players, someone can get 100+ win streak. But yeah we'll look into all of this, but we don't want to make changes until we see how the changes we just implemented take root. We would only wipe if we feel we're now out of the weeds on some of these issues and know we have a more fair system.
Thanks for all the feedback!

Ok that pretty much adresses all my concerns :) ty a lot!

Jorgensager
03-08-2013, 01:38 PM
As i said, if u actually had read my first post u would have noticed... the resent should be a 1 time thing, and should not be implemented right now, but once "unit Caps" be added(or any alternatives to the 4x issue being OP)

Sure with the addition of new units in the future some other balance issues might arrise, but at least by that time, the chances of exploits and 100 win streaks would not be as plausible as they are now. Not to mention taht the biggest part of the community would already have a decent amount of skills and knoloadge of in-game mechanics + If units caps are indeed implemented there should not be any future issue with 4x of the same.. as such thing would not be possible in the first place.

I did read your post... and didn't agree, so I replied. My point was (is) that you can't guarantee balance by dealing with the 4x issue. Other, unexpected imbalance problems are likely to arise in the future, and doing a single reset just few weeks after game launch* - before the majority of imbalance issues are likely to be ironed out - is na´ve in my eyes.

* Obviously assuming the 4x issue is dealt with relatively soon...

For these reasons it seems to me we cannot guarantee a fair win streak record board anytime soon, so I disagree with your suggestions (although I am generally for a win streak record reset when the game has attained an OK balance and is unlikely to change drastically).

Now, I am aware that the discussion has moved on since my last reply, and I have no intention of hi-jacking the thread, but I didn't like the tone you opened your post with.

In conclusion, I believe we agree that the "longest win streak" boards could benefit from a reset (or more) in the future, though not necessarily on the details of when/if this would be sensible. However, being aware of Stoic's ideas, I still don't see a point in full resets of the boards (though the Overall ELO board could benefit from degeneration over time with inactivity).


As a side note, assuming* this has already been reported a number of times [hence not worthy a thread], it seems that none of my level 1 units can be upgraded further (their kill counts are all yellow ~ even the Thrasher with 16 kills).

*I'm a bit busy at the moment, so I haven't had much time to play the last 10 (or so) days.

Yellow
03-08-2013, 01:57 PM
I did read your post... and didn't agree, so I replied.


How many times do you want them to reset the longest win streak boards? There's no point in having a Hall of Fame which is reset on every update.

My post clearly said that the reset/wipe should not be done right now, and that it should be a 1 time thing, so both of ur questions gave the impresion that u either did not read what i posted, or taht u did but decided to ignore it and ask for the sake of asking anyway.


Now, I am aware that the discussion has moved on since my last reply, and I have no intention of hi-jacking the thread, but I didn't like the tone you opened your post with.

I don't want to be rude, but what u like and what u don't like is up to u, i meant no offence with my "tone" but if some was taken so be it.



I still don't see a point in full resets of the boards

Once again thats why i made special remarks on the "Win Streak Leaderboard", as well as included posible exeptions of leaderboards that dont need a wipe.... Werent those included on my original post or?




it seems that none of my level 1 units can be upgraded further (their kill counts are all yellow ~ even the Thrasher with 16 kills).



Are u using only 2 diferent kinds of unit on ur build? If u had clicked on all units u would have realised that not all units have rank 2 and 3 unlocked, so far only RM, BW, WM and SM have both level 2 and 3 unlocked.

PS: the tone on this one was actually intensional as i did no liked neither the tone of urs.

Jorgensager
03-08-2013, 03:13 PM
I don't want to be rude, but what u like and what u don't like is up to u, i meant no offence with my "tone" but if some was taken so be it.

Once again thats why i made special remarks on the "Win Streak Leaderboard", as well as included posible exeptions of leaderboards that dont need a wipe.... Werent those included on my original post or?

Are u using only 2 diferent kinds of unit on ur build? If u had clicked on all units u would have realised that not all units have rank 2 and 3 unlocked, so far only RM, BW, WM and SM have both level 2 and 3 unlocked.

PS: the tone on this one was actually intensional as i did no liked neither the tone of urs.

By "tone" I was referring to the assumption that I had not read your post. I don't take offence from disagreement.. that's what the forum is [partly] for.

As for what you have or haven't said, your posts are not unambiguous, so my comments have possibly pointed out inconsistencies, but mainly stated my own opinion. Not everything I say is a direct disagreement with your arguments/opinions. As mentioned in my previous post, I am of the impression that we largely agree on the issue.

Thanks, but it seems to work properly now (although the Thrasher and most other units are, as you pointed out, not available for upgrade).

I did not have a problem with your tone in this post.

Anyways, my intention is not to hijack the thread, so - since I believe we both have stated our opinions - I will not post further on the issue here... if you want to discuss it (or the way I formulate my forums posts) in more detail, you could PM me (but are obviously not in any way obliged to do so).

Yojimbo
03-08-2013, 04:48 PM
Win Streaks: I can't believe, even playing new players, someone can get 100+ win streak. But yeah we'll look into all of this, but we don't want to make changes until we see how the changes we just implemented take root. We would only wipe if we feel we're now out of the weeds on some of these issues and know we have a more fair system.
Thanks for all the feedback!

I'm wondering if there's a chance some kind of exploit is being used. I was playing a high ranked player yesterday. The match went into pillage mode but before I could land the killing blow my opponent appeared to lag out and I was awarded the victory. When I checked their win streak it appeared not to have been affected. If a player lags out does it count as their loss?

I could have got his all wrong of course (hence not naming names). But the fact my opponent seemed to drop out just before he lost - and keep his win streak - seemed a little suspicious.

Butters
03-08-2013, 09:18 PM
If a player lags out does it count as their loss?

No it does not, which is only fair.
I myself had some luck with that as I CTDd only a few turns before being beaten square (by ANTI-) as I was, iirc, at 51-streak. I went on to 65 with the bonus chance.
However if the "lagout" can be induced by the player that is a big problem; for streaks and for W/L ratio. It should be checked if a CTD can be faked by terminating the client.exe process, for example. If so, not sure how it would be achieved, but it should count as a loss rather than a nothing.

Yojimbo
03-08-2013, 10:19 PM
However if the "lagout" can be induced by the player that is a big problem; for streaks and for W/L ratio. It should be checked if a CTD can be faked by terminating the client.exe process, for example. If so, not sure how it would be achieved, but it should count as a loss rather than a nothing.

Agreed. Again its perfectly possible that this player just got lucky with lag and I've got the wrong end of the stick. But it would rather undermine the ELO system if people were quitting the game so their loses weren't being registered.

Chumpy
03-08-2013, 10:38 PM
Are all the win streak players just not facing each other?

bruther
03-09-2013, 07:09 PM
So I hadn't touched Factions since the beta, and not much then, but I tried it this weekend again. I tooled around with the default team for a while, promoted my archer, messed around some more. I played four matches and won two. Then, I read this thread (http://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthread.php?1206-The-Strategy-of-Ultimate-Win). (I hope the devs have, as well.)

I tried out three raiders and the default thrasher and two Varl warriors... and proceeded to win about twenty straight matches. Since I promoted one of the warriors to a warhawk, I haven't had one that was even close. I'm a little bit disturbed by how dominant this build is; in my last game I beat a rank 5 team with my rank 3 team of warhawk, warmaster, thrasher, raiderx3 with room to spare.

Basically it seems to come down to two things: archers are not sufficiently effective, and warhawks are out of control. Maybe I just haven't played anyone who uses archers effectively yet, and as I rank up we'll see about that. But, at the moment I can't see how any other unit can do could possibly compare to the warhawk getting to use the most powerful attack in the game *twice* per turn. I'm not even very good at this game, but builds that include archers can't seem to take this raider/warrior build at all.

I have a suggestion: in addition to the cap of 2 Varl per team, I suggest a cap of 1 of each advanced Varl class per team (one warhawk, one warmaster, one warleader) and a cap of 3 of each advanced human class (no more than 3 thrashers, etc.). This would force more diversity and tone down the min/maxing a bit. I've actually promoted my other warrior to warmaster just because I wanted a colorful team with less than total cheese; but, I think a cap like this would mix things up quite a bit for everyone.

sweetjer
03-09-2013, 07:35 PM
Hey bruther, check this thread out http://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthread.php?1199-Unit-Cap-Idea-Suggestion-Request I think you'll find the discussion there pretty relevant to your concerns.

netnazgul
03-10-2013, 04:40 AM
To add to what bruther has said - there is a huge difference between rank0 and rank1 characters. So that warhawk can even be counted as two characters - he has effectively double damage in low-ranks cause nothing really stands against his 16str, and nothing can really hurt warhawk himself cause maximum you get 12str warrior and you still need to close the distance to warhawk between those raiders.

Butters
03-10-2013, 11:31 AM
@netnazgul : rank 0s have the same counters for warhawk as rank1s - armorbreak with WP, puncture, and very careful placement.

An update regarding matchmaking (my experience of it):
Again, today, tried to find a balanced match at 1400 elo and a power 6 team. This is the time of the day when Steam user count peaks so I would expect Factions lobby to be well populated, but then again it doesnt really seem to be.
Anyway, first match was against a power 1 (sic) team, the guy even had lower elo than me (1300 something). Of course the match was very onesided.
Second match : same guy. Same power 1 team. Second squashing.
Third match : tell the guy to field a power 6 team for this one ; sure enough, was matched to the same personfor 3 matches in a row.
Of course the unbalanced match is much more of an issue here than having the same ooponent x times in a row, but this episode comforts me in the idea that current matchmaking is not working as intended.

raven2134
03-10-2013, 11:39 AM
Yes, I have mailed Stoic and they will look into the matchmaker once they get back from the game show they are currently attending.

netnazgul
03-11-2013, 01:46 AM
rank 0s have the same counters for warhawk as rank1s - armorbreak with WP, puncture, and very careful placement.
Yes, but rank0 still has less capabilities for that.

And the whole issue was to point on general difference between chars having abilities and not having them, on the example of warhawk. Also not being able to distribute stats influences base units a bit.