28-07-2003 17:15									#121
	Suffering from ads?

Oops, missed a lot due to connection being down for almost a day, but Mathe, it looks promising... now just wait till I have a closer look at it .

	29-07-2003 07:14									#122
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Math tell me why you don't see the flaw? Could it be you have not play tested this? I think so... If so email me your results or post them here if you have play tested this...

I keep saying this but I am sure you will find out soon enough we have been there did that, the old system, the elo system. They are flawed require lots of rules are complicated. Very few liked it, remember the community voted out the first one and ruled out the elo.
So insinuations no it's called play testing and lots of it. Try it, we have... Maybe you should take the time...

You and Solver simply are not listening or do not care what people like Troll have to say. What he is saying is what the majority have already said.

I challenge you to play test this and put up a simple formula so the average person can also play test it.

Until then you have a formula that may or may not work, you say it does but I have not seen any proof it does under normal game conditions.

Anyone else?

	29-07-2003 07:52									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

For instance as I said CLEARLY:

in a 3 player game, A(dam), B(rian) and C(hris) are playing.

If Adam starts a game on tundra and chris on mountains and rivers etc... Who would you expect to win the game?

Was it skill?

If you are Adam and a newbie like Paul comes into your game who would you expect to win?

Was it skill?

You simply can not base a rankings system solely based on skill in a game such as CTP. It is ludicrous at best. I simply can not figure out why some people simply do not get this very important point.

Based on this one point your system is flawed, you will have people dropping games like flies within the first turn 9. We have already seen this take the hit and start another game.

Sooner or later you have several ace land games and you will be in top stop based on land not skill.

I also can not stress enough we have been there done that do you understand that? Your idea is not new it has been done and play tested it does not work...

At least in the 10% system the only person to take a fair sized loss is the loser. All other players gain or take a minor hit. That equals desire to play the game lets look at your examples:



in a 3 player game, A(dam), B(rian) and C(hris) are playing.
the ratings before the game:
A : 1050
B : 1020
C : 980
ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0
A : 1054
B : 1019
C : 977
ACB : +4 / -11 / +7 // SUM = 0 ( Why would C lose 11 points for beating a better B? Why would B gain more than A for being last, why would B gain for losing to a lesser C? )
A : 1054
B : 1027
C : 969
BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0
A : 1044
B : 1029
C : 977
BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0
A : 1034
B : 1029
C : 987
CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0
A : 1044
B : 1009
C : 997
CBA : +17 / - 16 / -1 // SUM = 0 ( Why would A lose less here for being beaten by both lessor opponents? Then the above example where he beat B? At that note why would B lose a whopping 10 more points here when unlike the above example he beat the top ranked player, flawed.)
1. A : 1049
2. B : 1004
3. C : 997
ACB : +4 / -11 / +7 // SUM = 0
CBA : +17 / - 16 / -1 // SUM = 0
CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0
Between ACB, CAB and CBA I really think you should have another look at this part of your system, rules, the other part can wait...

	29-07-2003 09:40									#124
	Tired of ads?

I don't think those number could be correct.

If the order is XYZ

X will always gain and will gain more the Y Y may loose or gain. Z will definitely loose. Y will always gain less then X and will gain or will loose less than Z. Anything else would be rediculous.

	29-07-2003 10:55									#125
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Last edited by Kralj Matjaz on 29-07-2003 at 17:07

	29-07-2003 14:28									#126
	Increase Your PM Length

the point you dont seem to get, blackice, is that the f**king scores are not reassessed every *9 turn.
the new rating simply replaces the old rating, so i really dont see where you suddenly take these values from and seem to base another rated *9 turn on these somehow.

A : 1054
B : 1019
C : 977

A : 1054
B : 1027
C : 969

A : 1044
B : 1029
C : 977

A : 1034
B : 1029
C : 987

A : 1044
B : 1009
C : 997

1. A : 1049
2. B : 1004
3. C : 997

this system may not be the simplest, blackice, but its sure simpler than you like it to be.

	29-07-2003 14:40									#127
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by blackice Math tell me why you don't see the flaw?

alright, so i tell you why i dont see a flaw that you claim exists ? no problem !!!

quote: Very few liked it, remember the community voted out the first one and ruled out the elo.

judging from Kralj's post i conclude that the community was how many people out of the real community ?

quote: So insinuations no it's called play testing and lots of it. Try it, we have... Maybe you should take the time...

pretty pointless to tell me to do playtesting (which you know is a lot of work), when you could far more easily just tell me what the so-called flaw is, so i could see it without putting 100 times the work in it and give up, which seems to be what you'd prefer.

admitted, i havent tested this system with 'real' results.
but that is the reason why i am discussing it here and also why i made the suggestion that we start the season with different systems and then the players make a simple vote which they like most.
they can see the results instead of understanding the whole system. this is what elections are usually based on.

quote: You and Solver simply are not listening or do not care what people like Troll have to say. What he is saying is what the majority have already said.

i listen a lot, you talk a lot, yet still we do not seem to understand each other's problems. what a cruel world.

quote: I challenge you to play test this and put up a simple formula so the average person can also play test it.

..or the average person directly sees the result in a sample table they can look at.
what does the average person say ?
how about this...
each average person who likes gives some theoretical test results, here in the forum, and each of our systems is applied to these test results and each of us then posts a sample table from our own system using that test data...

quote: Anyone else?

sure as a certain hot place there is someone else !

	29-07-2003 15:01									#128
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by blackice You simply can not base a rankings system solely based on skill in a game such as CTP. It is ludicrous at best.

you can, because
a) dealing with bad luck is part of skill
b) bad luck will be eliminated from the results the more games are included.

quote: Based on this one point your system is flawed, you will have people dropping games like flies within the first turn 9.

simple workaround:

a) dropping a game means last place.
b) make clear that only someone who is serious shoud start a game and deal with the problems they get. i, for my part, never drop a game due to bad land, let alone a multiplayer game.

also, in my system, only the most actual *9 turn counts, no matter how many *9 turns you might have been on the bottom of the rankings before.

quote: Sooner or later you have several ace land games and you will be in top stop based on land not skill.

not if you only count the most actual *9 turn. cause then all the dropped games will drag you down and the few leading games wont help you.

gotta leave now.
more on the other points later...

	29-07-2003 23:22									#129
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Pretty good thinking, Math .

	30-07-2003 01:40									#130
	Increase Your PM Length

I think both rating systems have been described in depth. It is time to vote, in my humble opinion!

Solver, I think much would be "solved" in this regard by creating two polls:

Poll 1. Would you like to be part of a multiplayer rating system for CTP?
A) Yes
B) No

Poll 2. Which CTP rating system would you prefer:
A) The 10% Wager System described by Blackice;
B) The Quadratic Formula System described by Mathemagician;
C) I don't care which system is used.

	30-07-2003 01:51									#131
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

could we possibly add my own system here ?
the quadratic system id rather call "the Solver/quinns" attempt.

	30-07-2003 01:55									#132
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

also, what about the idea to start with different systems ?

e.g.
Poll 2
Would you like to
a) start the rankings, using different systems and narrow down to one several weeks into the season ?
b) view some sample rankings based on sample results first and then decide on a system ?
c) decide on a system right away ?

and Poll 3 would be:
"IF a system is used right away, which should it be ?"
a) 10% wager system of blackice
b) quadratic formula system of Solver/quinns
c) Mathemagician's brilliant non-exponential ELO based system
d) where's the challenge ladder thread again ?

	30-07-2003 01:57									#133
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

in Poll 1 i vote YES anyhow

	30-07-2003 04:32									#134
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Several systems is a BIG pain in the ass.

Half three in the night, can't think straight... let's see tomorrow, I'll start at least the Poll #1.

G'Night.

	30-07-2003 08:34									#135
	Remove this text

quote: I don't think those number could be correct.

Copied and pasted from Math's example, which I point out his example is flawed, so yes I agree with you the numbers do not seem right. Can you explain that Math?

quote: so i really dont see where you suddenly take these values from and seem to base another rated *9 turn on these somehow.

The "values are copied and pasted from your example... and your example is flawed, if that is the base of your system it is flawed..I simply took your start ranking and then applied the possible A,B,C finish's you gave examples for.

quote: so, for several finishing orders: ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0 ACB : +4 / -11 / +7 // SUM = 0 c loses for beating b? b gaims for losing to c and a? BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0 BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0 CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 a loses for beating b? CBA : +17 / - 16 / -1 // SUM = 0 b loses for beating a?

Now tell me those numbers posted are wrong again? You posted them based on your system...I just applied the final math and whoa it's flawed...
Have another look...Tell me in simple terms your posted this what did I or you miss?

Kralj post's mean about as much to me as used toilet paper, I like everyone and think everyone is a good person until they prove to me i'm wrong ...Kralj just keeps providing reasons to prove me wrong...I would think by now others too...

quote: b) bad luck will be eliminated from the results the more games are included.) dealing with bad luck is part of skill

So if you only have time for one or two games? If you go back you will find this was the single most shouted complaint of the 10% system. Right old timers...You know it as well as I do...

I don't think you quite get the gravity of land in this game...Or do you hummm. Now toss in rookies to the mix oh the fun of applied non-skill.

10% system makes allowance for this yours does not and you simply dismiss it, not good.

Here is another one we have seen, you can only challenge people up or down three from your ranking...You have top playing top and rookies playing rookies, bad news been there the elite system.

If not that then why in heavens sake would a top player play a rookie? Time for more rules, been there too it will not end pages of rules to cover all the angles. The 10% needs no such rules. Simpler then you care to admit...

quote: a) dropping a game means last place..also, in my system, only the most actual *9 turn counts, no matter how many *9 turns you might have been on the bottom of the rankings before.

For one 9th turn or for the entire ranking? Seems rather sever if over all ranking drops to last for a dropped game, 10% system needs no such rule... So the joy of playing a game on tundra being in last for the entire game as a rookie, I can not think of a better way to punish one's self or to drop the league all together you?
Been there seen that...

Land, Math, accounts for the better part of a win no matter what your skill level... In Multiplayer and PBEM challenges you know as well as I do land is extremely important. This comment of yours is a whitewash of reality.

Why play a back to back same map challenge games if land means nothing? Why play the same map in the world challenge if land means nothing vs skill? Why start games over again in MP if land means nothing vs skill.
That exclusion of land as a major factor in this game vs skill is pure BS and you know it. I realize this system is yours and you would like to show your skills, which you have done. But do not hardcore it through by whitewashing what every single "SKILLED" player here knows...LAND IS A HUGE PART OF ANY WIN and or loss..Be real...

Flaws as pointed out in my last post, I took your starting ranking then applied the posible A, B, C finishes you gave examples to. I posted the comments did I miss something or are you just ignoring it? YOU GAVE THE MATH I JUST POSTED IT...it's flawed.. LOOK AGAIN ÌööÌ...

Now what problem do you have with the 10% system? I for one would like to hear it?

As far as a poll goes we maybe should consider just calling them:

a) 10% wager system
b) quadratic formula
c) non-exponential ELO based system

Give examples of the system I.E. The Formula's let the players decide, mind you been there did that the quad lost to the 10%. But hey lets do it again...and again...

We should keep it impartial if not it attracts childishness like what we have seen from... well take a guess think sore loser..., all personal with no content no community in mind posting what so ever...

No time for that if we plan on keeping this an impartial fact based, common sense, reality vote. That which should be in the best interest of the community.

	30-07-2003 08:54									#136
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Mathemagician so, for several finishing orders: ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0 ACB : +4 / -11 / +7 // SUM = 0 BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0 BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0 CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 CBA : +17 / - 16 / -1 // SUM = 0

sorry, misposted here. the numbers are correct, just not the order. it should say (so that the first score belongs to first player/letter in the list):

ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0
ACB : +4 / +7 / -11 // SUM = 0
BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0
BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0
CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0
CBA : +17 / - 1 / -16 // SUM = 0

now, based on the initial scores of 1050 for A, 1020 for B and 980 for C, A always gets +4 / -6 / -16 for places 1, 2 and 3. B always gets +9 / -1 / -11 and C always gets +17 / +7 / -3.

quote: Originally posted by blackice Now tell me those numbers posted are wrong again? You posted them based on your system...I just applied the final math and whoa it's flawed...

that i mixed up the order of the numbers still does not mean they add up in anyway for each *9 turn, blackice.
if you refuse to understand that and further refuse to explain to me what kind of flaw you see and why you
believe it is a flaw, i cannot help you.

quote: 10% system makes allowance for this yours does not and you simply dismiss it, not good.

if i dismiss anything, its because you only speak in half-sentences that dont explain the problem.
i suggest you explain one problem in detail in a post instead of alluding to all the problems at once without any insight what you mean.
didnt want to dismiss anything, just not understanding what you mean.

	30-07-2003 15:44									#137
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

What is not clear to me, and perhaps someone could simply and clearly tell me (I am too lazy to wade back through the voluminous posts) is

a) which system(s) only change points on a change of ranks?

b) which system(s) penalise early retirement, and how?

c) how are replacement players handled?

	30-07-2003 19:01									#138
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by ricketyclik What is not clear to me, and perhaps someone could simply and clearly tell me (I am too lazy to wade back through the voluminous posts) is

i'll try to answer for those systems i have understood

quote: a) which system(s) only change points on a change of ranks?

my system does that and as far as i understood it also the quadratic system of quinns that Solver explained.

note:
actually i think each system could be used in a way so that scores only change when ranks change (easily accomplished by 'replacing' the score instead of accumulating it).
the point is for which system this makes sense, i.e. its creator/representative wants it to be used. so again, mine and quinns' system plan to function that way.

quote: b) which system(s) penalise early retirement, and how?

here i can only speak for my system. (non-exponential ELO as it was called)

in my system there is about equal penalty for early or late retirement. you are the assigned the last place of the remaining players. the only difference for later retirements is that another player may have retired earlier.

example:
for example, in a 5 player game using my system, the player resigning first would be counted 5th (thus last) for the rest of the running game. if that player chose to resign later though, after another player has resigned, that other player would be 5th and the newer player 4th and so on.

quote: c) how are replacement players handled?

again, i can only speak for my system, as all your points can be deliberately chosen, independent of the mathematical implications.
for my system i havent solved that yet.
i'll be working on this and edit this post when i have found a way

	31-07-2003 04:36									#139
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Math, Solver, and blackice, I'll post all the polls if you like (Solver's a bit slow to the punch ), but please spell out each of your described systems in 50 words or less (for the voters). No emotional words, please, like "brilliant", "idiotic", "ridiculous", etc.

	31-07-2003 08:26									#140
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: that i mixed up the order of the numbers still does not mean they add up in anyway for each *9 turn, blackice. if you refuse to understand that and further refuse to explain to me what kind of flaw you see and why you believe it is a flaw, i cannot help you.

Yup you did I guess now you see the "flaw" I was refering to with your math...
The other "flaws" have been explained serveral times now...I guess you will just have to wait and see them. I can not and will not explain them any more you simply do not get it. You look at numbers not a whole system, we have and we have tested and looked closely at the elo and quad. The flaws are there look beyond the numbers.....

quote: ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0 b loses 1 point for beating c (see CBA) ACB : +4 / +7 / -11 // SUM = 0 BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0 a loses for beating c? BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0 c gets 7 for beating a and 7 for beating b?: (see ACB) CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 a loses for beating b? CBA : +17 / - 1 / -16 // SUM = 0 b loses for beating a? (See ABC) but b loses 1 point for beating a?

"Flawed" again are you sure you have it right this time cause it still does not make sense?

Point again why would a top player play lower ranked players? Is it a rule to force them to play?

quote: that i mixed up the order of the numbers still does not mean they add up in anyway for each *9 turn,

I simply assumed you intented this example for ONE ninth turn ranking...Was I wrong?

quote: if i dismiss anything, its because you only speak in half-sentences that dont explain the problem.

Half sentences? LAND IS A MAJOR PART OF ANY WIN OR LOSS ASK ANYONE WITH A HALF A BRAIN. Clear enough? You just dismiss this fact WAKEUP. How's that for half sentences? Skill and land placement are two different things PAUL, YODA, any world ranked top player will tell you this, let alone any average player. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Why do you wave it away with your magic wand? A FLAW...

ricketyclik

A) 10% does not do this it was tested and it was flawed. You wager 10% at your current ranking and that is it for the rest of the game.

b) 10% does this by dropping one full ranking in your over-all ranking, if you are first over-all you are now second over-all. The game penalty, there is none but the remaining players do get a bonus, i'll explain: Until a replacement is found say in a four player game the scores on the ninth turn are counted as a three player game. Meaning more points earned for each remaining player until the dropped player is replaced.

c) In the 10% system the new player is non-rated for two full 9th turn rankings. More than enough time for thier playing style to show through. After that they become ranked in the game, great opportunity for a newbie to jump in and get the feel for things. Also two full rounds of bonus for the remaining players for the BS of finding a new player.

Again I see numbers Math that do not add up. I see numbers but no system, rankings are a system not just numbers...

So tell me what problems do you have with the 10% SYSTEM? I for one would like to hear them? I mean you came up with a new one but clearly do not understand the old one? So why the push for a new one? Why not just support the old one? That goes for Solver and Quinn too...Solver just did not like it, unknown why? Quinn it was personal, that's understandable but time has passed and I have yet to see anyone clearly state why the 10% system was not good?

Partisan politics? It could'nt be so what is "flawed" about the 10% system? No emotional words, please, like "brilliant", "idiotic", "ridiculous", etc.

	31-07-2003 09:28									#141
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

sorry, misposted here. the numbers are correct, just not the order. it should say (so that the first score belongs to first player/letter in the list):

ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0
ACB : +4 / +7 / -11 // SUM = 0
BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0
BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0
CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0
CBA : +17 / - 1 / -16 // SUM = 0


Now I get it That is much more like it should be.

	31-07-2003 09:30									#142
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

OOPS, I think you were in a hurry. BAC can't be right.

	31-07-2003 09:45									#143
	Get a bigger avatar today!

3 Player game the 10%Formula: ..1ST..54%..2nd..31%..3rd..15% Formula...
Starting for the three players:
A : 10.5
B : 10.1
C : 9.7

Wager:
A : 1.05
B : 1.01
C : .97
Total: 3.03 for the pot.

ABC : A 1st) 1.64 / B 2nd) 0.94 / C 3rd) 0.45
New over-all ranking :
a: 12.14
b: 11.04
c: 10.15

Wager:
A : 1.05
B : 1.01
C : .97
Total: 3.03 for the pot. This remains until games end...

ACB : A 1st) 1.64 / C 2nd) 0.94 / B 3rd) 0.45 turn 9
New over-all ranking:
a : 13.78
b : 11.49
c : 11.09

BAC : B 1st) 1.64 / A 2nd) 0.94 / C 3rd) 0.45 turn 18
New over-all ranking:
a : 14.72
b : 13.13
c : 11.54

BCA : B 1st) 1.64 / C 2nd) 0.94 / A 3rd) 0.45 turn 27
New over-all ranking:
a : 15.17
b : 13.13
c : 12.48

CAB : C 1st) 1.64 / A 2nd) 0.94 / B 3rd) 0.45 turn 36
New over-all ranking:
a : 16.11
c : 14.12
b : 13.58

CBA : C 1st) 1.64 / B 2nd) 0.94 / A 3rd) 0.45 turn 45
New over-all ranking:
a : 16.56
c : 15.76
b : 14.52

Now lets just say because this game is full of Diplomacy (Backstabbing ) C and B gang up on A for another round...

CBA : C 1st) 1.64 / B 2nd) 0.94 / A 3rd) 0.45 turn 54
New over-all ranking:
c : 17.40
a : 17.01
b : 15.46

A is no longer in first... Now A, B or C could have other games or not, the point being is no one is assured a spot. B could have bad land but is still not out of the race by any means...

The rankings are always on the move, very (Pro)active to say the least. Now we all know in another 6, 9th turn rankings the whole game changes, I.E. sols cannons and muskets let alone wonders and land. Land included here Math because while you may have had forest for your fast start your opponent had mountains. His mines will out-produce your forest in the next 100 with out a doubt... We all know this...Right?

The point being with this system the rankings are very active and no one can be assured a constant ranking be it one game or ten.

You will also note all players gain points not lose them, we call that incentive... This helps to ensure no one quits a game which should be the main idea right? I mean all points add up so why drop a game? Thats part of what we call a "system" which is part of the "rankings" I.E. math, formulas what ever you choose to call it. One is useless without the other...

Now look at this the same players starting a new game at turn 54 with new players:

c : 17.40
a : 17.01
b : 15.46

Wager for game:

a : 1.74
b : 1.70
c : 1.54

Pot for new game: 4.98 as opposed to 3.03 for the first one.


Now this also ensures new games and participation for oldtimers and newbies alike...It also assure you can not sit on your butt in one game and expect to be top dog...

Seems to me and others, that is what we are after here is it not? If you doubt it check out the challege ladder Quinn started People want to play and they are not forced to do so per se.

10% has less rules more incentive and more "positive" activity in the rankings. It has been used for what 5 years now? It was designed with CTP and most important is easy to use and a complete "system". By use I mean maximizing the system to make the greatest gains in the rankings..Without quiting games and all the BS that goes with It. The formula is easy and the rules minimal "easy system of rankings".

	31-07-2003 10:14									#144
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: sorry, misposted here. the numbers are correct, just not the order. it should say (so that the first score belongs to first player/letter in the list):

ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0
ACB : +4 / +7 / -11 // SUM = 0 c gains 7 for for beating b?
BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0
BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0 C gains only 7 for beating A? (see ACB)
CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 A loses 6 for beating B? and C (see BAC)
CBA : +17 / - 1 / -16 // SUM = 0 yet B wow loses 1 for beating A? Yet gains 7 for beating B? (see ACB)

Nope still not right B may have lost to C but for pete's sake he beat the top player and loses points? FLAWED...Maybe I need three D glasses?

quote: Now I get it That is much more like it should be.

I am still miffed the math is still not working for me anyone else?

Seems like a top dog should never play a rookie. I guess you would make a rule they can't? Or is the rule you have to accept all challenges? In which case we have lives too we have what 30 active players?. Or is it you can only challenge two or three above your ranking? More rules in which case decide because numbers are only part of a "ranking system"

I for one with this system would never play a rookie anyone else? So little to gain so much to lose so little time... So I guess you have to make a rule to force people to play anyone...

Now if there is no rule we have packets of people in small groups playing each other with close rankings, "community" is lost...heirarchy, top dog, little newbie, bottom feeder. We should avoid this at all cost, should'nt we?

	31-07-2003 13:18									#145
	Increase Your PM Length

Actually, Blackice, it seems to me with the 10% system with the pot capped, there is no change in score without a change in rankings.

Correct me if I am wrong.

	31-07-2003 14:52									#146
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by blackice ABC : +4 / -1 / -3 // SUM = 0 ACB : +4 / +7 / -11 // SUM = 0 c gains 7 for for beating b? BAC : +9 / -6 / -3 // SUM = 0 BCA : +9 / +7 / -16 // SUM = 0 C gains only 7 for beating A? (see ACB) CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 A loses 6 for beating B? and C (see BAC) CBA : +17 / - 1 / -16 // SUM = 0 yet B wow loses 1 for beating A? Yet gains 7 for beating B? (see ACB)

the points each player gains/loses are already summed up (not over 9* turns, just for the theoretically 'seperate' results between each 2 of the three players).
so, just taking this one example you criticized:

quote: CAB : +17 / -6 / -11 // SUM = 0 A loses 6 for beating B? and C

C, as the worst player beat both higher ranked players, thus he gains +17.

A 'lost' to the weaker C and 'won' against the also weaker B.

losing to a weaker player = lose many points
beating a weaker player = gain few points


lose many points + gain few points = still lose a few points = -6

B 'lost' to the stronger player A (lose a few points) and to the weaker player C (lose many points).
summed up, he loses points twice, for a total of -11, which is not as much as C gained (as both of C's beaten opponents were ranked higher, the wins thus more unlikely)
had B lost to two weaker players, he would have lost more points. you can see that from the -16 A loses when losing to everyone else.

[i]it works analogously for the other examples.

--
i posted that cause the number table just hit my eye.
i dont bother reading all your other stuff, blackice. sorry.
80% rants and 20% information isnt worth it. period.

	31-07-2003 17:05									#147
	Tired of ads?

Yeah, Quinns, spelling out each system in 50 words is what we need and what I have some trouble doing .

You could certainly describe the Quinns quadratic formulas, could you not, having created them ?

	31-07-2003 22:22									#148
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Okay Solver, here goes -- in 50 words :
---------------
Quadratic Rating System: The change in a player's rating, done every 10 turns at the *9 mark, is calculated as though the player is playing individual games against all opponents. The rating change is based upon:
Probability of lower rated player defeating higher rated player =
[1 /(2 + (1st_Player_Rating - 2nd_Player_Rating)^2)].
--------------

Last edited by quinns on 31-07-2003 at 23:45

	31-07-2003 22:31									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

alright, Mr.Solver - but be aware i was always bad at school at essays and the like.

"The Non-Exponential ELO system"
by Mathemagician


The basis of this system is to evaluate a player's rank and relative skill in one game with one formula, as well as to have all players' score gains/losses sum up to 0.
the score is re-calculated every mark *9 turn, but not accumulated.
score = 10 * (r(i) - s(i))
r(i) depends on your rank in the game
s(i) depends on your score/skill before the game

	31-07-2003 22:33									#150
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yeah, I pity the guys who can't understand any maths .