Board index DeFRaG Competitions DFWC 2017

DFWC2017 Survey results

DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:45 am

Hello everyone!

Thanks to everyone who participated in DFWC and filled out the survey questions.

Today I will share the following survey details with you:

- General notes about the survey
- The winning map maker, with charts
- Charts from other questions
- Point-making summary of what you guys wrote in free-text questions, and my comments to that
- Some notes/suggestions for the next DFWC organization

So, lets begin with

General notes about the survey

Many people didn't paste their personal tokens - apparently they didn't understand what is the token there. We may need to rethink the survey process next time.

Some players voted twice - once with an invalid token, and once with a valid. Only 1 vote with the valid token was accepted then.
Some players used their nicknames instead of the tokens. If the nickname appeared only once in the list, and this player participated in DFWC2017, and his real token didn't appear in other votes, then the vote was accepted. Same if the player used a random word in the token field, but I could identify the player by the email. In these cases I replaced the nickname by the real token for security purposes (if someone wanted to leave his map votes anonymous). I will share all the votes/answers below, so that everyone with a valid token can find his own answers by the token, yet the answers are anonymous to others.

I failed to identify some of the players by either token or email, and I exclueded these votes from results. I could not even know if they participated or not. Anyway, I read through all the comments. Below are the tokens that were excluded because of this:

- Donaldduck8 ([nM] Donald?) - not sure I identified him correctly due to invalid token. Anyway, [nM] Donald didn't participate
- ace
- fakir - (it is NOT frAk1R)
- Menowa
- Ezyoda
- Lookovichka
- traitor
- ServuS
- Moti
- nikt
- shibby / shib / [<3]
- viewer77
- 123
- rickoshea
- qwad

I identified some players by either token or email, but they didn't participate. I excluded them from voting, but I read through all the comments:

- xlarve
- hades
- idm
- xloctis

So here we come to the most interesting part - the winning map maker!
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:49 am

Best map contest

Long story short: Some maps had really close results, and the winner (with a small margin) is map number 5.
Congratulations to Kabcorp!

Below are distributions of votes per each map.
Note: these scales are relative (in percentage), and some charts have different top caps - e.g. 40% or 60%. So comparing the height of the bars from different charts may be wrong.
Note: if you're a map maker, small number of points doesn't necessarily mean your map was bad. I mean it may or may not. Consider the following: I liked every map but I have a strict rank for them in my mind. I have to give my favourite map 5 points, then the next map gets 4 points etc. So few points may still mean that your map was good, but other maps were a bit better.
Round1.png

Round2.png

Round3.png

Round4.png

Round5.png

Round6.png

Round7.png

The following table shows the points deserved by each map for both visual design and gameplay, as well as average scores per player.
points_table.png

So the top-3 maps are:
1st place - Round 5 with 926 points (average 7.983 per player)
2nd place - Round 4 with 924 points (average 7.966 per player)
3rd place - Round 6 with 917 points (average 7.905 per player)
What a tense fight, huh!?

The final chart here is the stacked sum of points that each map deseved for both visual design and gameplay.
avg_design_n_gameplay_pts_stacked.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:50 am

Results of other questions


How many maps should there be in a perfect DFWC?
Google forms make an uggly chart for this question, due to many custom answers. However, we can see that most people voted for 7 maps. A bit less people voted for 6, and less for 8.
how_many_maps.png

I went through all the answers and tried to figure out the average value. If someone wrote "5-8", then I counted it as 6.5. Someone wrote there should be an even number like 6, and one of them is out of competition - I counted it as 5.
Finally, I got the average number of 7.2. And that's great, because in my opinion it has to be an odd number - we need a tie-breaker just in case. Remember Dex and Strangeland having equal scores after 6 rounds of DFWC2017?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:51 am

How many STRAFE maps should there be in a perfect DFWC?
Again, an uggly chart, but most people voted for (descending) 2, 3 and 1.
how_many_strafes.png

I went through the custom answers again. "2 or 3" translated to 2.5, "50%" translated to 3.5 (half of 7 maps), "one third of all" translated to 2.33 (which is 7 / 3) etc.
I got an average of 2.6.
Besides, multiple players asked for a map or two that are mostly strafes but with some weapon tricks too. Quote: "I would like to see more mostly strafe maps, i.e. long strafe sections on maps with weapons."
So the bottom line here is that there has to be 2 out of 7 pure strafe maps, and one more map that has long strafe sections intermixed with a few weapon tricks (plasma, rockets etc). Makes sense?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:52 am

Do we need an out-of-competition warmup round?
55.2% said a solid NO,
28.4% said a solid YES.
do_we_need_warmup_round.png

I read through the rest answers, took the reasoning into consideration, and changed the answers to a solid yes or no accordingly. There were only 5 participants who could not make any choice - I counted them as a NO, because well, we don't usually have a spare map. If we have a good map, then why not count its results in competition?
After this review of reasonings, I got 66.9% saying we do NOT need an out-of-competition warmup round.
The best reasons mentioned for a warmup round were to check settings/environment. Well, we can pick an old map and use it for setup test purposes. Like st1 or pcd or whatever. No need to consider it part of ongoing DFWC.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:53 am

What is the optimal DFWC duration, regardless of the number of maps?
Most participants said from 6 to 8 weeks, more like 8.
dfwc_duration.png

Again, I read through the custom answers and tried to come up with an average number. Answers like "1 week per map" counted as 7 (weeks), unless stated another number of rounds. Answers like "1 week per map, and more for the final round" counted as 8 (weeks). Some players said 3 or 4 days per round - I counted it as 0.5 of a week.
Believe it or not, I got the average of 6.69 weeks!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:54 am

Were overlapping rounds useful?
See the results in the attached picture.
overlapping_rounds.png

Among the custom answers there are a bit more answers against overlapping, rather than for it.
Mentioned advantages:
+ helps to manage time
+ extra time to think about routes in advance
Mentioned disadvantages:
- hard to focus on one map
- overlapping helps players in clans (stronger players spend time searching for good routes; weaker players can explore the new map, and then play the previous map in its last day when all the routes have been found)
- even harder if you play both physics

Given the confident answers in the picture above, and custom answers with reasonings, I'd say we have a tie in this question. Maybe we should make maps overlap but for a shorter period? Make them overlap 1 or 2 days? Or just do not overlap at all, I don't know.
As a map tester and demo validator, I found it more difficult to have maps overlap:
a) I need to double and triple check the new map in the middle of an ongoing round
b) I need to validate demos from the previous or sometimes pre-previous round
c) I want to spend at least a little bit of time actually playing the current round, even though I do not aim for a high rank.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:54 am

What engine should anticheat be based on next time?
Surprisingly, most players don't care! - 29.3%
22.4% want it to be based on iDFe, and 18.1% are ok with the current iodfengine implementation.
engine.png

Among custom answers, most popular answers are like "any one" or "any one that doesn't lag".
I myself find iDFe to be the best candidate. We are looking towards merging anticheat stuff into iDFe, but we need KG7x to share the source code for that :? Anticheat features demand more security than convenience/performance features do. If we implement anticheat based on iDFe, we will please everyone:
a) we will still have iodfengine-based anticheat for iodfe lovers,
b) we will have iDFe-based anticheat for iDFe lovers (good performance, new features), and
c) dfengine lovers probably just haven't tried iDFe yet :dance:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:55 am

Responsiveness of DFWC 2017 team
responsiveness.png

I think we did pretty well, but not perfect. We should iterate it on dfwc website, q3df website and forum that the main communication channel shifted to discord for the sake of faster issue resolution. Website and forum are still good for the public and official announcements. And if you don't get your issue solved in a public channel, feel free to ping your favourite DFWC organizer in a direct message.
The custom answers are like "I didn't need any help". There was also a player who couldn't make the anticheat client run on his x64 Linux. Sorry for that :( We'll try to fix it next time.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Re: DFWC2017 Survey results

Postby dqopb » Jan 22nd, '18, 11:55 am

Competence of DFWC 2017 team
competence.png

Most of bad custom answers are from players unhappy with anticheat client quality (FPS, mouse input), or map testing (too hard maps, too long maps, invisible walls).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dqopb
 
Posts: 178
Joined: May 2nd, '12, 8:48 am
Location: Belarus

Next

cron