Jump to content

Home

Who's the best player on this forum?


saberhagen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think instead of a tourney, that we should have an ongoing ladder system that would allow forumers more freedom in forming games, and there would never be a definitive winner, just a person at the top of the ladder that everyone is aiming to beat. Also, that way we could avoid messy timezone conflicts, since everyone will be graded on the same point scale, they could be placed in the ladder simultaneous. Also, you can just PM people you want to have a ladder game with, and privately work out the details, and then just simply report back to the central ladder organizer(s) who the winner was.

 

Its done quite effectively at AoMH.

 

All we would need is a ladder thread and a list of all of the participants ranked based on points allotted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'll let you, Vostok and saber deal with the type of tournament. I can do what I'm currently doing. I have no clue on how to organize a tournament. I'm just trying to get things rolling because I think this would be fun, and it'll get us playing the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a ladder might work better now you mention it. The regional groups thing would probably need at least 4 people in each group to be worth doing, and it's debatable as to whether we could get that just with regular forumers.

 

A ladder still brings some of the same practical problems (dealing with dropping, cheating etc) and some new ones, particularly making a fair scoring system, but we can copy existing ladders.

 

We still have to decide who's eligible. With a ladder system, we could open it up, but still have unofficial rankings for forumers. It occurs to me that the remaining inter+/experts are crying out for a decent ladder, but it also occurs to me that getting them involved could be more trouble than it's worth (read all the backbiting and accusations of cheating/smurfing at the GiRL forums and be very afraid!). Another thing is that it could only work as a manual forum thread if there were very few people in it and if it isn't seriously competitive, otherwise it would need to be run on a php/mysql site with an automated system to calculate scores when players report results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by saberhagen

Another thing is that it could only work as a manual forum thread if there were very few people in it and if it isn't seriously competitive, otherwise it would need to be run on a php/mysql site with an automated system to calculate scores when players report results.

 

Yea, since it's small right now, I'm just doing the site I have manually. Also, I don't know PHP so if it comes to that, someone else can take over the site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a slightly insane idea for a ladder scoring system. I'm not sure if it would work in practice, but it could be fun.

 

Basically, everyone starts on the same score. When they play a match they have to bet half their score. The winner gets the pot and the loser gets nothing.

 

For example:

 

Player A and player B have 100 points each. A beats B so now has 150 points, but B goes down to 50.

 

If it was an easy victory and A wants to bash B again, he will only get 25 for a win but risks losing 75. As a further disincentive to bashing the same person several times, you would be banned from playing the same person twice in a row or twice in the same time period (a day, a week, whatever).

 

To encourage people to play as often as possible, rather than getting a good score and jealously guarding it, there could be a monthly bonus/penalty - if you played more than the average number of matches that month you would get say a 25% bonus to your score, but if you were below average you'd get a similar penalty.

 

The exact details and figures probably need some testing/tweaking, but it's an interesting concept. Let me know what you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the loser didn't lose any points from losing a match, then the winner would be able to to win the same amount by beating them again, which encourages you to bash anyone you know is not as good as you. I planned it so that there are diminishing returns from beating the same person repeatedly.

 

If it works, it should give a kind of ranking, but there will be potential for rapid changes of fortune, which could either make it more fun and exciting, or just annoy people, depending on your point of view. Any more criticisms would be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my two cents:

 

If two players are even in score value, then the winner would gain the same amount of points that they would have had lost.

 

Player A (100) beats Player B (100). Player A gains 25 and Player B loses 25. If Player B won, then he would gain 25 and Player a would lose 25 points.

 

If there is a difference in score, then the points alloted and taken away if the higher person wins will be proportionally smaller than the points given/taken with equal players, but if the lower scored player wins, there will be a greater amount of points lost/gained

 

Player A (125) rematches Player B (75), and wins. He only gains 13 points and Player B only loses 13 points. If Player B wins, he would gain 37 points and Player A would lose 37 points.

 

This also helps persaude against continually bashing the same person.

 

The sum of the number of potential points that someone could win plus the potential points that they could lose in any match should always equal a pre-set number: in this scenerio it was 50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sounds like quite a complicated formula. I was thinking of half the loser's score, just because it's simple. In practice (if it ever did get put into practice) I would probably base it around binary numbers, thereby avoiding fractions as much as possible (eg everyone starts on 1024 or something like that).

 

If scores were calculated dynamically by a web script, it would be easier to use int values. Although it's unlikely to get that big, and will probably have to be administered manually via a forum thread. This means keeping it simple to minimise disputes and mistakes. People will always know what they stand to gain/lose from a match without having to think too much.

 

Edit: My mathematical assumptions were totally wrong. Testing a few hypothetical situations I realised you can hit fractions sooner than I thought. If someone with a very high score beats someone with a very low score then loses a few games in a row, they could end up with a 3 figure score which won't divide by 2, which really screws everything up.

 

 

This is how envisage a forum thread system working:

 

Whoever is in charge of administrating the competition will post a thread and hopefully DMUK will sticky it. The first post will be a summary of the scores and standings, to be updated by the administrator whenever necessary. Everyone who enters will have to post ONE reply to this thread. This contains their details (zone name etc), matches played and results and their current score. They will edit their own post whenever they play, adding the result of the match to it and amending their own score. Once a day, the admin will check all the posts and update the summary post if anything has changed. Thus the admin's summary will just be a guide to the standings. The latest real time info on each player will be contained in that player's post. They will have to come and edit it as soon as it changes.

 

Just an idea, but it's the best way I can think of keeping things up to date without resorting to php/sql.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Sith's idea. But I'm unclear on how you determine exactly what fractions of points are awarded in uneven matches. Do you suggest that the more games that occur between the same people, the lower the stakes get?

 

Now, saberhagen's post brought up a question: do we play via the Zone or with direct IP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zone or IP doesn't matter. Whatever system we decide to use, it would be up to players to organise matches between themselves and they could use whatever method they want.

 

After some more thought, I've realised what was wrong with my scoring system: no matter how high your score is, you can only divide it the same number of times as the gain you got from your smallest win (eg if you've ever beaten someone with 16 points you will only be able to divide your score 3 times before it screws up). A possible solution would be to make the starting scores very large.

 

My original idea with 0 points would be that there are free bonus points available to take the player back up to a certain level under certain circumstances.

 

Problem now is this is all getting very complicated and it was originally supposed to be an elegantly simple idea that everyone would be able to grasp with no trouble. It might be easier to copy a scoring system from an exisitng ladder rather than making up our own, but from what I've seen, their forumulas are quite complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about this: Everyone plays everyone once. The winner of matches get 1 point. After everyone has played everyone once, the top couple of high scorers go on to the next round. It'll keep going n til there are 2 people left, and that match will decide the winner. I think that's real simple...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just went to pro-ladder.com intending to copy their scoring system and found out that they're planning to allow people to start their own private ladders for clans etc, so if it happens soon we could get one for the forum. Should be a lot more convenient than trying to make up our own system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...