New AllegSkill ranks

Pedowich · Post by **Pedowich** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:14 pm

lexaal wrote:QUOTE (lexaal @ Jul 16 2009, 05:11 PM) What about a dynamic scaling:

example for 10 ranks:
30% to rank 0 (newbs, dead accounts)
10% rank 1-6
5% rank 7/8
rank 9 player #1

Where do you put the other 55%?

lexaal · Post by **lexaal** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:21 pm

Pedowich wrote:QUOTE (Pedowich @ Jul 16 2009, 11:14 PM) Where do you put the other 55%?

well.. ban them.
Use a bit of common sense.. Are you a lawyer?
30% to rank 0 (newbs, dead accounts)
10% rank 1
10% rank 2
10% rank 3
10% rank 4
10% rank 5
10% rank 6
5% rank 7
5% rank 8
rank 9 player #1

Pedowich · Post by **Pedowich** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:23 pm

Sorry my math inference skills are weak!

Post by **zombywoof** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:25 pm

I'll say it again: leave as is or rescale for 50 ranks. The system works. Don't fix what isn't broken.

sgt_baker · Post by **sgt_baker** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:25 pm

I really don't understand the need to cling to the 0 - 30 system. Go ahead and work out somebody's rank using the mu and sigma on the leaderboard. Wrong? No. That's what it should be.

We went with 0 - 50 when developing AS since that is the 'industry standard' defined, yes arbitrarily, by Microsoft. It made it far easier for us to avoid translation errors when comparing AS to known-working solutions to keep the whole shebang in 0 - 50 space. It is entirely possible to convert AS to 0 - 30 at this point, however that's lots more work than just displaying the native 0 - 50 ranks to the user.

Forget about rank-scaling for the moment. Let's just deal with the immediate horror of everyone's rank going up by 66%.

Post by **zombywoof** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:34 pm

Which is why I suggested we reset the ranks and have 11 or 12 slots in each of them (which is 66% up from 7 ranks).

sgt_baker · Post by **sgt_baker** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:49 pm

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Jul 16 2009, 10:34 PM) Which is why I suggested we reset the ranks and have 11 or 12 slots in each of them (which is 66% up from 7 ranks).

That can be done with relative ease.

Rank-scaling is something that'd need a code-change where AllSrv is concerned. Fortunately it requires minimal effort when performed alongside the changes required to make autobalance work or displaying commander skill in-game etc.

What you should be noticing by now is a tendency to mention, in passing, potential changes before they happen. This way you can all vent spleen in dribs and drabs as opposed to all going nuclear together.

Correct · Post by **Correct** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:55 pm

Newbie 0
Newbie 1.66
Newbie 3.33
Newbie 5

cashto · Post by **cashto** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:55 pm

sgt_baker wrote:QUOTE (sgt_baker @ Jul 16 2009, 02:25 PM) I really don't understand the need to cling to the 0 - 30 system.

And I don't understand the need to change it.

sgt_baker wrote:QUOTE (sgt_baker @ Jul 16 2009, 02:25 PM) It is entirely possible to convert AS to 0 - 30 at this point, however that's lots more work than just displaying the native 0 - 50 ranks to the user.

Whut? Multiplying by 0.6 is a lot of work? Explain.

Pedowich · Post by **Pedowich** » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:57 pm

Pretty sure he's referring to the behind the scenes maths cash, not to the output.