Evolved Rankings

Hey guys, I've been working on player rankings for http://evolved.sgrstats.com

Just wanted some ideas and opinions.

1. What sort of ranking formulas would you guys like to see.
2. Which formula should be the one for the leaderboard? ie. which should be the default, the one where you can claim to be best or worst .

I liked on sgr stats how you oculd restructure the board, but the problem was that it did not renumber the board. So you could be 34th in the rankings, 10th for headshots, but you had to count where you were.

So leaderboard with acen, decen options, with changable options. So you can be1st in K/D, but 3rd in exp.

Exp is not the best way to calculate the leader board. New players have no incentive to try to make the board, becuase other people have bene playign longer, no chance to catch up.

I am at a loss for recommended formula. (I belive their was a thread with recommended formulas - sgr stats thread)

Originally Posted by realazthat

Hey guys, I've been working on player rankings for http://evolved.sgrstats.com

Just wanted some ideas and opinions.

1. What sort of ranking formulas would you guys like to see.
2. Which formula should be the one for the leaderboard? ie. which should be the default, the one where you can claim to be best or worst .

You might want to check out this Thread: http://forums.stargateworlds.com/showthread.php?t=34088

I'm no use for producing formulas themselves but I would like to see rankings for Most Experienced, Most Damage Dealt, Most Health Dispensed. Others will want a K/D ranking but I don't care too much about K/D, it's a team game and I happily sacrifice lives if it helps the team. A Top Winner using Win/Loss ratio might be nice.

Edit: Didn't see Bonnonon's Post. I agree with the resequencable leaderboard, I did that too. I think the Thread they reference is the one I have linked to.

sweet mother of jesus ... looking good my friend im lovin it
and what u say your gonna add even better

and it tells me that my Average rank is a 2star general.. im pleased with that cos it tells me i aint that bad at the game


keep it up realz

For my part I think exp/time played would be a fair deal for newcomers, someone good would gain experience fast and making it to the top 10, while some people have just ridiculously high amount of experience and time played, who might not even make the top 10

Having a ranking means you try to put the best player on top, experience alone isn't a factor, kill alone isn't a factor, K/D (most overrated stat)... so what?!

Experience represent what a player gain by playing, if a player make more experience than someone else faster, it would make him a good player.

As Scott said: ...I agree with the resequencable leaderboard...

K/D ranking for me =D

for some reason it says I have only played 11 hours on amarna. :S weird.

Originally Posted by Bonnonon

for some reason it says I have only played 11 hours on amarna. :S weird.

From http://forums.stargateworlds.com/sho...5954&page=3#53:

Map stats (new):
(bug) Amarna appears to have invalid stats in SGR's db

I've had a thought about working out how long you've played on Amarna Bonnonon.

At the top of the Stats screen you are told your Global Time in game, currently 391:02:25 for me. In the maps bit it has the bugged figures for time spent in Amarna (only showing 05:04:22 for me) and then adds up the Total time spent on all the maps underneath this, showing 302:45:57 for me.

So 302:45:57 minus 05:04:22 equals 297:41:35 (the time spent on the other three maps).

391:02:25 minus 297:41:35 equals 93:39:50, the actual time spent on Amarna.

So I've spent just under 94 hours on Amarna.

Likewise I can use my Global Win/Loss ratio and the bugged Win/Loss figures to work out that I have actually been on the winning team on this map 260 times and lost 177 times, a W/L of 1.4689.

Apply the same calculation to your stats and voila. I would have used your stats rather than mine but I don't know your Member ID and we can't find people by username yet (presumably this will come with the ranking stats as it did on SGRStats).

i don't think xp or kd are any indicators of skill. of course i would like to see the list resortable for any column, but the primary factor should be somehow based on skill. i think xp/time is probably best, or maybe somehow incorporate accuracy and damage ratio too. or maybe it should be based on some sort of needlessly elaborate formula that takes top minds to figure out.
or perhaps don't even try. just make the initial order based on player id and let people sort and compare however they want.

Originally Posted by Scott Morrison

I've had a thought about working out how long you've played on Amarna Bonnonon.

At the top of the Stats screen you are told your Global Time in game, currently 391:02:25 for me. In the maps bit it has the bugged figures for time spent in Amarna (only showing 05:04:22 for me) and then adds up the Total time spent on all the maps underneath this, showing 302:45:57 for me.

So 302:45:57 minus 05:04:22 equals 297:41:35 (the time spent on the other three maps).

391:02:25 minus 297:41:35 equals 93:39:50, the actual time spent on Amarna.

So I've spent just under 94 hours on Amarna.

Likewise I can use my Global Win/Loss ratio and the bugged Win/Loss figures to work out that I have actually been on the winning team on this map 260 times and lost 177 times, a W/L of 1.4689.

Apply the same calculation to your stats and voila. I would have used your stats rather than mine but I don't know your Member ID and we can't find people by username yet (presumably this will come with the ranking stats as it did on SGRStats).

Thanks Man I wish I had a math brain... seems so simple now that you mentioned it.

The first question to ask is what basic components of the game are there?
K/D, Heal, successful flag runs, achievements, experience, accuracy (are all I can think of other then map wins/losses which are team based and not individual based).

Skill cannot be measure by experience because you gain experience without skill (to spite gaining skill with experience).

I think rank should be more on skill then experience so therefore k/d (and others) should be at a higher percentage then experience.

The base for rank should be answered by devs as a group and by the current regular player base eliminating personal opinions and providing a fair ranking system for all players current and future. With that said this thread is the right approach.

1.Identify components
2.What should rank be based on? (skill, experience, both, other)
3.Once question 2 is answered you can assign percentages to
the components to formulate the rank.

Originally Posted by blevok

i don't think xp or kd are any indicators of skill.

Well, it is, if you look at my experience and my time, you can see I gained more experience than many players who played more than me (sometimes twice the time). It wasn't a fluke, its skills

For my K/D, since I'm a reckless Jaffa, it doesn't go that well but it is more than 1.0 and still rising.

It will be hard to determine a standard for ranking. I wish devs would have found that solution at the beginning but they had more important things to do

Originally Posted by TheMadDoctor

Well, it is, if you look at my experience and my time, you can see I gained more experience than many players who played more than me (sometimes twice the time). It wasn't a fluke, its skills

i would have to agree its the same for myself , b4 sgr.stats went down i was in top 5 and most of the people in the top 10 had played twice the amount of hours,

so we have agreed on something

Originally Posted by Bonnonon

Thanks Man I wish I had a math brain... seems so simple now that you mentioned it.

No problem at all Lord Go'Tak, sire

What I intend to do has a few "secret sauces", different formulas in different columns on the ranking page. Each "secret sauce" will not be secret at all, and will be fully explained in detail (probably in a forum post), and derived from this thread, and the SGRStats better ranking formula thread (see my post @ http://forums.stargateworlds.com/sho...4088&page=3#62. Even though I entirely disagree with many formulas, I will be glad to implement them as a field in the rankings, even if I don't understand the formula or its reasoning at all (all I need is an equation).

Originally Posted by blevok

i don't think xp or kd are any indicators of skill. of course i would like to see the list resortable for any column, but the primary factor should be somehow based on skill. i think xp/time is probably best, or maybe somehow incorporate accuracy and damage ratio too. or maybe it should be based on some sort of needlessly elaborate formula that takes top minds to figure out.

1. Explain why K/D is not an indicator of skill in some way. Does it not indicate that you are a skilled killer (ie. you don't die often, yet you can kill many?).

2. So *what* are the factors of skill? (If you have more factors that I need to consider for my "secret sauce", I must hear )

3. XP/time is another good indicator of skill (in addition to k/d IMO), and so is accuracy (per class only, see my post mentioned above in the SGRStats better ranking formula thread). The problem with time, is that time is bugged; many people suffer time warps (ie. in a ten minute interval they gain 500+ hrs). Some suspect TimeTraveler but either way, this reduces the SPM (score per minute). There are similar measurements though. Score/kill, score/round, score/(average score on that map) etc.

4. The problem with damage ratio is that having a higher damage ratio doesn't mean you succeeded in your goal: to kill the enemy, or to win the match. In fact, if someone had a very low damage/kill ratio, it means they have the worst luck (or are less skillful), since it means they kept dying (or failing to kill the enemy), just before they should have killed 'em. So in a way, a high damage ratio, and low k/d could be looked upon as a negative (not necessarily my opinion, just something to consider).

5. Your the top minds I need. "Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you".



Bottom Line: Which Secret Sauce should be the default? How should it be chosen from among all of the sauces?

Originally Posted by realazthat

Bottom Line: Which Secret Sauce should be the default? How should it be chosen from among all of the sauces?

I think a poll could do the trick, waiting for at least 50 persons to vote, making sure you got a certain majority

what i mean is that you can't look at someone and say, your kd is 2.5 therefore you kick a$$. they could be a noob sci with 5 hours of play and 95% turret kills.
but that doesn't mean it can't indicate skill, just that it's not definite.
same goes for xp, and i hold myself up as an example. on sgrstats, i was always around 19, but am i really in the top 20 players? i don't think so. maybe in the top 50 or 75, but my kd is only .90 so by that stat, i'd be hundreds down in the list.
even xp/time could be inaccurate because i could be doing very well but still loose a bunch of matches in a row, so get less xp per hour. but then i could be doing terrible, but consistently on the winning team, so more xp.
it seems to me that to have an accurate rating of skill, the only way is for it to be a complicated formula with several variables.
but i really haven't put much thought into it, and don't really want to, it hurts my GF ratio. that is, i try to spend more time in game than on the forum. . i admit that i did not even read the rank formula thread at all. i figured there were enough people thinking about it, i'd rather not do crazy math, i'll just wait and reap the benefits when they figure it out...