Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
Ranking madness
|
fuzzycat wrote
at 11:37 AM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST
I know this is a prototypical whining post about the ELO-Ranking system. Well ELO is for 1 vs. 1 and not for 7 player multigames, I think its done very unreal, unfair in kdice. why?
I had just a game: (all almost equal starting scores) 7th place finished -40 6th places finishes with -26 (he had even higher score than 7th place) WHAT THIS? Is getting 7th nearly double as bad, as finishing 6th? REALLY? With all you experience on the game, I can just tell to low places, are people with bad start, which order they die is almost random. But taking DOUBLE as much Points from 7th than from 6h is just madeness. And as second place I got +26 points or so. Does that mean i have to finish 2 times as second to compensate a 7th place, were I didn't even move twice! 2nd place is muuuuch more difficult. Ah, just to hell with this. |
Replies 1 - 5 of 5
|
joby.d wrote
at 12:28 PM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST " http://kdice.travially.de/ "
If your opponents have the same rating as you in both games, then finishing 1st once compensates a 7th place. Finishing 2nd place compensates a 6th place. I've played a multiplayer game that used ELO before and the adjustments seemed accurate. And you're supposed to lose more points for having a higher score, in this case the guy who got sixth lost an extra point or two compared to the guy in 7th. Play against higher rated opponents and you shall be very happy with the results. |
|
Nesadi wrote
at 12:31 PM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST Fuzzycat is right on the mark. ELO is for 1 vs 1 and not 7 player games. Used straight up it misses the mark. Something needs to be modified.
1) Add a modifier to a player's incoming score based on turn order before plugging them in to the ELO formulae. For example 1st +9%, 2nd +6%, 3rd +3%, 4th = no change, 5th -3%, 6th -6%, 7th -9%. So a 1500 point player going first is treated as an effective 1635 and going 7th as 1365 for ELO score adjustment purposes. More accurate adjustment percentages could be calculated from a database of games. How often does the person going 7th win? The person going 1st? OR 2) Change the starting setup: say 2nd to go gets +1 die, 3rd +2... 7th +6. |
|
|
fuzzycat wrote
at 1:14 PM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST joby.d <i>If your opponents have the same rating as you in both games, then finishing 1st once compensates a 7th place. Finishing 2nd place compensates a 6th place. </i>
This is correct, however the difference between 1st and 2nd can be a big deal. However between 6th and 7th is not much different, they are almost equal in looserness ;-) |
|
ryan2 wrote
at 2:03 PM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST I agree that this is an issue.
I don't agree that ELO can't be used for multiplayer games. ELO is simply a formula for adjusting a rating and it is used in tournament situations where there are hundreds of places. I'm working on ways to make the starting more level... possibly give an extra dice to 5th start, and an extra 2 dice to 6th and 7th. Perhaps the place values don't mean as much as they should. You can argue first place and 6th and 7th are obtained by luck/bad luck and the battle for 2nd-5th have the most skill involved. I'm working on new scoring that reduces the importance of place. I should have something to test in about 10 days. |
|
no_Wolf wrote
at 3:46 PM, Saturday January 20, 2007 EST Oy.
|
