| 1 |
[q]I've heard the logic behind finding an accurate representation of the player's skill and agree that it's good to have, but it shouldn't need to impose restrictions upon the shape of the ladders. [/q]
|
1 |
[q]I've heard the logic behind finding an accurate representation of the player's skill and agree that it's good to have, but it shouldn't need to impose restrictions upon the shape of the ladders. [/q]
|
| 2 |
Following this logic there would only be a single rating as adding all the MM games to all the casual games provable yields more accurate ratings. This isn't the logic I subscribe to, since I don't think finding the most accurate rating is the goal of a rating system. I think MM and casual should be divided because:
|
2 |
Following this logic there would only be a single rating as adding all the MM games to all the casual games provable yields more accurate ratings. This isn't the logic I subscribe to, since I don't think finding the most accurate rating is the goal of a rating system. I think MM and casual should be divided because:
|
| 3 |
* Tying the ladder to the way the game started is easy to understand.
|
3 |
* Tying the ladder to the way the game started is easy to understand.
|
| 4 |
* It lets people play casual without worrying about MM rank.
|
4 |
* It lets people play casual without worrying about MM rank.
|
| 5 |
* There aren't enough non-1v1 MM games for a separate team MM ladder to make sense.
|
5 |
* There aren't enough non-1v1 MM games for a separate team MM ladder to make sense.
|
| 6 |
* Desire for non-MM 1v1 that counts towards non-casual rating is rare.
|
6 |
* Desire for non-MM 1v1 that counts towards non-casual rating is rare.
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
[q]Why would you have an accurate WHR system only to make it inaccurate by introducing further distortions between shown rating and actual rating?[/q]
|
8 |
[q]Why would you have an accurate WHR system only to make it inaccurate by introducing further distortions between shown rating and actual rating?[/q]
|
| 9 |
Accuracy isn't the only, or even the most important, purpose of a rating system.
|
9 |
Accuracy isn't the only, or even the most important, purpose of a rating system.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
[q]I dislike the added complexity of having both a casual and a competitive rank color, or adding different versions of the color. Right now we already have 64 possible rank icons, adding a shiny option would mean 128 possible combinations that a user should be expected to understand. [/q]
|
11 |
[q]I dislike the added complexity of having both a casual and a competitive rank color, or adding different versions of the color. Right now we already have 64 possible rank icons, adding a shiny option would mean 128 possible combinations that a user should be expected to understand. [/q]
|
| 12 |
The glow would be at most eight extra images, one for each shape. All it would be is some extra embellishment that shows a rank image that is derived from the MM ladder instead of the casual ladder.
|
12 |
The glow would be at most eight extra images, one for each shape. All it would be is some extra embellishment that shows a rank image that is derived from the MM ladder instead of the casual ladder.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
[q]Players could have a rating for each of the 3 ladders - 1v1, teams, matchmaker and their casual rating. Instead of showing all 3 on the standard display of a user, we show their highest rating (and ingame, their rating for the game-mode in question as suggested before). However, if you hover over the user or go to their page, you get a clear display of each of their rating icon medals. [/q]
|
14 |
[q]Players could have a rating for each of the 3 ladders - 1v1, teams, matchmaker and their casual rating. Instead of showing all 3 on the standard display of a user, we show their highest rating (and ingame, their rating for the game-mode in question as suggested before). However, if you hover over the user or go to their page, you get a clear display of each of their rating icon medals. [/q]
|
| 15 |
This sounds good, apart from the fact that there are two ladders - not three. I'm also not so sure that your ingame rank should be the rank relevant to the game, as having your name look different in different types of games could be weird. The site could display both rank images on the home page and send them both to the lobbies for the purpose of being displayed in a tooltip. The MM versions could have the glow, if the glow also exists.
|
15 |
This sounds good, apart from the fact that there are two ladders - not three. I'm also not so sure that your ingame rank should be the rank relevant to the game, as having your name look different in different types of games could be weird. The site could display both rank images on the home page and send them both to the lobbies for the purpose of being displayed in a tooltip. The MM versions could have the glow, if the glow also exists.
|
| 16 |
\n
|
16 |
\n
|
| 17 |
I've tried to put forth the best version of "reserve the upper ranks for MM" and it still seems far worse than just adding an opt-in glow. The "send and display both" idea put forth by @Dregs could even make glow redundant, although glow wouldn't hurt.
|
17 |
I've tried to put forth the best version of "reserve the upper ranks for MM" and it still seems far worse than just adding an opt-in glow. The "send and display both" idea put forth by @Dregs could even make glow redundant, although glow wouldn't hurt.
|
| 18 |
\n
|
18 |
\n
|
| 19 |
The fluid nature of the MM percentiles, in addition to the 20% over-rank requirement to make it into the next bracket, makes the rank system a bit opaque. Players can rank up simply because more players joined the pool. This effect would be exaggerated in a league so perhaps we'd be better off fixing the ranks at some nice round numbers. Here is an example based on the current percentiles and MM population:
|
19 |
The fluid nature of the MM percentiles, in addition to the 20% over-rank requirement to make it into the next bracket, makes the rank system a bit opaque. Players can rank up simply because more players joined the pool. This effect would be exaggerated in a league so perhaps we'd be better off fixing the ranks at some nice round numbers. Here is an example based on the current percentiles and MM population:
|
| 20 |
* purple: Top 5 MM
|
20 |
* purple: Top 5 MM
|
| 21 |
* dark blue: Top 20 MM
|
21 |
* dark blue: Top 20 MM
|
| 22 |
* light blue: Top 50 MM
|
22 |
* light blue: Top 50 MM
|
| 23 |
* yellow: Top 100 MM
|
23 |
* yellow: Top 100 MM
|
| 24 |
* bright orange: Top 150 MM
|
24 |
* bright orange: Top 150 MM
|
| 25 |
* dark orange: Top 225 MM
|
25 |
* dark orange: Top 225 MM
|
| 26 |
* red: Top 300 MM
|
26 |
* red: Top 300 MM
|
| 27 |
* grey: everyone
|
27 |
* grey: everyone
|
| 28 |
The rule for assigning rank images would be very simple:
|
28 |
The rule for assigning rank images would be very simple:
|
| 29 |
* Players gain a rank image when their ladder position reaches the required threshold.
|
29 |
* Players gain a rank image when their ladder position reaches the required threshold.
|
| 30 |
* Players lose a rank image when their ladder position drops below 1.2*Threshold. This means someone in position six can be purple, and someone in position 120 could be yellow.
|
30 |
* Players lose a rank image when their ladder position drops below 1.2*Threshold. This means someone in position six can be purple, and someone in position 120 could be yellow.
|
| 31 |
This is similar to the current system in that there is a buffer before you lose a rank. The difference is that the requirements for ranking up and down are spelled out explicitly, rather than existing as unseen thresholds.
|
31 |
This is similar to the current system in that there is a buffer before you lose a rank. The difference is that the requirements for ranking up and down are spelled out explicitly, rather than existing as unseen thresholds.
|
| 32 |
\n
|
32 |
\n
|
| 33 |
=== Detailed Structure ===
|
33 |
=== Detailed Structure ===
|
| 34 |
I'll now propose a system to combat loss aversion and promote activity in the league. Players gain and lose MM rank images using the system in the preceding paragraph.
|
34 |
I'll now propose a system to combat loss aversion and promote activity in the league. Players gain and lose MM rank images using the system in the preceding paragraph.
|
| 35 |
\n
|
35 |
\n
|
| 36 |
The first month of the league acts like a normal ladder with [b]none of the following systems[/b]. This period could even be presented as not really part of the league, but rather as the pre-league period, or as the seeding period. The aim is to give the ladder some time to settle before the ranks people attain are 'locked in'.
|
36 |
The first month of the league acts like a normal ladder with [b]none of the following systems[/b]. This period could even be presented as not really part of the league, but rather as the pre-league period, or as the seeding period. The aim is to give the ladder some time to settle before the ranks people attain are 'locked in'.
|
| 37 |
\n
|
37 |
\n
|
| 38 |
The whole league (including the pre-league month) lasts four months (three months would also be reasonable).
|
38 |
The whole league (including the pre-league month) lasts four months (three months would also be reasonable).
|
| 39 |
\n
|
39 |
\n
|
| 40 |
The league keeps track of your highest ladder position, as well as its corresponding rank image, and displays it alongside your current ladder rank and position in places such as the home page and community tab. This position is recorded as your final league position, in essence your personal best, for the league. The aim here is to make players feel like they can keep playing games without risking their current position.
|
40 |
The league keeps track of your highest ladder position, as well as its corresponding rank image, and displays it alongside your current ladder rank and position in places such as the home page and community tab. This position is recorded as your final league position, in essence your personal best, for the league. The aim here is to make players feel like they can keep playing games without risking their current position.
|
| 41 |
\n
|
41 |
\n
|
| 42 |
Players in the top five gain league points for playing games. Whoever has the most league points at the end of the league is the winner of the league, even if they never reached the top of the ladder. Every time a top five player finishes a full game (ie, one that was scored for rating purposes) they receive the following league points:
|
42 |
Players in the top five gain league points for playing games. Whoever has the most league points at the end of the league is the winner of the league, even if they never reached the top of the ladder. Every time a top five player finishes a full game (ie, one that was scored for rating purposes) they receive the following league points:
|
| 43 |
* 16 points for position 1.
|
43 |
* 16 points for position 1.
|
| 44 |
* 9 points for position 2.
|
44 |
* 9 points for position 2.
|
| 45 |
* 5 points for position 3.
|
45 |
* 5 points for position 3.
|
| 46 |
* 3 points for position 4.
|
46 |
* 3 points for position 4.
|
| 47 |
* 2 points for position 5.
|
47 |
* 2 points for position 5.
|
| 48 |
For the purpose of determining points, a player's position is the best of their position when they started the game and their position after the rankings were updated after the game, just to be generous. It is good to reward people when they make the top 5 and there is no reason to make someone who lost a position while playing sad.
|
48 |
For the purpose of determining points, a player's position is the best of their position when they started the game and their position after the rankings were updated after the game, just to be generous. It is good to reward people when they make the top 5 and there is no reason to make someone who lost a position while playing sad.
|
| 49 |
\n
|
49 |
\n
|
| 50 |
Every player will, at the end of a league, receive some sort of trophy or indicator of the best position they reached during the league. This metric is intended to be a more of a personal incomparable achievement, something that they can strive to improve upon for the next league. Players that accrued league points should appear on a league points leaderboard, and it is the position on this leaderboard that determines the winner, runner up, and third place of the league. Players with league points should also receive a trophy (or similar thing) that reflects their position on the league points leaderboard. If we decide to add something like a forum badge that displays your previous league achievement, then the player's position on the points leaderboard would be displayed instead of their highest position, as having any league points already shows that a player reached quite a high rank.
|
50 |
Every player will, at the end of a league, receive some sort of trophy or indicator of the best position they reached during the league. This metric is intended to be a more of a personal incomparable achievement, something that they can strive to improve upon for the next league. Players that accrued league points should appear on a league points leaderboard, and it is the position on this leaderboard that determines the winner, runner up, and third place of the league. Players with league points should also receive a trophy (or similar thing) that reflects their position on the league points leaderboard. If we decide to add something like a forum badge that displays your previous league achievement, then the player's position on the points leaderboard would be displayed instead of their highest position, as having any league points already shows that a player reached quite a high rank.
|
| 51 |
\n
|
51 |
\n
|
| 52 |
The
aim
of
the
league
points
system
is
to
encourage
activity
at
the
top
of
the
ladder.
If
everyone
plays
about
as
much
as
each
other
the
the
best
player
is
probably
going
to
win
the
league.
The
top
player
cannot
sit
at
the
top
without
challenge
because
the
second
or
third
player
will
be
able
to
play
more
games
and
accrue
more
league
points.
Ideally
this
incentive
would
trickle
down
the
league:
|
52 |
Ties
on
the
league
points
leaderboard
are
broken
by
rank
at
the
end
of
the
league,
as
ties
seem
like
they
would
be
rare
and
final
rank
is
a
tiebreak
that
cannot
result
in
a
further
tie.
|
|
|
53 |
\n
|
|
|
54 |
The aim of the league points system is to encourage activity at the top of the ladder, and to give the league a definite winner that isn't just dependent on the ranks at the end. If the activity at the top of the ladder is spread evenly between players then league will be won by whoever spent the most time at the very top. However, if the top player doesn't expose themselves to de-throning then they will fall behind on points, as the second or third player will overtake them in points by playing more games. Ideally this incentive would trickle down the league:
|
| 53 |
* The top 1 and 2 positions play to reap the points of their lucrative position.
|
55 |
* The top 1 and 2 positions play to reap the points of their lucrative position.
|
| 54 |
* The top 3,4 and 5 play to make some points and attempt to unseat those at a higher position.
|
56 |
* The top 3,4 and 5 play to make some points and attempt to unseat those at a higher position.
|
| 55 |
* The top 6 to 10 can try to make it onto the league points leaderboard by gaining a few points.
|
57 |
* The top 6 to 10 can try to make it onto the league points leaderboard by gaining a few points.
|
| 56 |
* The other players now have access to better opponents, to play in their attempts to climb as high as they can during the league.
|
58 |
* The other players now have access to better opponents, to play in their attempts to climb as high as they can during the league.
|
| 57 |
\n
|
59 |
\n
|
| 58 |
Perhaps
the
points
system
could
be
extended
to
the
top
10.
To
extend
the
system
I
would
do
the
following:
|
60 |
Perhaps
the
points
system
would
be
better
with
more
players
involved.
To
extend
the
system
I
would
do
the
following:
|
| 59 |
* 32 points for position 1.
|
61 |
* 32 points for position 1.
|
| 60 |
* 20 points for position 2.
|
62 |
* 20 points for position 2.
|
| 61 |
* 12 points for position 3.
|
63 |
* 12 points for position 3.
|
| 62 |
* 7 points for position 4.
|
64 |
* 7 points for position 4.
|
| 63 |
* 5 points for position 5.
|
65 |
* 5 points for position 5.
|
| 64 |
* 3 points for position 6.
|
66 |
* 3 points for position 6.
|
| 65 |
* 2 points for position 7.
|
67 |
* 2 points for position 7.
|
| 66 |
* 2 points for position 8.
|
68 |
* 2 points for position 8.
|
| 67 |
* 1 points for position 9.
|
69 |
* 1 points for position 9.
|
| 68 |
* 1 points for position 10.
|
70 |
* 1 points for position 10.
|
| 69 |
\n
|
71 |
\n
|
League Ideas