New AllegSkill ranks

Correct · Post by **Correct** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:34 am

Sounds like a challenge.

Post by **zombywoof** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:51 am

MrChaos wrote:QUOTE (MrChaos @ Jul 17 2009, 12:28 AM) You actually can't but you think you can, read the book Eyeball. I mean no offense... you know whenever we are on you have to predict the winner at launch every single game your on no cherry picking, I'll keep track and after say 300 games we'll post it, maybe a 100. It will be an interesting experiment

Also highly inaccurate and completely irrelevant unless the teams don't change over the course of the game.

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 7:58 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Jul 17 2009, 02:51 AM) Also highly inaccurate and completely irrelevant unless the teams don't change over the course of the game.

Read the words Im typing: AllegSkills ACCURATELY predicts the winner 80% of the time at game LAUNCH. Much of the other 20% is the ebb and flow post launch IMHO. The system doesn't get to "re-pick"

This is the claim Sir Baker's work is making. WE did throw out a goodish portion of games for being to small, 2 plus teams (the math would make you sob like a hysterical little bitch), those with data collection hiccups, etc etc Im guessish but 8-12%

Post by **zombywoof** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:41 am

Really. I thought it was predicting the results by seeing the team across the whole game.

That's very interesting.

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:33 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Jul 17 2009, 03:41 AM) Really. I thought it was predicting the results by seeing the team across the whole game.

That's very interesting.

Hmmm I meant to edit it, but didnt last night since the read my lips type statement is misleading

and well just never mind

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:40 am

Allegskill is measures the skill to win at Allegiance. Much as we'd probably like it to be all about personal skill at playing the game, it's to a large extent also knowing which commanders to back, and whether you're trying to maximise your chance to win when you pick who to fly for.

It's still pretty sweet, and miles better than anything we've had before.

badpazzword · Post by **badpazzword** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:56 am

cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ Jul 17 2009, 02:17 AM) A more serious problem is whether a (21) is worth the same as, more than, or less than three (7)s.

Allegskill does not work like that. AllegR4 uses sum of ranks to get a 'team rank', while AllegSkill uses mu's and sigma's to produce much better matchups (R4 came out earlier). A problem in the not-yet-finished implementation of AllegSkill is getting those numbers to the autobalance portion of Allegiance so that R5 (or R6 or whatever) can bring the full AllegSkill awesomesauce to our games.

finnbryant · Post by **finnbryant** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:16 pm

so the only way to give comms anything close to allegskills true knowledge would be to replace the team rank with a probability of winning?

eg
yellow team (45%)
blue team (55%)

(ignoring draw probability here)

if im understanding right, that is the only point when allegskills potential can be condensed into a number without becoming blurry, semi-meaningless and difficult to truely understand.

as to the original discussion, why cant people just trust baker? hes proven himself to be far more capable than you at understanding this type of problem, so shutup and let hims do his thing.

Post by **Raveen** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:24 pm

Finn Bryant wrote:QUOTE (Finn Bryant @ Jul 17 2009, 03:16 PM) why cant people just trust baker? hes proven himself to be far more capable than you at understanding this type of problem, so shutup and let hims do his thing.

QFT

Imago · Post by **Imago** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 3:10 pm

hey brood you crazy animal.... maybe it has something to do /w the stats not making it to the database.....AFAIK the server triggers events (large, clunky, xml ones) only once and does not retry if it fails.....the way the server "pushes" the stats is retarded. just wanted to say the word retarded, cause when you said it sounded so cool!

baker don't let any of these people slow you down......