Should we put a governor on rank?

[jgbaxter]

I've been thinking of this for years, it's a simple idea that would give more weight and accuracy to rank by incorporating an AllegAge component.

As many of you are aware previous to using Elo/Helo as the sole means of equating rank we used AllegAge. The idea of AllegAge was that the more times you uniquely logged into Alleg the more experience you had with the game, and thus by default the more skill you had in the game (to a degree anyway). The purpose of this thread is to take the AllegAge component (experience) with the ranking method (relative skill or at least probability of winning), by doing this and placing a governor or limiter on rank we'd have a more accurate gauge of someones skill hopefully.

The side benefit to this is that a newbie wouldn't lose their newbie number (0)-(4) within a week, because of that they'd receive a little more leeway from players in the community and thus have a better chance of staying as there'd be a higher likelyhood they'd enjoy their initial experience in the first month.

A players rank would be limited by their AllegAge and thus more accurate, it will also seem more like they earned the rank instead of just being exceptionally lucky or simply good at stacking... it will make the displayed rank limited by the players experience in Alleg. This will also make it much easier and a more accurate way of organizing games when people look at helo rank to balance a game, it will should take a huge dent in people whining of stack... well, that's one theory anyway.

So to clarify again, let's say your Helo points gave you enough to be rank 15 (2102) points, though you were only playing for a month (thus your AllegAge was (7)), your rank would display as (7) as that's as high as you could go since your AllegAge is limiting uncontrolled random points gained in games.... after a year your AllegAge would show as (15) and thus Vet1, if your helo points from playing was the same or higher, then you'd show as a rank (15) vet1, if you had less points from playing then your rank would show as less since AllegAge isn't limiting the displayed rank since you haven't earned enough points.

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

[Cadillac]

Limit, maybe.

Boost, no.

[jgbaxter]

QUOTE (Cadillac @ Sep 29 2007, 09:21 AM) Limit, maybe.

Boost, no.

It's definately not a boost...

If your AllegAge says you've been playing and have gained X experience in the game, then that is the max. you can have as your rank, regardless of how many points you gain from playing games, it's a limiter to have peoples relative skill in game also equate to their time playing. Thus limiting a players displayed rank to a maximum of how long they've been playing. Definately no boost, and definately more accurate at least. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

[SP4WN]

Im all for the idea, seems like its been thought out properly.

The only part im not so sure about is the amount of times you log in? If you implement that then people could just sit there logging in an out to boost ranks.

As for age, sounds cool to me.

Spawn
umedS

[jgbaxter]

QUOTE (SP4WN @ Sep 29 2007, 09:48 AM) Im all for the idea, seems like its been thought out properly.

The only part im not so sure about is the amount of times you log in? If you implement that then people could just sit there logging in an out to boost ranks.

As for age, sounds cool to me.

Spawn
umedS

AllegAge was always slightly problematic in that way. However, it was relatively minor and that was for two reasons;AllegAge was based on unique log in days, meaning it only counted towards your age a maximum of once per day.AllegAge is based on a mathematically higher number of unique logins to get to the higher ranks, thus you'd have to exploit it over a vast time period.AllegAge is the number of unique log in days, doubled, square root; (2xDays)√

AllegAge 01 = 001 Days
AllegAge 02 = 002 Days
AllegAge 03 = 005 Days
AllegAge 04 = 008 Days
AllegAge 05 = 013 Days
AllegAge 06 = 018 Days
AllegAge 07 = 025 Days
AllegAge 08 = 032 Days
AllegAge 09 = 041 Days
AllegAge 10 = 050 Days
...
AllegAge 15 = 113 Days
...
AllegAge 20 = 200 Days
...
AllegAge 25 = 313 Days
...
AllegAge 30 = 450 Days


Even though Alleg has been around going on 8 years, there are very few AllegAge 30 people around.

As it is now, someone that started on a Friday could be Inter(1) by Monday. Using AllegAge as a limter, it would take them a month to gain that level (at best)... Inters should have at least a basic understanding of the game and the community, you'd think that a month would be more suitable then a weekend. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

[shadowmose]

Cool. I like the idea
but i believe you can play for 1 month (30 days) and be at competant level with the rest of the rank 13's

[jgbaxter]

QUOTE (shadowmose @ Sep 29 2007, 10:21 AM) Cool. I like the idea
but i believe you can play for 1 month (30 days) and be at competant level with the rest of the rank 13's

That's the beauty of the idea really, is the rank 13 someone that's played 3 weeks and will have the same knowledge and ability as one that's played 3 months, no, more then likely the one that's played 3 months has more knowledge and ability, and the limiter will reflect that in most cases. If the person playing 3 months had less knowledge and ability, then you'd see that too.

In case 1 you're looking at both being rank 13, in case 2 with the limiter you're looking at the newer person having rank 13 by helo limited as rank 7 by AllegAge and the longer player person limited to rank 13 by both helo and Alleg Age, however by your example it's more likely that the newer player will reach rank 14 because they are faster at achieving that goal by helo, or they'd reach it a similar time.

You wouldn't have situation which crop up often such as a rank (8) asking what a nan is... /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

[Pos_21]

If we can lower the slider to something like 200 days on the top end, then absolutly.

[rojomojo915]

What if you were to base alleg age on hours played and not unique log ins?

[jgbaxter]

QUOTE (Aeris @ Sep 29 2007, 11:17 AM) If we can lower the slider to something like 200 days on the top end, then absolutly.

Remember, 200 days is right now AllegAge vet6 (20). There are only 26 people with helo ranked that high, and I'd wager all or almost all are AllegAge 20>.

QUOTE (rojomojo915 @ Sep 29 2007, 11:32 AM) What if you were to base alleg age on hours played and not unique log ins?

Hours played could work, however that would actually make it more restrictive even from what Aeris is thinking... Then again maybe it depends, if we changed AllegAge to use it's base as, let's say, 2 hrs instaad of 1 day, it might be better at both ends, but would have to definately be calculated as time in game as opposed to time logged into asgs. The problem there is you'd have to have it only have those hours count if the game counted, because otherwise people could just idle in a game, especially in r4 where you can have 1 player games.