SE4 Rating System

Slynky · #1 August 17th, 2003, 05:41 PM

Welcome to the Ratings system, georgig!

(So, now I must ask, you want our KOTH game to be a "rated" game?)

BBegemott · #2 August 17th, 2003, 06:01 PM

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 ]

Lord Chane · #3 August 17th, 2003, 06:14 PM

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.

Slynky · #4 August 17th, 2003, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BBegemott:

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.

Thanks for the info, BBegemott (though the link doesn't seem to work for me for some reason).

Lord Chane did the program in about 4 hours. While the site you posted may help with computations, I had plans to post 2 sets of statistics to my site: 1 for all the Ratings (sorted by rating, then by games played) and another list of the games people have played (with the date and win or lose). Those reports will come out of Access and sent to Word and then published on the site. So, I'm not sure the site you posted would have helped with that.

The formula, now posted at the SE4 Ratings site is essentially the same as used in the USCF with modifications that disregard the 20-game provisionary rating formula.

Slynky · #5 August 17th, 2003, 07:14 PM

Welcome to the Ratings system, Rextorres! You bring a lot of talent to the field.

Mikeyman · #6 August 17th, 2003, 07:20 PM

I may join, but I have one question first...

Quote:

The only requirement is that in a multi-player game, it must be a single victory ("Last man standing").

Does that mean only Last man standing games can be rated? I am kind of unclear on that.

Excimer-500 · #7 August 17th, 2003, 07:43 PM

I'm definitely interested. In regards to Multiplayer games that are not Last Species Standing, why not simply have an agreement before the game begins that the allies can decide who the official winner is, instead of being forced to fight one another?

In other words: Three allied players win the game. Player A was considered to be the most instrumental player, B the next, and C had just a minor role (one of those players in the corner who helps with tech and resources

Then C resigns (turns his empire over) to B, and B resigns to A.

If I understand the scoring correctly, Player C should still gain points in his/her/its rating, but just not as much as Players B and A.

When there is a disagreement as to who did more in the game, there is still the Last Species Standing option.

Just my two cents