Topic: Rating system
WorldSavior
Joined: 2016-10-15, 04:10
Posts: 2134 OS: Linux Version: Recent tournament version  One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2019-09-09, 09:11
The last three tables don't seem to make sense.
There are maps for sixteen players and you can play on them, the problem is just that the UI doesn't allow it to make settings for all players. With last trunk it was possible for some time, but then that feature was unfortunately removed. Maybe 8 should be changed to 16 in your model? Edited: 2019-09-09, 09:11
Wanted to save the world, then I got widetracked 
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
einstein13
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1116 One Elder of Players Location: Poland |
Posted at: 2019-09-09, 10:01
I agree. I suggest that standard deviation should not be higher significantly than initial one. For example if SD > 350 or 400, you should reject the test. What abut number of games per round: 2 and all factors as the first one? Can you simulate that?
I guess that this can be fixed after "alpha-release" to cover all the cases einstein13
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
trimard
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-03-05, 22:40
Posts: 230  Widelands-Forum-Junkie Location: Paris |
Posted at: 2019-09-09, 23:23
But there is a problem I think the factor ITERATION_LIMIT (number of iteration max on step 5) should be set to 2, whatever we do. Otherwise volatility never changes. That's why I started messing around with the number tbh, I didn't understand why the volatility was static. There wouldn't be all that fuss about step5 if could just ignore it right away! On a side note, I think we need more games too
Yeah sure, why not? Actually much easier to do than I though at first PS:
Ok, but after that, I'm starting back my studies this week, so I'll be much slower in the work and the replies. I'm sorry, it's a special, shall I say "bloody" year in my cursus Edited: 2019-09-09, 23:29
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kaputtnik
Joined: 2013-02-18, 20:48
Posts: 2564 OS: Archlinux Version: current master One Elder of Players Location: Germany |
Posted at: 2019-09-10, 20:28
We have already the one for the encyclopedia: https://github.com/widelands/widelands-website/blob/master/wlhelp/models.py Creating a form in django is easy, handling a form in django can be tricky
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
einstein13
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1116 One Elder of Players Location: Poland |
Posted at: 2019-09-12, 14:05
As I understand the model, volatility doesn't have to change. The most significant are Rating and Rating Deviation. The rest can be static and the points will change anyway. Also note that our situation is not the best fit for the model: we are playing not too often, while the model works the best with multiple games for each player in every calculation step.
You already did great job! einstein13
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
trimard
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-03-05, 22:40
Posts: 230 Widelands-Forum-Junkie Location: Paris |
Posted at: 2019-09-15, 21:20
Ok, so I'm starting to understand the whole thing a bit better. VolatilityIt should take 3 to 19 iteration for step 5. If we put 3 as a limit for now, we can have a reasonnable change of the volatility. I will however make the decimal stored bigger so that even small cahnge can be taken into account. Rating periodThe number of game per round is our current rating period. But it's not done to work like that. It should be a time period in which we can hope player make from 10 to 15 games. However if we applied this rule it would mean we wouldn't even have a complete rating deviation with current games. It means all the games would be calculate at the same time, which would mean this score: Which doesn't seems so bad? Does it? What I propose as an alternative is we make some kind of rule, like "at least 5 games per user rated in this period". We are far from the suggested 10 to 15 games in glicko. But it's already kind of a hard requirement. It would mean max 2 rating period I think for the current number of games we have, well maybe after a few more game. Of course I'm talking average. So if some players play 20 games, it would make it up for the player that played only 2 or 3 games. Rating period for player that had no gamesI forgot about it. It is not yet implemented, and it shows in the last test I made. Of course the rating deviation should be much higher for most player! Indeed that would mean that for 30 games, with 5 games rated by rating period, in total 6 rating period. Hence in many of these rating period, some players wouldn't play and their standard deviation would get much higher. Edited: 2019-09-15, 21:22
Attachment:
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
einstein13
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1116 One Elder of Players Location: Poland |
Posted at: 2019-09-16, 00:03
How hard in your models and coding is to create one-game glicko recalculation? I think that official rank should be as good as possible (so it can be taken every week or two weeks), but players does want to know what are their current results too. That means changes every played game. einstein13
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
trimard
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-03-05, 22:40
Posts: 230 Widelands-Forum-Junkie Location: Paris |
Posted at: 2019-09-16, 08:54
Sorry that wasn't clear. Having a rating period doesn't mean we can't update the score after each game. Just tells us how to group the games. If the game you just played created a new rating period it changes nothing except other's players standard deviation will get higher Edited: 2019-09-16, 08:56
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
einstein13
Joined: 2013-07-29, 00:01
Posts: 1116 One Elder of Players Location: Poland |
Posted at: 2019-09-16, 11:15
Current usage of Elo system in chess doesn't update ranks all over the players, only to participants of the one particular game. So my idea is to apply Glicko the same way: only participants of the one game we are targeting changes the rank values. einstein13
Top
Quote
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
trimard
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-03-05, 22:40
Posts: 230 Widelands-Forum-Junkie Location: Paris |
Posted at: 2019-09-16, 16:55
Rank value value won't be change though. Only standard deviation if, and only if, there is a change of rating period
Top
Quote
|
. 8 is enough for now and probably never used.
