ELO implementation, half baked?

Chat about anything and everything Frozen Synapse

Moderator: Admins

Post Reply
TheRaven42
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:06 pm

ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by TheRaven42 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:31 pm

-edit-
My initial reaction was based on ELO calculations that were wrong. looks like things have settled out and it looks much better. Scores are much closer and no one feels "out of reach".
Getting the UI in line with the results screen and match histories using ELO as well is still needed.
-edit-



Ok, don't get me wrong. I think its a step in the right direction, but some issues.

I posted on the blog: Open challenges are now less appealing without knowing who I will get matched up with. potentially high risk vs reward. Matchmaking needs to take score into account. or allow for un-scored matches when you want to just play 'for fun'.

Second: interface is not completely switched over. There are still old score modifiers in game history, results screen, etc, and its very confusing. Splash screen at the beginning of a match should say the points at stake (this is new I know).

Without a score reset, it does not solve the problems with the ranking system. it still takes many many games(even more now) to gain rank.
Example:
Bin: 6443
Raeynn: 4918
difference = 1525
If Raeynn wins every match against say Beefiest to get max points) it would take at least 50 wins (probably more) to rank up. Is Bin (or theBeefiest) that much better? I really doubt it.

I'm sure someone can do better math than me, but I still think a score reset is needed. Erasing all pre-release games at the very least, you know which games were played when (or you could not calculate ELO) so its possible to delete based on date.
Last edited by TheRaven42 on Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Omroth
Site Admin
Posts: 1825
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:07 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Omroth » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:35 pm

Hi TheRaven42.

Thanks very much for this - we're investigating everything right now. We want to get the right system.

Ian
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Paul » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:36 pm

We're definitely considering a score reset but there are apparently some objections - if anyone has any I'd like to hear them, as we're probably going ahead with that soon.
Paul Kilduff-Taylor

Mode 7 Games
User avatar
Omroth
Site Admin
Posts: 1825
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:07 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Omroth » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:36 pm

I'd just like to say that we're LEANING towards a score reset at this time... but no decisions have been made yet.
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Paul » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:39 pm

We are LEANING.
Paul Kilduff-Taylor

Mode 7 Games
7h30n
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:41 am

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by 7h30n » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:43 pm

I think it would be good from time to time to do that. Perhaps like once or twice a year (somethig like Seasons in StarCraft 2)
teratoma
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 8:24 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by teratoma » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:44 pm

I really don't care about the scores. I have never played any game because I was focused on rising up on the leader boards. I play games because I like playing them. And really, it seems that because there is scoring and leader boards at all it encourages people to play cheaply (accepting all challenges and only playing ones they start at an advantage, and rage quitting when about to lose).

But, everyone starting on a level playing field, only the worst players would be against that. Really, who would claim any skill AND be against the chance to prove it?

I vote: remove or reset scoring.
User avatar
urbanhusky
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:16 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by urbanhusky » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:51 pm

Personally, I'd like to vote against a score reset since I do not see any gain in resetting the scores.
Also I really like the score I have and would hate to see that gone - all the hours, days I've invested would basically be gone in an instant.
Rakshasa
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:48 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Rakshasa » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:55 pm

I did not play in the beta and really dislike the idea of a score reset.

I care about my score and I've played a lot of games to get to where I am. I look at my rank as a direct expression of my progress in the game. A reset levels the playing field, sure, but it also erases all my progress. Right now all that's really out of reach for someone like me are like, the #1-3 spots on the leaderboard, which isn't that big a deal. I'd be happy to make it into the top 10.

I would think the most important thing to consider about a score reset is "how much of the player base does this affect?" If we're doing a score reset to make a dozen highly vocal, tippy-top-ranked players happy, but it makes the rest of the player base unhappy, then it's not a good deal. Of course, I don't know how the rest of the player base feels.

Maybe you should just reset TheBeefiest's score :twisted:... I kid, I kid.
Image
Hdfisise
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 6:09 am

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Hdfisise » Fri Sep 09, 2011 3:57 pm

TheRaven42: What would the difference be with losing the maximum number of points under Elo compared to losing -200 points under the old system?
User avatar
Paul
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:33 pm
Location: Oxford

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Paul » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:01 pm

@Rakshasa

Totally get that point of view, and that's why I think it'll be important to keep a record of the current scores and league table, but don't you also like the idea of a fresh challenge where you can actually fight it out with people on a more level playing field?

I suppose that affects comparative scores more, but you're more interested in just consistently improving your own score - the "watching the number grow" factor - not being patronising, I too enjoy watching numbers grow!
Paul Kilduff-Taylor

Mode 7 Games
Diomyr
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 2:12 am

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Diomyr » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:06 pm

I think that the way to cater to everyone would be to have a partial score reset: basically you take the scores as they are now and according to a player's rank, you assign them the possibility of starting with a higher Elo score than other players. So say, people in the top 10, top 50, top 100 and top 250 started at Elo scores of 1400, 1350, 1300 and 1250 respectively (assuming a neutral Elo score of 1200). This way you reward people in the top rankings without hurting the others' abilities to catch up if they really deserve to be there, you don't provide a way for the people who "grinded" rating in disreputable ways to stay on top indefinitely and it would make for a fairer and more balanced start. This would involve more work on your part, sure, but is sort of a mid-term that would make everyone the least angry possible :P

Failing that, I'm with score reset. The people who are good will still be good. If they play, it will show. If they don't play, well, then why should they care?

Diomyr

EDIT: I forgot to mention, I highly endorse a "play unranked game" option. I like playing a game without the pressure of everything counting, sometimes. If people get to care about their score, they'll tend to try and protect it by playing less, only when they feel the right circumstances are gathered. And playing less is bad for everyone :P
Last edited by Diomyr on Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TheRaven42
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by TheRaven42 » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:07 pm

Hdfisise wrote:TheRaven42: What would the difference be with losing the maximum number of points under Elo compared to losing -200 points under the old system?
The difference is (if I understand ELO correctly):

If a match is between players far apart, the high ranked player will only get a minimum of points for a win, but will lose the maximum on a loss.
Player 1: 2500
Player 2: 1500

player 1 wins:
Player 1:2501
Player2:1499

if player 2 wins:
Player 1: 2468
Player 2: 1532

So why would player 1 want to play a ranked game where there is little gain in a win, and much to lose?

Thats why my biggest request is the ability to play un-ranked games. I don't always want to play for score, I mostly want to play for Fun.


Actually, removing score, but keeping say level? does not sound too bad.
teratoma
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 8:24 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by teratoma » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:09 pm

scores are not a true indicator of your skill. Think of all those games you lost at first. Those losses do not reflect your current skill, and knowledge of the game. If scores were reset it would not reset your progress. All that time you spent playing, you gained experience. Not experience points, but true experience. And no one can take that away. A reset would be a true indicator of all you have learned. And your current skill.
Rakshasa
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:48 pm

Re: ELO implementation, half baked?

Post by Rakshasa » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:11 pm

Paul wrote:@Rakshasa

Totally get that point of view, and that's why I think it'll be important to keep a record of the current scores and league table, but don't you also like the idea of a fresh challenge where you can actually fight it out with people on a more level playing field?

I suppose that affects comparative scores more, but you're more interested in just consistently improving your own score - the "watching the number grow" factor - not being patronising, I too enjoy watching numbers grow!
Online communities are funny that way. All the johnny-come-latelys (and I consider myself very much in that demographic) resent the stats / big numbers / unique widgets of the beta players until they get to that point themselves, at which point any kind of level playing field seems like anathema. "I like my big number and I don't want it to go away" sums it up pretty well.

I'm just afraid I'll look at that uphill climb and lose interest. I really don't know how a score reset would affect me, which is the source of my unease.

On another note, what just happened to the leaderboard? I just looked and some players are missing and all the scores changed and I'm #13 and some guy named Jefis is #1 now? It can't just be the Elo implementation, because I checked as soon as that was updated and TheBeefiest was still up there with like 7800 something.
Image
Post Reply