Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61
  1. #21
    Pangolin Wrangler KazuhLLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    2,066
    Blog Posts
    1
    Livestreams
    View Channel: kazinsser

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Houdini View Post
    Where do the longer weight times factor in? All of the ratings could be dynamically updated as the game results come in. We already have to record scores and gametypes once a game finishes, what more work would it be to update a simple toggle to "Won Last Game" or "Did Not Win Last Game"?
    Updating the games would be quick enough, but since the 2nd round's rankings/match-ups are determined by the first round of games you'd have to wait until a round was complete (or nearly so) before setting up the following round. And whenever one army has more squads than the other they'd no longer be able to just be put into a game with the first squad that was done since they'd need to wait for an appropriate opponent rank-wise.

  2. #22
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by KazuhLLL View Post
    Updating the games would be quick enough, but since the 2nd round's rankings/match-ups are determined by the first round of games you'd have to wait until a round was complete (or nearly so) before setting up the following round. And whenever one army has more squads than the other they'd no longer be able to just be put into a game with the first squad that was done since they'd need to wait for an appropriate opponent rank-wise.
    Okay, now I understand what you are saying. Basically, you can't play a squad that is still in a match so either way you have to wait for that game to finish before you can play another game with that squad. Squads that are still playing and delaying the "Rating" would be delaying battle nights anyway.

    I may be mistaken with how battle night games are started, but it seems like we work on a linear system where G1 is started before G2 which is started before G3.

    Example:
    G1:
    RA vs. BA
    G2:
    RB vs. BB
    G3:
    RC vs. BC
    G4:
    RD vs. BD
    G5:
    ?? vs. ??
    G6:
    ?? vs. ??

    These games are setup and playing. For whatever reason G2 is extremely delayed and doesn't finish on time. Instead of delaying setting up G5 just skip the squads that are still playing matches when trying to match people up by rank (just as would be done if there was an army numbers imbalance). Setup the next game based on whatever teams/rankings are available when the game needs to be setup and when G2 actually finishes they are added back into the ranking pool.

    I use "rounds" as a loose term to describe the concept of how the ratings would be determined. Depending on numbers and delays between setting up games the match ups should be completed on a rolling basis. As the battle setup people are approaching the end of the currently setup rounds, they would go through and pair up the next couple of games. The rating system doesn't necessarily imply that all of the match ups need to be setup as rounds (in an ideal world that would be great). It should be more realistically be used as a tool to quantitatively prevent squads without a single win from playing squads without a single loss.

  3. #23

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    I'm up for giving the idea a shot, I mean we are having a long peace time to work on fixing things right? Well then let's try it. I mean we won't know for a fact the flaws of the system until we try it and we don't know the full extent of the pros of the system until they are tried. Seeing something in a picture never gives the same feel as seeing it in person. Just my opinion here, not trying to butt heads.

  4. #24
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    For people confused on how the calculations work I have a sample battle night here broken down into rounds.

    Sample Battle Night

  5. #25
    Useless without Toast Jam Cliché's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,750
    Blog Posts
    2
    Livestreams
    View Channel: jamcliche

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    This might have been answered already in words, but I am better able to interpret your example stats than your post. So I have a question about a numbers imbalance.

    Say BLUE outnumbers REDD 5-4 in Squads like in your example. That means BE will have a rating of 0 after the first round (not having played yet). They could potentially be a heavy hitting Squad, but their 0 rating would mean that, for Game 5, they would have to be matched against the lowest-rated team from the first round of games. In your example, however, RC, rated at 180 after their first game, played BE, rated at 0.

    I assume this is due to a ruling to send a top-rated team against a total wildcard so that said wildcard doesn't get an artificially inflated rating that they might get from beating a Squad that just already lost, is this correct?


    Real power comes from the man next to you and is built on the foundations of brotherhood and unity. There is no such thing as a one man army.

  6. #26
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Jam Cliché View Post
    This might have been answered already in words, but I am better able to interpret your example stats than your post. So I have a question about a numbers imbalance.

    Say BLUE outnumbers REDD 5-4 in Squads like in your example. That means BE will have a rating of 0 after the first round (not having played yet). They could potentially be a heavy hitting Squad, but their 0 rating would mean that, for Game 5, they would have to be matched against the lowest-rated team from the first round of games. In your example, however, RC, rated at 180 after their first game, played BE, rated at 0.

    I assume this is due to a ruling to send a top-rated team against a total wildcard so that said wildcard doesn't get an artificially inflated rating that they might get from beating a Squad that just already lost, is this correct?
    I did not assume anything about the skill of the teams when I was setting up the sample matches (in fact, I just randomly selected a team to win without really caring about how good they would end up being).

    Since Blue had 1 more squad that Redd, I setup a rotation where BE sat out the first game, then BA, then BB, then BC, etc.
    After round 1, the rankings where:
    RB == RC > RA == RD
    BD > BE > BB == BC (BA is not going to play this round)

    The reason the wildcard squad played a highly rated team is because they where the second highest rating even at 0 points.

    If we wanted to make some assumption about the skill of the wildcard team to force them to play a good team, that is possible, but really I was trying to generalize the formula so that we wouldn't have to make as many assumptions about team skill.

    W3z4b1 suggested a system where last weeks ratings would carry over for the initial seeding of teams so instead of starting at 0 points squads start at their last weeks ratings (unless they didn't play last week) and then after the first game the ratings would be reset to only use the current week's results.

    I'm not sure if W3z4b1's idea would be a potential solution to the problem you present, but hopefully I was able to explain where the matchup came from.

  7. #27
    Useless without Toast Jam Cliché's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,750
    Blog Posts
    2
    Livestreams
    View Channel: jamcliche

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Houdini View Post
    The reason the wildcard squad played a highly rated team is because they where the second highest rating even at 0 points.
    This was my error. I had thought that one of the other 180-rated teams were still in the round 2 rotation. That clears that up.

    On the subject of carryovers, I do think there is a potential there. Perhaps averaging numbers at the end of the night for each of a Squad's individual teams, across both map results? It wouldn't do any harm IMO, since nothing is to be gained by intentionally losing a game just to get a low rating to win the next week (to be sure of this, do not rate exhibition matches whatsoever). In any case, any carryover rule would require people to stop using made-up names for Mixes and abide by the rules used to identify a team in the RoE.


    Real power comes from the man next to you and is built on the foundations of brotherhood and unity. There is no such thing as a one man army.

  8. #28

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    This system is also going to mean next to shit-all if one side is still getting most of the wins.

    "last game's winners" and "last games losers" will just be entire armies.



    Virtus Tentamine Gaudet
    FM For 6 wars spanning 3 generations

  9. #29
    Useless without Toast Jam Cliché's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    1,750
    Blog Posts
    2
    Livestreams
    View Channel: jamcliche

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    This system is also going to mean next to shit-all if one side is still getting most of the wins.

    "last game's winners" and "last games losers" will just be entire armies.
    I have to agree - we have such a limited pool that any "ranking" system may eventually fruitless. As it is, we can probably predict most game outcomes without punching numbers.

    EDIT: I'm not ruling out a desire to theorycraft this topic.


    Real power comes from the man next to you and is built on the foundations of brotherhood and unity. There is no such thing as a one man army.

  10. #30
    Double D Masters
    Darksail 5weg
    Buying GF
    Kickstart Xbone pl1x

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    434

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    So this is the pretty version that has real teams with real ratings that are real. Or not. But it's super pretty and it updates team rankings automatically and places them with their names so you just got put in W/L right after for easy comparison! Available at your local K-Mart

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
    Quote Originally Posted by Graycochea View Post
    I need you guys to never change.
    Quote Originally Posted by Houdini View Post
    You are significantly more likable than me

    http://fcwars.net/forums/image.php?type=sigpic&use  rid=3628&dateline=1407905  356


    H4 Recv5 CO Recognition-DSR

    [URL=http://minus.com/i/WhKTFFwt5awt]
    *Instert legally binding skype chat about Donkey buying me an X1*



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Website maintained by Metkil5685 and Mythonian.