GG Rank System

[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.

[ZERO]

The issue is that the only time death is counted against you is when you actually lose levels or lose the game.

---------- Post added at 08:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 PM ----------

Also I was using those numbers to demenstrate the value of one thing over the other. You notice that in the stats that the best players have much less gg_lose events for the number of wins. In the existing stat system I have aldrady shown in mutiple examples above that the new strucutre allows for those with less wins to have a better score than someone with more by that plaer having more level up events.

I would like to see someone actually do the math and see if they can come up with something better. You can see the example data mutiple times in the previous posts.

[ZERO]

Lets Compare some various systems in these we will ignore stats from stealing levels, leader and last level b/c I do not have real world data for those on these ranks.

This is data built from 4 YEARS worth of gg stats. These are real numbers from actual players over that time. Lets see how my system ranks them and how other ideas rank them. Then let us decide which of these methods is the best way to rank players. These ranks come in 3 groups.

• Top 5 level rank
• Top 100 level and close rank
• Low level rank

So here is some variants:

--------------------------------ZERO Ranking-----------------------------

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill	RANK	online time
RellikDloc ™♠	756	54	155,884	5,991	4394465	1	523:01:32
Penis シ	744	194	123,239	4,787	3827260	2	768:24:52
yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	3634005	3	476:20:22
Maladjusted	278	119	138,864	7,358	1750030	4	587:32:53
Kr@zy Simon	278	75	45,018	1,652	1419330	7	269:46:44
Toffee	277	63	59,300	2,254	1512730	6	277:05:53
Tyrael	277	73	71,268	1,639	1550645	5	259:53:38
ying	17	11	51,828	2,180	305740	8	97:17:13
Killer	17	9	4,814	271	85215	9	33:26:10
kamizzza	17	2	913	11	84510	10	9:31:33
traiblazer	17	48	12,097	379	23590	11	142:07:20

-------------------------------------END ZERO RANK-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------1000ggwin -500gg loss------------------------------------

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill	RANK	online time
RellikDloc ™♠	756	54	155,884	5,991	1478465	1	523:01:32
Penis シ	744	194	123,239	4,787	1239260	2	768:24:52
yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	944005	3	476:20:22
Maladjusted	278	119	138,864	7,358	876030	4	587:32:53
Kr@zy Simon	278	75	45,018	1,652	457330	7	269:46:44
Toffee	277	63	59,300	2,254	530730	6	277:05:53
Tyrael	277	73	71,268	1,639	588645	5	259:53:38
ying	17	11	51,828	2,180	259740	8	97:17:13
Killer	17	9	4,814	271	35215	9	33:26:10
kamizzza	17	2	913	11	20510	11	9:31:33
traiblazer	17	48	12,097	379	51590	10	142:07:20

This method produces the exact same results however we see that the difference in skill between Maladjusted and yed has greatly reduced. With this method lets say all else equal Maladjusted can get the same score as yed if he just had 67 more wins. So do you think below is a good result?

yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	944005	SECOND	476:20:22
Maladjusted	346	119	138,864	7,358	944030	FIRST	587:32:53

I just do not see how Maladjusted should have a higher rank than yed sure he has played 100 more hours but he still have hundreds of less actual wins and more actual losses. The point of gg is to win is it not? This is why I reject the idea of setting the difference between wins and level gains so low. Also please remember that level steals have a 10x multiplier and if that was in here it would be even messier for yed.

-------------------------------------END 1000ggwin -500gg loss------------------------------------

-------------------------------------ZERO with no losses-------------------------------------------

	wins	losses	L+	L-	skill	RANK	online time
RellikDloc ™♠	756	54	155,884	5,991	1505465	1	523:01:32
Penis シ	744	194	123,239	4,787	1336260	2	768:24:52
yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	990505	3	476:20:22
Maladjusted	278	119	138,864	7,358	935530	4	587:32:53
Kr@zy Simon	278	75	45,018	1,652	494830	7	269:46:44
Toffee	277	63	59,300	2,254	562230	6	277:05:53
Tyrael	277	73	71,268	1,639	625145	5	259:53:38
ying	17	11	51,828	2,180	265240	8	97:17:13
Killer	17	9	4,814	271	39715	10	33:26:10
kamizzza	17	2	913	11	21510	11	9:31:33
traiblazer	17	48	12,097	379	75590	9	142:07:20

With adding a few wins to Maladjusted

yed	719	93	55,603	1,302	990505	2	476:20:22
Maladjusted	346	119	138,864	7,358	1003530	1	587:32:53

Here we have created a real clusterfuck. Basically wins have no real value. This may be surprising b/c what we did was remove the cost of losing which one would think would increase the value of wins. Instead it has a reverse effect.

The reason for this is simple as stated earlier in the thread stats should be based off probability and that is correct. Good stats should take into account the chance of a bad player winning vs a good player wining. yed here managed to get hundreds more wins in 100 less hours than Maladjusted however is ranked lower. It is clear from the stats that most of Maladjusted wins are likely him getting lucky and having played a lot relative to yed that is. This is clear in both the time played and the wins he has gotten. Random chance says the players have == likely hood of winning and losing when these players are on the last level. However we reward winning 2x as much as losing. There is yes a higher chance of losing b/c you can lose on any level. However the data shows that most players with decent wins have more wins that losses. This we would expect. Just as we do not want to count only level up counting only wins and not losses makes it virtually impossible for new players to ever rank up. There needs to be balance, balance that a reletive scale by subtracting some points for losses takes care of. As you see in the original model there is no such problem.

Therefore any method that does not include subtracting losses can not be accepted. ALSO PLEASE NOTE THAT LOSSES PRIOR TO JULY 1ST CAN NOT AND THUS WILL NOT BE COUNTED SO ALL PLAYERS PRIOR TO THAT DATE BASICALLY GET A TEMP BUFF THIS SHOULD GO AWAY OVER TIME THOUGH SO NO WORRIES LONG TERM.

-------------------------------------ZERO with no losses-------------------------------------------

So here I have shown mine and 2 popular other ideas and explained and showed with real rank data why my method retains more logical results. If someone can show my model creating illogical results or another model wich creates better results I want to see it.

[XX0wnsXY]

Like I said previously, I don't mind anything but the losing team aspect, which seems to have been removed anyway.

[ZERO]

Yes I agree that the team based stuff was a bad idea lol.

Also are you guys liking the info you can find on the stats pages now? I am not done yet but I am trying to focus on providing more gg related data for things like maps and on the main pages ect than kills ect so we can see the stuff that matters.

[Carmichal]

I'm a bit confused, are the psycho stats new, and what I see are stats from today? Because I'm not on there, been playing a lot today.

[ZERO]

No those are only 6 hours of stats from January 1st which I am using so I can program the web pages to show the stats data. Which I have finished now.

[Carmichal]

Oh well derp! TY.