Maintenance for the week of December 23:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Change The Ranking System – May Update
RCubed1967
✭✭
This is a follow up from my posts “Revised Leadership Board System for ToT”. The first portion of this post specifically discusses the data I gathered in May 2023 and provides further reasoning why a change is needed. The last portion of the post discusses my proposed change and comments gathered from other participants.
May 2023 Results
I played a total of 250 games and finished the season with 1110 points, placing me in the top 5%.
As shown in the following table, my win/loss ratio was similar to last month based on if I had start or not. My average win ratio when I did not have the start was improving as I changed tactics (you will see my win rate improving later in the season).
Only 28% of my games were one-offs (I played the other person only one in the month) yet this had the largest impact on my score. This is shown in the 2 tables below. The first table shows the net point and my wins, the second breaks each series into the number of wins I had in the series.
The final table shows my average points per game in a series. Specifically, please look at the row with 6 games in the series where with 4 wins I averaged 8.5 pts/game, 5 wins I averaged 78.3 pts/game, and in winning all 6 games, I received 35.5 points per game...and if I only won 1 game, I only lost 1.3 pts/game! Now compare that to the single games where each loss cost me 95.1 pts/game and my wins gave me 83.7 pts/game.
Undoubtedly and unfortunately, the single match ups are currently the meat and potatoes of winning series.
The next graphs show how fast points and rank change in the current system with my games this month.
Changes Needed
As several players have stated, a ranking system based on chess is not appropriate for an RNG based game. My simple example stands, chess does not have randomly placed pieces, but ToT does. When RNG is a dominant part of the game, series must be the dominant factor in ranking. No matter how good you are, you will lose to RNG occasionally. That said, if you are good, you will statistically win your series.
I proposed the following last month:
1 - All players enter the monthly ranking at the same point total (say 500).
2 - Each win is worth +5 points, each loss is worth -5 points. There is a maximum of either 4 wins or losses you can have against a player. After either 4 wins or 4 losses, you cannot play that player competitively for the remainder of the month.
3 - There is a net 40 points available for series wins (over and beyond the win/loss system). This provides the scaling between players beyond a win ratio. The most a player can gain for a series is +20 points and the most a player can lose for a series is -20 points. The logic of the system is as follows:
3.1 - When two players have played twice, the 40 points is distributed. These same points are redistributed if they play additional games (maximum 4 wins or 4 losses). The series points are added to the win/loss points.
3.2 – Calculation is (40 * (wins/(wins + losses))) – 20
3.3 Round to 0 digits
The table below shows the distribution of points.
In discussions with several other players, most liked the changes but there were two concerns noted by a couple of the top ranked players.
First was a concern about wait time in prioritizing series over first available match. I personally don’t see this as an issue because the maximum wait time to prioritize a series could be set at one or two minutes. The likelihood of exceeding the cap 4 wins or 4 losses only occurred 5 times (out of 250 games) to me this month.
The second issue is about the win/loss calculation. The concern here is that a person with a high win rate and high number of games played could exceed the points of a better player. I agree with the concern.
There is a work around on the second issue. The win/loss calculation could be simply a point allocation based on the win rate over the month. It could be something as simple as taking your win rate, subtract 50%, then multiply that by 2000 (e.g., 53%-50% = 3%. 3% x 2000 = 60 bonus points). The bonus points would only be available to player with more than 30 ranked games played in the month to make it statistically valid.
The downside to the workaround is that it is less visible. Visibility could be added to the game startup so you see your current win rate and the current series.
I beg for a change to the ranking system. ZOS - please make if appropriate for the type of game we play.
Players – please add comments. Support, contradict, modify – just comment.
Thank you
May 2023 Results
I played a total of 250 games and finished the season with 1110 points, placing me in the top 5%.
As shown in the following table, my win/loss ratio was similar to last month based on if I had start or not. My average win ratio when I did not have the start was improving as I changed tactics (you will see my win rate improving later in the season).
Only 28% of my games were one-offs (I played the other person only one in the month) yet this had the largest impact on my score. This is shown in the 2 tables below. The first table shows the net point and my wins, the second breaks each series into the number of wins I had in the series.
The final table shows my average points per game in a series. Specifically, please look at the row with 6 games in the series where with 4 wins I averaged 8.5 pts/game, 5 wins I averaged 78.3 pts/game, and in winning all 6 games, I received 35.5 points per game...and if I only won 1 game, I only lost 1.3 pts/game! Now compare that to the single games where each loss cost me 95.1 pts/game and my wins gave me 83.7 pts/game.
Undoubtedly and unfortunately, the single match ups are currently the meat and potatoes of winning series.
The next graphs show how fast points and rank change in the current system with my games this month.
Changes Needed
As several players have stated, a ranking system based on chess is not appropriate for an RNG based game. My simple example stands, chess does not have randomly placed pieces, but ToT does. When RNG is a dominant part of the game, series must be the dominant factor in ranking. No matter how good you are, you will lose to RNG occasionally. That said, if you are good, you will statistically win your series.
I proposed the following last month:
1 - All players enter the monthly ranking at the same point total (say 500).
2 - Each win is worth +5 points, each loss is worth -5 points. There is a maximum of either 4 wins or losses you can have against a player. After either 4 wins or 4 losses, you cannot play that player competitively for the remainder of the month.
3 - There is a net 40 points available for series wins (over and beyond the win/loss system). This provides the scaling between players beyond a win ratio. The most a player can gain for a series is +20 points and the most a player can lose for a series is -20 points. The logic of the system is as follows:
3.1 - When two players have played twice, the 40 points is distributed. These same points are redistributed if they play additional games (maximum 4 wins or 4 losses). The series points are added to the win/loss points.
3.2 – Calculation is (40 * (wins/(wins + losses))) – 20
3.3 Round to 0 digits
The table below shows the distribution of points.
In discussions with several other players, most liked the changes but there were two concerns noted by a couple of the top ranked players.
First was a concern about wait time in prioritizing series over first available match. I personally don’t see this as an issue because the maximum wait time to prioritize a series could be set at one or two minutes. The likelihood of exceeding the cap 4 wins or 4 losses only occurred 5 times (out of 250 games) to me this month.
The second issue is about the win/loss calculation. The concern here is that a person with a high win rate and high number of games played could exceed the points of a better player. I agree with the concern.
There is a work around on the second issue. The win/loss calculation could be simply a point allocation based on the win rate over the month. It could be something as simple as taking your win rate, subtract 50%, then multiply that by 2000 (e.g., 53%-50% = 3%. 3% x 2000 = 60 bonus points). The bonus points would only be available to player with more than 30 ranked games played in the month to make it statistically valid.
The downside to the workaround is that it is less visible. Visibility could be added to the game startup so you see your current win rate and the current series.
I beg for a change to the ranking system. ZOS - please make if appropriate for the type of game we play.
Players – please add comments. Support, contradict, modify – just comment.
Thank you
0