Jump to content


Photo

Marschall Platinum


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Spece

Spece

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:53 PM

Hello,
when we have the first Marschall Platinum - what you think ?

Posted Image

^^a lot of work and sweat :)

Spece
Posted Image

#2 Zapt0r

Zapt0r

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 October 2012 - 10:51 AM

think it will take a while :D. seeing as noone is even in silver yet.....

#3 SpacemanSpiff

SpacemanSpiff

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 11 November 2012 - 11:25 PM

Check Silver now :P

#4 Spece

Spece

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:01 AM

Check Silver now :P


Posted Image
Posted Image

#5 Zapt0r

Zapt0r

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:59 AM

cool spaceman!

#6 trickz

trickz

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,450 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 27 November 2012 - 02:56 PM

i dare to say it's just impossible with the current system to go to platinum marshall
although i do think that the gabs are smaller once you climb up the ladder
you need less points to unlock the next rank in silver then you need to do in the bronze category
for instance,...you need 80 points to promote from bronze general to bronze marshall i believe
but you only need a few points to promote from silver spy to silver scout and the higher you climb the less points you'll need to unlock the next rank but the problem is that you have to be flawless because when you lose (look at spiff for instance), the silver guy immediately loses 20 points or more and he only gains a few when he wins
even drawing is fatal for a silver guy so he needs to be on target every time because he has more to lose than to gain from that point
i don't know what the barriers are but in this current system, i'd say it's impossible

maybe it's possible to achieve the gold status at one day but i think that's about it then....

if i'm wrong, then prove me wrong!!! :)

i know i won't prove it because i'll never make that status
if i ever make it to silver, then i won't play anymore so my name is forever in the silver ladder hahaha

no, i'm a realist
it's not my cup of tea and i'll never make it to there :)
I love the smell of Napalm in the morning

#7 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:31 AM

Math has been one of my worst subjects in school and without going into advanced systems of calculations, it would indeed be quite difficult for anyone to get far beyond a high silver rating with the current number of players and random challengers of different rankings being set forth by the computer. A larger number of players would first have to play here, and then if the computer can generate the best of the best playing one another, then you can see a more faster advancement to higher rankings. Right now it seems anyone can face anyone of any rating right now, and if a Marshall loses to a Miner that is a "Major" loss in ratings. I don't deem it impossible to get to a platinum rating, it just won't happen unless if we start to see consistently on this server having hundreds of people at a time on the site.

P.S I do like the Badge Spece. Great job there!

#8 johannnes

johannnes

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:01 PM

In my opinion it isnt impossible but there have to be a lot of  players who are gold first..... I think itts very hard to become platinum marshall but who knows ???... :huh:



#9 peterhier

peterhier

    New Recruit

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:21 PM

Where can I find a table of all ranks and the posts needed to achieve them?



#10 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 02 June 2013 - 06:53 AM

That's a good question Peter, I don't believe the site currently has a page going over how many points is needed to get to each rank.  One thing I can tell you is, when you become silver, you advance through the ratings just as if you would if you were a Bronze rating.  That meaning even though a Silver Spy is higher ranked than a Bronze Marshall, it'll usually only take one win to get to silver Scout or even perhaps a Silver miner pending on who you defeat if they are a high ranked silver player. 



#11 Wonky

Wonky

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 02 June 2013 - 04:28 PM

The entire problem with the rank structure as it currently exists is that it is pegged to the ELO system, which has been discussed at length in other areas of the forum.

 

Mathematically, ELO behaves like games such as Nintendo Mario Kart.  If you have ever played that game, 8 people are racing.  The person in first is slowed by several programming tricks (such as having a disproportionate number of traps directed at him).  The person in 8th can go faster and has no traps directed at him.  The result is that the group is constantly tightened, which has the effect of keeping the race competitive for as long as possible.  Kids enjoy that kind of rigging.  Adults, on the other hand, tend to prefer a system that allows a true measure of competence.

 

If this site is aimed at kids, then the way it is set up is ideal as Platinum level players will constantly be brought down to Bronze status and low-ranked Bronze players will be brought up quickly to middle or high status.  But, if this site aims at the serious Stratego player, then it is really unfair to the Satan-NLs and Enigmas of the world who truly deserve a rank much higher than they are currently assigned.



#12 varishnakov

varishnakov

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 02 June 2013 - 04:42 PM

Chess has an ELO system. It works and it is not aimed at kids.


I have quit the site until the cheating players are dealt with.


#13 johannnes

johannnes

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 02 June 2013 - 05:28 PM

I agree with varishnakow .... im a chessplayer and i have round 1400 elo :)



#14 Wonky

Wonky

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 02 June 2013 - 09:18 PM

ELO is better than most.  But not as good as some.  It tightens the field by making it harder on the top ranked players and easier for the lower ranked players.

 

The reason that it is not so good for Stratego as it is for chess is because the pieces are hidden in Stratego, which adds a significant element of bluffing and risk calculation that is not present in chess.  This conversation has been held many times by people much smarter than me.  Believe the math or not--it is what it is.



#15 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 02 June 2013 - 09:51 PM

The thing I would like to see is rankings that are similar to those of Chess since our rating system ELO is fashioned off a chess rating system.  As you can see our best highest silver players are just that only silver.  Satan is a silver Colonel is the highest rank we have on our site and we haven't even gotten close to Gold yet and now we are also talking Platinum? 

 

I would prefer a chess rating system and names that match that.

 

Rating range Category:

2600+ World Championship contenders

2400–2600 most Grandmasters (GM) and International Masters (IM)

2300–2400 FIDE Masters (FM)

2200–2300 FIDE Candidate Masters (CM), most national masters

2000–2200 candidate masters, experts (USA)

1800–2000 Class A, category 1

1600–1800 Class B, category 2

1400–1600 Class C, category 3

1200–1400 Class D, category 4 below

1200 novices

 

This is set up perfectly for our site actually if we instead change titles around

 

2600+  - Marshall

2400-2599 -  General

2300-2399 - Colonel

2200-2299 - Major

2000-2199 - Captain

1800-1999 - Lieutenant

1600-1799 - Sergegant

1400-1699 - Miner

1200-1399 - Scout

1199 - Spy

 

http://en.wikipedia....s_rating_system

 

This link goes over many different chess ratings, but typically you start at a rating of 1500 which would mean you are miner but, have to work your way up to become a Marshall. There is also a 20 game provisonal system where the first 20 games measure your true ablitity so if you play 20 games and beat a few Marshall rated players your starting rating after 20 games would be very high vs if you lost to a few spies you'll start very low. 

 

I know this is a "would be nice" suggestion and we have many more things to worry about right now but, thought I'd just give my two cents on our ELO ranking system and titles.



#16 varishnakov

varishnakov

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 89 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 02 June 2013 - 10:55 PM

ELO is not trying to find some intrinsic measure of your ability, it simply is a measure of your success. If you beat many opponents, and high rated opponents you will have a high rating.
A real quantifiable measure of play is not possible, I think.


I have quit the site until the cheating players are dealt with.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users