How about a little ranking system? Could use some feedback!

[Eerie]

Oi!

...so that day (and some other days aswell) I was being asked if there could be some sort of ranking system, which would be based on Monthly Rumble Tournaments perhaps and all. Well, why the hell not? Perhaps it could also provide us with some additional content and surprises in the future. So, without any further ado, I present to You the very basic concept of how it could look like:

http://midopecet.tk/suc/ladder.html

The way it works is explained inside the pic as You can see.

Now - it is only a VERY BASIC concept, nothing official. At this point I'd like to ask You to give me any feedback, Your thoughts on how it could be improved, what should be changed. Perhaps You see a better point system, which could be used instead?

Please advise!


PS There's only been 3 tournaments so far, so keep in mind, that the scoring will/would probably clarify after a few more months! What's there right now might be a little misleading.

[Dark Riku]

Looks like the person(s) that enter the most will automatically be higher.
I like the idea and would like to see all tourney results separate too.

Could we maybe apply the Ladder Lugrim made for the rumble tourneys instead?
Lulgrim Ladder

Or just have the both of them? :p and see what difference it gives?

[Eerie]

Looks like the person(s) that enter the most will automatically be higher.
I like the idea and would like to see all tourney results separate too.

Could we maybe apply the Ladder Lugrim made for the rumble tourneys instead?
Lulgrim Ladder

Or just have the both of them? :p and see what difference it gives?

Hm. We could use both, why not? I'd be zero'ing or resetting the rumble ladder after 6 months or maybe 1 year, while Lulgrim's ladder could be used as an 'of all time' thing?

[Toilailee]

I see all is right with the world again. :]

[Dark Riku]

I see some trouble though with Eerie's way. As this is supposed to be like a league representing players skill that entered the tournament.
But the players that enter the most will automatically be higher.

I would make the best 4-5/6 (or 9/12) performances count so you are not punished for missing some tournament due to how your real life schedule might be.
If you enter all tournaments your best scores will simply count.
So it's definitely not disadvantageous to enter as much as you can.

This is at least the way we do our internal club championship for Tabletop 40K ^^
3/4 tournaments count so you can miss 1.

Thoughts?

[Torpid]

Yeah, that works better.

You can't have it like it is now. The amount of tournaments you play obviously doesn't indicate your skill level.

[Eerie]

I see some trouble though with Eerie's way. As this is supposed to be like a league representing players skill that entered the tournament.
But the players that enter the most will automatically be higher.

I would make the best 4-5/6 (or 9/12) performances count so you are not punished for missing some tournament due to how your real life schedule might be.
If you enter all tournaments your best scores will simply count.
So it's definitely not disadvantageous to enter as much as you can.

This is at least the way we do our internal club championship for Tabletop 40K ^^
3/4 tournaments count so you can miss 1.

Thoughts?

Well, I gotta think about it. Does anyone agree or disagree with that? If so, why and what would You do? Do You see another way to make it more fair, that wasn't mentioned already?

[Wurgl]

I like the idea of a ladder a lot.

at the moment, in eeries system, the amount of points u get is linear. in most ranking used in sprots, its not linear, but the gaps get bigger at the top.

some examples: formula one (not a sport, ill still use it):

1st 25
2nd 18
3rd 15
4th 12
5th 10
6th 8
7th 6
8th 4
9th 2
10th 1

tennis (ill take master 1000 tornaments cuz easy math):

winner 1000
2nd 600
SF 360
QF 180
RO16 90
RO 32 45
RO 64 10

Also, atm you dont get points for walkovers. I disagree with that, i dont think it makes much sense. if someone like toilailee gets 2 walkovers in the first 2 rounds, hes practically missing out on 6 possible points for his ranking. Just award the points depending on what rounds u reach, nvm the walkovers. thats how its done in tennis aswell.

about the point that the system rewards those who play more tourneys, well thats kinda natural isnt it? I personally dont have a big problem with it, 1 saturday evening a month doesnt rly destroy my real life commitments.

But i can see the point so if public opinion is to change it then rikus system sounds good. cuttung the worst performance out of 6 or the 2 worst out of 12 tourneys.

[Dark Riku]

Getting points for where you got in the tourney sounds better to me too.
So default wins will give you points.

I would like to keep the points awarded to players losing 1-2 though.

Will give it some more in depth thought after tourney.

[Raffa]

one problem with it i forsee.

let's say player a loses to wurgl in round 1, and player b beats up on a noob to face wurgl in round 2 before getting stomped...player 1 gets less points?

I would structure the system as in you get more points for losing to players who go further

[Dark Riku]

one problem with it i forsee.

let's say player a loses to wurgl in round 1, and player b beats up on a noob to face wurgl in round 2 before getting stomped...player 1 gets less points?

I would structure the system as in you get more points for losing to players who go further

We have Lulgrim's ladder for this. It's like elo.
Also where did player 1 come from after a and b? XD

[Eerie]

one problem with it i forsee.

let's say player a loses to wurgl in round 1, and player b beats up on a noob to face wurgl in round 2 before getting stomped...player 1 gets less points?

I would structure the system as in you get more points for losing to players who go further

It would make sense if there were more tournaments and generally the scale - the amount of games were larger/bigger/mroe numerous. Basically certain people would get eliminated by those 'going further' players more often, even though they aren't really better. So either way the player to be more lucky with drawings will receive more points. Also, I kinda think this system should reward the tournament results. It can't be seen like the regular ladder. But that's just my oppinion :<

[crazyman64335]

i'd like to see a ladder ranking, although i'd probably do too much trolling to be taken seriously. The problem is that it takes too much for higher level players to get on and play 1v1's. Most players i know that are high leveled just hop on and play a bunch of friendly 3v3's. If there were some sort of appealing factor for people to play a "Ladder" system (which i would enjoy) then there would probably be more people willing to play. But as it stands now if you say to someone who joins your game and you say "Ladder" it's probably just going to confuse them.

[Toilailee]

Well even if you enter everytime, you still have to win in them for your score count to be high. You don't get much points for simply entering or winning few games.

[Dark Riku]

We are using Lulgrim's system for the tournament...
All games played just have to be calculated into the thing.

[Eerie]

I've updated the ladder with last rumble results by the current rules.

[Toilailee]

I've updated the ladder with last rumble results by the current rules.

I was sure wurgl'd be first now.

[Unconscious]

What would be really nice is someone who can create a new thing like the old battle net.

What kind of training does someone need for that?

[Ace of Swords]

I hope this won't hijack the thread, but I would like if even with steam it would be possible to implement a ladder this way...

There is another old game in the same state of this one, it's called Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance and it's by far more popular than this even in MP, that's thanks to some guys who picked up the balance of the game via a mod called FAF (Forged Alliance Forever), now this mod obviously deveployed over the years but they reached a point where the game is launcher acts for alot of things, it has a ranked ladder system of it's own, and setting up a game via this launcher permits you to play an automatized ranked game, like it worked for the old search game in DoW2, all mods/new maps/news/updates and whatever else are all uploaded on this launcher which provides for automatic updates aswell as an easy way to browse and download new mods and maps.


Now for DoW, it wouldn't need to do all of these things, but I was wondering if it's possible to have an automatic ladder of which everyone can access at any time that works on a third party programm and hosts the data on an own server (completely separated from steam).

http://i.imgur.com/viURLhT.png This is their lobby.

[Dark Riku]

If we could use Lugrim's ladder in that way with a ranking system of our own would be so sweet. Really missing ranked.

[Nuclear Arbitor]

we would need a serious network coder in order to do anything automatic. the only coder devoting anytime to elite right now is thomas and i'm not sure he has the time or knowledge to work on that.

[Ace of Swords]

to be honest, if this system is doable, I would gladly donate 20 euro/month Still it's done, I feel like having a real ladder would be a huge milestone for the elite, and perhaps a huge boost in both player pool and competition, with the right publicy of course.

[Unconscious]

Any kind of system like it would also be good for table top, whoever is into playing that.

[Eerie]

Well, I think that an automation of the ladder will have to wait, but perhaps we can come up with something in the future. As for now - we can only think about working with easily accessible data, which tournaments or perhaps a LEAGUE could provide us with.

[Lulgrim]

My original plan was to set up a league with prizes for season winner/runner-ups but I can't really focus on that for now.

I have started calculating skill ratings based on the recent 1v1 tournaments starting with COCA and moving to MRTs. I have a bunch of ratings up (MRT#1 is slightly WIP) but as you can see the RDs are still quite high and the situation is kinda like retail "placement phase" until I get more data to narrow it down.

[Lulgrim]

I decided to leave COCA out for reasons and start from MRT#1 instead. MRT#2 is also calculated, as well as the inactivity between MRT#2 and MRT#3.

http://www.dawnofwar.info/index.php?page=ratings-1

You can see ratings shaping up but there are still <10 players with a half reliable number.

[Rataxas]

Dont think ladder will work in system BO 3 , if you want to do this , the tourney should work like everyone vs everyone. Why so ? Its simple , one guy can get more skilled players on BO3 in his line then other one. So there is no point to keep going on this project in that way. The best way to create ladder is option from Supreme Commander FaF. It's a mod for SC also designed by players and working in two ways.:
1) you got diffrent ranking system for custom games ( i remamber old days in DoW1 there was custom ladders as well ) which count all games 1v1 2v2 3v3 or 4v4 , and add you points for winning the games.
2) you got ranking ladder which one is harder ( more diffcult to earn more points ) and count only on ranking games with exactly ranking rules like we got random posis and 500 vp.

[Uncle Milty]

Maybe really go for a league like system with pairings according to a somewhat timetable-ish plan. Give those people a week or two to agree on a date and time to play. This could probabely increase overall community activity and communication between players on general.
I think for the most part it wouldn't be hard to find referees or even streamers for those games counting either.

[Lulgrim]

Dont think ladder will work in system BO 3

I wouldn't necessarily call it a ladder right now, but as long as there are matches between players we can calculate mathematical skill ratings based on who wins whom. Best of whatever doesn't really matter.

Problem is that in elimination only a small # of players can accumulate enough matches to get a reliable rating (low RD). And even that takes a few cycles. But ratings were asked for and now we have some.

If players want to submit games in between tournaments to lower their RD, that's great, I can include the data. It would be a lot better. But the system has existed for a while now and though some people have indicated interest, there have been no submissions.

Maybe really go for a league like system with pairings according to a somewhat timetable-ish plan. Give those people a week or two to agree on a date and time to play. This could probabely increase overall community activity and communication between players on general.

Sounds good if you can just get it rolling. Anyone willing to write up the system? Make a committee and start typing...

[Uncle Milty]

Sounds good if you can just get it rolling. Anyone willing to write up the system? Make a committee and start typing...

I can offer to get some streams going as far as i got time to do so (even on work day evenings (EU)). Other than that I hope that I don't promise too much by saying that Eerie and me discussed providing some player based commentary like harlequin did back in the days since there haven't been much cocasts lately.