http://quakelive.com/user/load once you've logged in. You'll find the tier info lurking in there.

lol..that was within miliseconds.. thx anyway :)

nvm..got it from someone in irc channel: http://www.quakelive.com/user/load

Icing on the cake : lookup greasemonkey script in the QL forum, and you'll get a little thingie which will show your tier info directly in the QL page :D
(I'll have to mess around with it as well).

how many tiers are there?

Only 5.

sure about that?
should be more tho

Yes, there's only 5. When you beat crash at expert or whatever it's called you get tier 4 in all gametypes...

and you get tier 5 once you beat UnnamedPlayer.

UnnamedPlayer is such a n00b though

my screenshot folder says otherwise :(

In duel, yeah. Weird tho, a lot harder to get tier 5 in every other gametype :) But i'm not that good so I guess it's ok.

if you beat unnamedplayer in QL you far surpass 99% of the players :<

Highest skill is tier 1 or is tier 5?

Tier 5.

10 tiers would be better, imo.

hmm..haven't they said there will be more tiers once they get bigger sample of players?
or it was maybe just about the distribution within the tiers

I think it's that the tiers will be more effective earlier on, as the player base expanded. BUt now that it's open beta, it's about as good as it's getting.

I get the feeling its almost impossible to increase your tier in CA but perhaps I'm just too poor of a player.

Getting the same feeling here. Maybe its based on kill/death ratio and not on number of wins. That would be retarded for CTF though.

CTF is retarded anyway. the maps ruin everything tbh.

yeh, I'm at tier 3 and never saw a game that is "more challenging".

Same here.
Feels a bit like what fox said that to me - typically I'm in the top scorers, do a lot of damage but not necessarily kills. Might be winning more than every second CA yet nothing seems to change. I'll have to play some more to further comment...

I would say they should go with damage done vs damage received.
Also I only have a low win percentage vs. total games because I tend to be the one switching teams when they are uneven and i have a feeling that gets counted as a disconnect...

I connected to a game which was in its last round (too late to join) and waited for the next map to join in.
This round of spec-only was counted as DNF. yay
I have switched teams a few times though, the games weren't DNF.

I think it should just be average damage done per round, otherwise it promotes the zzz counter-strike kind of play.

might be right, but of course if your team is winning you won't get as much damage when going zzz.
Also don't you won't those people to be promoted to a tier they don't deserve so they get raped a lot? ;P

If you use LG as your main weapon you won't get as much kills as people who use spike weapons such as RG or RL, since if both are attacking the same target its very unlikely that the smooth damage will actually do the finishing blow.

So those of us who prefer the LG get, well, shafted.

Also, my playing style is to defend the focal points (the best points to have on the map) at the start, which means I take a lot of damage initially but also deal a fair amount of damage. Usually, this results in my dying early or getting quite low, so I'm not around when the end comes and people start to really drop off.

I believe my kill/death ratio is 1.7 in CA, which obviously isn't enough since my tier isn't moving the slightest.

I am a total shaftwhore, and that indeed quickly cost me a lot of rounds in QL CA.
Since then I have adjusted my playstyle for QL CA and play a much more RL-centric aggro game now - a bit too aggressive which usually ends up with me dying while the remaining players finish up. The scores show the damage output pretty well even when I don't get that many kills :)

my problem is that I couldn't dodge a snail if it was charging at me, so I always die quite fast :(

Like this ? =)

I diagree with your assumption. Because rockets don't always do 100 damage and rails don't always hit.
And when a rockets leaves the opponent with 1 - 40 health, guess who will get the kill.

I had rounds where I got three kills just by using lg while others where using rockets and rails. Sure there are also rounds where I didn't get any kill in a similar situation but I'd say it pretty much evens out.

I can make an analogy in order for you to understand my point, to make it more clear, I'll make it more excessive.

Say there is something that has 10,000 hp and there is one weapon that does 10000 damage every 3 seconds, we call it the nuke, and one that does 3000 damage every second, we can call it the stream. Of course, when the first weapon hits, it doesn't matter if the stream had brought it low or not, the nuke will still kill him. Hence, the nuke will get more killing blows.

We can make it a bit lesser, the target still has 10,000 hp. One weapon does 2000 damage every other seconds, one does 1000 damage per secound. Two people are using the bigger, one is using the stream. The nukes are firing every 1 seconds at average with 2000 each and the stream is hitting every second for 1000. It means that the only time the stream will kill the target, is if the target gets to <1001hp and even then its just a 50% chance. While the chance for those using the bigger weapon is 50% if the target is between 1001-2000 hp and 25% if its less. Hence the chance of killing the target with the stream is 25% whilest the chance for those using the bigger weapon is 37.5% each.

Its simple mathematics, nukes will get more kills than dots. As for your counter argument that it can miss. Yes, but so can every weapon. Rail should not miss more often than LG, on the contrary since LG is more ping dependent, people generally has a better accuracy with rail than with LG.

Yes it is simple math, but you still made mistakes. Gonna ignore the first example for (imo) obvious reasons, and go with the second one.

First part:

We can make it a bit lesser, the target still has 10,000 hp. One weapon does 2000 damage every other seconds, one does 1000 damage per secound. Two people are using the bigger, one is using the stream. The nukes are firing every 1 seconds at average with 2000 each and the stream is hitting every second for 1000. It means that the only time the stream will kill the target, is if the target gets to <1001hp and even then its just a 50% chance.

I think your way of thinking is slightly wrong there, instead of commenting on it I'm gonna write how I would calculate it.

You need to decide on a firing time first, because for example i quake lg and rail deal damage instantly, while rockts need time to fly. For convenience sake lets say both start dealing damage at the beginning.
Then it is as follows (it a little simplified because for low hp both weapons could get the kill...):
1 - 2000 hp, nuke gets the kill
2001 - 4000 hp, stream gets the kill (nuke does 2000 at some times, stream finishes up)
4001 - 6000hp, nuke
6001 - 8000hp, stream
I think you get the idea...

Therefore, in this example they should get both 50% of the kills.

Just now realized that while you say stream you actually mean a weapon that shoots once every second, while I assumed it should do continous damage (you know, like lg ;) ) In any case you are still ignoring the part where the traget has 3001 - 4000hp. In that case "stream" would get a whopping 100% of the kills. On the other hand nuke gets all the kills from 1001 to 2000.

So for you example and assuming they fire at almost the same time we would get:
1 - 1000 hp: 50% each each
1001 - 2000hp: 100% nuke
2001 - 3000hp: 50% each
3001 - 4000hp: 100% stream
the cycle repeats.


Now in Quake you would have to consider they actual maximum damage/s for each weapon, the average accuracies and add up the delay of rockets (though I'm not sure if that would have a theoretical effect, in probably does practically because the limit is 400hp and not infinite).

But as said before I'm sure it pretty much evens out...

Your example is true, but if you add another person using nuke (its often gankfest in CA) then my example holds water. It would mean the one using stream would only get 25% of the kills while the other two get to share the 75%.

1 - 1000 33,3% each
1001 - 2000 50% each nuke
2001 - 3000 33,3% each (the second hit gets the kill)
3001 - 4000 50% each nuke
4001 - 5000 33,3% each (the third hit gets the kill)
5001 - 6000 100% stream
cycle repeats

(33,3 + 50 + 33,3 + 50 + 33,3)/6 = 33,3
(33,3 + 33,3 + 33,3 + 100)/6 = 33,3


gb2school ;)

5001 - 6000 100% stream.

Doesn't matter since no one dies running around with 6000hp. The people dying are those with low hp, otherwise they generally manage to run away.

uhm, you talked about 10000hp in your example ... and as seen below this translates to roughly 200hp ingame.

Just admit you were wrong.

We can make a more true to nature example.

LG average damage over 0.8 seconds, 96, assuming it all hits.
RL average damage over 0.8 seconds, 100, assuming it all hits (but doesn't splash).

Using your own accuracy numbers your RL aim is 35% and your LG aim is 25% but to be honest your RL aim is probably way higher, since you use rockets to jump and shooting it randomly at places where foes commonly are. However, RL does less damage per second if it hits close to the target and it takes a while for it to go off (but that doesn't matter in the long run, as long as you hit). Also, RL may actually kill a secondary target. I'll assume it evens out and to make the calculations easier I'll just assume both weapons hit at the same time initially.

You start with 400 hp but no one dies there so its not interesting.

If the target is at 100hp, the rocket will kill him.

From 1-99 the only time the rocket won't kill him is if he is at 6hp or less, then its a 50% chance. From 101-107 its a 50% chance.

So at the crucial killing point between 1-107 hp, there is a wooping 94.4% chance to do the kill if you are using the RL compared to LG.

not wanting to be mean, but you should try to make less mistakes, especially since you called it simple math (which it is).

The first part is correct (as it was in your calculation before), but then you are wrong again because you set the limit too low. Again.

The "crucial killing point" is not 1 - 107 hp but extends to the sum of both damages during 0,8 second therefore it is 1 - 196 hp.
So LG gets the kill for certain for the range from 108 - 196.

Therefore LG gets 49% and RL 51%, which is due to your assuptions regarding actual damage/s.

So ultimately what is boils down to is the weapon balance in the game and you own skill with each weapon.



What really put's me of though: Did you really believe those 94,4% yourself???? Thats a ratio of almost 1 to 20! I mean that result should have made all warnings signs in your head go off...

The "crucial killing point" is not 1 - 107 hp but extends to the sum of both damages during 0,8 second therefore it is 1 - 196 hp.
So LG gets the kill for certain for the range from 108 - 196.

Its not a certain kill at all, the more hp the target has, the more likely it is for him to get away (and the calculation restarts, giving the advantage to the RL again). Even if he just gets away for two seconds, the entire calculation is restarted, thus the RL gets a huge advantage.

a. yo can't just mae up new factors after the calculation.
b. 0,8 seconds are not to be considered a long times.
c. if you do in fact consider 0,8 seconds a long time then you can not simply assume a rocket hits instantly, because by the time it reaches the target the lg will already have done some damage.

So e.g. the opponent escapes with 14 hp, can you guess who will make the kill???


Just admit you were wrong, please.

I've always just been talking about the lower hp, since no one at high hp is going to die. Its you who started talking about what would happen at 5000 hp.

If the opponent escapes with 14 hp, in an optimal setting the RL will make the kill, since it will fire before the opponent is visible.

As for assuming it hits instantly, you can also take into consideration that you can fire RL prematurely (RL also has infinite range).

Do you find it rare while attacking someone, you will lose contact with him for one second every now and then due to pillars, corners, team mates blocking etc etc? Do you not agree that it would restart the calculation and thus giving the RL an advantage?

b. 0,8 seconds are not to be considered a long times.

This isn't over 0.8 seconds. It is the damage you would at average get if you hit 100% of your hits, likely 25% is a more true number, so add 4x to that time. The reason I mentioned 0.8 seconds is since its the time it takes to fire one rocket (and to fire 16 LG cells).

For crying out loud, you said it was simple math yourself, then you fucked up the calculation and the math actually proved you wrong and now you are trying to make excuses.

I mean seriously, if you wanted to go with 5000hp why did you write 10000hp in the first?
And now you come with prediction rockets?


This is over and you have been served.

I have yet to see you prove any of my math wrong, all you did was fairly inaccurately add to what would happen if the person was high health and afk, whilest the entire discussion from my part was about low hp.

I think my point has been proven. If you want the killing blow and its multiple people attacking the person, its better to attack with a spike weapon than a smooth one.

Perhaps you do not think so, but judging from your recent comments such as "you have been served", "you were wrong" and so on, it is unlikely anything will change your mind and frankly, that level of discussion I grew tired of many years ago. If you want to continue the discussion in a civil fashion, then we can go continue. Otherwise, have a nice day.

If you want to calculate anything you need to make the parameters known first from what you posted you calculated wrongly and I calculated correctly. It really is as simple as that.
You can't just change the parameters afterwarts and declare yourself to be correct.

What you were doing was from a mathematical viewpoint simply ridiculous? Why would I bother to continue discussing that?
Whenever I say something you'll just add another factor trying to make yourself sound correct. "and frankly, that level of discussion I grew tired of many years ago."


Oh and killing someone with 130 hp and 50 armor with two players doesn't mean he has to be afk, and I also wouldn' consider that "high hp".

And IF you had indeed mentioned "low HP" anywhere near the begining of this discussion I would have arguend that opponent with hp >30 get killed by lg more quickly because it does damage instantly. Besides, usually you would use sg then...
But you didn't bring up low hp before now.

Have a nice day.

you too.

I didn't read any of the maths stuff and I don't care who is/was right/wrong on that matter but I agree with Paladia on the killing blow being easier with the spike wepons.

There may or not be a advantage to the spike weapons, but if so it is only marginal. (math doesn't lie)

I believe that people "feel" they are much better has psychological reasons.
You just notice the rail shot or that rocket to the face much more than the "slow" grinding with the lg.

Even more so when you are the one using the lg.
You expect to receive the kill, so it's no surprise to you when you get it -> you don't remember it much
on the other hand if someone rails him before you get the kill you feel robbed -> you remember it more.

I'd agree with that point of view actually. But from a strategic point of view looking at public CA games I see the optimal strategy to keep your distance and use the long range spike weapons and maybe SG when you get into closer quarters.

You'll end up with more kills on average as you can single hit people of medium health dead, the shaft user needs to be in a more risky situation and his damage is dealt over time rather than one single impact blow.

well, I would say the reason for that is that you can use those spike weapons from a long range and disappear after a shot, while with a lg you have to go all in on one opponent for a longer period.

If there were for example a mg with the same dmg / s as rail I would say you could use that for long range just as well.

That would make long range non-spiking the best strategy for damage and winning but spike weapons would still have the advantage of the killing blow more often than not (Unless you made the MG DPS assuming 20% or so accuracy).

The spiker only needs to hit that one single shot which for me makes it the optimal strategy in public CA games for getting kills and staying alive.

Being a successful CA player is about more than that though and none of the scoring systems can totally reflect the impact a player can have on the game anyway.

assuming you have same accuracy for both the mg and the rail, say 40% and then have the same dmg/s you will get a very even amount of kill.

Because if for example the opponent has 15 health. You will easily kill him with mg, but with the rail you will have to hit the shot!

Since I am aware that rail accuracy is probably higher, that could be balanced through higher damage for the mg. Thus delievering the same result.


if you want some sort more reasoning you should read comments #34 and #37. Not gonna do it again :)

While you are correct, such a weapon would pretty much ruin every gametype totally. I can just see it now, once a player/team has the Super MG the game is over, or in CA it's who can peek Super MG people the most!

I'd still say that the optimum strategy for public CA games to get kills (Not damage since it's roughly equal) and stay alive is to use the long range spike weapons.

I'd still say that the optimum strategy for public CA games to get kills (Not damage since it's roughly equal) and stay alive is to use the long range spike weapons.

that I can agree with as well as where a super-mg would probably ruin gameplay.

But the original discussion was about two people ganking one opponent and then the optimal choice depends on other factors such as positioning etc.

In the case of ganking I'd say it's equal!

thank you! :)

It all depends on the meaning of effectively

ahhahhaha :D