Close

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    196
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Lightbulb I suggest change Rating System

    For currently, the rating system is, at the beginning of each month, you win and gain much rating, you lose will drop little rating, so most players reach about 300 rating. But from middle of the month, If you are at 300 rating, you can hardly gain 1 rating when you win but very easy drop 2 rating if you lose. So it's very hard for people to keep their rating at a high level because he win 10 times, only get 5 rating, and lose 2 or 3 times will drop this 5 rating. This is very unfair! He get nothing then. This made the game a very ridiculous phenomenon --- the top rating players all play very little games in the season. If you have interest, please check the No.6 player, A1 Sir Prize, rating 350, this guy win 6 match and lose 3 match, and then he gain No.6 in Ranking! How ridiculous!
    So do anybody think this game's rating system need to be change? What I think is, very simple, at beginning of each season, all players start at 0 rating and if he win a game, he gain only 1 rating, no matter his opponent's rating is high or low, and if he lose a game, he drop 1 rating, also no matter his opponent's rating is high or low. Because the game's system already assign the most nearby rating player as your opponent, so this is fair, You win, gain 1 rating, you lose, drop 1 rating. This change encourage people play more. If you are a high skill player, you play more, you win more, then your rating will be more higher. If you are a middle player, you play more, you can also get a no bad rating.
    I know this change will made the rating not so shine (370 or even 400), but this is more truth, your rating reflect your true level. At least if you want gain 350 rating, you must play at least 350 games and all win I like this, don't like win 6 lose 3 and gain 350 rating, Ranking 6.
    Guys what do you think?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Nijjis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    364
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I think A1 surprise has played more than just 9 games. it looks like he changed his name from a1 sir preyes to a1 sir prize, and this caused his game count to reset after name change.

    the reason why you can gain rating faster at the start of the month is because you have 0 game history. so if you go from 5-1 record to 10-2 you will gain rating fast. much faster than if you went from 50-10 record to 60-12.

    also as you climb towards the top of the ranks you will be almost always be matched against lower rated players. if I'm rank 5 with a 360 rating that means there's only 4 players above me. so most of my matches will be against players in the <360 range.

    if you average out all of your opponents rating you will probably be playing against a 320-330 player on average. these wins do less for increasing your rating, and when you lose you get hit hard. basically the higher you climb / the lower the competition you face = your win % generally has to keep increasing if you want to continue climbing.

    if you are a 300 rated player you will get plenty of matches against higher rated players. therefor your wins do more for your rating

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    196
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nijjis View Post
    I think A1 surprise has played more than just 9 games. it looks like he changed his name from a1 sir preyes to a1 sir prize, and this caused his game count to reset after name change.

    the reason why you can gain rating faster at the start of the month is because you have 0 game history. so if you go from 5-1 record to 10-2 you will gain rating fast. much faster than if you went from 50-10 record to 60-12.

    also as you climb towards the top of the ranks you will be almost always be matched against lower rated players. if I'm rank 5 with a 360 rating that means there's only 4 players above me. so most of my matches will be against players in the <360 range.

    if you average out all of your opponents rating you will probably be playing against a 320-330 player on average. these wins do less for increasing your rating, and when you lose you get hit hard. basically the higher you climb / the lower the competition you face = your win % generally has to keep increasing if you want to continue climbing.

    if you are a 300 rated player you will get plenty of matches against higher rated players. therefor your wins do more for your rating
    Thanks for explain, I know this. And I also know, if one want to keep his top rating, he should play less, if he play more, he will absolutely drop. The system seems encourage players stop after gain high rating. And many players did so.

  4. #4
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,028
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1

    I suggest change Rating System

    People used to think they should stop and camp and this was the common viewpoint until we made it a requirement to play more than 100 games to qualify for WC2016 in some cases. What became clear then was actually that it pays to play more.

    The highest rating recorded in five years was hit by Otto with 100 games.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    105
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    It is true that playing less can result in higher rating. Regardless, I have hit 350 on an account with probably about 40-50 games, and I also hit 350 on another account with over 300. Is it easier to camp? Yes. But not mandatory.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Ikhsan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Ternate
    Posts
    258
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    This rating system make shadow era more unique than other TCG, I disagree to change the rating system


    A1 Wolverine✌

    Sent from my ASUS_Z007 using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Senior Member jacelkos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    France (GMT+1)
    Posts
    170
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    People used to think they should stop and camp and this was the common viewpoint until we made it a requirement to play more than 100 games to qualify for WC2016 in some cases. What became clear then was actually that it pays to play more.

    The highest rating recorded in five years was hit by Otto with 100 games.
    With all due respect I don't think this is true.

    It's easier to rush the ladder in the early days when ratings are not settled and camp for most of the season, playing a game every 5 days.
    Even with the 100 games requirement for WC people aimed for 100 games and started camping afterwards. It's just easier this way.

    Regarding the higher ratings in the last year (or has it been longer?), it comes from the fact that forfeiting a game before T5 now counts as a win rating-wise for your opponent.
    A rough estimate based on the top 100 is that people get about 20 more rating points (e.g. 320 is the new 300).

    With all that being said, I do like this elo based system And I've camped my fair share over the years at season's end
    Member of Supreme Legion

    We are legion, For we are many
    IGN: SL Jacelkos

  8. #8
    Senior Member Nijjis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    364
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I don't know how the math works out, but I'm not so sure... although I have seen anecdotal evidence that a 10-0 rating on day 1 will net you a higher rating than on day 10... can anyone please explain how the rating calculations work?

    Even if wins at the start of the month are worth more that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be easier to climb. Consider this: on day 1 there's probably a greater chance of you bumping up against top tier players at the bottom of the ladder... A week in though a lot of people will be sorted closer to their actual skill level.

    The month I finished top rating I think I got off to a slowish start. So I played a handful of games the first several days... I think it was 1-3 games played after 3 or 4 days. I probably wasn't even top 10-15 a week or more into the month.
    Last edited by Nijjis; 07-27-2017 at 06:12 AM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    105
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    At the beginning of season you are more likely to run into players that have higher rating than what they would have over a larger sample size. So when you beat them, your rating increases more quickly

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    569
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    The rating system needs a minimum gain for people who play a lot of games like myself and others.

    I beat a guy when I rated 273 and there rated 334 and I only received 2 points. The system is flawed because once you play a certain number of games you stop gaining points where people who only play 1 every 5 days gets like 30 points when they win. This does need to be corrected.
    Last edited by Fristar; 07-29-2017 at 11:42 PM. Reason: Error is typing

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •