MR_SLIN
Account Details
SteamID64 76561197980196963
SteamID3 [U:1:19931235]
SteamID32 STEAM_0:1:9965617
Country United States
Signed Up July 21, 2012
Last Posted July 2, 2017 at 8:43 PM
Posts 3928 (2.1 per day)
Game Settings
In-game Sensitivity 2.133
Windows Sensitivity 6/11
Raw Input 1
DPI
1600
Resolution
1920x1080
Refresh Rate
144hz
Hardware Peripherals
Mouse Zowie FK1
Keyboard Filco Ninja Majestouch-2 (Cherry MX Reds)
Mousepad Steelseries QcK+
Headphones Sennheiser IE 80
Monitor BenQ XL2730Z
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 257
#3 sickest airshot of all time? in TF2 General Discussion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W02L-2lk1I

posted 2 weeks ago
#6 Froyotech will not be going to i61 in TF2 General Discussion

Lost interest? So it's not a money thing?

posted 4 weeks ago
#76 Post a Medic demo, get a video response in Mentoring
Legit_LurkkiETF2L Low (2nd lowest div) https://serveme.tf/uploads/76561198012692998-663417-315-20170527.zip the reckoner one, red med http://logs.tf/1735515

Thanks!

Here ya go! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gXhvAGGJZo

posted 1 month ago
#75 Post a Medic demo, get a video response in Mentoring
deotf2Hey Mr. Slin,

My name is deo. This is a match in Asia Fortress Cup, division 3 Grand Final. Please help me to see where I actually did wrong and made mistakes since my teammates were blaming me for nearly everything and told me it was my fault that they lost the game. Thank you.

Link: https://mega.nz/#!1wZXzZLT!sFPAWToy8CrNJUfFSsOhdHgyWnDfsyeYJEk1-um60XE
deotf2Hey Mr Slin! I am deo in the most current video. Thank you for all your suggestions and I will always try to do the best I can in the future. I appreciate that! :)

Sure thing :D Sorry for not posting the video here, I tried to use a new format but I don't think it worked as well. Will return to the old one for future demo reviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qaKGf4YaHI&t=8s

posted 1 month ago
#37 Oldest comp TF2 players? in Off Topic

Where's Smaka

posted 1 month ago
#87 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
GentlemanJonMR_SLINGentlemanJonThe suggestion for the queueing problem could use some work, one game every 35 minutes is pretty clunky.I think you misunderstood the concept. It's one one game per 35 minutes, it's that each player plays one game per 35 minutes, which actually starts to sound pretty reasonable. Once the first round starts, all games begin at the same time so you could potentially have hundreds of games starting all at once. The most any one individual will have to wait for a round to start is 34 minutes and some change, but after they synchronize with the other games the queue times would become significantly shorter.No I understood but worded my response poorly. Only starting games every 35 minutes is a very clunky solution and very far from optimal user experience. There are no matchmaking systems I know that work like this apart from players at the extreme end of a ranking system in a game like LoL where top players can wait for ages because they're at the long tail of the ranking curve.

Gotcha. I agree that it's not optimal but I also think it's the best middleground step between a captain-only system that runs games every 13 minutes or so (starting around 3 games in 35 minutes), and a much more scalable solution like LoL dynamic queue. It's a shame we don't have that kind of player population :\

posted 1 month ago
#83 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
shorasThen how about combining automatic ELO-based picking with captaining? Say, the system picks 12 players out of 40 based on their ELO and then two captains pick their teams. Still better than completely getting rid of captaining (that I'm sure a lot of people like).

That's a really unique idea but it doesn't solve the problem that Invite / top level players have with abandoning PugChamp: while you often see some Invite players playing pugs with IM and even Open players, some other top Invite players hate playing with people who are not competent. Thus, if 11 Invite players are added to a system, they'd oftentimes rather wait an extra 10 minutes to get a 12th Invite player than fill the pug with an Open player. A captain-only system with no automatic picking allows you the freedom to stall out the start of a pug while you get that 12th person without forcing you to play with someone you don't like.

If we could solve this problem then I think it'd be easy to design a new system going that has no captaining.

posted 1 month ago
#80 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
shorasMR SLIN Imagine if 100 people are added to PugChamp. By the time you finish picking 3 pugs, B4nny and all of the invite players from the first pug are already added again. So at a certain point people aren't able to play as long as pugs are picked one at a time. If all pugs start at the same time you'd solve this problem and you can solve this by using a computer to pick teams based on skill rating.Just make drafts happen on a separate page (like faceit match page) so you can have more than 1 at a time?

The problem is, in order for captaining systems to really work, you really should be drawing from the entire pool of available players at any given point in time. The nice part of PugChamp right now is that if 40 people add up, the captains choose between the entire 40 people.

If you run two drafts at the same time for the same pool of 40 people, you'll run into conflicts. You could separate PugChamp into divisions, where you can add up to the division that best suits you (invite division, open division, ugc division) but I think automated picking does that same thing much better.

GentlemanJonThe suggestion for the queueing problem could use some work, one game every 35 minutes is pretty clunky.

I think you misunderstood the concept. It's one one game per 35 minutes, it's that each player plays one game per 35 minutes, which actually starts to sound pretty reasonable. Once the first round starts, all games begin at the same time so you could potentially have hundreds of games starting all at once. The most any one individual will have to wait for a round to start is 34 minutes and some change, but after they synchronize with the other games the queue times would become significantly shorter.

posted 1 month ago
#79 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
GentlemanJonMR_SLINThe code is all publicly available right now but it's polite to ask. You should have asked your co-worker about the legalities, it's not polite to ask, it's legally required. The code is unlicensed and subject to all normal copyright laws. Just because you can see it, it doesn't mean you can take it or make derivative works from it.

You don't have to lecture me, my dude. Pugchamp is fully open source.

posted 1 month ago
#69 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion

Okay, if that's the case, then by definition PugChamp is a pug and MixChamp is matchmaking.

So what I'm hoping for is to expand MixChamp's capacity, team balancing capabilities, and just overall fun factor for players of all skill levels by allowing more people to add at once. By starting pugs in waves, you can sync everyone up and ensure that games are balanced as well as possible. No matter what skill level you're at you should hopefully be able to find games with players of a similar skill level.

This differs from FACEIT in that you can add on a per-class level and get a skill rating on a per-class level, something that isn't offered by FACEIT at this time.

I suppose PugChamp could be left alone so nothing gets messed up there (nothing lost). You could bring skill ratings back for PugChamp but you could also just leave it off and then only bring back a public-facing skill rating for MixChamp.

posted 1 month ago
#67 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
Tino_Wait I am confused Slin. Are you making a pug system or a matchmaking system? Because what you suggested was not a pug system, it was a matchmaking system.

What's the difference, a pug is a group of 12 random people coming together and matchmaking them together is kind of the same thing. Maybe I'm getting my terms confused but let me know if i'm using the wrong word.

Does matchmaking presume that you match people by skill rating?

posted 1 month ago
#63 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
TobYou're getting ahead of yourself. First you need a playerbase... Once you have that you can start thinking about monetization. You can start advertising this very second to players on your stream, on youtube that you want to do this. Tell them to start playing mixchamp.

I can't get players to use a system that doesn't work at scale. This is the reason why people don't add up to FACEIT, why high level players don't play TF2Center, or why only users of a specific skill level play MixChamp.

The issue with MixChamp specifically is that once users fill the 12 required roles, it immediately boots up and begins the game. Because it doesn't wait for the entire pool of available players to add up, it struggles to balance games like a proper matchmaking system would.

Example:

  • 25 users are available to play. 10 of them are Invite players, 5 of them are Open, and 10 of them are UGC.
  • If they don't add up to MixChamp in exactly the right order (all Invite players first, then High Open, then Low Open, then UGC) the system will match it as first come first served.
  • Thus the pugs would likely be a mix of Invite, Open, and UGC players, so instead of two good pugs you get two bad ones.

This is why we suggest a system that queues up the games in waves. All 25 players are available for the computer to choose from at the time that you start the picking. This is simply not available in MixChamp right now. I agree that MixChamp is closer to what we're looking for than PugChamp, though.

//

Also Option A is a way to begin monetizing PugChamp without having to change anything else. Once PugChamp gets some money coming in they can purchase servers and the like.

posted 1 month ago
#60 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
Tino_So who's going to do all of the backend work required to spin up a new thing?

I think it's much better for this new service to be a for-profit endeavor whether it's FACEIT, TF2Center, Stadium, or ABC new service. Nothing can run for free like this, so you have to find a way to monetize.

Option A
Ask PugChamp if they're interested in pursuing a new monetization strategy. It's going to sound like a meme but here's what I'd do. I'd put ads on the website just like TFTV. Then I'd modify the PugChamp global chat so that if you subscribe at $4.99 per month you get no ads, a badge in the chat and next to your name on the picking interface, some sick emotes, and something cool in mumble tool (I'd find a way to recolor names or something).

The rest of it would come out of pocket and you can continue to accept donations.

Option B
Ask FACEIT to do it. They already have a monetization strategy and a will to develop a TF2 matchmaking system. Problem is, nothing they do for TF2 is because they love TF2. Everything they do for TF2 is really just a test run for a future copy pasta to their CS:GO offering, so if it doesn't work for CS:GO it doesn't work for TF2. I don't think queuing up for a service by class and class-specific skill ratings are something they're interested in developing.

Option C
Ask ESEA to do it. They've modified their pug experience in the past and I'd ask them to see if they're still interested in attracting TF2 users to their pug service. The downside with this option is that I guarantee they'd make users pay for ESEA Premium and I don't think it would scale as well if people had to pay to play. Also they have the same problem as FACEIT since everything they develop is for CS:GO and slightly adapted for use in TF2.

Option D
Ask TF2Center to do it. The main problem here is that the PugChamp value proposition is significantly different than their current product offering so I'm not sure they'd go for it. TF2Center is all about getting games started quickly with no balancing and you can play with your friends. PugChamp is about creating high quality games with solo queue only.

Option E
Ask Valve to do it. This one is also kind of a meme but a bunch of us know the devs and we can at least pitch them the idea of how they can improve their matchmaking service. Of course, they'd pursue their own ruleset, cater mostly to pubbers, and take two years to release a product so this is the worst option in the short term.

Option F
Rip the code from the PugChamp GitHub repo and spin up something new, with Erynn and Tsc's permission of course. I asked my coworker to see how much effort it would take to spin up a new service as a pet project and he said maybe 3-4 weeks for a good full stack developer, so I'd just need to see who is available in the community to pursue such an endeavor. Maybe I'd hit up the Stadium guys and see if they're still interested in building things.

posted 1 month ago
#56 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion
bearodactylTrying to reinvent the wheel and and make a whole new pug service from scratch is overcomplicating things, all that's needed now is more servers.

Agree, Bear. We as a community can sit here and talk about the improvements PugChamp can make: they can increase the number of servers, they can make the picking more efficient to reduce wait times, and they can work to enforce a code of conduct that prevents people from doing dumb things like killing pugs. All of these are good ideas.

However, at the end of the day, we're limited by the two developers who own the service, and there have been no major updates to PugChamp since August 2016. Unless we get them some help, we may have to explore alternatives. In my brief interaction with the team I learned that there weren't many resources available to expand the service since it's currently operating as a not-for-profit -- they can't pay for more servers, hire developers, or expand at the speed that the community wants them to. It feels to me like they're just doing basic upkeep as a service to the community while not taking the steps needed to quickly grow for the good of the scene. It's also hard to expect them to do so while they have other obligations like jobs and life and stuff.

I appreciate the dedication to the community that the PugChamp team has had thus far. It's an amazing service end-to-end and it serves its current purpose well. I'm just trying to push the limits to see how we can continue to grow TF2. While it's not optimal to spin up a new service, I'm looking at all options for the good of the scene and leaving all options on the table.

posted 1 month ago
#45 How to make PugChamp better in TF2 General Discussion

Hey Jarrett,

I understand that PugChamp hasn't seen much development since August 2016, as I talked to Erynn about this at length. I'm willing to look at starting something new if that's what it takes. At this point in time Erynn says she's still working on the site and still trying to develop it so I'm not necessarily trying to hijack her project. This whole thread started out for me as I was thinking of ways to expand PugChamp and grow the top end of the pugging scene.

I agree with a lot of you guys in this thread that maybe what we need is an improved MixChamp instead of an improved PugChamp. Take the auto-picking but adapt the system so that it can handle more than 12 players at once to create balanced teams. Assuming we use a good skill rating system, I think it would work then.

My motivation for expanding PugChamp is as follows:
1. I think pugging is the lifeblood of comp TF2 and I don't think there is a good option for new players to play 6s and get into the game. We begged Valve to create this experience for us but it didn't go very well, and we should look into taking matters into our own hands through 3rd party MM services. By creating a centralized pugging experience you have a path for players to play against people of the same skill level while also working towards playing against higher level players.

2. PugChamp is already pretty successful and has most of the playerbase. I'm not looking to get 100 people in the queue right away, I was simply looking for a way to expand PugChamp past the 36 person capacity problem. First we make it possible for 40 people to add up, then work towards 60, 80, 100 as we expand. As many of you mention in the thread you've never seen 40 people add up to PugChamp and it's not because nobody knows the site exists -- it's because the 40th person knows they won't get picked. Rather than waiting around to not get picked they go to other services that cater to new players instead like TF2Center and MixChamp. Newbie Mixes are great but aren't scalable since they only happen at a specific time of the week and require a lot of manpower. Automated picking can solve this.

3. If we have an idea for sustainable pugging at scale then I'd knock on every door and see if they could build it and how much time it would take. If MixChamp can't do it then I'd ask FACEIT or Valve or whoever. I've also asked some of my co-workers to see if they'd be willing to contribute lol. It's a pet project for sure, but I feel it's a good cause.

I'm not really asking you guys to do the work I'm just trying to get your help to vet the idea. If any of you are software developers that's a plus.

posted 1 month ago
1 2 3 4 ⋅⋅ 257