GG Rank System

[ZERO]

So now I have compleate control over the stats for gungame! I am working on the programing to make it so I can do point skill based controll via bonus events like how I track xp in wcs for use as rank.

Here is a list of commands I can track and who can get points for them:
gg_win = winner (can track who they won from)
gg_levelup = player who leveled up
gg_team_lose = player on losing team
gg_team_win = player on wining team
gg_leveldown = player leveled down
gg_knife_steal = player stole a level from another player (can track who lost a level from this)
gg_last_level = player is on last level
gg_leader = current leader
gg_knife_level = player is on knife level

What I suggest for the new system is that players start with a base skill of zero and just get points for particular actions with the following formula:

gg_levelup +5
gg_leveldown -5
gg_leader +1
gg_last_level +1
gg_knife_steal +10
gg_team_win +2
gg_team_lose -2
gg_win = 5000

This implies the following difficulty logic winning once is 1000 times as hard as leveling up. Winning is 500 times harder than stealing a level. Winning is 2500 times harder than being on the wining team. Winning is 5000 times harder than being the game leader. Winning is 5000 times harder than getting to the last level. The parts in () may not be possible but regardless I think this will create a system where players with more wins are ranked high and then players with similar numbers of wins or the same number of win are ranked over each other based on the other data.

What do you all think?

---------- Post added at 10:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:30 PM ----------

To show also that using the stats like that is easy to verify:

Levels Gained:	45,975
Levels Given:	32,199
Levels Stolen:	2,224
Levels Lost:	683
Wins:	83

(83*5000)= 415000
(5*45,975)= 229875
(10*2,224)= 22240
(-5*683)= -3415
=663,700 score

Note this does not include the points from being a leader or on last level or winning/losing team.

---------- Post added at 02:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:15 AM ----------

Please post opinions on this ranking system. I will be making it so you can track these values on a per client basis as well.

[XX0wnsXY]

I like the breakdown of stats. Very indepth and fun! I don't know about the math or if that is a good or bad thing..but from what I can see..it will seperate people on a different level who may have the same amount of wins. So if you and I had the same amount of wins, but I had less levels lost etc..I would be above you...correct?

the only thing I will say is..do you have to factor in "being on the winning/losing team?" I think everything else applies, however GG is not at all a team game and sometimes that is how it goes. If you're on a losing team, you could very well be on that same losing team for the whole map and that would really be unfair if the teams are stacked in a way to tilt it that much.

[ZERO]

Now I would like to offer some additional options but they will only take effect for stats after I make the programing adjustments please let me know what you all think. (I have verified these are possible)

• Trigger a "gg_leveldown" for each level a player loses (currently it just does 1 regardless of the amount taken)
• Trigger a gg_lose for the player that caused the game to be lost (-2500 when triggered)

So what do you all think about adding these to make the future stats more complete?

---------- Post added at 02:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:34 AM ----------

With above I would recommend this formula:
gg_levelup +5
gg_leveldown -5
gg_leader +1
gg_last_level +1
gg_knife_steal +10
gg_win = 5000
gg_lose = -2500

[ZERO]

I will now be updating the gg logging so that it will count mutiple leveldown events correctly.

Also it will start tracking the gg_loser all stats after today will have this data. Over the next few months it should balance out from the previous 6 of not having them.

[ZERO]

New rank recordings are now in effect.

[ZERO]

You can see example stats here: http://www.ibisgaming.com/gg_stats/

This is just a fee hours worth of data. I am still building the actual parts that let you see wins ect so keep your pants on.

Please note you can see the current win system in work. Notice how the 2 best pacers have the same numbers of wins and then are mostly separated by the gglevel up events.

Now currently we can not count for gg_lose events. However losses starting today will count. So for example if we pretend that this is rank data from today twurk would be in second place which makes more sense as the current data shows that that is where he would belong if we are trying to clearly evaluate the player skill.

[ZERO]

Lets compare how the ranks will differ from those before today and after today: (this does not take into account the higher number of level down events also we do not independently track leader or last level data but you are awarded for it in both of these models)


----------------BEFORE JULY 1st---------------------
Formula: WINS(5000) - Losses(0) + Levelup(5) - Leveldown(5) + knivesteal(10) + leader + lastlevel

twurk = 1st
twurk=42032skill
twurk=8(5000) - 1(0(not counted)) + 345(5) - 34(5) +43(10)= 40000+1725-170+430=41985 [42032-41985=47 times user triggered gg_leader or gg_last_level]

Mutnaggewinu =2nd = 41976skill

----------------AFTER JULY 1st---------------------
Formula: WINS(5000) - Losses(2500) + Levelup(5) - Leveldown(5) + knivesteal(10) + leader + lastlevel

Mutnaggewinu =1st = 41976skill (currently he has no losses so skill does not change)

twurk = 2nd
twurk=39532skill
twurk=8(5000)- 1(2500) + 345(5) - 34(5) +43(10)= 40000-2500+1725-170+430=39485 [39532-39485=47 times user triggered gg_leader or gg_last_level]

So as you see from the data I believe these values to be quite logical. It is based mostly off win# but from there is able to then separate out players that have close to the same number of wins and define who is better.


Please post comments about how you all feel about this ranking.

[Carmichal]

IDK if it is too late for this, but can you please change GG_lose to maybe -500; also GG_win to +1000. IMO it seems a bit much to get +5000 for a win, and a loss is -2500 when the rest of the ways to gain points are so far from that.

IMO. There should be no GG_loss. I can see a lot of regulars, who may not be the best getting frustrated trying to dig out of that hole since you need to kill 500 people to just get rid of that. 5000 thousand point for a win in over kill! Yes you should get a hefty reward for winning, but 5000? I can see many more people get frustrated. I can see people leaving, and that is not good for the server.

If I had my way all the time you would only get 500 points for a gg win, and no points lost for having been naded.

[ZERO]

In the previous stats you got 1 to <1point per kill and 500 points for winning and -500 for losing. You also lost points for level down and got no points for being a leader or having the last level.

Previous rank was determined basically only by wins. This rank is also intended to be win base but also account for who is better for players with close to the same stats.

Here is the rank shown again and then the explanation:
WINS(5000) - Losses(2500) + Levelup(5) - Leveldown(5) + knivesteal(10) + leader + lastlevel

Winning a gungame is 1000 times harder than leveling up and 100 times harder than stealing a level. IT is also 5000 times harder than being the leader or on the lastlevel.

Being the person killed at the end of the gungame is 500 times harder than losing a level.

Stealing a level is twice as hard as leveling up (you also get the level up so when you steal your effectively getting +15)

A better player would logically be one that has more wins relative to losses. Has more levelups than leveldowns has more steals than another player, is more often the gg leader and is on the last level more often.

The current formula makes it so that two players with the same wins makes it so if one has 1 more win give they effectively have .5 as many.

Who is better a player with 500 wins and 20 wins given or a player with 495 wins and 10 wins given to other players. Oh wait these are the same... the amount of losses you need to go down is more than you think. A player with 505 wins for example would need 30 losses to be ranked the same!

Lets take a look at how this formula effects the rank of the past stats:

(remember old stats would drop the skill points if it got too big)
Here is the top 3 winners from 2007 to 2011 and their rank followed by what their rank would be now:
Xerenix | ibis.a RANK175 1,148wins 121losses
Nissan GT-R R35 <ibis.a> PEW™ Rank5808 1,041wins 123losses
Fluffy Frufflebottoms RANK8 809wins 32losses

It is clear given the massive difference in wins that these players should be in 1st 2nd and 3rd. However how does our new rank better deal with people that are close together on wins who deserves the higher rank? Lets take a look:

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill
RellikDloc ™♠	756	54	155,884	5,991	4394465
Penis シ	744	194	123,239	4,787	3827260
yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	3634005

So as you see even with a lot of losses it takes a huge amount before you start dropping below someone else. The amount of levelup events builds up over time as well thus giving the rank of a player that plays a lot a slight buff over someone who just started. This makes ranks stick more which is also logical in a ranking system.

But we can compare more from old data. Here we see how the number of losses still does not cover the difference that simply having many gglevel up events does:

Bink of the North Village	533	53	39,109	770	2724195
کHÅקY V1яU5 ibis.a	512	272	232,259	10,751	2987540
Envy | Ibis.a	501	166	86,933	3,785	2505740

In that example HÅקY V1яU5 ibis.a still had a higher rank than Bink of the North Village despite having less wins. In this case blink would need to keep playing longer in order to close the gap. So we see here that there is already a system that takes into account how much a player is actually playing and rewards them. However we do not want that reward to be too great. Now that score may be a lot closer if we also accounted for the other parts of the model like steals last level and leader but that data does not exist for these players.

So do we still think that the difference between wins and levels is too much? Or is it not enough now? Do we see how taking points for causing someone else to win effects the rank but now critically?

Thoughts?

---------- Post added at 07:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:35 PM ----------

Here is another example:

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill
Rated EC-10	462	274	269,387	8,524	2929315
[???.?]<?????¡??>	456	88	39,995	837	2255790
Vagina ツ	455	162	144,434	6,950	2557420
lietuvis	450	71	30,066	556	2220050

In this case we once again see how having a lot of levels can equate to gg wins on their own over time. Even though ?? has more wins to losses Vagina has way more level gains and thus enough to still be ranked above.

Lets see for some people that have the same gg wins and if the data is looking logical:

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill
Maladjusted	278	119	138,864	7,358	1750030
Kr@zy Simon	278	75	45,018	1,652	1419330
Toffee	277	63	59,300	2,254	1512730
Tyrael	277	73	71,268	1,639	1550645

Now we see again that longer time player comes out ahead even when the gg losses are stacked against them. Maladjusted clearly the worst player out of this group but still has a higher rank right now. This will change though in a few more weeks as the other 3 are gaining wins and other stats at a faster rate.

From what I can see this system allows ranks of long time players to be protected but not at the cost of preventing new players from moving up in the ranks at a reasonable pace. Can we get any comments or suggestions as to other ideas.

If someone else has a more fair way of dealing with the ranks and can show the math I would be happy to use it.

[brett friggin favre]

here's my concern: should it be based on "difficulty" or on probability? especially for giving up the gg win, saying it's 500 times harder than losing a level...well look at it probability-wise. let's say it takes 15 rounds and there are 20 players. the average number of deaths would be 15, multiplied by 20 players = 300. that means that about 1 in 300 deaths gives up a gg win. similarly the average number of kills should be 15, again 1 in 300 kills grants a gg win. but the other question is whether or not we should punish the one who gives up the win so severely. probability dictates that you stand (on average) a 1 in 19 chance when the server is full of giving up that win. the fewer deaths you have, the lower your chances, and vice versa. but since it's just a matter of probability, should it really cost 500 kills if you just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

another point i hinted at in there is that the good players will get their wins, indeed, but they will also have excellent k/d ratios. so should being the lucky one to get a win be so much more advantageous? to where it's worth 1000 kills? ALSO if some people, say, fluffy, penis, mut, and myself, all get on at the same time...everyone else in the server will suffer rank-wise, because they can't get that win worth 1000 kills, and those of the top players in there (competing for high ranks) would also suffer as we stand much less chance of getting a win as compared to when it's just one of us and a bunch of scrubs. it is my personal belief that the rank system shouldnt be so dependent on how many hours you've put into the server. it should prioritize these three things (after a certain point with wins): win%, kdr, knife kills. to me, those things are the truer display of skill than putting in 900 hours and winning the probability game. after all, the determining factor in this rank is called "skill" and not "determination". i think we need to think in terms of what gets you wins, not just that you have wins. kdr and win% will get you wins, so being the base of what makes you a successful player, it should be the base of the stat system imo.