Another elo suggestion while we're at it

vlad13 · Post by **vlad13** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:46 am

Would it be possible to implement for an individual to "opt out" of elo? That way people who antistack can opt out.

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:59 am

Having a scoring system that only scores part of the people makes it difficult to say the least, if not pointless. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

vlad13 · Post by **vlad13** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:10 am

Well when all polls about elo come in the 50-50 range i really don't think there will be a solution that everybody will agree on.

Post by **Pook** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:45 am

You couldn't really score half the population of a game.

I'm pretty sure you'll be able to turn stats on and off at some point... I believe that if the auto-balancer isn't enabled, that the stats won't count. (IIRC)

ELO is currently a mechinism to enable us to get a balancing system in place. If the underlying model that supports that balancing system is later changed to something else, that's fine too... more important to me is the ability to prevent stacking than the perfect accuracy of a ranking system.

As long as it's "Close" or even "Usually Close" then it's good enough for a start.

apochboi · Post by **apochboi** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:55 am

How about we just stop Pook from $#@!ing around with a microsoft game any longer ??

Post by **Pook** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:58 am

Post by **Tigereye** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 3:49 am

apochboi wrote:QUOTE (apochboi @ Nov 4 2006, 09:55 PM) How about we just stop Pook from $#@!ing around with a microsoft game any longer ??

Hey maybe you haven't been keeping up with current events pal, but Microsoft gave this game up 6 years ago.

Welcome to 2006.

--TE

vlad13 · Post by **vlad13** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:31 am

Pook wrote:QUOTE (Pook @ Nov 5 2006, 12:45 PM) ELO is currently a mechanism to enable us to get a balancing system in place. If the underlying model that supports that balancing system is later changed to something else, that's fine too... more important to me is the ability to prevent stacking than the perfect accuracy of a ranking system.

I wonder if people will stack less if they have no elo to worry about in the first place but i guess we'll never know.

ski2slow · Post by **ski2slow** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:18 am

vlad13 wrote:QUOTE (vlad13 @ Nov 4 2006, 11:31 PM) I wonder if people will stack less if they have no elo to worry about in the first place but i guess we'll never know.

I sincerely doubt it. People will always stack to win a game.

-ski /ninja.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":ninja:" border="0" alt="ninja.gif" />

Rhapsody · Post by **Rhapsody** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:00 am

vlad13 wrote:QUOTE (vlad13 @ Nov 5 2006, 06:31 AM) I wonder if people will stack less if they have no elo to worry about in the first place but i guess we'll never know.

Hm, lets see.... there was time when there were no ranks no elo. Did people stack? Why yes - they did!