Ratings and all around it

[0 calories]

Hello,

 

I would love to know if is possible to see how I played 1vs1 or other player  (to my understanding it is the only way to get rating score) in the past. In fact list who play against whom + result and proabably date.

If no such feature exist, is there way to create mod for that? If so please can you point me to specific API documentation ... i would love to try write it.... if not exist such possibilites is there any plan for 0ad developers to enhance game in such matters?

Currently all I can see in game is just leaderboard with ratings but and summary without details. 

With such level of details it would be easy to see additional statistics.

 

Last question is why there is no something like overall score for team games? Do you consider that only 1vs1 battles are showing real player exprience in game?

I spotted some statistics at the end of the game per player from many perspectives (economic, army...) I feel such data could be easily used to calculcate it.

 

Many thanks for answers. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

your best bet is to look at the statistics summary for any given game from the replays menu. All your games should be there, ordered chronologically. 

To be honest, I agree it would be nice to have some additional player statistics as options in the player profile.

[poised]

Has anyone seen a write-up that explains how ratings work? Why can someone who has played hundreds of games against good players have a rating lower than someone who has beaten his mate 10 times?

Edited December 9, 2022 by poised
typo

[Mentula]

1 hour ago, poised said:

Has anyone seen a write-up that explains how ratings work?

It's on the FAQ page. In short, the page says:

Quote

You will start with a score of 1200, which will increase if you win and decrease if you lose.

The rating adjustment is calculated with a simplified ELO algorithm, the exact details can be found here: elo.py.

For a general overview on the ELO rating system(s), Wikipedia offers a good explanation.

2 hours ago, poised said:

Why can someone who has played hundreds of games against good players have a rating lower than someone who has beaten his mate 10 times?

As you will notice by looking into elo.py, the adjustment of a player's rating mostly depends on the difference between that player and their opponent. The stronger your opponent is, the more your rating will increase in case of victory. Similarly, the weaker your opponent is, the more your rating will decrease in case of defeat.

Therefore, having played hundred of games does not say much on the player's ELO rating. Winning/losing "quality" games is what affects the rating most.

[BeTe]

Quote

Why can someone who has played hundreds of games against good players have a rating lower than someone who has beaten his mate 10 times?

I don't think 10 wins will bring him many points or at least not significant. With every new win he will get less points. So for example if he is 1400 and opponent 1000, he will get 1,8 points. So he need to win ~50 games to get to 1500 rating.  In case of 1500 vs 900, he gets 0.6.

I guess this calculator is same as 0AD's ? https://www.omnicalculator.com/sports/elo

ELO is fair rating system, 0AD should keep it.

I'd only think about some slow decay so it's more realistic, so that it reflect fact that when players don't play they become a bit rusty. Tennis (ATP) has something like that. You need to defend your points on next year tournament, otherwise you lose that points.

Edited December 9, 2022 by BeTe

[poised]

On 09/12/2022 at 8:36 PM, BeTe said:

I don't think 10 wins will bring him many points or at least not significant. With every new win he will get less points. So for example if he is 1400 and opponent 1000, he will get 1,8 points. So he need to win ~50 games to get to 1500 rating.  In case of 1500 vs 900, he gets 0.6.

I guess this calculator is same as 0AD's ? https://www.omnicalculator.com/sports/elo

ELO is fair rating system, 0AD should keep it.

I'd only think about some slow decay so it's more realistic, so that it reflect fact that when players don't play they become a bit rusty. Tennis (ATP) has something like that. You need to defend your points on next year tournament, otherwise you lose that points.

Your reply is the closest I've seen to an explanation of how the rating system works at all. Thanks for your corrections. I wonder if a problem with the rating system is that it is difficult to find a clear explanation about how it works and so some of us build on misconceptions.