Best Host for the opponent

The host will need to be the better for the most of players in the game (8 players) and not only for our team (4 players). This rule will be official from the ZombieSlayinGod #5.

By exemple, if a team of 2 US and 2 EU players need to play against a team of 4 EU players, this team will need to select one EU player like host and not one US players. However, to select their US host, the team can replace the 2 EU players by 2 US players if these substitutes are US.

__________

What do you think about the teams compounded by at least two players from differents country in the goal to select the worst host for the opponent?

Since the Cashmoney Town tournament, QOADRICORN has the idea to form a team with 2 differents country with different host to handicap the opponent.

It was firstly with Argentina players from the BKN team (CRISTOPHER & Alonso), then now, with my last French teammates (jeanyves, Rageux & magoul).

For me, it's not a cheating, at the moment of the host has the better connection of the team (biggest bandwidth). But it's also not a good stategy and I will explain why after.

In the futur, do we need to let the choice of a team to select the host by strategu, to we need to oblige to take the better host for the opponent?

Last edited by YoPlixBoy25 on Mon 3 Aug - 0:55; edited 11 times in total

thats cheating simple as that !!! just unfair players would do that , like qoad did today but we still won

I completed my first message, go to read Priceless !

This is not a cheating for the moment because the rules said to use the better host from its own team, but no necessarily for the opponent. It's why I ask now if we need to change this thing.

Anyway for me, this is not really a good strategy.

I used an exemple with these conditions :
- All the players have the same bandwidth (~900 kbps).
- The host has always 4 bars.
- The players from the same country of the host has generaly 3 good bars.
- An European has 1 bar with a South America (Argentina) host every time.
- An European has 1 bar with a Japanese host every time.
- An European has 3 bad bars with a North American host generally.

An exemple of a match 2v2 with two opposite connections :
- Team A = 2 European
- Team B = 1 European + 1 Argentina

Game 1, the Team A host (European host) :
- Team A has 4 & 3 bars = 7 bars
- Team B has 3 & 1 bars = 4 bars
- Handicap of connection for the Team B = -3 bars

Games 2, the Team B host (Argentina host) :
- Team A has 1 a 1 bar = 2 bars
- Team B has 4 & 1 bars = 5 bars
- Handicap of connection for the Team A = -3 bars

It will be always balanced at the end, so it's a "false" strategy finally.
I can post other exemples if need.

lol sorry yoplix but that does not make any sense at all. u cant count the bars and decide if its a handicap XD

I know this is not the better, but the sole element to give information about the quality of the connection during the game.

I sure there are also others exemple where there are disadvantage, but it's only for the case where we have 3 differents country during the match, like our 4v4 against BKN from the CashMoney Tournament :
- Team A = 4 European
- Team B = 2 US + 2 Argentina

Game 1, the Team A host (European host) :
- Team A has 4 + 3x3 bars = 13 bars
- Team B has 2x3 + 2x1 bars = 8 bars
- Handicap of connection for the Team B = -5 bars

Games 2, the Team B host (Argentina host) :
- Team A has 4x1 bar = 4 bars
- Team B has 4 + 3 + 2x2 bars = 11 bars
- Handicap of connection for the Team A = -7 bars

In this case, this is a problem !!

Last edited by YoPlixBoy25 on Tue 12 Aug - 1:01; edited 2 times in total

I go to add a poll

well i think , for example , if its a 2v2 or 4v4, and you have 3 of 4 or 7 of 8 players from europe and 1 player from the usa tl, then the usa player cant be host . a american 3 bar is worse then a european 2 bar , its delay because of distance .

There are exemples of there are disavantages, but I think, as said in my first exemple, it was not a real disadvantage in your game. I will check the bars tomorrow for the broadcast.

Also, why to have wait to play this famous match to protest against this thing?

I remember you that it was autorized from March (CashMoney Tourney), and considered like a liberty, at the moment of the host is the better of the team.

Priceless_Legacy wrote:

lol yes i press select to check the bars but you cant count them to see a disadvantage , because european 3 bar is not american 3 bar , for example , if elpablune is host i have 3 bar but the connection is very good , but if qoadricorn hosts or an other american person i have 3 bar but the connection is terrible for me because the distance is to huge . also there are some european players that have terrible connection like jeanyves , bellidez or joel . if they host you get 3 bar just because you get a good signal but the connection is still awful . so a 3 bar is not always a 3 bar , you haven't explained anything of this in your suggestion

[Only admins are allowed to see this link]

I'm not stupid, and I already played many games to know that there are differents 3 bars, it's said here there are 3 good bars and 3 bad bars

YoPlixBoy25 wrote:

- The players from the same country of the host has generaly 3 good bars.
- An European has 1 bar with a South America (Argentina) host every time.
- An European has 1 bar with a Japanese host every time.
- An European has 3 bad bars with a North American host generally.

It's just to simplify the things because the bars are ONLY about the Ping, you know what is the Ping?

Actually it goes like :
- 4 bars = 0-100ms
- 3 bars = 100-200ms
- 2 bars = 200-300ms
- 1 bar = +300ms
(official sources)

So the impression that the 3 bars is good with EU and bad with US is because :
- 3 bars US = ~190ms certainly (almost 2 bars)
- 3 bars EU = ~110ms certainly (almost 4 bars)
But 2 bars US or EU will be always worst than 3 bars US or EU.

It is inversely proportional, more we have bar, smallest is the ping :
Color : red < yellow- < yellow+ < green
Bar (nb) : 1bars < 2bars < 3bars < 4bars
Ping (ms) : 300ms > 200 ms > 100 ms > 0 ms

Last edited by YoPlixBoy25 on Wed 13 Aug - 19:14; edited 4 times in total

Correction :

For an European player :
- 3 bars US = ~190ms certainly (almost 2 bars)
- 3 bars EU = ~110ms certainly (almost 4 bars)

As you are more smart, suggest me your solution to measure the hadicap of the connection for a team over the other during a game without to use the bars (ms ping).

If you don't like the sum of "bars" (interval of ms), I can do the sum of the ms directly by the impressions according the difference with 3 bars of EU and 3 bars of US

4 bars for host = 0ms (answer directly)
4 bars for teammates = ~50ms
3 bars from EU = ~110ms
3 bars from US = ~190ms
2 bars = ~250ms
1 bar = ~350ms

More the Ping of the team is big (ms), less the connection is good.

Also, we need to add some differences for the US, because it's huge :
US West = ~270ms
US Middle = ~230ms
US East = ~190ms

Also I forget to say, 3 bars for QOADRICORN because he's from CANADA, from Montreal and he has a really good connection (optic fiber). I think it's the better host from America for the European.

[Only admins are allowed to see this image]

I will creat a "map of connection" for the European players to help everybody.

ya i know these things but the point is like i said , i can take you for example , you always made jeanyves host because you knew that he has terrible connection and it will make thd enemies lag , on jeanyves connection every european should have 3 or 4 bar but it doesn't matter because his connection is crap

At the past, it was really the sole of the team to have the better connection. He had ~800 kbps, bebert and me ~700 kbps, Canaflo ~600 kbps, magoul ~200 kbps. We just have all an ethernet connection. More than is as I'm broadcast all my games from 2014, I cannot be the host. Why do you complain about our host if I say you he was our better?

lol because he is not , jeanyves was the worst host .vi played already on canaflos and magoulls connection and it was good , but jeanyves connection is terrible . also when i see some videos from your team jeanyves is always the only ,together with you who has 3 bar . so i dont think that he was the best host is true

Yes, this not the case now but he was really the best in the past I say you (biggest bandwidth).

Exemple during the CashMoney Tournament, we are 4, me, jeanyves, magoul, Canaflo :
- I broadcasted in live all my games, so I had ~300 kbps (I go in the red bars all the 5 minutes).
- Canaflo lived in a camping area at this period, bad connection, he had ~600 kbps
- magoul had its last host, when he times-up 1/2 times, he had ~200 kbps. I will show you that we had all 1bar with him (worst than a Japanese host).
- and jeanyves had ~800 kbps.

Yes, we had all bad connection but he was the best, it's sure !

More is than, jeanyves was the main Griefer of the team, so it was our strategy to use him like host because he had a good advantage to Grief the opponents by this way.

Stop to think we was an unfair team to use a bad host to win our games, some of our opponents really used, THEM, their bad host, (like CRISTOPHER from the BKN Team) and we accepted this thing without claim like you, and we won all our matches.


So this topic mainly just to say that the choice of the host is not finally a huge disadvantage, at the moment where you beleive that the opponent use their bad host, you can do the same thing for your game. It's just this main excuse for the bad losers to say "because of the connection". We just need to adapt out game about the connection. I had already disclosed all our tricks here :
[Only admins are allowed to see this link]

And I find there are more and more games won with the opponent host these last months (UHC, etc..), you too you won the 5th game against the BKN Team I see.

After to have check some elements in the Communidad Zombies tournament about the JIZZZ games, I will say if this suggestion will become an official general rule for all the next tournaments.

so it is ok when i am host and give everyone 1 bar???

No why?
You lost your match 3-0 because of the connection again? ...