TEL-System - Need a change?

[Rok]

Yeah, I noticed, I just didn't want to review my whole post  

EDIT: You still didn't convince me.

B): It's exactly the same thing atm, it's just, well, it spans over multiple seasons, heh.

At first glance it seems like loser would lose about half the points they'd get if they won, right? I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but TUS system worked like that in first few seasons. It didn't really work well, you might check it out.

[franz]

HHC, so how is the overall ranking changing? you only talked about points won for the season rank

[HHC]

Hmm franz, do you know whether it adds the same amount of points to the overall rating as to the season rating right now? e.g. when you win and get 55 pts, do you get them for both season and overall?

In that case you need to seperate the two.
Let the overall rating work like it does now (calculating games based on just the overall rating) and next to it, let the season rating be compiled with the help of the new technique (use both overall and season rating to calculate the pts for a match).
You'll get two # of points for each match, a certain number gets added to your overall (55) and an other number to your season rank (like 24).

I really don't think this should be a major issue codewise.

[franz]

so on the flip side.. if 556 ranked Peja beats 1559 ranked me, he won't get the 72 point boost to season ranking as it would be like right now.. he gets only like 62 points since his season ranking would be 1000.  but then you're saying the overall rankings will still be hit with the +/-72?

just clarifying

Edit: I don't know, maybe MI can jump into the conversation and talk about how overall/season points change per game because I'm not exactly sure if it's how I think it is

[HHC]

B): It's exactly the same thing atm, it's just, well, it spans over multiple seasons, heh.

In practice, it's a world of difference.

At first glance it seems like loser would lose about half the points they'd get if they won, right? I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but TUS system worked like that in first few seasons. It didn't really work well, you might check it out.

It may be true for the above case, where both players have a seasonal ranking lower than the overall one. As soon as Nino levels his overall ranking with his seasonal ranking (that is, accumulate a season ranking of 1483), then he'd lose 55 pts again like in the old situation.

But I see your point. If Random and Nino, both with an overall rating of say 5000, would play against each other at the very start of the season (with seasonal ratings of 1000), then the winner would get 80 points, while the loser would lose only 1 or 2.

I don't see this as being a big problem though. As said to Franz, the overall ranking runs seperately, so they would not get 80 points added there.
The only real shitty thing about it is that Nino and Random could cooperate together to quickly accumulate a gigantic score. (If they agree to 1-1 they both win a smashing 78 points in the current season).
=This does seem like a major issue though, but I don't know if people are really that lame). Either way, in early season, the good players will quicly gain rank this way if they play half-decent players. As soon as they hit the 3000 mark or so, any such cheating is no longer possible).

[HHC]

so on the flip side.. if 556 ranked Peja beats 1559 ranked me, he won't get the 72 point boost to season ranking as it would be like right now.. he gets only like 62 points since his season ranking would be 1000.  but then you're saying the overall rankings will still be hit with the +/-72?

just clarifying

Yes.

[franz]

The only real shitty thing about it is that Nino and Random could cooperate together to quickly accumulate a gigantic score. (If they agree to 1-1 they both win a smashing 78 points in the current season).
=This does seem like a major issue though, but I don't know if people are really that lame). Either way, in early season, the good players will quicly gain rank this way if they play half-decent players. As soon as they hit the 3000 mark or so, any such cheating is no longer possible).

well then I think most of these people requesting a change will NOT like this.. because they've already mentioned that they hate the idea of guys with overall rank easily getting into great playoff positions

[HHC]

Im not sure if you're not making it bigger than it really is franz. A lot of players have 1200+ ranks at the moment. All of them will be worth quite a few points. Something like 50 to 80.

The more games you play for the season, the faster these scores will start to dwindle down to 0. Sure it can give you a jump start, but I think all the other players will experience a similar jumpstart as well (unless they play only players with an overall rank of 900 or so..). It doesn't give the good players an extra advantage, as everyone else can play against these players as well and gain an equal amount of points.

The problem I'm having is that winners and losers no longer gain or lose an equal ammount of points. This can lead to games that have a negative balance or a very positive one (like described above). In case of the latter... a 1-1 or 10-10 can give both players a whole lot of points, rather than keep the overall balance at 0 points. This can easily be used to farming points early in the season.
But like I said, other players will find it easy to harvest a lot of points as well, and there is a point in the season (when season ratings start to match or outgrow the overall ones), that such abuse can no longer take place.
On the other hand, if Dark and SPW are both at 7000 overall points.. it would be fairly easy for them to translate this into 7000 season points just by playing 1-1 against eachother, without ever damaging their overall ranking.

[franz]

yeah, I don't know.. it seems like a lot of complexities for not as much 'proven' benefit..

your main goal seemed to be to stop the bashing early in the season and still retain benefits of an overall rank.. but I fear it's also introducing newer problems, like the one you mentioned.  it just makes me uneasy because not every scenario has been fleshed out perfectly and made clear that this really is the best solution.

[Rok]

The way I see this idea of yours, HHC, it's just some fiddling with numbers, unnecessary complicated, and not representing what ratings should represent, that is the skill of a player. Why not just have +2/-1 points then, it's simple and it works basically the same  

If you're really interested in a better rating system, have a look at Glicko rating system: http://www.glicko.net/glicko.html. It takes into account the activity of the players - the players who play more have a higher rating accuracy and thus gain better points than those who play infrequently or are only just starting. IMO, it would be ideal for a worms league. You only need to persuade MonkeyIsland to code it

[franz]

people seem to like the simplicity of starting fresh.. and with such a small community as ours, we can usually figure out who is trying to mess with the system and call them out (or just try to play them to knock them down).  it can't hurt that much either to let all sub1000 rated players have a confidence boost at the beginning of a new season starting at 1000.  maybe it gives them some nice hope to continue playing and try to get better.

it's not perfect.. but is the current system perfect either? I could support either system. I really don't mind what system is in place.  I just enjoy playing, and I hope whatever system is used also helps to keep players happy and enjoying the league.  that should be the main goal I think with our unique community.

[HHC]

yeah, I don't know.. it seems like a lot of complexities for not as much 'proven' benefit..

your main goal seemed to be to stop the bashing early in the season and still retain benefits of an overall rank.. but I fear it's also introducing newer problems, like the one you mentioned.  it just makes me uneasy because not every scenario has been fleshed out perfectly and made clear that this really is the best solution.

I tend to think things through firmly. As I see it, there's just 1 complexity. If we can work around that flaw in some manner we've got the ideal system IMO. Sure it needs to be tried and tested, but that goes for every other system as well. I don't think there are any major issues to expect, other than the one mentioned.

And I may possibly have the cure: namely limit the max amount of points to gain from a match from 80 to say 60.. and at the same time increase the min amount of points that you get for a loss to 20. This way Random and Nino would gain only 40 points from playing 1-1, rather than nearly 80. With a tight control on replays provided here on TUS, those 40 points gained hardly weigh up against the time consumed getting the draw. You might as well play other people and gain over a 100 pts there if you can finish it 2-0.

The way I see this idea of yours, HHC, it's just some fiddling with numbers, unnecessary complicated, and not representing what ratings should represent, that is the skill of a player. Why not just have +2/-1 points then, it's simple and it works basically the same.

If you're really interested in a better rating system, have a look at Glicko rating system: http://www.glicko.net/glicko.html. It takes into account the activity of the players - the players who play more have a higher rating accuracy and thus gain better points than those who play infrequently or are only just starting. IMO, it would be ideal for a worms league. You only need to persuade MonkeyIsland to code it.

Talking about fiddling with numbers lol. There was no easy way to explain it Rok, but in practice it's just a matter of editing like 2 lines of code, nothing more.
Ratings with my system will reflect the skill of a player a lot more than starting out from scratch each season. This sytem has the major advantage of taking into account the skill level of your opponent right from the start of the season. The old TUS system does that too, but does not allow independent, fresh season ratings, while mine does.

[avirex]

i support new rating every season....


but i have an idea, it stems from a post komo made *gasp*


at the start of each season.. players have 0 points, and all sart with a handicap of 10.


for every loss, your individual handicap will go down a point... so when i start a fresh season of TEL, and i lose 5 games in a row... my handicap will then be 5...

lets pretend mablak beat me all 5 games.... first game he won 10 season points, second game 9, then 8, then 7 then 6..... he now has 40 seasonal points and a handicap of 15....

from this point on, beating me only gains any particular person 5 points... (if i lose again, ill go down to 4)

each player has that ability to go down to a handicap of 1, depending on their losing streak...


ok, so now lets say im a handicap 4... and i beat mablak, who is handicap 15... i will gain 15 seasong points, and mablak will be knocked down 1 handicap...   

pretty simple concept, and i cant think of anything negative about it....

[avirex]

ahhh nevermind.. that wont work... just thought about it.. lol... som1 at 1 handicap can just only play mablak/random/etc type players.. if they lose, who cares they only lose 1 point, but if they win.. CHA CHING....

if everyone was fair, the system would be great... but this would just encourage avoiding... nvm

[Husk]

well, tbh first i thought its not really fair a player gets 15 wins from me, but the matches were more balanced then the others i got on tel.

Maybe somethink, if players like me play tel its not good cause of skills. To fix it we could do a system which includes 2 leagues. in league A are the better players, in league B dudes like me. The best and worst Players would change Leagues in next season. but dunno how to put each player in a league. just an idea.

maybe we r onto something right here. top 20 to first league and rest to second league. at the end of the seasons, first league's lowest 5 would change places with second league's top 5, or summit like that.