Jump to content


Photo

New Site Ranking (Suggestion)


  • Please log in to reply
107 replies to this topic

#1 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 05:30 PM

This follows on from discussion in this thread: http://forum.strateg...-greek-players/

 

Below is an idea for an external ranking, which removes the presence (and impact) of multiple accounts on the Ranking.

 

New Site Ranking (NSR)

 

Any player who wishes to join the New Site Ranking (NSR) must satisfy the criteria* for confirmed accounts

 

Each player specifies one username (eg TheOptician) that will officially represent them in the NSR.

 

Results are only counted towards the NSR if both players have joined the NSR, and only if both players are using their official username.

 

Two players on the NSR can either be matched together as normal (by clicking ranked) or if they decide to play against each other (by challenge).

 

Players then report results to the NSR committee who maintain the bank of results and update the Ranking

 

Scoring would be operated in a similar manner to the current ELO system

 

*Criteria would need to be established

 

-----------------------------

 

If players wish to have millions of aliases to experiment with then they can do so as they wish. This suggestion does not require multiple accounts to be detected, declared or prevented, but it does mean that any unknown accounts will have no impact on the NSR. (NSR players will of course still play against non-NSR players, but these results will not be counted).

 

 


  • Aris1970 likes this

#2 Astros 17

Astros 17

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,224 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Scout

Posted 17 December 2016 - 05:34 PM

How does this system prevent a player from scouting setups on an alternate account in non-NSR games then using that information in a NSR match?


3 - 0

#3 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 05:35 PM

Some have questioned how to deal with those players that 'scout' set-ups under a non-NSR name and then use that info when they later play a NSR game.

 

If you click 'Ranked' with your NSR name this indicates that you are ready to play an NSR ranking game should you be matched with a fellow NSR member

 

If you then get matched with a non-NSR member, simply be wary that your opponent 'could' be an alias (I think we all already consider this possibility) and accordingly do not use a set-up that you would use in an NSR ranking match.

 

If players wish to experiment with new set-ups (as they undoubtedly will) and do not wish to play an NSR ranking game, then they may choose to log-in with an unknown alias. So long as this alias is unknown, then any players who do attempt to 'scout set-ups' will not know the NSR account which it belongs to!



#4 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 05:41 PM

Would it not be easier to force all NSR games be played between NSR players?

 

No one would have to worry about a possible alias then, assuming the NSR list itself is free of aliases.


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#5 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,713 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:09 PM

there is not "scout setups"        Mix your "set ups" every game !
it's not possible (it is stupid thought) players middle and high level to speak about "scout set-ups"

if someone lost a game for this reason :D  then .... is the most stupid excuse


  • Sohal likes this

#6 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:13 PM

Re: 7seas - Sorry I don't follow you. The only games included in the NSR are the games between two NSR members.

#7 Gwynplaine

Gwynplaine

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 426 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Sergeant

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:16 PM

@Aris1970–Thank you for bringing absolutely nothing of value to this discussion, and for imposing an uninformed opinion. Opinions are like sphincters–just about everyone has one and they all stink.

 

P.S. I do agree with you about mixing setups...that is good advice.


Edited by Gwynplaine, 17 December 2016 - 06:17 PM.

  • KARAISKAKIS likes this
"I try to think, but nothing happens!"

#8 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:19 PM

I think Aris is saying that 'scouting set-ups' isn't really an issue. Some basic precautions can be taken to guard against this.
  • Aris1970 likes this

#9 Gwynplaine

Gwynplaine

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 426 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Sergeant

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:28 PM

Then it is my mistake and I apologize–I'm sorry Aris1970.

 

It seems to me that the truly talented player, the one who has developed significant skill, and truly loves the inherent challenges of this game would be working against themselves by wanting to scout a setup. They do not need to do this to prevail in even the most difficult of situations. So, yes, I would agree that the basic premise in this line makes sense.

 

The question about aliases must also encompass "why" do quality players feel a need for an alias account? There are many that come to mind and I believe through many discussions I have had with a very broad spectrum of players is that they enjoy having an account with which they do not feel emotionally attached–please bear with me. A person's account is something that they take pride in having, in naming, in developing, and in protecting. The term "Practice account" has come up repeatedly and for me makes perfect sense. In other words, the feeling I got is that they do not have an emotional attachment to the account and are willing to genuinely practice. Of course, why not just suck it up and do all of your work on only one account?

 

So, the fundamental idea of TheOptician's presentation makes perfect sense. The questions, however, as prompted by astros also makes a lot of sense; nevertheless, this is an excellent starting point and might help to devise a concise plan of operation.


"I try to think, but nothing happens!"

#10 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,363 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:33 PM

I doubt they are practice accounts .They all end up on the same ELO more or less .

 

I think the main motivation is ego .

 

Players enjoy winning more than losing and so if they are an 800 level player they are typically losing 1 in 3 games , but if they start another account from 100 they get a pleasant run of maybe 25 wins in a row against low level opponents .



#11 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:33 PM

there is not "scout setups"        Mix your "set ups" every game !
it's not possible (it is stupid thought) players middle and high level to speak about "scout set-ups"

if someone lost a game for this reason :D  then .... is the most stupid excuse

 

Yes this is solid advice.

 

I do not mix my setup enough. However, that does not change the fact there are people who lotto indiscriminately, and scout setups because they use bogus accounts and do not care about losing. They just wish to troll high ranked players. 


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#12 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,713 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:34 PM

if you do not know to make a new good setup in minutes (5 minutes) , I'm sorry , but you do not know stratego



#13 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,493 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:34 PM

I think and I believe that The0's proposal is the ideal solution .
For those who still want to hide and play under their anonymity , it is simple ,,, they have no place in NSR
For those who want to enjoy competitive games and have fun with their startego friends inside a healthy competition , there is a place inside NSR.
This plan also will leads to better organisation with further online federations which will be responsible to quarantee for their members as unique players in order to participate in the NSR.
The only obstacles are
1. find the necessary volunteers . The assumed time which must be spend on this plan in a weekly basis is big
2. find the best ranking system which must be as much as possible automatic (just to need to input manually the results and then calculations will be automatical)
3. Decide the criteria to accept new members in NSR or leave this in federations. (Each federation can have different criteria if they wish but they will be responsible for their members)

  • TheOptician and Master Mind like this

#14 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:37 PM

if you do not know to make a new good setup in minutes (5 minutes) , I'm sorry , but you do not know stratego

 

Sure, I can make a setup in 5 minutes but it is unlikely to be good enough to meet my standards. Often, it takes a few matches before I tweak a setup to its current form to make it 1) tradeproof, and 2) suitable for all kinds of play (both attack and defence)


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#15 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,363 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:41 PM

What annoys people is the site leaderboard is full of stupid aliases.

 

It seems much easier to me to simply remove the aliases from that than to have another one relying on manual updates and people remembering to take screenshots from every game .


  • kokokitty and sevenseas like this

#16 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,863 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:51 PM

..just a few remarks:

1) If you allow for friendly games then you will have  a nightmare monitoring all that NSR ranking "live" cause if you have let's say 100-150 NSR players who would on average end 3-4 games every hour (70-100 games/day) you will not have enough resources to monitor all that "live" and long term.

2) I guess you should limit this NSR ranking only to ranked games. The principle should be that 2 NSR registered players who get matched together can bring evidence of the outcome of their game to you. Based on the defeat, draw or victory screen that you will get as evidence you can update the ranking on a regular basis but not necessarily "live". Additionnally with the victory, draw or defeat screen you know exactly how many points a NSR player has won respectively lost, so you don't need to invent a new points system.

3) friendly games could lead to some abuses for example imagine that a player agrees to always lose his games against one of his friends who will always win and they agree to play 10 games a day ... so I recommend to not do this for friendly games

4) disconnects should be treated as a defeat for who disconnects unless the other player does not want this game to count for the ranking, otherwise people could intentionnally disconnect when they are losing

5) Overall this system will favor those player who play more often. For example Playa1 who plays only 1-2 game a year will be ranked much lower than a Sevenseas or Spyros77 who are playing much more

6) NSR games shall be also valid if only one of the 2 NSR players wishes the game to qualify in NSR ranking but not the other, otherwise the loser can always refuse to have the game qualifying in the NSR ranking. So any screenshot brought by one of the 2 players showing the outcome of a game is sufficient to consider the game qualifying for NSR ranking. If 2 NSR players do not want their game to qualify for NSR ranking they only have to not report such game.

 

... overall I think you shall just try to launch this NSR ranking and see what's happening. If it works well everybody will be happy and if it doesn't work as expected people will stop reporting their games and the initiative will die by itself ... but i like it


If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#17 KARAISKAKIS

KARAISKAKIS

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,493 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:51 PM

Someting also important is to be necessary to play a certain amount of games inside a period.

To avoid selective choose of opponents in this amount of games there must be a limit of random ranked games for this period (this means  that every palyer must have a minimum number of random games against players who are in NSR and prove it with time stable screenshots)



#18 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 06:54 PM

Re: tobermoryx
I completely disagree. Removing the aliases is impossible without admin help. The probability that admin would start taking steps to assess the identity of registered players is microscopic.

If the community gets together and produces an NSR (which is effectively a list of registered players) then we do not need to concern ourselves about the existence of alias accounts. This is because the NSR ignores any effect that those accounts have.

#19 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,363 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 17 December 2016 - 07:13 PM

Yes admin would need to remove (or just reset to 100)  the aliases and so , as we know , that means it is not going to happen tomorrow.

 

Admin would not though need to be 'assessing the identities' of the aliases because the overwhelming majority of them are obvious.

 

And most of the others are dormant (which would also be a case for reset).

 

A list of accounts to be reset could be submitted to admin so no detective work required for them.

 

It may be that 4 or 5 aliases would survive the cull and remain on the platinum leaderboard until they gave themselves away somehow . But better to remove 300 and have 5 remaining than to leave 300 aliases on there because we couldn't guarantee that 5 or so wouldn't survive.



#20 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,498 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 17 December 2016 - 07:36 PM

Re: Napoleon

1) It is not necessary to have the sequence of games in the correct order. All ranking changes can be calculated simultaneously at the end of the week. If a player has a ranking of eg 600 at the start of the week then all the games that player plays that week will use the ranking of 600. At the end of the week the ranking is updated.

2) Whether friendly games should be included is something that can be discussed. The victory screen fortunately can distinguish a friendly from a ranked. However, the change in ranking will need to be calculated independently - because this points change will be different to the change shown on the victory screen.

3) friendly games could lead to some abuses

Yes, but theoretically so could ranked games. I'm not sure what is the benefit for the player who agrees to lose deliberately though? At least with all results being published this behaviour would be noticeable. You could always limit the number of times that Player A could play against Player B in a week.

4) disconnects should be treated as a defeat for who disconnects

Agreed that this has to be the case, unless the winner decides not to report.

5) Overall this system will favor those player who play more often. For example Playa1 who plays only 1-2 game a year will be ranked much lower than a Sevenseas or Spyros77 who are playing much more

Well this is unavoidable - you can't expect a player who hardly ever plays to have a high ranking quickly. However, this effect would be less in the NSR system than the current system. Tournaments (sanctioned by the NSR) could contribute to the ranking too.

6) NSR games shall be also valid if only one of the 2 NSR players wishes the game to qualify in NSR ranking but not the other, otherwise the loser can always refuse to have the game qualifying in the NSR ranking. So any screenshot brought by one of the 2 players showing the outcome of a game is sufficient to consider the game qualifying for NSR ranking. If 2 NSR players do not want their game to qualify for NSR ranking they only have to not report such game.

Agreed. In the past the option to refuse a game has been touted - but this is mainly so players could avoid having to play against a suspected alias. This wouldn't be an issue in the alias-free zone that is NSR, so refusal to play should not be allowed to prevent ranking manipulation. As you say, any victory screen (which isn't a friendly) should be accepted as official.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users