Duel Rating System

[Yellowtail]

Maybe you could have a requirement of X amount of games before joining in any tournament to prevent anyone from starting out with no rating.

[werewindle]

would this require nick registration + always using the same alias? what if a good player trolls slightly less good players and snipes their ELOs with newly made identities?

[Combinebobnt]

If you read the above posts, there were mentions of a minimum amount of duels until ranking applies and other methods to prevent that problem. (along with other related problems from that)

[Fluffles]

Is anything like this going to be setup anytime soon?

[n3mesis]

Hey tey had something like this on Quake 3 called Mongolian Championship Tournament

[Watermelon]

Is anything like this going to be setup anytime soon?

It's coming, just I need another dev to handle an encryption library and it'll develop rapidly from there

[Fluffles]

thx mate your such a sweetheart eh!

[Lollipop]

I'm not sure just how this is working, but it sure seems like a good idea to me, even though I'm useless in player vs player fights

[Spectre]

it would be interesting

[XCOPY]

No because theoretically if you're a good player you're gonna be playing worse players at the start of tourneys, hence being seeded apart, it'd make for better later rounds. Although I guess if you were quite shit you could have a rating below the default of someone who's never played, but the default is supposed to be the average player rating. I don't think it could be abused.

What if a stupidly high ELO player stops playing? Everything sounds very cumulative forever, which sucks.

[one_Two]

No because theoretically if you're a good player you're gonna be playing worse players at the start of tourneys, hence being seeded apart, it'd make for better later rounds. Although I guess if you were quite shit you could have a rating below the default of someone who's never played, but the default is supposed to be the average player rating. I don't think it could be abused.

What if a stupidly high ELO player stops playing? Everything sounds very cumulative forever, which sucks.

That wouldn't really matter, you could still overtake them.

[XCOPY]

Unless such player's ELO slowly go back to 1200 over time. Really, I feel that it needs a time penalty.

[one_Two]

Unless such player's ELO slowly go back to 1200 over time. Really, I feel that it needs a time penalty.

Idk what you mean, it wouldn't effect things at all if someone stopped playing, they'd have to be good in the first place to get such a high rating.

[XCOPY]

Let me draw:

Player: Herp
Current rating: 9001

He hasn't played for 1 week, so it will mean a total of 50 rating points will be taken off.

One week later...

Player: Herp
Current rating: 8951

The same player didn't play for 1 month already, the penalty could be higher, I will apply 100 just as an example. The current week penalty would be added to the monthly penalty, which would be a total of 150. Considering that a month have approximately 4 weeks... So the monthly total would be, say, 300.

One month later...

Player: Herp
Current rating: 8701

Other values may be adopted. This is a good alternative to the whole reset thing. (which still even if the reset occurs, the good players would still keep themselves on top. They are good, right? If they were once, they can get themselves to the top again)

[one_Two]

Let me draw:

Player: Herp
Current rating: 9001

He hasn't played for 1 week, so it will mean a total of 50 rating points will be taken off.

One week later...

Player: Herp
Current rating: 8951

The same player didn't play for 1 month already, the penalty could be higher, I will apply 100 just as an example. The current week penalty would be added to the monthly penalty, which would be a total of 150. Considering that a month have approximately 4 weeks... So the monthly total would be, say, 300.

One month later...

Player: Herp
Current rating: 8701

Other values may be adopted. This is a good alternative to the whole reset thing. (which still even if the reset occurs, the good players would still keep themselves on top. They are good, right? If they were once, they can get themselves to the top again)

Idk man, those scores are arbitrary I guess but they wouldn't be that high. The scores would range between 900-3000 probably. It wouldn't need to be reset or lowered, maybe what you're thinking is someone could get a high rating and then just stop, but others would be able to overtake them, ELO system is used in alot of sports/games and I can't think of any that lower or reset scores.

[XCOPY]

Yes they are arbitrary, but point stands.

Again, if they are that good, they can keep and get themselves at the top once again. What I would like to avoid is "immunity" and the abuse of fakes. This would give a reason for these high grades players to keep playing.

Also, sports are a different matter.

[Watermelon]

What do you mean by immunity, and abuse of fakes?

[XCOPY]

@Watermelon

What if a stupidly high ELO player stops playing? Everything sounds very cumulative forever, which sucks.

And the "immune" player would not play at all to avoid losing rating points. Instead he would use fakes against others to keep his main nick clean.

[Watermelon]

With a properly working ELO system that's very difficult to do, plus things could be added in so people who don't play lose ranks ever so slowly over time.

I read a paper on a modified ELO system with volatility that adjusts for people who don't play a lot, so this could be used effectively to punish them.