Rating system

[Ray]

Hey!
here is the topic to discuss the rating system, but I guess you figured out this from the title of the topic but I felt like writing this spam shit down. xD
OK, so seriously. I think the rating for the "classic league" is just perfect like in XTC. 500 for start, 30 points are moving between the players, depending on the ratio and the difference between the two players.
XTC counts the overall score by summarizing the difference of schemes from 500. Here is an example:
Elite: 530
WXW: 510
BnG: 490
T17: 480
RR: 540
Roper: 510
Overall: 560
In every game, they take the scores of each schemes as a base to count from. Those 30 points are moving there, and at the end it is calculated to the overall score as I showed.

I hope you could understand. This rating system is perfect in my opinion.

[WookA]

yeah this system worked good in xtc, another thing we need to figure out is if ratings will be reset at the end of a season or stay the same, id guess make a vote... or maybe give people the option to reset their own rating

[MonkeyIsland]

Well, I gotta say let's not copy.
This site till now has been so unique and I'm planning to keep it this way. Let XTC keep its own rating system for itself.
I'm sure we can have something different for TUS. Not totally different but still not a cheap copy.

[Rok]

I personaly don't like xtc's rating system very much.

My option would be a system similar than the one in cbc league, which is i think based on chess rating system (ELO). So is xtc, but with different starting points and rating changes.

The basics of my proposition are same as in xtc, but instead at 500, scheme rating would start at 1000. We'd keep the calculation for overall rating - simply adding together scheme ratings. Rating change for wins/loses would remain the same, 0-30 points (rounded to whole numbers, without decimals), with a little adjustment, for example so that high ranked player would win at least 2 or 3 points when winning against low ranked player.

A problem is, when a less skilled player plays a lot of games and loses most of them, his rating quickly drops very low (like 100 or 200 in xtc), which is imo a little discouraging, especialy for new players and playing against that player isn't rewarding anymore. That's why we'd set a lowest limit to which rating can drop (in cbc league ratings couldn't go lower than 1000 points). That way good players would easily go over 2000, less skilled wouldn't drop down to 0.
These are more or less cosmetic changes, but doesn't it feel better to have rating of 2500 than 800?

We'd have 2 ratings, one for season standings, which would be reseted after every season, and the overall rating, which would show player's performance over a longer period of time.

Would this way be unique enough?

[WookA]

i like your idea rok, only problem i see with it is 1000 points being the lowest your rating can go, it makes it easier for people to noob bash or for people to help eachother out by losing on purpose, i think the best way to solve that problem is to allow a rating reset maybe once a season? or whatever people want

[Ray]

I personally didn't get your point WookA, could you explain it a little more? :\
But yes, Rok has given us a nice idea.

[MonkeyIsland]

Wooka is right about losing on purpose. I guess the solution is having no limit. So people would care to keep their lovely points

I always laughed at these TV matches, when the people have "thousands" of points. 
Personally, I prefer to have points with decimal than having thousands of points

A problem is, when a less skilled player plays a lot of games and loses most of them, his rating quickly drops very low (like 100 or 200 in xtc),which is imo a little discouraging,

Jackdaniel in dP inner league lost at the beginning and his rank became negative. having minus points made him kick a lot of asses to make his rank positive. ( dP starts with 0 points)

I think maybe we could set it like, If a person with lower points beat someone with higher points, then more points than usual he must gain and vise versa.
This thing won't be applied to close points. I will set a rank to each range of points, so that if someone with lower rank beat someone with higher rank ...

[WookA]

I personally didn't get your point WookA, could you explain it a little more? :\
But yes, Rok has given us a nice idea.

say we start the season at 1000, but some1 keeps losing and ends up with a really low rating and wants a fresh start, my idea was giving them the option to reset it to 1000 once a season (only once to avoid people getting too many points for easy wins) i think this would encourage people to be more active, even if they lose alot

[MonkeyIsland]

Wouldn't it give him the chance to lose to his friend as much as he want right before he reset?

"Hey Monkey, need any points? I wanna reset!!"

lol

[Ray]

here is another idea: start from 1000 but cannot get under 700 or something like that

[MonkeyIsland]

Still will give same damage, but a bit later.

How about some "Loan" option?  Someone could request TUS some loan IF his point are under 1000.
And pay back that loan when his points gets more than 1000 + the loan he borrowed or something like that xD

[WookA]

Wouldn't it give him the chance to lose to his friend as much as he want right before he reset?

"Hey Monkey, need any points? I wanna reset!!"

lol

yea you have a point, but i guess there really is no way it can be 100% avoided

and what happens if there was a limit to how low rating goes... what happens if that person loses? their scheme ratings and everything stay the same?

[MonkeyIsland]

I say as long as he is losing, He must lose his points. But maybe set it like he could come to top  bit easier. 

Like I said, I will use worms 20 ranks : giving people "Absolute Beginner" to "Elite" ranks.
Now let's say a standard points to gain is 10 : If you win you gain 10 points and maybe your opponent lose 10 points. 
One of the ranks trick will be this : If an "Absolute Beginner" member beat a "Major" member, then he will gain way more than 10 points (standard points) and vise versa.
One of its good features is, people won't keep playing noobs to add to their points. There's no surprise when a "General" beat a "Novice". So maybe he gain less than 10 points...

To sum it up, when someone keep losing, his rank will become lower BUT his chance to gain back his point will increase. 
 

[Ray]

Good idea here.

[Rok]

and what happens if there was a limit to how low rating goes... what happens if that person loses? their scheme ratings and everything stay the same?

It would only affect wins/loses record and season rating. Overall rating wouldn't go lower than certain limit.

here is another idea: start from 1000 but cannot get under 700 or something like that

That's what i was thinkin too.

I always laughed at these TV matches, when the people have "thousands" of points. 
Personally, I prefer to have points with decimal than having thousands of points

Ratings will not go that sky high, trust me.

i like your idea rok, only problem i see with it is 1000 points being the lowest your rating can go, it makes it easier for people to noob bash or for people to help eachother out by losing on purpose

Noob bashing cannot be completely avoided in any system, i believe. A good player will not benefit much from a player with 1000 rating. Sure, when the league will start and everybody will start from 1000, it will be easy for pros to gain rating, but their ratings would increase quickly so that noobbashing would become a waste of time. 6 or 7 wins vs a rookie is the same as 1 win vs an equaly rated player.