Ladder and League relocation issues

How-to and support discussion for game play over internet.
User avatar
siron
Posts:504
Joined:Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:35 pm
Location:Hamburg
Contact:
Ladder and League relocation issues

Postby siron » Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:08 am

Finally, StepNRazor is back and LordBrazen has already the code of our kali ladder.

So there is hope that we will see the Ladder and League hosted by LB soon.

We should use this thread to discuss several proposals about new ladder features. Further, we should inform LB about the current bugs.

I am aware of the following issues:

1) Website-Bugs
Current ladder site works only with InternetExplorer at moment. For example, the links at the top (Main Ladder and Game History here: http://www.pixelexiq.com/moo2/ladder/de ... ?sort=Rank ) don’t work when you use Firefox, Opera etc. So you are just able to report games with the internet explorer.

2) Seb79 issue
Seb has played 38 games at moment and he has still just an elo estimate. Actually, you should get a full elo after 20 games. When Seb79 played his 20th game he actually had a full elo. But some games were double entries and marius removed them. So Seb lost his full elo (Marius probably downgraded his elo manually) and when seb played again his 20th game he did not regain his elo.

How to fix this problem?

Just upgrading his current elo estimate to a full elo? I assume that LB could easily do this.
Or should LB try to rate seb's last 18 games. (Opponent's elo's are not changed when they play against elo estimates.) Seb and his opponents should discuss it here.

3) K factor
PK would like to see more volatile elos. It is easy to achieve this by increasing the K factor (current value is 16). (I looked at the code and it seems we have to change just 1 value in the ladderroutines.asp)

So what K-Value should we choose? Voting?

Here is some background info about this K factor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELO_rating ... e_K-factor

4) Inactive Players
PK would like to see a ranking based on elo. But actually, besides our ladder ranking there is also the option to rank the ladder players according to their elo in our current ladder. Though, there are some inactive players at moment at the top and it seems illusionary that some of the active players will ever reach them. AlexD and me proposed that inactive players should lose their full elo. It should be downgraded to an estimate. When they play again they regain their full elo immediately. This is common in chess and go ratings and would give current ladder players the possibility to reach the top position in this ranking.

Counter proposals? I hope not :P . We should discuss the period of inactivity which should cause such a downgrade then. 2 months, 3 months , 6 months? Which period is appropriate? Voting?

5) Feel free to add proposals here.

User avatar
StepNRazor
Posts:70
Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
Contact:

Postby StepNRazor » Wed Oct 19, 2005 11:55 am

Question #1
here is a sugested solution, more replies found here.
http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/ ... 54583.aspx

All you have to do is modify your browserCaps section of the web.config file.

<browserCaps>

<case match="^Mozilla/5\.0 \([^)]*\) (Gecko/[-\d]+)?Netscape[6|7]/(?'version'(?'major'\d+)(?'minor'\.\d+)(?'letters'\w*)).*">

tagwriter=System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter
browser=Netscape
version=${version}
majorversion=${major}
minorversion=${minor}
frames=true
tables=true
cookies=true
javascript=true
javaapplets=true
ecmascriptversion=1.5
w3cdomversion=1.0
css1=true
css2=true
xml=true
</case>


<!-- MOZILLA //-->

<case match="^Mozilla/(?'version'(?'major'\d+)(?'minor'\.\d+)(?'letters'\w*)).*">
<case match="^[5-9]\." with="${version}">
tagwriter=System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter
</case>
</case>


<!-- OPERA 5+ //-->

<case match="Opera[ /](?'version'(?'major'\d+)(?'minor'\.\d+)(?'letters'\w*))">
<filter match="[4-9]" with="${major}">
<filter match="[5-9]" with="${major}">
tagwriter=System.Web.UI.HtmlTextWriter
</filter>
</filter>
</case>

</browserCaps>


Question #2
I think this was a boundary check bug that Marius fixed.


Question #3
Dunno but it seems like the elo is working ok on ladder allready.
I am sure that useing the same formula will add to consistancy for past players.

I would like to see a link added that displayed all games a player had with each person with 2 field won and loss. I feel this has a lot of impact, it is something I view on sports games not just that someone won or lost but who they won and lost to.

Another thing that might be fun is that players be allowed to post a save of a ladder game once they reach a certain number of laddr games, win or loose, and to further this they could have a more games games slots when they reach more games played something like N games played = a save slot, 2(N) = 2 saves, X(N) = X saves.


Question#4
Once again I'm a big ladder player, but I think that some of the old players should be honored and retain their achievements. Sort of like remebering old boxing champions, they cant get in the ring anymore and dont hold a title belt but are still called champ. If there is some reason their elo score is cuaseing a problem with other players abilities to get a title belt and become a champ then maybbe there scme problem with elo scoreing.

User avatar
siron
Posts:504
Joined:Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:35 pm
Location:Hamburg
Contact:

Postby siron » Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:15 am

Question #2
I think this was a boundary check bug that Marius fixed.
I think thats an different issue. Seb has an elo estimate right now. So his problem is unfixed.
Sort of like remebering old boxing champions, they cant get in the ring anymore and dont hold a title belt but are still called champ. If there is some reason their elo score is cuaseing a problem with other players abilities to get a title belt and become a champ then maybbe there scme problem with elo scoreing.
Downgrading means just adding an asterisk to their elo. If you want to distinguish between estimates and inactive players you could also use some other symbol. Further, you can still remember these old champions when you add a separate ranking including inactive players. Even old box champions are not included in current rankings, so I dont see that elo score causes any additional problem here.

User avatar
seb79
Posts:2
Joined:Sat Sep 10, 2005 10:48 am
Location:Berlin

Postby seb79 » Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:47 am

It is not so important for me to get an elo which reflects all my previous games correctly. It would be fine to have one which works for the future. E.g. the estimate I have now as a starting point.

Marius
Posts:1
Joined:Fri Oct 21, 2005 8:25 am
Contact:

Postby Marius » Fri Oct 21, 2005 8:29 am

I just want to let everyone know that I'm going to contact LB to give him whatever he needs.

I wish I had the time to help out more.

User avatar
PK
Posts:88
Joined:Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Location:Poland
Contact:

Postby PK » Fri Oct 21, 2005 10:45 am

Ladder web site works with Firefox. Thing that is not working are several links. If u know the finall address of website and paste it into search bar web site will be displayed and even reporting is possible. I often open ladder and paste on the end gamehistory.asp and it gives me a web site with history.

Seb`s case should be corrected long time ago. I hope to see it fixed soon!

K factor should be risen to a higher value. I would like to see some dynamic in the scores, not just 1-10 points movement who barely anyone will ever see.

Ladder no1 should be based ONLY on elo scores. Current system is not fair.
PK

User avatar
ALEX|D
Posts:306
Joined:Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:54 pm
Location:Germany NRW
Contact:

Postby ALEX|D » Sun Oct 23, 2005 4:46 pm

3) K factor
We should increase k-factor a bit, so that there´s a bit more movement on ladder stats.
4) Inactive Players
After some month, inactive player´s elo should be frozen, as long as he gives his comeback by playing a ladder game.
Ladder no1 should be based ONLY on elo scores. Current system is not fair.
I think so too, ELO says more about a players skills. Best Skill should be best rank imo !

User avatar
Cabman
Posts:235
Joined:Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:58 pm
Location:Zabrze, Poland

Postby Cabman » Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:29 pm

I agree with PK and ALEX... and hope that Siron eventually play with me from time to time :D

User avatar
siron
Posts:504
Joined:Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:35 pm
Location:Hamburg
Contact:

Postby siron » Wed Oct 26, 2005 7:43 pm

1) Website-Bugs
Current ladder site works only with InternetExplorer at moment.
LB told me that he has already fixed this problem. :)

@ K value
K factor should be risen to a higher value. I would like to see some dynamic in the scores, not just 1-10 points movement who barely anyone will ever see.
We should increase k-factor a bit, so that there´s a bit more movement on ladder stats.
Some values please. 20? 30? 40?...
Ladder no1 should be based ONLY on elo scores. Current system is not fair.
I can’t see that the system is „unfair“. You want to delete the current system completely?
I think so too, ELO says more about a players skills. Best Skill should be best rank imo !
Of course, ELO is more related to the player skills than the other ranking. But: Shouldn’t there be any other factors? (In the current system activity is a huge factor. And imo thats a good further factor.) Players with top skills might prefer to say no. But I guess more average or weaker players might lose interest in ladder then. The current system is more dynamic for those players (EVEN when you change K value). Actually, both ranking systems are now in our ladder but elo ranking is almost ignored. When there is a elo ranking of active players it is surely more attractive to watch such elo ranking. But I don’t see why these both systems cant coexist then...as it was intended when the site was founded.
and hope that Siron eventually play with me from time to time
heh. Will play more 1v1s when ladder is relocated then.

User avatar
PK
Posts:88
Joined:Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Location:Poland
Contact:

Postby PK » Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:05 am

Hmm... Siron is right about old system. It awards more active players who can advance in ladder faster then lazy old non playing veterans :)

I vote for K=40 ... :D
PK

User avatar
ALEX|D
Posts:306
Joined:Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:54 pm
Location:Germany NRW
Contact:

Postby ALEX|D » Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:23 am

I vote "k value" = 50.

User avatar
siron
Posts:504
Joined:Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:35 pm
Location:Hamburg
Contact:

Postby siron » Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:28 pm

I asked several other players about the k value - but no feedback here.

So I think it is time for a decision. I asked ALEX|D and he agrees with PKs proposal.

k value is 40 then.

So let's go to the next ladder issue:
"After some month, inactive player´s elo should be frozen, as long as he gives his comeback by playing a ladder game."
OK. How many months?

2? 3? 4? 6?

Further:

LordBrazen had the idea to add further tournaments.

Here are my thoughts: I dislike to add further "ladders" which would run permanently. But seasonal tournaments are an idea which I fully support.

Additionally, Moo2 has its 10th birthday next year. So it is a good occasion to test the demand for such tournies.

The Release Date was the Oct 31, 1996 (according to game spot). StepNRazor proposed a 1v1 and 4way tournament and (imho) the finals (and semifinals) should be near this date.

Any ideas? How about 2-4 qualification tournies for these finals?

User avatar
ALEX|D
Posts:306
Joined:Fri Jul 29, 2005 12:54 pm
Location:Germany NRW
Contact:

Postby ALEX|D » Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:03 pm

K=40 okay with me.

I would like to vote, to move a player into inactive-status after 6 month.

I think tournaments r okay.

:idea: Tournaments sequence:

1) Both player arrange about Setup (switches, galaxy settings & techbans ...)

2) Each Player create a race.

3) Some neutral players, should make the save, they all need to agree on map, if someone has big advantage, they should edit save as long as it is ~balanced !

User avatar
Cabman
Posts:235
Joined:Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:58 pm
Location:Zabrze, Poland

Postby Cabman » Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:51 am

K=40 ok
I like the idea of tournaments.
Count me in.

User avatar
StepNRazor
Posts:70
Joined:Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:42 pm
Location:Tualatin, OR . U.S.
Contact:

Postby StepNRazor » Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:55 pm

I like 40's I rember sneaking one into a movie theater in ALaska and watching Jack Nichlson in a wearwolf movie drinking a 40 =)
I had thought of some sort of level playing field map modding along time ago back in the TSL day their was a map leveler but no one seemed to want to go this route. there might be an alternative to haveing a map modded by a third person, perhaps some more work in the balanced start thread or perhaps some discusion on a tourney switch that sets hw to excat same settings and dunno but maybee could do some settings for all the other star's but I think a tourney switch would be nice and a lot quicker to use than trying to find a nuetral 3rd party to mod a map to
as it is a tourney is seem like there might be some number of games played by single or double elimination type thing dunno is the tourney a free flowing of games played or is it more like an archery or chess tourney dunno I'm ok with which ever way it go's but think some decesion on which way it is done should be made.


Return to “Internet games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests