Rating system

[quote=The_Bishop]I'm not sure to understand. God_of_War, do you suggest to use 12 different ratings? Or 24? It would be really confusing I think, and still in your proposal you haven't considered the great difference that there is between increasing cards and capped cards (which is the only difference I would consider). Not to mention: some are better in live games, others in long-terms; some are specialist of Fogo'war, others (like me) are totally dumb with Fogo'war... And, what about the one setting that changes the gameplay more than anyother, the sametime turns?? So I wouldn't want and wouldn't ask to have different ratings for any different settings, it could be logical but will result to be crazy in my opinion. I'm just asking to make the rating adjustments heavier (both winnings and losses) for games that last for 6 hours compared to games that last for 15 minutes, and still continue to use [b]one rating only.[/b][/quote] 8, I can count 8 that I mentioned. A sign on how the ratings system is messed up if you saw 12 there. :) Long-term vs Short-Term games are the same. It is still a game of risk. If by better players, you mean more patience, than a patience rating can be devised for those that take their sweet-ass time making a move. Yes this is sarcastic cause I see zero difference in being able to read a board in 3 mins vs 24 hours, you can either read it or you can't. I would say those who need 24 hours to read a board are "worse" than those whom can do it in 3 mins. In Chess, it is being smart enough to decipher the board quickly that is key, not sitting there pondering for a full day. Capped vs fixed vs Uncapped - Still the same type of game mode being played. If someone wants to spend a year playing 1 game of capped at 12 than so be it. Overall, don't you want to know WHO is the best at Deathmatch, WHO is the best at Capitals, WHO is the best in 7-9 player games, WHO is the best head to head? The current system tells you none of that. Or update the Statistics so we can see our records in all these game type. I did miss one stand out- SameTime. Also - off topic, but why are there not any quarterly tournaments that give the winner a Free Premium pass for 3 months or something. Would this not help the site attract attention?

@@God_of_War, I re-read your previous post: [quote=God_of_War]2 sets of Ranks per game that wittle into 2 of the following upon ending. Domination Caps Death match Assassination 2 to 3 player 4 to 6 player 7 to 9 player So if you win a 8 player caps game, the caps rating and 7 to 9 player ratings increase. [/quote] As I see it, you mentioned 4 gametypes and 3 ranges of number of players. This would sum to 7, right? As they are 2 independent parameters I assumed it has to be intended as 3x4 = 12 different cases. More logical I think and even easier. However re-reading better your last sentence I get what you mean, basically each game would affect 2 ratings of the total 7 -- or 8. Ah okay, the 8th is Same Time that you forgot to mention before. So for example if I play 4p Capitals same-time turns then 3 of my 8 ratings would be affected: 'Caps', '4 to 6 player' and 'Same Time'. Just to clarify if I got it right this time... I would hardly class 2p and 3p together, but okay it's a detail. I think we already discussed somewhere about [b]multiple ratings[/b] and realized the [b]multiple problems[/b] of it. The whole site would need quite a re-work to allocate 8 ratings per player. Then what about the ranks? One could be for example Corporal in Assassination and Liutenant in 7-to-9-player, or should we add a combined parameter (the 9th rating?) as an average value to determine everyone's military rank? Everything doable, yes, but pretty hard and not sure if it would be worth. Plus I thought, should we have 8 different Dominators, one in each category? Or just 4, one in each gametype? Or again we use the combined parameter, in order to have one Dominator only? @@God_of_War, I reply in short to the rest of your comments: 3 minutes games are about taking decisions fast, they are funny, dynamic and often affected by bad moves, or even blunders and misclicks. Different from 24h games which are more thought and usually are better quality games. However moving fast it's an ability too, that not everyone has, so okay... You know the difference, then why you say they are the same? [size=12px][i]The standard time control in Chess is: 40 moves /90'+30'', SD /30'+30'' which is long to explain but in practice means that a game lasts for about 5 hours; and an even longer time control is used for the world championship. Well, also Speed Chess exists, usually considered inferior although spectacular, of course. Off topic: I don't care to seem pedophile, [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b11TWXThkJE&t]I love Pinkamena![/url][/i][/size] A [u]capped card[/u] Death-Match has a completely different strategy from an [u]increasing card[/u] Death-Match, isn't so? I think tournaments are a useful tool to determine who's best in a certain type. For example we know that Maafi is the absolute leader of Domination games, and there's a near-to-end tournament which will tell us something about who's the best 'capitalizer'. Team tournaments also, head-to-head, capped cards with fog, 'pairs in the fog' too... Almost every possible kind, among the most popular at least. I agree that would be nice to show some player's statistics divided by gametype, yes. Not sure if it can be done though. [quote=God_of_War]Also - off topic, but why are there not any quarterly tournaments that give the winner a Free Premium pass for 3 months or something. Would this not help the site attract attention?[/quote] Because Christmas comes once a year! :) Click the link below please: https://dominating12.com/forums/15/tournaments/3502/caribbean-xmas/post/62551#post-62551

Nice to see there is a true reward in place at least once a year. I agree the strategy's do mix between capped and non-capped, but if it is deathmatch, caps, etc... it is still the same game of risk, just have to adjust. And Long-term games have mistakes too and in short-term games, those mistakes still need to be realized and picked up upon to capitalize. I don't think looking at a board for 5 mins or 20 hours gives me any advantage as I'm not going to change my tactic much by staring at the screen more. Still comes down to the dice helping me or screwing me with the move I want to make. Is there more "aggression" in 3 min games, more tilt? sure, but there is still tilt in 24 hr games too and we've all seen plenty of bad play in both games. I'm an example of it too when going for the winning move. The rating system is difficult and I honestly sometimes wish it didn't exist. I think I've been as high as 4,000 and am now hovering around 2,500. I attribute this to playing a lot more 2-3 player games and playing more games with lower ranked players where I lost a ton each time for a loss vs gaining minimal for a win. But the site needs activity and newbies and even veterans need to play. Maybe the solution is simply saying, you win a 9 player game, you get 80 pts. If you lose, you lose 10 regardless of ranks. Cause then when a newbie or veteran blows the game and gives it to someone, you are only out 10 and not 40 when other players only lose 5, or 15, etc... Anyway, i wish I had more time to run numbers and such, but overall, to me, there needs to be incentive for the bottom to catch up, and there needs to be a way for the top to not feel like they are being slapped hard for every loss, unless they play games among their own ranks only.

@God_of_War, interesting points expressed in your comment. Yes I am sure that playing head to head against low level players will cause your rating to drop drastically. Years ago was even worse, then Vexer tryed to fix the formula but now the trend is weird and the issue still not 'fixed' enough. I'll suggest my own formula for 2p games when having time.

Any chance 2p games could be best of 5? At least then you might get some more back and forth? Just typing out loud.