My post was less of a concern, more a case of raising a point to consider when working out a formula.

Oh, and nvm that chopsticks opinion, he's too old to pay any attention to, let alone too drunk!

Thanks for the compliment Rade.

Stoner I made this post before the new series started it has nothing to do with you having a good rank right now.

My whole point was that there are great players out there that don't get a high rank because they don't have the time. If you look at the last 3 or 4 stats series I am one of those people that has spent more time on here for a higher rank. In no way did I feel in any of those series that I should have been in the top 10 let alone the top 5. Any new ranking system that is put into place would not help me be ranked higher (unless based on self kills and resigns) quite frankly it would drop me way down the stats list. I was just saying that it would be neat to come up with a ranking system that favored the player who is a better shot and uses better strategy. After all isn't that what a ranking system is for, to show who is best?

Ahhhh...ok...I see what you mean PeanutsRevenge....sorry..misunderstood ya

I tried playing around with the figures a bit and applied them to my equation (intact...no changes to the formula), and the result was, the more a player plays, obviously his Number of kills would increase, and based on that alone, his skill level (based on the said equation) will increase. However, when you add in the weapons used parameter figures, his skill level will rise too, but the rate of the increase depends on what weapon he uses....meaning...if he used more BBMs and Missiles or Rollers, then his skill level will rise faster as compared to if he had used Nukes, Funkies, Heavy Hogs or DHs.
Now, assuming his Shot/Kill ratio stays the same, his skill level will really skyrocket, but add some real world effects to that assumption, and you will find that due to the increasing shot/kill ratio figure (this is assuming we're not talking about Vihor or XTC), his skill level will not increase too fast, and if his shot/kill ratio increases relatively more as compared to his number of kills and weapons used parameters, then the player can possibly even have a decrease in skill level.
Hope this explanation applies to the point you raised PR.

Another thing to think about is.......the skill level will still include Number of Kills in its calculation but with Weapons Used parameter added to the equation, it sorts of balances the odds of a player getting a high rank based on No. of Kills alone, and the way the Shot/Kill ratio is placed in the equation will definitely keep the figures in check. Remember, you can have a very very good Shot/Kill ratio if you just use Sandhog every round, but the Weapons Used figures will balance up the final result......See how the relation is between all the parameters I mentioned?

With some of the figures I've been scribbling down, I have tried to bring Game wins heavily into the equation.
After all, I believe thats the main thing we're trying / should be trying to win. Sometimes this required alot of defense / attack / Cash cowing etc..

When taking game wins into account, it gives context to the hogs / funks / bbms etc... and takes away from those dedicated to rank coming in, hogging then leaving in the 3rd/4th round.

Something along the lines of (game wins/rounds played)x100.

Unfortunately, this does descriminate heavily against people like the Chopstick that get a game and a half in per day as they'll have 3-6 rounds or so extra and with this site no longer displaying current round, would be annoying (although i am sure that can be put back easily enough).

ADDITIONAL: Your current method does seriously penalise those that rarely play though it seems, if more kills = a naturally higher rank (with all other factors being equal), hence trying to bring some kind of time into it. Whether that's time played (a tricky thing when theres dirters about) rounds played (would need to ensure no rounds are wasted by joining late or leaving early).
Then again, would kills per shot equal it much...
hmmm. (sorry, not slept for over 24 hours, losing the plot)
I hope to properly crunch some numbers in the next few days, but atm I am working with figures all day and that killing my consentration for this formula writing.

If your spoken English is as good as your written, maybe we can throw some ideas at each other on Skype over the weekend instead of missiles

You're most welcome PoM......good to see ya on the forums but would be nicer to see you during the game..

And well said PoM, especially this part .......

Eureka ! The solution is simple, very simple in fact but knowing that the guys that want to skew the game in their favor won't like it, I'll just watch how this turns out.

Oh yeah, I haven't seen a update on the scoring changes. How did that work out and PLEASE put the assists back to a common multiple. Ten was too low but was easy to calculate. Then it was changed to nine and now I've noticed that it has been lowed even more to six. If you just had to lower it, a multiple of five seems easier to calculate in your head.

No POM ... and regardless of what Raden says or thinks, that isn't the idea at all. The stats are only for bragging rights, that is all.

You have to have an honest game to determine who is the best.

Hello PeanutsRevenge,

Sure, good idea.....this weekend is not suitable though...got a proficiency check at work coming up on Sunday and Monday. Looking forward to crunching some numbers with ya.

As for Game and Round wins, it cannot be emphasized heavily in the equation, cos like u said, it will be discriminating against players (skilled or unskilled) who don't play as much as others, but it is worthwhile to have a look at how they can be incorporated into the equation. By applying an optimal factorization value, it might be possible to make them a fair parameter to have in the calculation.

Well, the wins would have to be in context as I said.. factored against rounds played.

It's just that every game is different and most people play each game on its own merits, hence the various weapons and tactics that are employed.

The only descrimination I can think of, is as stated... those that join late or leave early will lose out. (even more so the less games are played, as, if 15 rounds are played, with 5 in one game, followed by the full 10 for the next game, thats 50% extra..)

However, I don't think that these people would ever get a 'fair' ranking system as they'd never have the money for weapons required in the latter rounds. I personally tend to use those rounds as a warm up.

Going for new records are we Rommel... Two posts and nothing constructive at all. N1.

and BTW, I do believe the scoring is back to how it was before with 100 for a RW, 30 for a kill and 6 for an assist!

Rommel,

I would appreciate it if you'd share your ideas with everyone, any solution is most welcome, regardless of whether it is liked or not by certain quarters. Don't just watch how it turns out, your inputs might shed some light on some areas which I or others fail to see. After all, this is all only for matters of discussion, what we say here today will not necessarily be implemented tomorrow.



Regardless of what I say or think?? Why place too much importance to me and to what I have to say or think, I'm just another player who wants to express what I feel about what another player said.



Very true....it is only that, Bragging Rights, but wouldn't it be nicer to brag about something that is earned, based on skill-appropriately-calculated as opposed to the current setup?



Please elaborate on this statement of yours......it is very ambiguous

Perhaps you didn't know :



It seems strange that you haven't heard about this, especially with all of the controversy surrounding sporting event's recently but I think I can condense it all into a simple sentence.

In order to fairly determine a champion, all players must play by the same rules .

If you still don't understand, try this link :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty_One_(game_show)

Heh, still beating around the bush are you Rommel, but whatever u r implying I can only guess, actually a couple of guesses, because I came up with 2 possible scenarios to what ever I think u were talking about.

I suppose it would be best if we all reduce suggesting ,implying and get too personal.

I agree...sorry...twas getting out of topic.

@ Romm
Please stop disrupting the debate. If you wanna comment or have suggestions of your own please share them, but keep the vague accusations and sarcasms to yourself.

@ Raden
Some initial thoughts on the model. I will get back with more when I have went over it a few additional times.
Pros
====
* Your model is a combination of ratios and time spent (total kills). I think this is needed as a pure ratios ranking system would allow a player to win even though he/she might only have played a few games in the entire series.
Cons
====
* It seems to me that your model is very accuracy oriented as it does not consider game or round wins at all. In addition to this it factors weapon use quite heavily.
* I don't like the inclusion of resigns. You are still alive for one extra shot and if you were hit previously the player gets an assist. Penalizing valid game tactics seems more like personal preference than fair skill determination (and yes I will stick by this opinion even though I don't really like resigning).
*Suicide deaths are not necessarily connected to skill, as enemies dying funky adds a high "randomness" factor to the variable.