Kaikki raportit
#13853: "Tournament Prestige Fix"
Mitä tämä raportti koskee?
BGA:n sivusto
Mitä tapahtui? Valitse alta
Ehdotus: mielestäni tämä parantaa huomattavasti sivustoa
Tarkka kuvaus
• Selitä ehdotuksesti tarkasti ja ytimekkäästi, jotta se on ymmärrettävissä niin helposti kuin mahdollista.
Two issues with prestige. First is that prestige is awarded based on number of scheduled rounds and not the actual number of rounds. This causes a tournament scheduled for 20 rounds that ends up only have 2 people and lasting 1 round worth 20 times as many points as it should be. The second is that tournament prestige is too heavily weighted for masters. In Terra Mystica for example, I recently hit master in Terra Mystica and noticed that my contribution alone for a 15 person round robin (even if less than 15 signup) jumped from 990 for an expert to 4950 for a master...a factor of 5 for a couple rating points difference. Yes Master should be worth more and I can understand not wanting only breaking up contribution by levels, but a factor of 2-3 seems far more appropriate than x5. I haven't worked out the exact ratios for the other level jumps, it seems everything up through good gives the same payout, but at least up to expert the payouts don't seem crazy. Comparing 5k for 1 person's contribution to a single tournament is worth as much as being ranked in the top 5 in the game!!• Mikä on selaimesi?
Safari v13
Raportin historia
8. marras 2019 1:36 • sprockitz • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
[img]i.ibb.co/X8cXM0J/Screen-Shot-2019-11-06-at-9-17-48-PM.png[/img]
Here's an example of the problem...players creating mini-tournaments worth 5k+ prestige!
Here's an example of the problem...players creating mini-tournaments worth 5k+ prestige!
8. marras 2019 5:06 • sprockitz • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
My best guess for multipliers based on your level rank are as follows (I’ve looked at adjacent levels of players in the same tournament to come up with these estimates but obviously someone with the code available can check them):
Beginner, Apprentice, Average, Good: x1
Strong: x2.5
Expert: x10
Master: x50
If this was changed to say:
Beginner, Apprentice, Average: x1
Good: x1.5
Strong: x3
Expert: x6
Master: x15
I think you get a more appropriate scaling and would solve the issue of tournaments being worth a bit too much prestige in general (relative to Top ranked Elo or the prestige for games won, reaching Elo levels...etc).
Combine these adjusted numbers with fixing the round multiplier to multiply by the actual number of rounds instead of the scheduled number I think it’ll solve these issues.
These two changes would take one of the 2 person Keyflower tournaments above from ~5000 to ~100 points. 5000 points from a master scheduled for 15 rounds gets reduced to 1500, then since the tournament is actually only 1 round instead of 15 the round multiplier of 15 becomes 1 taking the 1500 down to 100.
Beginner, Apprentice, Average, Good: x1
Strong: x2.5
Expert: x10
Master: x50
If this was changed to say:
Beginner, Apprentice, Average: x1
Good: x1.5
Strong: x3
Expert: x6
Master: x15
I think you get a more appropriate scaling and would solve the issue of tournaments being worth a bit too much prestige in general (relative to Top ranked Elo or the prestige for games won, reaching Elo levels...etc).
Combine these adjusted numbers with fixing the round multiplier to multiply by the actual number of rounds instead of the scheduled number I think it’ll solve these issues.
These two changes would take one of the 2 person Keyflower tournaments above from ~5000 to ~100 points. 5000 points from a master scheduled for 15 rounds gets reduced to 1500, then since the tournament is actually only 1 round instead of 15 the round multiplier of 15 becomes 1 taking the 1500 down to 100.
8. marras 2019 10:16 • RicardoRix • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
very good suggestion!
25. marras 2019 17:03 • dudi2 • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
In addition to above suggestion:
Perhaps it would be reasonable to credit a positive number of prestige points starting with a minimum number of participants of 6 for all tournaments.
If there are less participants then more than half of the number of participants would earn prestige points which seems way to much.
Perhaps it would be reasonable to credit a positive number of prestige points starting with a minimum number of participants of 6 for all tournaments.
If there are less participants then more than half of the number of participants would earn prestige points which seems way to much.
25. marras 2019 17:12 • dudi2 • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
Or use a factor to update the prestige points:
new_prestige_points = old_prestige_points * (number_of_participants-number_of_medals_awarded)/number_of_participants
If negative, set prestige points to zero.
Examples for round-robin (3 medals awarded):
1-3 players: 0
4 players: 0.25
5 players: 0.40
6 players: 0.50
10 player: 0.70
15 players: 0.80
Examples for single-elimination (4 medals awarded):
1-4 players: 0
5 players: 0.20
6 players: 0.33
7 players: 3/7
10 player: 0.60
20 players: 0.80
50 players: 0.92
100 players: 0.96
500 players: 0.992
new_prestige_points = old_prestige_points * (number_of_participants-number_of_medals_awarded)/number_of_participants
If negative, set prestige points to zero.
Examples for round-robin (3 medals awarded):
1-3 players: 0
4 players: 0.25
5 players: 0.40
6 players: 0.50
10 player: 0.70
15 players: 0.80
Examples for single-elimination (4 medals awarded):
1-4 players: 0
5 players: 0.20
6 players: 0.33
7 players: 3/7
10 player: 0.60
20 players: 0.80
50 players: 0.92
100 players: 0.96
500 players: 0.992
1. joulu 2019 9:49 • Ftarantino • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
I do agree with the initial idea.
I don't agree with Dudi2 ideas. There many games with not that many active players that are already penalised by the fact that there are less players, less tournaments and that the average elo of the players is not so high.
I add as well that in my opinion when the tournament is on invite only it should be penalised and give less points.
I don't agree with Dudi2 ideas. There many games with not that many active players that are already penalised by the fact that there are less players, less tournaments and that the average elo of the players is not so high.
I add as well that in my opinion when the tournament is on invite only it should be penalised and give less points.
1. joulu 2019 9:52 • Ftarantino • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
I'm adding as well that I noticed that normally Swiss tournaments are giving more points that round robin tournaments. I see it the other way around. I would give more points to a round robin tournament thanto a Swiss one. A round robin tournament in which you have to play at the same time with more players is much more challenging. Moreover round robin tournaments are limited to 15 players so anyway they generally don't get so high with the prestige points.
1. joulu 2019 10:01 • Ftarantino • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
Finally I add another suggestion. In my opinion the prestige should be higher if in the tournament any top 1/3/5/10/20 players are involved.
1. joulu 2019 10:44 • Ftarantino • Kehittäjät eivät ole vielä tutkineet tätä ehdotusta:
I'm adding another idea based on what I perceive as a problem.
The points of the tournaments once acquired stay forever, the points of the ranking stay only till when you are in that ranking position.
To solve that I propose 2 solution:
1. To give some "fixed" point for the year-end ranking. So for teh players finish first in 2019 for a game he/she could have let's say 2500 points that are like the tournaments point and do not disappear if he/she is not first anymore
2. To give a deadline to the tournaments point and delete the points of the tournaments for example after 5 years
The points of the tournaments once acquired stay forever, the points of the ranking stay only till when you are in that ranking position.
To solve that I propose 2 solution:
1. To give some "fixed" point for the year-end ranking. So for teh players finish first in 2019 for a game he/she could have let's say 2500 points that are like the tournaments point and do not disappear if he/she is not first anymore
2. To give a deadline to the tournaments point and delete the points of the tournaments for example after 5 years
Lisää jotain tähän raporttiin
Lisää tähän mitä tahansa, minkä katsot oleelliseksi tämän bugin toisintamiseksi tai ehdotuksesi ymmärtämiseksi:
- Toinen pöydän tunnus / siirron numero
- Ratkaisiko F5 ongelman?
- Ilmestyykö ongelma useita kertoja? Joka kerta? Satunnaisesti?
- Jos sinulla on kuvankaappaus tästä bugista, voit käyttää Imgur.com:a sen lähettämiseksi. Kopioi ja liitä linkki tähän.
![i.ibb.co/X8cXM0J/Screen-Shot-2019-11-06-at-9-17-48-PM.png[/img]](https://i.ibb.co/X8cXM0J/Screen-Shot-2019-11-06-at-9-17-48-PM.png[/img]){kind=link}