-
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.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules