Calculating Newbie Status

[AdmiralKirk]

Ill first start off by saying im not sure how this number is calculated now. My only facts are thus. I apperently registered a name almost a year ago but never got around to actualy playing. Now, a year or so later, I regestered another name, and attempted to play in the newbie zone and was promptly banned for a day. I can garuntee that my actual play time was less than 30 mins between _both_ names, so unless this was a bug, it seams like a problem that could use correcting. Idealy the newbie rating should be based off of actual in-game usage and kill/death ratio, something along the lines of:

(sudo code)

if(Usage > 200 || (Kills > 100 && KDRatio > 1.5F))
Player->Newbie = No;

Or something like that. Since I havnt dug into the protocol yet, Im not certain weather the kill/death ratio would even be avaliable to the login server, however it should still at least recieve login/logout times and that would be sufficient info to record actual usage (generaly recorded in hours). Assuming that the login data is stored in an MySQL server, I can even provide you with the line of SQL thatll do the trick:

UPDATE logindata SET UsageHrs=UsageHrs+(TIMESTAMPDIFF(MINUTE, LastSeen, NOW()) / 60) WHERE Name='%s'

Thatll give you hours with decimal precision. LastSeen is a TIMESTAMP field filled with NOW() when the user first logs in. The above update is run when the user logs out. Again, however, I dont know how the current system or protocol works, so perhaps its done the way it currently is simply because thats the only feasable way. Being a programmer I know how these things can be. However if it is at all possible to actualy use real usage instead of (im guesing) the time since the account was first registered, I think you would alianate far fewer newbies this way ^^. Also I would recomend that usage, or at least newbie status, be reset if the account hasnt logged in for a period of 6 months or something like that. Or mabye just purge accounts that havnt been active for 6 months. Anyway, thats my $20.45 thanks for listening /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

[Pook]

The newbie modifier is nothing more than a "negative weight" applied to ranks of new players so that their rank doesn't start out at (15). (1500 is the starting ELO rating and is what ranks are based on)

Previously, the newbie modifier was based on # of games played. However, returning vets that had been away from the game for an extended period were coming back to a (0). To fix this problem, it was suggested that we include the callsign's date as part of the newbie modifier. This of course had the side effect that you've experienced.

So, which is more likely to happen:

- Long time player who was on a break (before ELO) returns.

or

- New player signs up, goes away for a year then comes back.

Probably the first one, if you ask me. There's just no way for me to correct BOTH circumstances. Over time, it won't be an issue anymore because the timespan between "Now" and "Before ELO" will be so great anyone returning is a newbie anyway.

Of course, that assumes that we're still using ELO at the time - there are other ranking methods in development and one of them may prove better... in which case we start all over with the "Before <insert new ranking method here>" date.

[AdmiralKirk]

Ah, so its basically post upgrade issues along with a lack of control over the source if I understand you. Well, it sucks to be collateral damage, but oh well, not that I haven't had to do this to other people before for similar reasons so I understand. Anyway, thanks for the informative reply!

[Bunnywabbit]

edit: I take way too much time to write this stuff

AdmiralKirk:

You have the misfortune of your first callsign creation and your second attempt bridging a reset of the stats system we are currently implementing.

Without going into the details of that (of which i know little, by the way) apparently the admins/coders assumed the number of people in a situation like your own would be small enough to manage by hand, and too small to warrant the effort of providing for in the code. Whether or not that assumption is still valid is up to them. We *can*, however, be reasonably sure the issue will become less and less pressing with time.

While this may not be the best way to say a big hello to players like yourself, all this stuff is set up and kept running by volunteers; they get restless if we don't let them have a life now and then.

[madpeople]

QUOTE (Pook @ Feb 13 2007, 03:40 PM) So, which is more likely to happen:

- Long time player who was on a break (before ELO) returns.

or

- New player signs up, goes away for a year then comes back.

Probably the first one, if you ask me.

am i understanding this right?
QUOTE There's just no way for me to correct BOTH circumstances[/quote]so you fixed the first one, but
QUOTE Over time, it won't be an issue anymore because the timespan between "Now" and "Before ELO" will be so great anyone returning is a newbie anyway.[/quote]
so over time the one you fixed will go away, but the other will still remain?
shouldn't we fix the one that remains and let the first one dissapear on its own?


QUOTE Probably the first one,[/quote]
hmm, it seems more likley the second one will happen.

there is a fixed number of people who left a while ago and who can return, every time they do, the number of them decreases. (since they have played before, they can probably survive in the regular servers, even (1)'s can survive, so they should have no problem, they may suck, but they don't need the newbie server)

we get new players all the time, some join and only play a few games then leave, we have an ever increasing population of new players who leave who are capable of returning, who when they do, will not have played alleg much before (i.e. not returning vet) and will want to play on the newbie server and then get banned for it.

i'm just saying, screw the decreasing minority in favour of the increasing majority.

[Bunnywabbit]

QUOTE (madpeople @ Feb 13 2007, 05:14 PM) so over time the one you fixed will go away, but the other will still remain?

No, that's the exact opposite of what he's saying.

The Vets who went AWOL before the reset area dwindling group, but since it is unlikely that they will completely forget about Allegiance (unless they get really, really old /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> ), the chance of them returning remains higher than that of the second group; the people that logged in only once or twice before the rank-reset. The numbers of the latter are also expected to dwindle: they have expressed only a fleeting interest, which will either be revived, or become more fleeting as time goes by. It is not strange to assume that it becomes increasingly unlikely that they will give it another go if they haven't already.

Given your leet Excel skills demonstrated elsewhere, I'm sure that, given the data, you could do a graph of the 'probabilty of return' as a function of time since last login for groups sorted by days played before callsign reset. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" /> I wouldn't be surprised if it would plane out near zero for the latter group after a few months.

Note that the second group is also a fixed number: only the ones who signed up before the rank reset count. 'Regular' newbies get a (0).