WarGear Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
general_features:scaling_championship_points_based_on_games_played

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
general_features:scaling_championship_points_based_on_games_played [2014/03/28 16:21]
Ozyman 		general_features:scaling_championship_points_based_on_games_played [2017/03/18 00:09] (current)
Ozyman [Comparing Rankings]
Line 1: Line 1:
-The idea here is that boards that are played a lot have greater competition than boards that are not, so players should have a chance to earn more CP on popular boards.  A semi-logarithmic scale is proposed to provide more CP to boards that have been played more.+The idea here is that boards that are played a lot have greater competition than boards that are not, so players should have a chance to earn more CP on popular boards. Although this is balanced by the fact that less popular boards are more likely to have more experienced players, and conversely popular boards are more likely to have lots of newbs (whose starting 1000 GR is higher than their true GR, and so represent easy pickings).  But even so, getting into the higher ranks of popular boards requires competing against very good players, and so players who support this ranking change believe that rank #10 on WGWF is much harder to achieve than rank #10 on $UNPOPULAR_BOARD.
  
 +One way to think about finding an appropriate scale, is to imagine equivalent rankings between boards.  For example, if achieving rank #5 on $UNPOPULAR_BOARD is roughly equivalent in difficulty to achieving rank #35 on WGWF, they should earn equal CP.  More detailed discussion and comparison along these lines in the Comparing Rankings section below.
 +
 +
 + A semi-logarithmic scale is proposed to provide more CP to boards that have been played more.
 +
 +==== CP Master Table - Proposal 1 ====
  
 ^# of plays    ^   Top Rank CP   ^   Min GR for top rank   ^  # of ranks that get CP^ ^# of plays    ^   Top Rank CP   ^   Min GR for top rank   ^  # of ranks that get CP^
Line 14: Line 20:
 The CP is a compromise between exponential growth & linear growth.  It goes up +10, +15, +20, +25, etc. between categories.  # of ranks lags one category behind to allow top ranks to have a difference >1 between ranks. The CP is a compromise between exponential growth & linear growth.  It goes up +10, +15, +20, +25, etc. between categories.  # of ranks lags one category behind to allow top ranks to have a difference >1 between ranks.
  
-Most boards keep the 20/1500/10 that we currently have. Popular boards get 35 CP.  Very popular boards get 55 CP, WGWF gets 80CP, and in a few years will bump up to 110CP.+Most boards keep the 20/1500/10 that we currently have. Popular boards get 35 CP for #1.  Very popular boards get 55 CP, WGWF gets 80CP, and in a few years will bump up to 110CP.
  
 +
 +==== CP Master Table - Proposal 2 ====
 +
 +This proposal does not weight popular boards quite as heavily as proposal 1.
 +
 +^# of plays    ^   Top Rank CP   ^   Min GR for top rank   ^  # of ranks that get CP^
 +|0   -   10    |      --         |        --               |         --|
 +|10  -  100    |      15         |       1250              |          5|
 +|100 -   1k    |      20         |       1500              |         15|
 +|1k  -  10k    |      30         |       1750              |         20|
 +|10k - 100k    |      45         |       2000              |         30|
 +|100k-   1M    |      60         |       2250              |         45|
 +|1M  - 10M     |      85         |       2500              |         60|
 +
 + 
 +The CP is a compromise between exponential growth & linear growth.  It goes up +5, +10, +15, +20, +25, etc. between categories.  # of ranks lags one category behind to allow top ranks to have a difference >1 between ranks.
 +
 +Most boards keep the 20/1500 that we currently have, but the top 15 would earn CP. Popular boards get 30 CP for #1.  Very popular boards get 45 CP, WGWF gets 60CP, and in a few years will bump up to 85CP.
 +
 +
 +==== CP for maps with 100-1k games played ====
 The 100-1k range would keep the current CP table: The 100-1k range would keep the current CP table:
  
Line 31: Line 58:
  
 Other ranges would require their own tables which have not been proposed yet, but would follow the same basic shape as the standard table. Other ranges would require their own tables which have not been proposed yet, but would follow the same basic shape as the standard table.
 +
 +
 +==== Comparing Rankings ====
 +
 +One way to think about finding an appropriate scale, is to imagine equivalent rankings between boards.  For example, if achieving rank #5 on $UNPOPULAR_BOARD is roughly equivalent in difficulty to achieving rank #35 on WGWF, they should earn equal CP.  If we have enough data points below we can use them to make sure the tables described above are fair.
 +
 +Here are some proposed equivalent rankings.  Initial values here are a complete WAG, and are more for illustrative purposes.  Please feel free to adjust or discuss in the forums:
 +
 +^ Board 1 ^^ Board 2 ^^ Board 3 ^^
 +^# of plays    ^   Rank ^ # of plays    ^   Rank ^ # of plays    ^   Rank ^
 +|100   -   1k    |      1         |     10k - 100k   |    10   |     100k - 1M    |    20   |
 +|100   -   1k    |      5         |     10k - 100k   |    25   |     100k - 1M    |    20   |
 +|100   -   1k    |      10        |     10k - 100k   |    40   |     100k - 1M    |    55   |
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
  
general_features/scaling_championship_points_based_on_games_played.1396038067.txt.gz ยท Last modified: 2014/03/28 16:21 by Ozyman

Page Tools

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki