It is currently Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:58 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Forum rules


Please stay on topic at all times in this board.

Please be respectful to other members and administrators.

No spam.



Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 233 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:19 pm 
Maintenance & PR Team
Maintenance & PR Team
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:28 am
Posts: 264
Gold medals are incredibly simple to get. So much so that they are a worthless accolade. A person doesn't even have to spend money to get one. If you live in your mother's basement and have no friends, you could get a gold medal every week with some half-assed build that only wins 60% of the time.

The weekly tournament rewards quantity, not quality and the pool of people who like to brag about how much time they spend on their computer isn't nearly as large as the pool of people who would like to be able to brag about their win-rate for a week.

Let's have a 64-player bracket-style tournament where you enter a single setup. You can replenish your kits between matches but not change their type. And you can't touch anything else about your setup. Then we'd have an accolade worth fighting for. I'd play this without even a reward.


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2015 5:58 pm 
Lieutenant Major
Lieutenant Major
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am
Posts: 1421
Oh being number 1 is not good :?:

I didnt know that :!:

Better to be on rank 27 :!:

Funny

:lol: :lol: :lol:

So a good win-loss-ratio is better :?:

_________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:17 am 
News Team
News Team
 Profile

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:40 am
Posts: 242
Location: England
Gender: male
Nice idea J^8

_________________
Fang456!
-300 Subs + COUNTING!
-SUPERMECHS GOALS:
1) Reach 1 Gold Medal
2) Reach 1 Silver Medal
3) Reach 1 Bronze Medal
4) Get Into The Top Clan
5) Reach 100 Mythicals :P
6) Spend $1000


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 11:15 am 
Lieutenant Major
Lieutenant Major
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am
Posts: 1421
jtothepowerof8 wrote:
Gold medals are incredibly simple to get.

Image

Thats why you have so less gold medals :!:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

jtothepowerof8 wrote:
The weekly tournament rewards quantity, not quality and the pool of people who like to brag about how much time they spend on their computer isn't nearly as large as the pool of people who would like to be able to brag about their win-rate for a week.

Image

So the weekly win-loss ratio is much more important ...

1217 / 32 = 38 ... bestplayeroftheworld
_560 / 19 = 29 ... j^8-rabbit

funny

:lol: :lol: :lol:


P.S.: we dont talk about or compare the win-streak ;)

_________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:01 pm 
Head Moderator
Head Moderator
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:02 pm
Posts: 1622
Regardless of who's got the better ratio here, both are quite fantastic.

But overall, I believe J^8 was trying to get at the fact that some people can actually physically be at their computer longer to put in more matches, but it doesn't necessarily mean they actually have a better mech.

With the results shown, we can't see who you lost those 32 matches with. For all we know, that could be 32 losses against J^8, which would make it seem like he's the better player, but you could log in more hours (I am NOT saying this is actually the case, just putting the scenario up there).

The tournament style would eliminate the quantity aspect and make it purely about the quality of the mech and a tad bit of luck.

If we calculate everyone's Win/Lose ratios they come out to the following:
Best - 38.03
CocodiJoco - 5.57
Dewah77 - 8.26
r1234 - 12.71
Nic - 17.47
grosbite - 11.15
crash - 10.91
Dottore - 8.24
j^8 - 29.47
DongNiYu - 9.13

Just looking at the example you put up Best, sure you deserve 1st with your win ratio, but CocodiJoco's ratio is 5.57. It's the WORST out of the top 10 there. While the fact that he played so much more should be attributed, the fact that his ratio is so low should also be factored in. j^8's ratio is VERY good. He SHOULD be 2nd based on that ratio determination, but he can't log in the hours like you do.

I dunno what the current system calculates exactly, but it should be point based in my opinion.
Wins = x pts
Losses = loss of x pts

So if Winning were +2 pts and losing was -5 or something, then we'd have a better system for determining those who deserve rewards. It still rewards quantity, but puts more emphasis on quality (better ratios).

New rankings based on above would be
1. Best - 2594
2. Dewah - 1428
3. Coco - 1228
4. r1234 - 1123
5. j^8 - 1025
6. Nic - 1018
7. grosbite - 951
8. crash - 908
9. DongNuYu - 809
10. Dottore - 804

_________________
Image
Gettin' real tired of your shi...


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:20 pm 
Lieutenant Major
Lieutenant Major
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am
Posts: 1421
malicewolf wrote:
... For all we know, that could be 32 losses against J^8, which would make it seem like he's the better player, but you could log in more hours (I am NOT saying this is actually the case, just putting the scenario up there).


Even as scenario not possible ...
bestplayeroftheworld won 5 against j^8 out of the last 7 battles
:!:
;)

Also the system dont "allow" so much battles against the same player :!:

malicewolf wrote:
If we calculate everyone's Win/Lose ratios they come out to the following:
Best - 28.03


Please correct that ... a small but important mistake :!:

1217/32 = 38,03


;)

3rd point about time ...
if you dont take part of a world-championship, you will NEVER be a world champion, doesnt matter if you are 7 times better than the actuell world champion.

You can compare it to the tennis main-tour ... if you dont play 40 weeks you cannot be number 1
:!:

_________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:11 pm 
Head Moderator
Head Moderator
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:02 pm
Posts: 1622
ah, my mistake, fixed the 3.

Point being once again. Those who commit more time should not be burdened just because they have the time. But those who cannot commit quite as much shouldn't be burdened either when they no doubt DO have considerably better mechs as seen by the stats.

There is no doubt, you should be on the top in all the scenarios above. But, Coco having the WORST W/L ratio of the group (and by a large gap too), should be factored in as well in my opinion. Coco's got quantity, but not quality. My altered version would reward j^8 for his superior mech with his great win/lose ratio, but not so much that it overshadow's the time dedicated by Coco.

And I do have to agree with the quantity of medals, vs. quality issue. BD has a similar issue going on. There are indeed a good many who deserve the medals they have and the medals are a good representation of THEIR specific achievements. Then we have other's who have simply gotten away with farming medals on noncompetitive worlds, yet they have more medals than some of the best players in the game.

It's not to say your achievements aren't earned, but that not everyone's are.

_________________
Image
Gettin' real tired of your shi...


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 2:48 pm 
Specialist
Specialist
 Profile

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:20 pm
Posts: 27
Here's the current top 15 mechs with 4 hours to go:

1. bestplayeroftheworld - 1270/38 - 33.42
2. GLADIATOR - 1140/36 - 31.67
3. Dewah77 -1063/116 - 9.16
4. EXPENDABLE12 - 1110/138 - 8.04
5. r1234 - 753/98 - 7.68
6. grosbite - 693/55 - 12.60
7. Hansen Dw - 655/155 - 4.22
8. CocodiJoco - 654/99 - 6.61
9. crash - 602/60 - 10.03
10. kraimar - 519/72 - 7.21
11. Expendable13 - 505/42 - 12.02
12. * THE-Evil * - 514/19 - 27.32
13. tigermask - 516/14 - 36.86
14. j^8 - 512/10 - 51.20
15. roccotano4 - 535/45 - 11.89

When you control for # of matches played, you get a ranking based on skill.

Here's that same list ordered by win/loss ratio with the change in position in brackets:

1. j^8 - 51.20 (+13)
2. tigermask - 36.86 (+11)
3. bestplayeroftheworld - 33.42 (-2)
4. GLADIATOR - 31.67 (-2)
5. * THE-Evil * - 27.32 (+7)
6. grosbite - 12.60 (0)
7. Expendable13 - 12.02 (+4)
8. roccotano4 - 11.89 (+7)
9. crash - 10.03 (0)
10. Dewah77 - 9.16 (-7)
11. EXPENDABLE12 - 8.04 (-7)
12. r1234 - 7.68 (-7)
13. kraimar - 7.21 (-3)
14. CocodiJoco - 6.61 (-6)
15. Hansen Dw - 4.22 (-8)

The larger the +ve number the more the current ranking system under values a player's relative skill level, the larger the -ve number the more it over values a player's relative activity within the week.

The fact is that if players could only play 500 matches that counted toward their weekly ranking the second list would be the leaderboard.

I agree with j^8 that skill is far harder to come by than hours spent in front of a computer and have way more respect for a high win/loss ratio by players who play a lot of matches every week than the way the current leaderboard ranks players. A certain level of activity is important though, a player who wins his first 75 matches and then quits for the week shouldn't be in first place either.

Despite the fact that the old ladderpoint system could easily be cheated it did, in theory, produce a much better ranking as it appropriately valued both quality and quantity. To stay at the top a player had to both win a lot of matches AND have a high win/loss ratio.

The fact that Ogonna's 13 gold medals all came from the old system makes them far more valuable than 30 gold medals under this new system.

Is there any way the tournament j^8 suggested could be made a reality? It would be really interesting to see the results.


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri Apr 24, 2015 4:04 pm 
Lieutenant Major
Lieutenant Major
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am
Posts: 1421
Sorry - but you are a Goofy j^8 ... I tell you now exactly why ...
(you should really think about why you are)

beststreakoftheworld = j^8

Dont lie about, because Malice can see it :!:

That shows "oh I want see me in first rank" and you tried with an other account to agree with yourself ... funny :!:


beststreakoftheworld wrote:
Here's the current top 15 mechs

Top 15 ... why not top 10 like Malice used ... oh you are not in top 10 :!:
:lol:

beststreakoftheworld wrote:
the second list would be the leaderboard.

Dreams, dreams, dreams.



beststreakoftheworld wrote:
I agree with j^8

As mentioned ... you agree to yourself.

:lol:

beststreakoftheworld wrote:
Despite the fact that the old ladderpoint system could easily be cheated ... that Ogonna's 13 gold medals all came from the old system ...

Funny that the one who cheated write this AND for the other cheater it explain exactly why he got it in old system :!:

Really ... thats the main reason I HAD TO write "Goofy" ... it is not bad meant ... it just describe your thinking perfectly :!:
;)

Btw ... 1 tournament says also absolut nothing (right kit - just 1 example).
You would need weekly tournaments ... OHH ... we HAVE weekly tournaments
:!:
:shock:

:lol:

_________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: SuperMech Tournament
PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 4:18 am 
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
 Profile

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2013 3:40 am
Posts: 517
Gender: male
malicewolf wrote:
Regardless of who's got the better ratio here, both are quite fantastic.

But overall, I believe J^8 was trying to get at the fact that some people can actually physically be at their computer longer to put in more matches, but it doesn't necessarily mean they actually have a better mech.

With the results shown, we can't see who you lost those 32 matches with. For all we know, that could be 32 losses against J^8, which would make it seem like he's the better player, but you could log in more hours (I am NOT saying this is actually the case, just putting the scenario up there).

The tournament style would eliminate the quantity aspect and make it purely about the quality of the mech and a tad bit of luck.

If we calculate everyone's Win/Lose ratios they come out to the following:
Best - 38.03
CocodiJoco - 5.57
Dewah77 - 8.26
r1234 - 12.71
Nic - 17.47
grosbite - 11.15
crash - 10.91
Dottore - 8.24
j^8 - 29.47
DongNiYu - 9.13

Just looking at the example you put up Best, sure you deserve 1st with your win ratio, but CocodiJoco's ratio is 5.57. It's the WORST out of the top 10 there. While the fact that he played so much more should be attributed, the fact that his ratio is so low should also be factored in. j^8's ratio is VERY good. He SHOULD be 2nd based on that ratio determination, but he can't log in the hours like you do.

I dunno what the current system calculates exactly, but it should be point based in my opinion.
Wins = x pts
Losses = loss of x pts

So if Winning were +2 pts and losing was -5 or something, then we'd have a better system for determining those who deserve rewards. It still rewards quantity, but puts more emphasis on quality (better ratios).

New rankings based on above would be
1. Best - 2594
2. Dewah - 1428
3. Coco - 1228
4. r1234 - 1123
5. j^8 - 1025
6. Nic - 1018
7. grosbite - 951
8. crash - 908
9. DongNuYu - 809
10. Dottore - 804



What was the problem with the old ladder point system? When you get 5% of you oponnents's ladder points. And if you lost you lost 5% of your points. It was a way better system. Because the losses doesnt count now... But then for example if "best" was in the first place with like 100 000 ladderpoints he just stopped playing when j^8 came online so he wont met him and wont lose ladderpoints. So j^8 had a chance to catch him because she was afraid to lose ladderpoints. And if she would play maybe lose once against j^8 and lose the first place. But now he can still play and lose 3 times against j^8 and nothing happens because the losses doesnt count and j^8 has no chance to catch him.


Top
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 233 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Copyright Tacticsoft Ltd. 2008   
Updated By phpBBservice.nl