Skill rating's rather unfortunate sideffect.

Perhaps it'a coincedence or it's because it was the weekend and some players have an actual life away from dominating12 but I've noticed that there are certain players ( and no I won't name names ) that when they get to a point in the game that they are almost certain to lose they default so they avoid being defeated by another player or maby they just don't want to bother with a lost cause.

Now correct me if I'm wrong but the skill rating is calculated based on the number of players you defeat and their skillrating AND their skillrating is in turn determined by the number and quality ( ergo skillrating )of the opponents they have defeated.

If you are a player with a high skillrating are you then not rewarded by defaulting?
It keeps your number of defeats down so you don't count in other players skillrating calculation.
I only bring this up because a was in 2 games with a high profile player who defaulted in both games after it was clear that he/she was very likely to be defeated.

Perhaps the skill rating should be calculated in another way?
I really don't see why if you win a game only the players you defeated count for your skillrating.
If I am playing a game with 8 of the dominating 12 and I manage to win by defeating just 1 of them why then is this a lesser acomplishment than say when I'm in a game with 5 newbies and 2 top players and I defeat the 2 top players.
I'ts much easier to defeat top players when your surrounded by ( pardon my french ) clueless idiots than when your surrounded by battle hardened veterans.
Most of the times the newbies make a typical beginners mistake ( never play a capitals game with a newbie, most of the time they attack everything in site leave their capital with 1 ot 2 armies and are defeated by the next player inline who then has double the armies then the rest of the players )and someone gets the game handed to him or her.

This reward for defaulting also causes situations that throw the game, 1 player defaults and the player next to him or her suddenly has almost no borders to defend and has a lot of armies freed up to attack the others remaining players.
Why not take away the incentive to default by changing the way the skillrating is calculated?

Whether or not a player 'defaults' during a game makes no difference. If you win you win. If you lose you lose. It does not affect the formula calculation in any way.

Its then only in the "standings" that the effect of defaulting is seen?

If you default, you can't be defeated so you don't count for the standings ratings.

It's a bit like some players who ask another player to defeat them because they don't want to be defeated by you ( it happens ).

It still counts as a defeat. The winner of each game is credited with defeating all of the other players in that game.

You are not credited in any way with defeating a player during the game. The winner is the only one credited and he/she gets credit for it all.

Must have been out of boredom then, I thought this player defaulted for a reason ( not that I'm complaining, in both cases I benefited from the default ) but I thought it odd.
2nd question, if you are credited with the defeat of all players are you not better of ( skillratings wise ) to play games with as many high ranking players a opposed to games with a lot of newbies?

It's actually based(in part) on your record against that individual player so for example if I played against someone with more skill points than myself but beat them all the time I would receive less points at the end of the game than if I was playing someone with less skill points than myself but I lost to all of the time.

There are two ratings: skill points and battle points (the normal points thingy you (can) get ranks for).

Skill points are weird, and not completely fair (anymore), so you can ignore them, but if you have to know, it depends on how many persons the people beat that you beat (you get it? No, me neither).


You get battle points for winning a game, and winning only. It doesnt matter whether you kill someone or not - the more players in the game, the more battle points - the better players, the more points you get
(and yes, the better you are, the more points you lose if you dont win).

If you time out (turn grey - I guess that's what you mean with defaulting) than you can't win the game, and thus you will lose the game (and thus lose points, standings, everything like normal).

Ah, so there is a problem with the skillpoints? Is that the thing vexer brought up in the last domination 12 rankings ( that you still get skillpoints for beating players that haven't played in months )?

The skill level is still displayed in your profile and the player lists, for good old times sake, but it isn't used by anything anymore.
Vexer mentioned one of the problems, another is that an average player who played 2000 games will have more skillpoints than a super good player who played only 200 games.
(That's why in past D12 calculations Vexer used a combination from skill points and skill points divided by total games played).


Here's a thread on skillpoints:
http://www.dominating12.com/forum/?cmd=topic&id=199

And here's an article on how the normal points work:
http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=article&act=view&aid=14