N00b ranting / rating system

[Ornatkur]

How rating system works? I have tried to study how to play better, and I think I'm getting much better, but my rating just drop and drop. I get asskicked from lower level player, but in some other hand overpower better ranked players. I know I am terrible loser, but are medium players vanished from server? Or should I change my thinking about multiplayer gaming? 

 

[Boudica]

Hello, perhaps the problem could be that currently only 1-vs.-1 matches can affect the rating. However, the rating doesn't get adjusted if the game isn't marked as a rated one by the host before the start, or if any of the players leaves before the other player wins or resigns (that includes closing the host). You can tell that the rating got adjusted when you can see a rating adjustment message in the main game lobby after the end.

It has been observed that many lower-level players quit the game instead of resigning, which can make your victories ignored, while your defeats can get counted. That makes your score lower than it should be. My advice is not to worry about it that much. If you get underrated and later win against a player with better rating, you'll get more points for that victory. If you actually improve at the game significantly, the score should calibrate itself quite fast.

Of course, quitting a rated game still is against the rules. Justice is enforced in this regard by the mods if you can provide replays of such games. We are still only talking about 1-vs.-1 matches that aren't set to unrated in the beginning.

Edited May 11, 2019 by Boudica

[Ornatkur]

Thank you for wise word Boudica.

 

Real issues might be:

1) first rated game start from 1200. I'm fighting to get back that level, how about starting from zero? 

2) I think multiplayer has become much more demanding in last months. 

3) It impossible to know, what level opponent you will face. 

4) When playing something like 4x4, lower rated players tends to be kicked out or otherwise harassed. I think this is poor behavior. When i host big game, I try to remember tell FFA (free for all) and do my best for balancing. Nothing is more frustrating than wait game start for a hour and then got replaced. In pro game this is ok, but then that should be stated in game name.

5) Should multiplayer game have free text field, that states hosts personal expectations? 

6) Is there any kind of help text, which tell how rating works? I havent found. I think well fighted game deserves more points (or less point lose) even if result is defeat. 

 

 

What ever, just saying what I think and feel. 

 

 

 

Edited May 12, 2019 by Ornatkur

[Boudica]

1) I've checked your stats and they don't really look that bad. You have about 50 % win ratio. In my opinion, as few as two games won could get you above the initial rating. I wouldn't switch for another account, not exactly because it's not allowed, but mostly because you now have a history of games won and lost, so people can check that you aren't a smurf or someone that just installed the game. There aren't so many people playing regularly, so it's even more important whether your name sound familiar or not.

2) Well, the regulars don't keep getting worse over time. :-)

3) You never know for sure. There are even some low-level players with high score. It's easy to achieve when you only play rated games against players you know you can beat easily (and especially if they are overrated). The rating serves as an indicator but it's not absolutely reliable.

4) I agree that communicating the host's intentions is really something we should work on. Often people get unassigned without any explanation. It wouldn't be hard to tell in the host name that the game is intended for higher-level players.

On the other hand, I wouldn't say it's bad not to include newbies in all the games. I've seen way too many games getting spoiled by unskilled players that just want the game to start fast and then quit the host a few minutes later without any explanation. I wouldn't come join the training of Real Madrid CF and then be all surprised why they don't let me play with them, like come on, guys, it's just a game, right. I can totally play football too. Even though there are no real pros in this game, with all these leagues it's started getting more serious and more sports-like, so I see some resemblance.

5) The host name alone allows for more text than most stable hosts are willing to enter already. :-)

6) I don't know about any specific documentation of 0 A.D. rating system. Anyway, I know it's just a customized version of the Elo rating system, which is used for chess games. The important things to know include that only the current rating of both the players and the binary game result is used to determine the rating adjustment. The bigger the difference in the rating, the more points you can get if you win "against expectations", and the less you lose if you lose. The exact course of the game or factors like the number of total games played aren't considered.

 

Edited May 12, 2019 by Boudica
typo

[Ornatkur]

Thank you, had some work pressures.... 

That article about Elo rating system was really interesting, and returned fully my belief. 

So in nutshell, if greater rated player beat lower rated player, winner scores just couple of points, and if lower rated beat better player, he scores lots of point and loser lose really many points. I think this is outstanding system. Maybe some words about this in help? 

[Boudica]

You said it correctly. It might be a good suggestion to include some more info about the system. Not sure if there is a good place for it directly in the game manual.

[afarre]

On 5/12/2019 at 3:06 PM, Ornatkur said:

Thank you for wise word Boudica.

 

Real issues might be:

1) first rated game start from 1200. I'm fighting to get back that level, how about starting from zero? 

2) I think multiplayer has become much more demanding in last months. 

3) It impossible to know, what level opponent you will face. 

4) When playing something like 4x4, lower rated players tends to be kicked out or otherwise harassed. I think this is poor behavior. When i host big game, I try to remember tell FFA (free for all) and do my best for balancing. Nothing is more frustrating than wait game start for a hour and then got replaced. In pro game this is ok, but then that should be stated in game name.

5) Should multiplayer game have free text field, that states hosts personal expectations? 

6) Is there any kind of help text, which tell how rating works? I havent found. I think well fighted game deserves more points (or less point lose) even if result is defeat. 

 

 

What ever, just saying what I think and feel. 

 

 

 

I totally agree with you in the 3rd point, thats the main reason I tried to improve so hard. People does not respect if u under 1300.... This should definetly change

[seeh]

Hi i searched about rating in the WWW and found the Glicko-2 rating. found implemented on game servers online (like Pokémon Showdown, Lichess, Free Internet Chess Server, Chess.com, Online Go Server (OGS),^[1]Counter Strike: Global Offensive, Team Fortress 2, Dota Underlords, Guild Wars 2,^[2]Splatoon 2, Dominion Online and Gods Unchained,^[3]), and competitive programming competitions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glicko_rating_system

What rating system 0AD is using?

[Boudica]

Hi, I think it's just the Elo rating system with a minor customization.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Boudica
fixed link

[seeh]

I looked in the client v0.24 and found nothing (still nothing) about it. Probably implemented on the server. It also makes more sense to calc the rarting there and save it.

Edited January 2, 2021 by seeh

[badosu]

It's elo and implemented in the lobby not. Search for rating in the lobby bot repo on 0ad github org.

[badosu]

The rating algorithm is fine. The problem is the lack of season resets, ability to unrate 1v1s and/or lack of depreciating points for inactivity.

Also, sample size. Any small community will have inherent unreliable rating numbers.

[seeh]

what about a system for rating where could gamer always could get more (like experience)? and it constantly becomes less over the time (to a middle value. little like normal training in real world). winner gets experience (calculate this like old good elo rating), looser not. think about the effects that this could have. all ratings get closer together but the best player will still stay the best. daring a rated game is no longer risky. point are only lost over time (see e.g. aging process or experiences with success or something).

[LetswaveaBook]

10 hours ago, seeh said:

what about a system for rating where could gamer always could get more (like experience)? and it constantly becomes less over the time (to a middle value. little like normal training in real world). winner gets experience (calculate this like old good elo rating), looser not. think about the effects that this could have. all ratings get closer together but the best player will still stay the best. daring a rated game is no longer risky. point are only lost over time (see e.g. aging process or experiences with success or something).

The problem with that as far as I can judge is that it measures how much you play as much as what your win ratio is.

[seeh]

have idea that works, i love it i really guess it will not implemented. but we never knows.

two additional simple rules:

1. rated games only change rating of winner. totally stupid? wait

2. end of the month all ratings will stretched between 300 and 3000

the promise:

- rated games will not canceled, server shutdown, will ended with resigning , not  shutdown the the server by host.

- best player still stays with best rating. its only stretched a bit.

- best player dont need to be so afraid playing versus a smurf loosing much point

- ok, maybe a disadvantage. players who don't play will get a lower rating over the years.

Edited April 4, 2022 by seeh

[thephilosopher]

If you think your rating is too low, there are basically two ways to "correct" it that I know about: only play against people rated higher than you and win about half those games, or rack up a large number of wins against noobs.

 

The first strategy is preferable to the second one, both because it's a more true indicator of ability and because a fair number of "noobs" in the lobby are smurfs (far from all, but, to be honest, a number of them are).

[seeh]

9 minutes ago, thephilosopher said:

If you think your rating is too low,

no i dont think so

[thephilosopher]

Just now, seeh said:

no i dont think so

It can be hard to tell. I have no idea whether my rating is about right or too low.

[seeh]

4 minutes ago, thephilosopher said:

It can be hard to tell. I have no idea whether my rating is about right or too low.

i simply think my this idea is great. maybe we could use arguments my real rating has nothing to do with this. my real rating is probably 1100 or so. nut much more. so its ok how it is.

[seeh]

my last motivation was something else (so i got this idea) :
a high rated 2000+ vs really good medium player with middle good rating.
host exit the game. see screenshot.

it would be so nice if all these things were no longer an issue. correct? there would no longer be these pages where reports were made, if someone did that, there would be no arguments, etc. no bad mood at all, no whining.

Edited April 5, 2022 by seeh

[thephilosopher]

It's got its advantages and disadvantages. The main problem with only changing the rating of the winner is that it would give higher ratings to players who just play more games. Even if they lose most of those games.

[bad player]

41 minutes ago, seeh said:

my motivation (last time) was something else. i saw high rated player exit server.

it would be so nice if all these things were no longer an issue. correct? there would no longer be these pages where reports were made, if someone did that, there would be no arguments, etc. no bad mood at all, no whining.

i swear this must be some user1's tactic to bring users to forum 

heres my thread about rankeds 

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by bad player

[Yekaterina]

@seeh what should happen if a person exits a server? We don't know whether they will come back (could have been a connection issue or ragequit). 

I think it is unreasonable that multiplayer games involving more than 2 players are not rated. There should be an option to make multiplayer games count, as many players in the lobby only play 4v4, 3v3 or 2v2. I often play 1v2 or 1v3 as well and I don't understand why the outcomes of those games are never documented in my player profile.

 

[seeh]

13 hours ago, thephilosopher said:

who just play more games

that's true. same i said in my first posting. it feels not so very bad for me.
==>maybe could limited to the 5 best games he did in this month

Edited April 5, 2022 by seeh