The State and Future of Rank

Allegiance discussion not belonging in another forum.
Xynth
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:03 pm
Location: St. Louis

Post by Xynth »

There has been a lot of discussion and misinformation on the current player rank implementation on discord so I wanted to make a post here to give some less ephemeral information.

The current state of player rank is based on a cumulative player score stat that is recorded by Steam. This is simply the Score you see at the end of a game added to the previous sum of all player scores you have received. This cumulative score is then compared to an array of threshold values to determine player rank. This is similar to an experience level system in an RPG.

This system was chosen because it is first, easy to implement and second, gives players a sense of accomplishment as they level up. More skilled players will level up faster. But a less skilled player could reach a higher rank just by playing A LOT. Therefore, comparing two ranks gives you a little information on the skill and experience levels of the players but nothing definite.

From BT: We're changing the goal of Rank away from using it as an evaluation of a team's chances of winning a match. Instead, we want to use it as a reward and a motivation to play. By granting rank on interval, and using the game economy as the reward driver, we're going to increase individual player investment in the game. The second job of Rank is to also discourage cheating. As a free game, we need player time investment to build up a sense of loss should that investment be sacrificed. By adding more levers to areas that we want to reward (probing, nanning), and adding bonus to points scored against high KB targets, or against higher ranking players we can really move the needle for players that are motivated by persistent points.

For those players who are not motivated by ranks and achievements, they're just going to stack it up anyway. It doesn't really matter how much we stack shame them. :)

This is all that is implemented, the following is future plans.

I want to add more opportunities to gain score to the game. Currently, it is mainly things like base kills and player kills. While these are fundamental to game play, it doesn't measure all ways to contribute to the game. Things like good probing and nanning are important but not previously recorded.

Additionally, many have expressed concern with "stacking" and how allegskill encouraged anti-stacking. To help offset this I plan to implement a factor on player scores of (opponentRank)/(yourRank). Therefore any score you earn playing on a team that is 2:1 stacked against is doubled and likewise halved on the stacker team. This should help drive the stacks toward unity.

I have been working towards these goals in my achievement work so I think I can do this in Two WeeksTM, err I mean two weeks.
Xynth@PK
Image
Drizzo
Posts: 3685
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:00 am

Post by Drizzo »

Kill/Eject Ratio + Drones killed will give you a decent baseline metric to rank pilot ability. More markers will help with fine tuning but historically speaking the game changers have always been people capable of killing 3-4 defenders and then whatever they were defending. Also usually when you have that much mastery over piloting, it goes without saying you understand how to scout the map etc. as well.

Maybe elect for separate ranks for pilot ability and command ability and give the player the choice of which to display before accessing the game list (similar to squad tags). Command rank purely based off of W/L
cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ Oct 16 2010, 02:48 AM) Interceptors are fun because without one, Drizzo would be physically incapable of entering a sector.
MagisterXF94
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 9:46 am
Location: Trieste, Italy

Post by MagisterXF94 »

QUOTE I want to add more opportunities to gain score to the game. Currently, it is mainly things like base kills and player kills. While these are fundamental to game play, it doesn't measure all ways to contribute to the game. Things like good probing and nanning are important but not previously recorded.[/quote]
:iluv: :ninja:
QUOTE ^cashto@Elem (all): yeah, i imagine if you're rusty, you could build op short for no reason, build a naked ref, then go two techpaths even though your mining is by all objective standards $#@!ed[/quote]
Image
Wasp
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Wasp »

When looking at the various pilots, it's difficult to distinguish which pilots will do what before the game starts.

If there were three rankings...Command (based upon win/loss), Whore (based upon Kill/Eject & Drone kills) & Utility (based upon a matrix that will have to be defined), we could then see a proper balance as teams are selected.

I'm not a scout type of player but, I will fly a scout if I absolutely have to. Others will only fly scouts, even to defend with because they refuse to fly HINTS! If we know ahead of time who is likely to do what, we can balance based upon those indicators.
vogue
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:28 am

Post by vogue »

Some good ideas in here. I get the idea behind keeping it points based because people do want progression. At the same time, some people (p032) care a lot about rank and will stack mercilessly if there’s no penalty for it.

I think we should strike a middle ground. Maybe a meshed algorithm that takes into account a progression/time played aspect, pilot effectiveness, and perhaps even commanding ability.

I’m not sold on the above being the entire pool of predictive metrics, but the general idea is that: what separates the best from the average is the ability to put on many different hats. Rewarding on W/L is a simple proxy to get at that, but I think we can do better.

If anyone has the leaderboard data from ACSS, I’ll even take a swing at designing said algorithm.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ May 5 2013, 08:35 PM) Vogue is clearly #1 and commanding against him feels like commanding against Spideycw at times... though he lacks that little bit of "I don't care who's on my team or what the factions are, it's going to be a stomp anyways" that Spidey managed to pull off in his heyday.
dusanc
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 12:06 pm
Location: СРБИЈА/Serbia

Post by dusanc »

There is one modifier that we can implement that would decrease stacking - players on team with more points get less points.
Something like:

Points=Points_from_game x (sum(enemy_points x played_time) /sum(friendly_points x played_time))

So if people stack they get less points.
- "History repeats itself for a reason" - "It's easy to cry for war when you've never experienced it" - "It's better to negotiate for 10 years then make war for 10 days" - "The strong do as they will, and the weak do as they must"
Image
Wasp
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Wasp »

vogue wrote:QUOTE (vogue @ Oct 17 2017, 11:57 AM) ...takes into account a progression/time played aspect...
According to steam, the time played is not equal to the time in a game but rather, the total time you've had allegiance running. Might need to see if the time played can be measured.
DusanC wrote:QUOTE (DusanC @ Oct 17 2017, 02:06 PM) There is one modifier that we can implement that would decrease stacking - players on team with more points get less points.
Would noobs then join the disadvantaged team to rank up faster?

Having a numbered system seems too vague to determine what a player will do in a game. I think we need to identify their behavior based upon what they do and rank that.
Last edited by Wasp on Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Xynth
Posts: 224
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 3:03 pm
Location: St. Louis

Post by Xynth »

"There is one modifier that we can implement that would decrease stacking - players on team with more points get less points."

Yes, that is where I was going with:

"Additionally, many have expressed concern with "stacking" and how allegskill encouraged anti-stacking. To help offset this I plan to implement a factor on player scores of (opponentRank)/(yourRank). Therefore any score you earn playing on a team that is 2:1 stacked against is doubled and likewise halved on the stacker team. This should help drive the stacks toward unity."

I wrote code last night for exactly:

"Points=Points_from_game x (sum(enemy_points x played_time) /sum(friendly_points x played_time))"

Noobs will rank up faster if they are on the disadvantaged team but only if they do something that earns them points.
Xynth@PK
Image
Wasp
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Wasp »

Xynth wrote:QUOTE (Xynth @ Oct 17 2017, 03:12 PM) Noobs will rank up faster if they are on the disadvantaged team but only if they do something that earns them points.
So a noob scouting around in a totally noob team, will rank up much faster than if the noob is on the experienced team. I can see how this may discourage stacking by those who love their ranks, but what will happen to those who don't care about ranks and noobs? Those who don't care and noobs will rank faster than the stacking vets.

I think the application of a rank based upon discouragement factors assumes that the rank is the reason for stacking. I'd argue that stacking is due to good players wanting to fly with other good players regardless of their ranks. This is why I think we should categorize the players and rank on those categories.

Take me for instance... My command rank would be zero because I never (and can't) command. I'm not really into scouting unless I have to so that rank would be based upon a matrix of factors divided into the time i'm scouting and I'm really not great at scouting so that rank would be mediocre at best. I do love to shoot at things and I'd say I'm better than average in that regard so my whore rank would reflect that...so...what a commander would see before he accepts me to his team is:



Wasp (0)(4)(7)
Command rank, utility rank, whore rank.

If we sum upon those numbers, a quick glance at the teams values would tell us what one team likely needs when compared to the other team.



just my opinion, as always. Sorry for all of the edits.
Last edited by Wasp on Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
qqmwoarplox
Posts: 1647
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:18 pm

Post by qqmwoarplox »

I like the idea of separating ranks into categories
Post Reply