quote:

Originally posted by CDR_Alpha_Niner:
cheating has nothing to do with it

the focus is on a single engagement

1 battle = 1 point, not 4

Cheating does support your side though, a single cheater can create 4 wins for his side when playing 4v4 while it counts for 4 points.

wait, what?

how does 1 guy affect the outcome for 3 other players by cheating?

if he tries it, he dies because he's got 4 opponents to contend with

This is a natural outgrowth of how wins and losses are tallied in Endwar. Once you accept the underlying logic of how wins and losses are tallied for EACH PLAYER, the fact that a team win is one win per player makes much more sense.

The game doesn't count losses in the TOW per se; it simply tallies up how many players have won their games, and apparently applies some sort of fudge factor on certain maps (although the developers have refused to explain how that part of it actually works, if indeed it does). So, it doesn't matter whether you play 1v1 or 4v4: each winning player contributes to their faction's overall tally for the day for each match that they play.

I don't see the problem. You can certainly make the claim that letting JSF get 4 wins for every game played on TMI is unbalanced and unfair since the map so heavily favors them, but to say that the underlying principle of one victory per winning commander is unbalanced just doesn't hold water.

On a perfectly even map with perfectly even opponents, each player has a 50/50 chance of adding his winning point to the overall scoreboard. That's about as fair as it gets, and in no way changes the overall odds when compared to 1v1. The fact that a win or loss on 4v4 results in a slightly bigger swing doesn't change the actual pivot point for the odds, unless the map itself is unbalanced.

Personally, since I get less XP and fewer promotions playing 4v4, I think the developers did it right in not also discounting my time investment in a match when counting wins/losses. There's plenty of legitimate stuff to complain about with this game, but the way they count team wins isn't one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Whovian_Omega:

I STRONGLY agree with you!!!

but it's still only 1 battle, it is only 1 engagement

how can you award a faction 4 wins for 1 engagement? this seems biased against 1 vs. 1 players

If I may borrow your words, wouldn't what you want (4 players = 1 win) be biased against 4 players too?
I think Whovian_Omega and I have been trying our best, but if you are still not convinced, let's agree to disagree and move on.

perhaps

there will always be bias against somebody because you can't make everyone happy at once

my argument, though, is that because only 1 battle being fought, regardless of how many players commit, only 1 point should be awarded to the winning faction, not 2 for a 2 vs. 2 or 4 for a 4 vs. 4, because only 1 battle is being fought

you can do two things with my argument: agree or disagree.

quote:

Originally posted by CDR_Alpha_Niner:
there will always be bias against somebody because you can't make everyone happy at once

you can do two things with my argument: agree or disagree.

I agree with both those statements, so we should just stop trying to convince each other and move on

heh

now let's see ubisoft act on it -oh wait! we can't because they're busy at E3-

quote:

Originally posted by CDR_Alpha_Niner:
how can you award a faction 4 wins for 1 engagement? this seems biased against 1 vs. 1 players

Because it doesn't matter. The size of the swing doesn't affect the pivot point. Have you ever taken a class in statistics?

If you gamble, your odds of winning a hand are exactly the same whether you bet $5 or $20. If you consistently bet $5 per hand, and the guy next to you consistently bets $20, you both still have the same statistical chance of winning each hand.

In fact, either person may appear to win (or lose) more money than the other, but that's just because the win/loss percentage of the money in play is relatively stable. The pivot point remains the same regardless of the size of the bet.

In Endwar, each faction bets 1, 2, or 4 "points" per hand. The larger the bet, the bigger the swing, but the pivot point is unchanged and the overall expectation is not affected by the relative sizes of the "bets" themselves.

You don't really have the choice to disagree on this one: this is basic mathematics at work. Your original premise is flawed, so unless you're just saying you don't like it for purely subjective reasons, you really ought to complain about something more constructive.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Whovian_Omega,

I'm arguing on the premise of giving each faction only 1 victory per battle, no matter how many players are involved.

In a 4 vs. 4, only 1 battle per meeting between players is fought, so how can Ubisoft give 4 points per 4 vs. 4 victory and claim that 4 battles were fought instead of just one?

Flawed, my ***. It's clear as day, and yeah, I am in college, thank you, with a triple major!