.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

BCT Commander- Save $8.00
winSPWW2- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Shrapnel Community > Space Empires: IV & V

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 17th, 2003, 01:15 AM
Slynky's Avatar

Slynky Slynky is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,499
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Slynky is on a distinguished road
Default SE4 Rating System

We all play SE4 to have fun. I can't think of a game I have had more fun at for so long.

But, if you are like me, you long to test your skills against others. And, if you are of a competitive nature like me, you long to see how you measure up.

Here is, in my opinion, the best way to date to do so: The SE4 Rating System.

Why is it a good way? Because it's roughly the same rating system used to rank world chess players. It's based on points. Win, you get points. Lose, well, you lose points. But, if you are playing against a player rated higher than you, you are (kind of) expected to lose. If it turns out that way, then you don't lose many points. But, if you win, you get more points. It's based on a formula that considers the rating of the person you are playing against. It's a way of gaining and losing points (and how many points) depending on the rating of the player you play against.

So, you ask, what is the difference between this and all the other ways we have in the forum and on the PBW site to see how well you do? Simple. It measures your playing ability over all the games you play! Not just a tourney (where you may have gotten lucky for a round or two). And it's different from KOTH. In KOTH, you may have drawn some weak opponents and gotten lucky positioning for enough games to give the King a challenge.

Another thing you need to consider: This rating is independant of any game you want to play in. Just because you are an SE4 rated player doesn't mean every game you play will be rated. A rated game must be agreed upon by other rated players in the game. So, you are free to play fun (and sometimes weird) games without worry about it affecting your SE4 rating.

I'm still working out the details of the rules and Lord Chane is working on a program to do all the computations. The website is already paid for (for a year) and there are no ads.

So, take a look (at least) and consider joining up.

(and feel free to make suggestions for consideration)
__________________
ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third. (Ambrose Bierce)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old August 17th, 2003, 02:14 AM
narf poit chez BOOM's Avatar

narf poit chez BOOM narf poit chez BOOM is offline
Shrapnel Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: CHEESE!
Posts: 10,009
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 1 Post
narf poit chez BOOM is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

sounds good.
__________________
If I only could remember half the things I'd forgot, that would be a lot of stuff, I think - I don't know; I forgot!
A* E* Se! Gd! $-- C-^- Ai** M-- S? Ss---- RA Pw? Fq Bb++@ Tcp? L++++
Some of my webcomics. I've got 400+ webcomics at Last count, some dead.
Sig updated to remove non-working links.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old August 17th, 2003, 02:35 AM
Jack Simth's Avatar

Jack Simth Jack Simth is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,174
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Jack Simth is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

Just a thought: chess is pretty much exclusively a one-on-one game, while SEIV isn't. The chess scoring model will either need some adaptation to deal with multiplayer games, or forbid multiplayer games. Should alliance victories reduce the amount of points recived by the victors, as they didn't eliminate all competition (perhaps divide the "spoils" between the winners; if so, should the "spoils" be divided evenly? How to determine the divinsion if not?), should rated games be exclusively the Last-man-standing variety, or should all victories be figured equally, regardless of the number of winners? What about multiple losers? Should all losers take the standard hit computed as a one-on-one loss to the winner, or should it be divided somehow? Should the first to fall get a more extreme score loss than the Last to fall, or should it be even across the board? Or should the chess model be left as-is by keeping track of who falls to whom and treating those as one-on-one matches (more paperwork, and leaves the chess rating system intact, but allows someone to lose the game overall yet gain in rating - in some circumstances, more than the actual winner. Moreover, it can't exactly deal with the situation of empire A weakens B to the point where C plucks B out with little effort - who should be considered the victor over B?)?

Just some things to think about, as they have the potential to cause arguments if not addressed up front. As long as the rules are consistant, clear, and not slanted, a game is fair.
__________________
Of course, by the time I finish this post, it will already be obsolete. C'est la vie.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old August 17th, 2003, 03:38 AM
Slynky's Avatar

Slynky Slynky is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,499
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Slynky is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

Hi Jack, and thanks for the interest and concerns.

"Just a thought: chess is pretty much exclusively a one-on-one game, while SEIV isn't. The chess scoring model will either need some adaptation to deal with multiplayer games, or forbid multiplayer games. Should alliance victories reduce the amount of points recived by the victors, as they didn't eliminate all competition (perhaps divide the "spoils" between the winners; if so, should the "spoils" be divided evenly? How to determine the divinsion if not?)"

While not perfect, I think this rating system will be the best way to rate players "across the board". That means multi-player and one-on-one. So, I think we agree that one-on-one is no problem since it mirrors chess. In this regard, KOTH could serve a dual purpose...try to get to the top of the hill AND try to boost your rating. Now, in multi-player games, we have a different situation. Again, though not a perfect resemblence, a multi-player game isn't much different that a chess tournement with 5 rounds. So, if there are 5 rated SE4 players in a multi-player game, just as Geo proposed in the Ladder system, you report wins against some people and losses against others. For example, if I was in such a game and was the 3rd to be killed, then I'd report a win against 2 others and a loss against the remaining 2. But you DO make a good point...I should modify the rules to say the mulit-player games with players playing for a rating MUST be "Last man standing". This doesn't prohibit alliances...but as has been discussed in many other threads, you make those alliances knowing one day you must fight against your allies for the final determination of victor.

"Should the first to fall get a more extreme score loss than the Last to fall, or should it be even across the board? Or should the chess model be left as-is by keeping track of who falls to whom and treating those as one-on-one matches (more paperwork, and leaves the chess rating system intact, but allows someone to lose the game overall yet gain in rating - in some circumstances, more than the actual winner"

A person doesn't have to have his multi-player game be a rated one. But, if I understand your question and concern, it works both ways: If you are the first out, you will lose points to every rated player still in the game. Conversely, if you win, you will get points for every victory. Not much different than a person who went to a chess tournement and never won a game or one who won the tournement. Those in the middle will win some points and lose some points.

"Moreover, it can't exactly deal with the situation of empire A weakens B to the point where C plucks B out with little effort - who should be considered the victor over B?)?"

This is true. But, once again, not much different than the multi-player games and results Geo explained in the Ladder proposal. In ANY multi-player game, someone might be upset about appearing to be the first rated player to lose (and therefore try to run and hide as long as he can). But, with the good sportsmanship I have seen displayed in KOTH, I would hope people would look at their situation and do what the chess masters do...resign. More to your point, though, in the above example, B is plucked. B reports a loss to EVERYONE in the game. I'll run B through the calculation program against every other rated player who is competing as a rated player. And, that's the way it should be...since, in your example, every other player played a part in his "plucking".

I hope this answers your questions somewhat. And remember, should the multi-player battlefield be a place you are worried about with your ranking, you can still be a rated player but just not want a certain multi-player game to count toward your rating. To clarify, there can be 3 other people who have agreed to a certain game being a rated game for them but that doesn't mean you have to join in...you can just play the game without consequence to your rating. One problem MIGHT be that a multi-player game starts and there are 5 people in it who agree for it to be a rated game (for them). Let's suppose the current points leader is in that game. As a point leader, do you worry that others will gang up on you? Or as a person in the middle of the Ratings...do you try to ally with the point leader? It, in my estimation, can go either way.

Now, in closing, the obvious best situation is one-on-one. And that is why it's perfect for KOTH. Also, if we get enough people with Ratings, GrandpaKim and I plan on sponsoring a classic Swiss-system tourney just the way it's done in chess tournements all over the world (well, as much of the world as I have played in...I've only played in rated games in the US and Germany). AND, barring problems, I plan to offer a money prize to the winner.
__________________
ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third. (Ambrose Bierce)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old August 17th, 2003, 04:26 AM
Slynky's Avatar

Slynky Slynky is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,499
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Slynky is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

You've been added, E3. Welcome aboard.
__________________
ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third. (Ambrose Bierce)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old August 17th, 2003, 08:44 AM

Magnum357 Magnum357 is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Great Falls, Montana, US
Posts: 208
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Magnum357 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

This is very interesting to me and I might considering joining, but what about mods? I love mods personally and I was thinking about making a personalized mod that is very balanced in terms of weapons and systems. Whould this rating system have its own set of "offical" mods that must be used?
__________________
Gryphin-

I started my first game. The Selay Consortium just hosed a colony ship, @#%Q@#R, Then accepted a Trade Treaty.
What is it about Neutrals that shoot first and ask quesitons later?

Atrocities-

Its called Gun Ship Diplomacy. <img border=0 title= alt=[Big Grin] src=biggrin.gif /]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old August 17th, 2003, 11:03 AM

eorg eorg is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: seiv.pbw.cc
Posts: 115
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
eorg is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

money prize will draw more people in but there will be no fun anymore - maybe andromeda poster signed by aaron?
__________________
'artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity'
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old August 17th, 2003, 05:41 PM
Slynky's Avatar

Slynky Slynky is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,499
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Slynky is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

Welcome to the Ratings system, georgig!

(So, now I must ask, you want our KOTH game to be a "rated" game?)
__________________
ALLIANCE, n. In international politics, the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third. (Ambrose Bierce)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old August 17th, 2003, 06:01 PM

BBegemott BBegemott is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 162
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BBegemott is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

Quote:
I'm still working out the details of the rules and Lord Chane is working on a program to do all the computations.
I think you and Lord Chane should check http://www.swissperfect.com
There is a program that calculates ELO Ratings.

[ August 17, 2003, 17:02: Message edited by: BBegemott ]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old August 17th, 2003, 06:14 PM

Lord Chane Lord Chane is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 58
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Lord Chane is on a distinguished road
Default Re: SE4 Rating System

Quote:
Originally posted by Slynky:
Here is, in my opinion, the best way to date to do so: The SE4 Rating System.
You can sign me up. I think it adds an interesting dimension to know the caliber of an opponent or potential opponent above and beyond what you may have heard about them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.