The Official Unofficial Multiwinia Ladder

[MaximusBrood]

Jelco: I don't think that if IV were to create crate pickup events it would be _that much_ data.
Maybe a suggestion worth asking for?

[xander]

Jelco: I can't seem to find a "people who have challenged me" kind of page. I am sure that it exists -- I would really like it if you could put that in the set of links on the left. martin is currently trying to challenge me, but it is a pain in the ass to actually find the challenge to respond to him (unless I am missing some giant link somewhere).

xander

[martin]

something like this link is what I imagine you'll want:



it's a little obscure :/

[Imeanunoharm]

The scoring system is really bugging me. I did send an email to "staff", but I may as well sign up and address it as others may be able to elaborate.

Please don't take anything personally if I mention your name, but I can't explain without examples. I am not trying to blame anyone, just trying to understand. GAme tally's have the form Name_(No.ofGames)_Wins:Losses.

I'm currently #90 odd. I beat a number 11 (at the time) and I've beat some people in the 20's and 30's ranks, and for the most part my losses are to people higher up (Fredtdh might confirm I almost almost got him twice in 2 out of 3 matches last night). Admittedly I've lost 3 (or 4?) games to people lower than me.

But what seems quite strange to me is that there are people with way worse win loss ratio's than me that seem to have higher scores, eg. #670316_(4)_0:4, and there are a tonne of people that have won one game and got 27 points straight off the bat. My first ranked game I lost, does that instantly set me up as a "weak" player (RE the "strength" system metioned in the faq), and thus it is much harder for me to get points for wins or something? (Another eg. #670305_(2)_1:1 where his first game was a win and what looks like a quick 57 points.) One thing that I instantly think of is, would updating the strength system daily (instead of weekly as the faq says) before the daily score tally improve how points are awarded?

Mabye another side illustration of this seems to be Xander. His strength is through the roof due to his (early) streak, even though from what I can see from a cursory glance at later games many of his opponents are way down the ladder and would argue against scoring that many points per game. Again, nothing personal Xander.

Something's wierd. I hope this helps.

[bert_the_turtle]

Potential parsing problem in this game: http://multiwinia-ladder.net/viewmatch.php?m=747
I didn't disconnect, I got dropped for reasons unknown (didn't lag out or anything).

[Imeanunoharm]

A rating period starts at midnight on the night from Sunday to Monday and lasts a week - this means that, for every game played in this week, people's ranks are practically frozen.

Ahhhh. This being the relevant sentence. Thanks for that. Makes more sense. I'm also not worried about in game scores (that was more of an aside because they were great matches and I realised later he was number 2), a defeat is a defeat, I agree.

Do you think it would be better to have a one day rating period, so that the ranks change relevantly to the scores and the games played that day? I think it's good to see yourself changing if you had a good day, but not so good for me today (I copped a couple of beatings, but I blame bad crates )

[bert_the_turtle]

Now, really:
http://multiwinia-ladder.net/viewmatch.php?m=876
While I did disconnect, there was a sync error, and I was the cause. That should count as a valid excuse

[TomCat39]

I'd like to submit an idea for the display of the ladder.

I've looked and many are unregistered (ie some number in rank X instead of the registered name).

My thought is, can a display script be run to remove the non registered players from the ranks? Not remove them from the database or the calculations. Just hide them from the rankings and maybe shift all registered up accordingly. Then when they register it readds the display of their slot and shifts everything accordingly?

Does that make sense?

The thought is that only registered names are displayed in the rankings. I mean, seeing 65932 in rank 20 means nothing to me, but seeing Xander in rank 1 does.

[Mas Tnega]

I'm not sure if it's been answered, but I doubt it would have occured to anyone until you gave the explanation:


How does the system factor Futurewinians and Evilinians?

[xander]

I'm not sure if it's been answered, but I doubt it would have occured to anyone until you gave the explanation:


How does the system factor Futurewinians and Evilinians?

Over IRC at one point, Jelco seemed to indicate that Evilinians and Futurewinians are also ranked in the database. Though I'm sure he can add more details. ;)

xander

[The GoldFish]

1) I would like all evilinian victories to be attributed to my account please.

2) I assume they function as a CPU player as the target of the multidual system Jelco explained above; if the evilinians win, then you lost, ok great, but you were beaten by all the real players who scored more than you, and you beat all the players who you scored more points than.

[bert_the_turtle]

bert: "I will implement it later" is what I said. A CLIENT_QUIT equals a disconnect at the moment, there is no accounting whatsoever for any reason.

Yes, yes, but the second case is slightly more complicated, and I don´t want you to forget about it

[Mas Tnega]

Mas, xander: Evilinians and Futurewinians are not ranked in the DB, that's somewhat of a sarcastic suggestion from someone which turned into a popular myth at some point. They will not participate in the score rankings' duels, meaning that you can still lose a match but win every single duel which represents that match (read my scoring system explanation post if this is a bit vague). They cannot be ranked as real users since their performance doesn't change over time - they're CPU players - but they're also not assigned a standard score - deciding on a fair score for each of them would require heavy data analysis at every score recalculation, probably. This is a debatable thing though, and I will go and see if there is another (better) way of implementing them.

To be completely clear on this: If they win the match, does it still go down as a loss for the highest scoring human team?

[TomCat39]

TomCat39: They are ranked like other users for several reasons, the most important one being that this should be a convincing reason for people to register.
Jelco

I am of the mind, not displaying them would be more incentive so that they could see how they are doing. I didn't realize the server was stating your rank from the DB when you joined. Just witnessed it today. With that in mind, a person can just memorize their number and since they are displayed, they know where they are at without others easily identifying them. Of course they could find out just by joining a ranking server too...

I understand the variance problem of what is stated via server and what would be shown if the unregistered were hidden. I wasn't aware of that when I was thinking about it all.

An interesting conundrum. Being the servers display the ranks upon joining, hiding them doesn't really motivate to join any more than not hiding them.

At this stage, I don't see any motivation to register except the desire to want to register to put a name to the number. Beyond that, I don't see any need since you can always see how you are doing once you know your number.

Interesting.

*ponders some more*

[bert_the_turtle]

To make those numbers more telling, one could list recently used ingame names on the profile pages.