Elo Formula

Fragtzack · Post by **Fragtzack** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 5:03 pm

People can just sit out a game if they can not play on the winning team. That is what I mainly do and how I climbed the Elo ladder. All you have to do is look at the teams and evaluate the losing team. It could be faction, map, commander etc. Then either join the other team or sit out until a more favorable game starts. This is called stacking, and Elo is the direct cause.

The only way Elo would work with these fantasies of "statistical probabilities" is if every pilot was forced to play every game.

Let's make a community poll.

- Stick with Elo development
- Revert to the old stat system
- Develop the old system to award naniting/probing
- Do away with recorded stats all together

Dengaroth · Post by **Dengaroth** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:34 pm

Fragtzack wrote:QUOTE (Fragtzack @ Sep 3 2006, 07:03 PM) People can just sit out a game if they can not play on the winning team. That is what I mainly do and how I climbed the Elo ladder.

At the danger of repeating myself, if "climbing the ladder" is what you want to do, sure. It's the Heisenberg principle all over again - the results of a measurement are affected by the fact that the entity is being measured in the first place. Besides, that's what the autobalance patch is about - if the result is more or less determined, to give you a choice between trying to sway it or not play/go play elsewhere. No freeloading.

If you're so convinced it's not working anyway, why not just play and not worry about the system?

Fragtzack wrote:QUOTE (Fragtzack @ Sep 3 2006, 07:03 PM) This is called stacking, and Elo is the direct cause.

Ok now that's the biggest pile of bull@#(! I've heard in the recent past. Are you SERIOUSLY trying to say that stacking is here because of ELO? One would think you're not playing for a couple years.

Fragtzack wrote:QUOTE (Fragtzack @ Sep 3 2006, 07:03 PM) The only way Elo would work with these fantasies of "statistical probabilities" is if every pilot was forced to play every game.

Explain why you think that.

It's obvious that if your condition was fulfilled, the ratings would converge faster, yes... but "the only way it would work"?

tmc · Post by **tmc** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:44 pm

if someone sint forced to play every game, he can simply sit out the games where he can't join the winning team. Thus, his ranking is ever-increasing, and hence ELO doesnt work.

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:13 am

tmc wrote:QUOTE (tmc @ Sep 3 2006, 06:44 PM) if someone sint forced to play every game, he can simply sit out the games where he can't join the winning team. Thus, his ranking is ever-increasing, and hence ELO doesnt work.

Nope.

His ranking will increase for any stacked game he joins. However ELOs for those who do not sit out will slowly begin to converge. After a while he won't be able to join any stacked game - with his high ELO he'll be forced to join the team with the low ELO. And if his high ELO doesn't reflect his actual skill, the teams are likely to lose, and his ELO will start going down.

There is really no escaping this. It works, as long as the ELO adjustments per game are sound.

tmc · Post by **tmc** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:59 am

what do you mean he wont be able to join the stacked team?

Fragtzack · Post by **Fragtzack** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:12 am

Its been a year, how long before Elo for Allegiance starts to work? Do we need another year to "converge" and then throw out the calcs again? What has changed to start making this system accurate? Resetting everyone to (15) is the magical answer?

Wow is all I can say.

Post by **Tigereye** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 4:46 am

Fragtzack wrote:QUOTE (Fragtzack @ Sep 3 2006, 11:12 PM) Its been a year, how long before Elo for Allegiance starts to work? Do we need another year to "converge" and then throw out the calcs again? What has changed to start making this system accurate?

Many bugs have been removed from the system including:A bug where -3million minute durations were assigned to some playersA bug where many players' names were not listed as even playing in the gameA bug where players ingame times were greater than the game's lengthA bug where kill/eject counts were not counted correctly (of course, neither of these 2 stats are used anyways)A bug where drawed games were never countedA bug where games with a countdown were never countedAnd probably more that I can't remember.

In short: many things have changed to start making the system more accurate. By resetting everyone's rank, we removed all anomolies introduced by old bugs in one swoop.

--TE

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:07 am

Curious though, the commander percentages didn't reset, feel free to reset those too. /huh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":huh:" border="0" alt="huh.gif" />

Spunkmeyer · Post by **Spunkmeyer** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:29 am

tmc wrote:QUOTE (tmc @ Sep 3 2006, 09:59 PM) what do you mean he wont be able to join the stacked team?

As time progresses both the stackers and the skilled will have high ELOs. They won't be able to join the same team no matter how many games they skip. This will get "worse and worse" for them as time progresses.

Frag - we've said this countless many times: ELO won't converge until the teams are restricted. I have just described the mechanism. All you need to do is read.

tmc · Post by **tmc** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:53 pm

no, they can always join the same team. Unless youre talking about after an autobalance button gets implemented.