AllegSkill

Duckwarrior · Post by **Duckwarrior** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:24 am

Is this thing still around?

Post by **zombywoof** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:28 am

Unfortunately not. Sgt Baker did a great job developing a mathematically accurate model of who was good and who wasn't. Obviously when Broodwich played all of 5 games in 5 years and was ranked as a (3), you see the thing has some flaws, but wtf can you do about ranking people who don't play. On the flipside, P32 maxed out his mu by being a nearly unstoppable force, and Babs was a close second.

Terran · Post by **Terran** » Sat Mar 17, 2018 1:44 pm

we have a herpa derp add up the points system, something much better now, ranking tenforward as allegiance's top player

Post by **MagisterXF94** » Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:48 am

you know, you are giving @#(! to the person who co developed alleg skill in the first place right?
I feel sad for BT

Terran · Post by **Terran** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 1:08 pm

Senor NoirSol wrote:QUOTE (Senor NoirSol @ Mar 18 2018, 04:48 AM) you know, you are giving @#(! to the person who co developed alleg skill in the first place right?
I feel sad for BT

that made no sense. are you saying BT co-developed alleg-skill? who are we talking about? why would they revert to a herpa-derp system after developing the awesome alleg-skill system? why do that unilaterally instead of asking for feedback beforehand? just like all the other $#@!ed up surprise changes we've seen post-steam release

Wasp · Post by **Wasp** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:55 pm

Implementing "Allegskill" is one thing, conceptualizing it is quite another. Baker grabbed a ranking system that was inappropriate for this game and bastardized it conceptually until it made him happy. That's all. It doesn't work because it violates the underlying principle that the outcome of the game must be the sole responsibility of the players being ranked. The god like hand of the commander and the inconsistency of the rock placement and varying tech paths that greatly limit the comparable samples, completely disassociates almost every player of each game from outcome.

The fact that we are able to balance games on names alone and from that we can see that the numbers are off, we know that the current ranking system is neither useful or used and we are quite capable of balancing teams based upon our knowledge of what each of us will do in game. That is why I think it is the proper path to take to categorize players by what they do and rank on those categories. No nonsensical math is needed.

Post by **MagisterXF94** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:39 pm

Counter proposal :

index...showtopic=68191

Terran · Post by **Terran** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 4:39 pm

Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Mar 20 2018, 11:55 AM) Implementing "Allegskill" is one thing, conceptualizing it is quite another. Baker grabbed a ranking system that was inappropriate for this game and bastardized it conceptually until it made him happy. That's all. It doesn't work because it violates the underlying principle that the outcome of the game must be the sole responsibility of the players being ranked. The god like hand of the commander and the inconsistency of the rock placement and varying tech paths that greatly limit the comparable samples, completely disassociates almost every player of each game from outcome.

The fact that we are able to balance games on names alone and from that we can see that the numbers are off, we know that the current ranking system is neither useful or used and we are quite capable of balancing teams based upon our knowledge of what each of us will do in game. That is why I think it is the proper path to take to categorize players by what they do and rank on those categories. No nonsensical math is needed.

that's another decent option for a ranking system that makes sense. unlike the current system in place.

Mastametz · Post by **Mastametz** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 6:18 pm

The stacking problem has never been as severe as it is now due to the current ranking system.

Post by **zombywoof** » Tue Mar 20, 2018 7:02 pm

Wasp wrote:QUOTE (Wasp @ Mar 20 2018, 08:55 AM) Implementing "Allegskill" is one thing, conceptualizing it is quite another. Baker grabbed a ranking system that was inappropriate for this game and bastardized it conceptually until it made him happy. That's all. It doesn't work because it violates the underlying principle that the outcome of the game must be the sole responsibility of the players being ranked. The god like hand of the commander and the inconsistency of the rock placement and varying tech paths that greatly limit the comparable samples, completely disassociates almost every player of each game from outcome.

AllegianceSkill tracked command rank separately from normal rank. Also, as important as techrock placement is to a team's success, that variance affects both teams roughly equally. Finally, the ranking system was designed by statisticians who published their system in an MIT Press journal and worked together with Sgt Baker to tweak the system for Allegiance.

The biggest flaw in AllegSkill was lack of sample size... which is definitely not Baker's fault. Probably the fault of commercial airline pilots making paragraph-long posts about how they know more about statistics and algorithms than two guys with PhDs in computer science and a guy with a PhD in statistics and whatever qualifications Baker had.