GG Rank System

[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.

[StarsMine]

What about weighting the ranks in some form? It would allow the good players to climb the ranks faster.
I mean killing the rank 1 guy is worth more points then killing a rank 400 person. While death from a rank 600 person would hurt your rank more then death from the number 1 guy. Or something similar

Also what about your skill going down slowly when you dont play. So we dont have someone like I like turtles holding the number 1 spot for a year when he only touched the server once.

[ZERO]

A player that has not played in 14 days will be removed from the ranks but their stats will not be deleted.

Works exactly like pub, wcs and zm do now.

Also the only way to account for score it to use the inputs already listed.

[StarsMine]

Really? I know ?hack? had some form of rank weighting. I would have to ask Speaker of the dead for what exactly he used.
Its a great way of keeping the stats fairer, as the group of people who play at 3AM are not necessarly as good as the group of people who regularly play at 7pm. Also would prevent the top 10 coming in at the same time and make points during that time period mean a different skill level then points made when you hope in a game and no one in the top 100 are playing.