AllegSkill Online

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:52 am

Grimm

While I may have used a wee bit to much hyperbole in expressing the superiority of Excel vs OpenOffice, I respectfully submit to you that turning this into a ranty, flame war involving you calling me a liar and I in turn calling you a smelly troll of a fan boy is no way to interact in this most important of threads involving *gasp* rankings

MrChaos

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:05 am

Vlymoxyd wrote:QUOTE (Vlymoxyd @ Jan 23 2009, 08:51 PM) Baker, I took the time to edit my post in order to add that I wasn't questionning the system(Or the maths)... I wish you wouldn't have stopped reading before it...

Manually balancing using ranks or just being able to tell if there's a stack just because a team has higher total rank is something I'm not sure makes sense right now and I'd like to know if it does. I just figured asking the guy would be faster than reading the maths for the 10ths time and giving it a really hard though trying to figure out if what I was thinking made sense. I've taken stats both in college and university, I've read the big MSR article on trueskill and that wiki article but I still lack the knowledges required to fully understand what the MU truly means(Beside the obvious "Higher" = better).

Obviously, a team with a higher total rank should have a tendency to be better than others, but a shorter way to say what I'm wondering:

After taking the hypothesis that the conservative rank = the real skill of all players:
Is the rank an absolute measurement of skill(You can add it up and say that a team is stacked because it has a higher total sum of ranks(Or MU) or just a relative one( Rank (10) + (8) =! (6) + (12) )?

You don't have to answear/reply if you don't feel like it(I won't have any bad feeling about it, really, it's not an important question), but pls don't tell me that ranks aren't used in the formula and that I should read a wiki article that says what MU/sigma means to a player but offers no insight on what it means on a whole team.

I just keep hearing that teams with perfectly equals rank are "balanced", but after giving it a though, I somewhat beleive that teams balanced in ranks might not be balanced in skills(Again, even if everyone's sigma was 0 and that all MUs were perfectly right).

First there Mus wouldn't be zero since uncertainity is injected into the sigmas. Next even after life on this planet ends, the stars burn out will everyone have the same Mu since the population's PDF and CDF form a normal distribution. Again Baker has said the "stacker" ranking is a work in progress, an idea of his, unrelated to the actual AllegSkills bit, and should be taken with a grain of salt , at least for now. Finally you are mixing up the "stacker" ranking with the balancing feature IMHO.

Broodwich · Post by **Broodwich** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:35 am

IDK about these new ranks, so far autobalanced games still end up largely inbalanced. Also, because lots of stackers have lower helo and the rankings are more condensed, games that (by helo) would look ok if you glanced at the team's rank, are pretty much stacked to hell. I mean there are new pilots who have barely half a clue and have higher ranks than some vets? Im not saying all "vets" have a clue but its just that the new ranking system doesnt really reflect balance/skill any more than helo did. Im curious to know if this is planned to sort itself out anytime or if it will continue to reflect skill as inconsistantly as helo did.

Post by **Tigereye** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:52 am

Broodwich wrote:QUOTE (Broodwich @ Jan 23 2009, 09:35 PM) IDK about these new ranks, so far autobalanced games still end up largely inbalanced.

That's not the fault of the new ranks; autobalance wasn't changed.
It has'nt changed since it was added... It just sorts everyone by their ingame rank, and then assigns the odd ones to yellow and the evens to blue.

Since the ingame ranks are adjusted to prevent players who always lose from being classified as 'newbies' again, they don't reflect their true skill. (TrueSkill

)

The autobalance feature should be updated to use the mu/sigma values, and the matchmaking algorithm used in TrueSkill.

--TE

djrbk · Post by **djrbk** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:57 am

I have increased my rank by .2 these past couple of days.

Please re-adjust to keep my rank a perma (10) (or lower)

thx.

(mostly joking)

Broodwich · Post by **Broodwich** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:03 am

Tigereye wrote:QUOTE (Tigereye @ Jan 23 2009, 06:52 PM) That's not the fault of the new ranks; autobalance wasn't changed.
It has'nt changed since it was added... It just sorts everyone by their ingame rank, and then assigns the odd ones to yellow and the evens to blue.

Since the ingame ranks are adjusted to prevent players who always lose from being classified as 'newbies' again, they don't reflect their true skill. (TrueSkill )

The autobalance feature should be updated to use the mu/sigma values, and the matchmaking algorithm used in TrueSkill.

--TE

Sorry but when i say autobalance i mean when coms leave it on during the game then turn autoaccept on. Interestingly I have seen pretty even teams as far as when ab was used at the start(both with helo and allegskill) The problem is people who dont want to fly for the voob com will quickly drop to noat or something.

Loriana · Post by **Loriana** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:15 am

wow so many numbers...

this is seriously confusing.

and if you're all down the bottom of the list, it is very annoying to scroll up all the way to find out which column stands for what..

maybe a search function that would return one line of one user would be handy?

finki · Post by **finki** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:23 am

Loriana wrote:QUOTE (Loriana @ Jan 24 2009, 11:15 AM) and if you're all down the bottom of the list, it is very annoying to scroll up all the way to find out which column stands for what..

maybe a search function that would return one line of one user would be handy?

Or scroll the headline with the descriptions of the colums with you. Damn it I don't know how to say this in proper English but I think you know what I mean baker?

madpeople · Post by **madpeople** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:50 pm

finki wrote:QUOTE (finki @ Jan 24 2009, 11:23 AM) Or scroll the headline with the descriptions of the colums with you. Damn it I don't know how to say this in proper English but I think you know what I mean baker?

they've been talking about that a few pages back.

perhaps someone should trim this topic down a bit, I keep seeing the same things coming up over and over again like lots of little repetitive spirals.

HSharp · Post by **HSharp** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:02 pm

Leaderboard is nice, but I think they should have a floating header for the column titles, I wonder why no one has thought of an idea like that at all