Combine the chances together

[MicroBoss]

i know alot of people would like the chances of the giveaway to be combined, i think i know why it isn't (the chances would decrease 2x faster) but this way one server wont be full and then no one wants to join the 2nd they are just wait until someone leave. but this way people will join both servers and both server will be in usage.

i was thinking either the chances would decrease each map depending if the other server switched maps or after map change if other server switches it would add +2.5 on chance decrease.

[TJ1524]

I think they definitely need to be combined because of how horrible it is when server 1 is full. On airbus, everyone lagged and it was awful. No one wanted to switch to the other server because the giveaway was at a lower chance compared to the other server.

Even if it was farmable, you would need at least 6 people on both servers and have to hope no one leaves which is harder later into the night.

[Awesome]

Opposed to them being combined I propose that they play a catch up system, after say 2 maps if one server is slightly ahead of the other they reset to the medium of the 2 servers keeping the decrease from being effected by two servers going at once and keep a steady average on the decrease while not influencing one server over the other. so just a quick example with small numbers for you all reading this that dont math if server 1 is at 1 in 100 and server 2 is at 1 in 200 then at the "catch up point on map switch they would change to 1 in 150 to keep the average. As this system continues there really should not be much need on the numbers to change to much to match averages.

[MicroBoss]

(01-27-2018, 01:57 PM)Awesome Wrote:  Opposed to them being combined I propose that they play a catch up system, after say 2 maps if one server is slightly ahead of the other they reset to the medium of the 2 servers keeping the decrease from being effected by two servers going at once and keep a steady average on the decrease while not influencing one server over the other. so just a quick example with small numbers for you all reading this that dont math if server 1 is at 1 in 100 and server 2 is at 1 in 200 then at the "catch up point on map switch they would change to 1 in 150 to keep the average. As this system continues there really should not be much need on the numbers to change to much to match averages.

Very nice but bad idea. Right now server one is 1 in 1300 while server 2 is 1 in 9000.
You are increasing the chances to one server that has worked hard to earn its decreasing. And if no one plays on the 2nd server then it just really unbalanced. since server 2 is bring down server 1 and there hard work.

[Awesome]

Obviously if this was put into place you would have them start once a giveway reset silly. And if one server is inacitve for a certain amount of time it can take this into account to keep the drop chances averaged as they should be while keeping them the same.

[Brassx]

Yeah it was a tough decision, but it was made to prevent rarities from decreasing too quickly, as you stated.

I suppose what it could do, if one server is more than 2.5% lower than the other, it could catch up on map change. But then you have the issue of map changes being quicker depending on player count.

One solution I was considering was making the rarity decrease time based rather than map based, but I didn't like that idea much.

I suppose to most fair solution is to indeed 'catch up' to the lowest rarity available on map-start. I don't want to make it an average as it could potentially increase the number on one server on map change, making the people salty.

-edit- just noticed you said only apply that during a reset. That's fair.

[MicroBoss]

What if you made so the first slot which would be the Snowglobe Right now be on server one and the 2nd slot which would be the Crystal on server 2. And when ever someone gets the giveaway then it moves up. Say the snowglobes gets a winner before the 2nd server does. it would move the 3rd slot to 1st, and when someone whens 2nd server giveaway the 3rd slot would go to 2nd and to 2nd server.


(I dont know how much more to explain but ill try if you need me too.)

[Cobaltgeo]

I feel maybe 2 rolls should be made listen giveaways should be hard to roll but not that hard

[MicroBoss]

(01-27-2018, 06:27 PM)Santabalt Wrote:  I feel maybe 2 rolls should be made listen giveaways should be hard to roll but not that hard

1. dont really understand what you just typed.
2. im pretty sure thoses are the chances that you get from creates/post-round/events. so this giveaway is basically free godlike without any payment for crates. and you only waste what we all love and came here for. and thats TTT.

[Alex Summers]

I'd like for something like this to happen. With these giveaways, the server is constantly full, making it unbareably laggy. I've found it almost impossible to actually enjoy playing because of this lag. It's almost impossible to do much of anything on t rounds or just in general.