Scrim Rws system

[maddius]

I was playing on another pug server and there was a RWS system and I thought it would be pretty cool to add one to our scrim server because then if you are captain you can know who to choose especially if you're new to scrim.

[duffy]

I'm not sure about this one man. ESEA has this system (I assume you got some inspiration from there too) and it causes a lot of people to just play for themselves. A lot of people would start baiting so they can capitalize on kills and not die as much. The fun aspect of scrim would be lost, maybe a lot or maybe not even at all, but I think it would get hit.

[roux]

I'm not sure about this one man. ESEA has this system (I assume you got some inspiration from there too) and it causes a lot of people to just play for themselves. A lot of people would start baiting so they can capitalize on kills and not die as much. The fun aspect of scrim would be lost, maybe a lot or maybe not even at all, but I think it would get hit.

 

RWS (round win share) only calculates the metric out of rounds you've won, not on performance/score/whatever. Which means you can go 60-0 and still have a rws of 0. It is inherently flawed by how it expresses one's individual action rather than overall worth. HLTV's rating 2.0 is a better metric, but still lacking imo. There's no good way of showing a player's skill/worth with a number, which is why I refused to ever add such a thing to the server under my management.

[Gentoo]

RWS (round win share) only calculates the metric out of rounds you've won, not on performance/score/whatever. Which means you can go 60-0 and still have a rws of 0. It is inherently flawed by how it expresses one's individual action rather than overall worth. HLTV's rating 2.0 is a better metric, but still lacking imo. There's no good way of showing a player's skill/worth with a number, which is why I refused to ever add such a thing to the server under my management.

 

This is merely a tool that would potentially allow captains to pick more fair teams, not a system that would automatically balance them. Having any tool, even something as mundane as KD, would be better than nothing, as captains are not required to pay attention to it. The concern that players would try to play differently to increase it is genuine, but showing it only to captains when teams are selected would certainly cut down on this. ESEA's RWS system is based primarily on damage dealt and bomb plants/defusals. This is fairly objective oriented, and encouraging players to deal maximum damage and objectives if they wanted to grind such a stat, wouldn't be such a bad thing in my opinion, compared to using something like KD that would encourage players to wait till late round, when everyone is already below 100 HP.

 

This isn't even a stat you have to show in any way. Players could simply be organized on the selection menu in descending order of average RWS. While players that tend to "be a team player" instead of fragging out may feel shafted by this, it's not like they're the first pick already. I would really love any sort of system like this, and I think it would help a great deal when a rando gets captain or the captains do not recognize a player on the server. They're under no obligation to choose players with the highest RWS, but it would still give them some sort of metric to work from when choosing a team.

[Kieran]

From experience, the system isn't bad at determining which players are better than others. It's flawed but it isn't totally inaccurate. Servers I've played on the good players usually have higher RWS than the bad ones, and it would show the round count next to it to get a better understanding of how accurate the number is. Don't see the harm in such a thing other than some taunting and stuff like that.

[Stewie]

I'm not sure about this one man. ESEA has this system (I assume you got some inspiration from there too) and it causes a lot of people to just play for themselves. A lot of people would start baiting so they can capitalize on kills and not die as much. The fun aspect of scrim would be lost, maybe a lot or maybe not even at all, but I think it would get hit.

 

I agree with drippy it would make people lose the fun of picking different people rather then picking the same people every time.

[duffy]

RWS (round win share) only calculates the metric out of rounds you've won, not on performance/score/whatever. Which means you can go 60-0 and still have a rws of 0. It is inherently flawed by how it expresses one's individual action rather than overall worth. HLTV's rating 2.0 is a better metric, but still lacking imo. There's no good way of showing a player's skill/worth with a number, which is why I refused to ever add such a thing to the server under my management.

 

I've played ESEA and Faceit and I can safely say I see a ton of more baiters/people playing for themselves on ESEA and I believe it's because of this system. Granted, it only counts to the rounds that a team wins but if I were to die immediately and deal 0 damage on the rounds that we win because I was the one entry fragging because my team didn't want to because they want to plant or trade me for kills, I'm not getting any RWS. Also, I can still win the round by baiting my teammates if I'm that good. Yeah, it might be a little tougher, but my RWS would be booming if I plant AND kill 4 people with the help from the death of my teammates. This will all trace back to people just playing for themselves. And you might say that it won't happen because you are right in some aspects, but I've experienced playing ESEA (I'm sure you have at least once) and I can safely say that there are a ton of baiters on there, more than faceit and competitive, because there's no reward for it.