Please put feature requests in this thread.
|QLSTATS Activate account|
|QLSTATS Bug reports|
|QLSTATS How it works?|
|QLSTATS Install QLstats on Server|
|QLSTATS Change CA Elo Calculation|
|QLSTATS Account deactivated|
|QLSTATS Reset my elo please|
Also its bad that instagib data is mixed with all-weapon ffa, but I guess its difficult to separate all such things.
And also support url fragments (like "#tab-duel")
Appending "#duel" to the player profile link will show the duel stats (overriding the cookie).
Showing the opponent is something I already had on my todo list, but it requires some work on the database to work efficiently
There is no automated way and won't be due to the potential abuse.
The !alias minqlx script only shows the different names used under the same steamid. It doesn't support multiple steam-ids per player.
OLD STEAM ID: 76561198272178175
NEW (CURRENT) STEAM ID: 76561198276850600
Both steam IDs now bring up your old profile. You'll continue with the rating you had on the old account.
The matches you played under the new account can't be merged to the old account.
Travel distrance per round for each player. Low travel distance - predictable moves, long travel distance - unpredictable moves.
The best thing that could be derived from the data is the time span you were alive in a round. The game server only emits events for match start, death, kill, round over, match over, player connect / disconnect and team switch.
What you want can only be done by analyzing a demo file.
The current system seems to work quite well for CA matchmaking, which is the main purpose for the ratings, so I am not making any changes to the formulas without statistic "proof" that it will produce better team-ups.
Personally I think it doesn't matter for the match results whether you survive with 1hp or with 200hp. But the damage you deal has an impact on the match result.
There is no option to show them all.
Next step would be a ranking per steam-id, so everyone is #1 :)
They had a list of every map you played and just showed the wins/losses per map.
Having a rating for every map wouldn't make sense as PredatH0r pointed out, the margin of error would be way too big for most people.
It would however be interesting for people to see which maps they have played a lot or not at all. Adding a simple Win/Loss statistic then would be trivial.
I just would like to see some stats regarding thaws for FT matches like average thaws per game for each player.
I don't like this, because it makes it hard to determine the skill level of the match. Can you change it so that Old Glicko is always shown?
Also, if that's possible, clan pages that show individual members and their respective Ratings and stuff like total games played.
QLRanks had most of that and I think it's not impossible to implement, so... please?
You can't throw in a random set of numbers and except something good coming out of it. The system "learns" each players skills by observing many matches.
For that, all the matches you feed into the system need to be comparable, otherwise you are confusing the system instead of teaching it.
If you have several sub-communites who never mix with eachother, their ratings are not comparable either. They both form their independant rating distribution in the 0-3000 point range. That's not because the system is broken, that's because of the worong expectations about the system. It simply can't tell if A is better than B when they and their friends never play against eachother.
Now when you use these already shady ratings to sort all players and see who comes out top 100, you get rankings that are even more shady.
And if you then start to mix team sizes, pql/vql, vampiric/normal, ... for the system's input, you'll get nothing but garbage as output.
If I drop out of a match am I prone to lose more elo than if I stayed and finished? Does is punish quitters in other words?
In other modes a player with less than 50% match participation gets ignored, 50% and more are counted.
Ratings are there to have an idea about a player's skill for the purpose of shuffling teams and not for ranking (as in: you are #78 in the world). Arbitrary changes of the rating values to punish someone will do more harm than good. You'd award the quitter with better team mates.
If someone is overly aggressive and does a lot of damage, but gets killed off before he actually gets the kill, then someone healthy would just pick them all up. In the end a guy with more damage being outscored by a guy who plays super safe and has 10 more kills. You will end up losing glicko only because you were not playing safe at the early stage of each round.
When you hover your mouse over the column header, you see the formula.
A kill is as much worth as 25 damage in this calculation (in other words: damage/100 + 0.25*kills).
I am NOT using the score on the QL scoreboard for CA ratings.
When a server owner choses to track his server on qlstats, you'll have to accept it when you want to play on his server. His house, his rules.
The main purpose of qlstats is providing rating data to servers so teams can be balanced. This requires that all players have ratings. Another use of qlstats is to provide data for restricting access to the server, like min/max rating or keeping out cheaters/offenders. And that ofc requires that offenders are tracked and can't opt-out of it (I'm not saying here you are an offender).
This was the old system and it was much easier to
Follow who played well on the losing team for example.
I think it would be nice to punish players who quits midgame at least in free for all mode. E.g. this guy . His ffa elo seems to be going up and up and i dont think thats kind of fair. Kid only plays till the end if he finishes in top 3. Pretty much everytime hes at the risk of losing elo he just disconnects and precious elo is saved:). Like here
2 minutes played here 7 min played and here 5 min played. I follow this guy for last month and i can clearly see that he abuses the current system.
You said Maybe lower the percentage down to 25% or even less?
The rating is meant to measure a person's skill and a match that's only played for 2 minutes doesn't provide any accurate information to change the rating either up or down.
Unfortunately people don't understand that, look at the rating numbers and try anything possible to inflate them - or punish other people by deflating them. Both things reduce the quality of the ratings.
In team games, if a player is "punished" by lowering his rating, it is actually a "reward" because he will get better team mates the next game.
And then there are some technical issues about the data that's available about a match. I can't distinguish whether a player quit, got kicked, connection interrupted, ...
The only way to avoid this Heisenberg problem (people changing their behavior because you are observing them) is to not make the ratings public.
That is actually a pretty good idea for team modes. People, wanking about numbers only made for balancing games, is not healthy anw. Would be funny to see how whiners like qwih will react to that. For duel it has much more meaning to have the numbers public and is harder to manipulate the system. It also helps ppl find appropriate match ups. But personally, wouldn't mind if the numbers where publicly hidden in duel and you could only see your rating. Wouldn't be good though, since there is no shuffle in duel or bots finding you the best opponents. Also, tourneys like the recent <1700 and <1400, wouldn't be possible. For team modes is a must though!!
since it is possible to check the career stats in qlive, wouldnt be great to show it also in the player stat page here in qlStats?
For example, about the accuracy, actually we can only manage to check the average %, maximum in the last 100 matches. What do you think?