I think that any ranking should only take into consideration a certain length of the most current gameplay for each player. This time frame would be long enough to be statistically relevant, but short enough that it would better represent each player's current level. In this system if a player were to leave the game for a period of time, their skill value would be unchanged until they began to play again.
I also think that rank divisions should be relative to the highest and lowest skill scores. The divisions could be set at certain percentiles of skill value, for instance. This way a set number of self-adjusting divisions could be created instead of adding additional divisions or having to worry about manually tweaking them.
It's a great idea, but it needs to be a very wide gap so that new players aren't restricted to playing against noobs and therefore can't improve quickly.
At any given time there are a bunch of levels of play, but I like playing with people better than me because it makes me better. It might not be as satisfying killcount-wise, but eventually the skill does rub off.
So yeah. Make sure that if this is implemented you can play against people significantly (but not prohibitively) better than you are.
I also think that rank divisions should be relative to the highest and lowest skill scores. The divisions could be set at certain percentiles of skill value, for instance. This way a set number of self-adjusting divisions could be created instead of adding additional divisions or having to worry about manually tweaking them. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's actually pretty good. Perhaps to make this approach more valid, the skill scores could be collected and then analyzed for similarities. In essence, poorly skilled players usually play similarly to other poorly skilled players. The average players' skill points would have a range that would be much broader. The proficient players' skill points would also have a range. From experience I know that there is a considerable jump between the skill of the average and proficient players. It would be plausible to do a statistical analysis on the skill points collected to identify similarities between groups and assign skill level ranges. There can be more than 3 ranges. However, server operators could then choose which ranges of skill they want to allow on their servers.
<!--quoteo(post=1609069:date=Feb 24 2007, 04:36 PM:name=Harrower)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harrower @ Feb 24 2007, 04:36 PM) [snapback]1609069[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> It's a great idea, but it needs to be a very wide gap so that new players aren't restricted to playing against noobs and therefore can't improve quickly.
At any given time there are a bunch of levels of play, but I like playing with people better than me because it makes me better. It might not be as satisfying killcount-wise, but eventually the skill does rub off.
So yeah. Make sure that if this is implemented you can play against people significantly (but not prohibitively) better than you are. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was discussed earlier that this would be an option for server operators, just like mp_blockscripts is an option for server operators of NS right now. Servers ops could choose to allow all ranges of skill, allow all skill above a certain point, allow a certain range of skill. This is somewhat similar to the honour system currently in place in America's Army (the FPS game).
There are more benefits to this, such as collecting stats from games played between certain ranges of skill. This would permit balancing of the game based on information gained from more controlled sampling methods.
Necroposting this as a more on-topic cross-post to the discussion in General Discussion (linked below). Please leave it up, as I think this is where it best fits on the forums.
<!--quoteo(post=1614893:date=Mar 16 2007, 08:51 AM:name=Dogg)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dogg @ Mar 16 2007, 08:51 AM) [snapback]1614893[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->if a novice player joins then much like reserved slots it would kick the advanced player to make room for the novice player (when full).
Yeah, I'd pay for a reserved slot on that. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The algorithm to filter players would of course have to be more advanced than a simple Kills:Deaths ratio. For starters it would factor in the score (be it kills/deaths or overall points or whatever) of the player, his teammates, and each of the opposing players, with a specific focus on the player who was just killed (or who had just killed) whoever it is we're trying to get a number on.
But despite that, this isn't a bad idea at all. Locking players out of servers would be one way to do it, but adopting a TGlike "keep them until we have better options" functionality so that servers could fill with anyone, but later players would need to filter to their more "age-appropriate" server options, as servers would "prefer" a certain skill range, and choose to kick/keep players based on that range.
Sarisel.::' ( O ) ';:-. .-.:;' ( O ) '::.Join Date: 2003-07-30Member: 18557Members, Constellation
I don't really like the idea of kicking players from servers due to the impact this action can have on games. If you kick a fade or a commander, that's pretty bad. You'd need something to detect the role of the player.
unlockeable guns or alien movements nice... the idea of quake 4 is cool too upgrading ure gun.. or better bites.. i like that <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" />
Comments
I also think that rank divisions should be relative to the highest and lowest skill scores. The divisions could be set at certain percentiles of skill value, for instance. This way a set number of self-adjusting divisions could be created instead of adding additional divisions or having to worry about manually tweaking them.
At any given time there are a bunch of levels of play, but I like playing with people better than me because it makes me better. It might not be as satisfying killcount-wise, but eventually the skill does rub off.
So yeah. Make sure that if this is implemented you can play against people significantly (but not prohibitively) better than you are.
...
I also think that rank divisions should be relative to the highest and lowest skill scores. The divisions could be set at certain percentiles of skill value, for instance. This way a set number of self-adjusting divisions could be created instead of adding additional divisions or having to worry about manually tweaking them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's actually pretty good. Perhaps to make this approach more valid, the skill scores could be collected and then analyzed for similarities. In essence, poorly skilled players usually play similarly to other poorly skilled players. The average players' skill points would have a range that would be much broader. The proficient players' skill points would also have a range. From experience I know that there is a considerable jump between the skill of the average and proficient players. It would be plausible to do a statistical analysis on the skill points collected to identify similarities between groups and assign skill level ranges. There can be more than 3 ranges. However, server operators could then choose which ranges of skill they want to allow on their servers.
<!--quoteo(post=1609069:date=Feb 24 2007, 04:36 PM:name=Harrower)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harrower @ Feb 24 2007, 04:36 PM) [snapback]1609069[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
It's a great idea, but it needs to be a very wide gap so that new players aren't restricted to playing against noobs and therefore can't improve quickly.
At any given time there are a bunch of levels of play, but I like playing with people better than me because it makes me better. It might not be as satisfying killcount-wise, but eventually the skill does rub off.
So yeah. Make sure that if this is implemented you can play against people significantly (but not prohibitively) better than you are.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was discussed earlier that this would be an option for server operators, just like mp_blockscripts is an option for server operators of NS right now. Servers ops could choose to allow all ranges of skill, allow all skill above a certain point, allow a certain range of skill. This is somewhat similar to the honour system currently in place in America's Army (the FPS game).
There are more benefits to this, such as collecting stats from games played between certain ranges of skill. This would permit balancing of the game based on information gained from more controlled sampling methods.
<!--quoteo(post=1614893:date=Mar 16 2007, 08:51 AM:name=Dogg)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dogg @ Mar 16 2007, 08:51 AM) [snapback]1614893[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->if a novice player joins then much like reserved slots it would kick the advanced player to make room for the novice player (when full).
Yeah, I'd pay for a reserved slot on that.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The algorithm to filter players would of course have to be more advanced than a simple Kills:Deaths ratio. For starters it would factor in the score (be it kills/deaths or overall points or whatever) of the player, his teammates, and each of the opposing players, with a specific focus on the player who was just killed (or who had just killed) whoever it is we're trying to get a number on.
But despite that, this isn't a bad idea at all. Locking players out of servers would be one way to do it, but adopting a TGlike "keep them until we have better options" functionality so that servers could fill with anyone, but later players would need to filter to their more "age-appropriate" server options, as servers would "prefer" a certain skill range, and choose to kick/keep players based on that range.
Thoughts?