Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5  All

Author Topic: Leaderboard change  (Read 28481 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dougz

  • Isotropic Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 88
  • Respect: +440
    • View Profile
    • Online Dominion
Leaderboard change
« on: November 23, 2011, 07:14:09 pm »
+1

Starting with tonight's update to the leaderboard (if all goes well), only the past 30 days of games are going to be counted towards your rank.  Games older than that will have no impact whatsoever on your score.

This means that if you get better, your old games won't be dragging down your rank forever.  It also means that you can't maintain a high rank based solely on past performance, playing only an occasional game to keep your account active.  I think this is a good thing — I'd rather a high rank mean an active, fresh player — but you may disagree.  If there's something really wrong with it I can always restore the old method.  This is my third attempt at trying to account for player's skills varying over time; if nothing else it is at least the simplest to explain.

Yes, Karumah is still on top (and his sock puppet Kretin is now dead last, by far), but I expect everyone who cares knows about him so really, who cares.
Logged

painted_cow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2011, 07:22:32 pm »
+1

Well, personally I dont like this. Players who play a smaller amount of games per day were kind of "punished" with a higher deviation skill number with todays (or old) method. Now people, who play many games per day get even more advantage or am I wrong?

Or isnt there a chance to do an alternative all-time-Leaderboard then (also without the like 10 days inactivity kicks of players). Would be funny to see the whole number of players on isotropic as well and remember some oldtimers.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2011, 07:26:30 pm by painted_cow »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6035
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2011, 07:23:55 pm »
+9

Seems like this will cause some pretty swingy ranks.  A level 40 player who doesn't play for a month is suddenly going to come back as a level 0, and start doing real damage to everyone's ratings.

In general it will probably depress everyone's level except for those that play pretty much every day.  I worry that this might overly reward activity in place of skill.
Logged

painted_cow

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 151
  • Respect: +19
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2011, 07:28:42 pm »
0

In general it will probably depress everyone's level except for those that play pretty much every day.  I worry that this might overly reward activity in place of skill.

Who is seeing paralles to Magic the Gathering here? :-) Planeswalkerpoints anyone :D
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6035
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2011, 07:40:28 pm »
0

What if you set it to the last X games a player played, instead of the last 30 days' worth of games?
Logged

rod-

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 213
  • Respect: +49
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2011, 08:19:32 pm »
0

Last X or a number of days >30 would be good.  I'd enjoy having my first 400 or so games fall off of my ranking, but i've probably played 80 games in the last 30 days.
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4071
  • Respect: +2611
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2011, 08:50:56 pm »
+1

Quote
This means that if you get better, your old games won't be dragging down your rank forever.
Although a player's ranking is determined from all the results, surely the mathematics of the rating system already guarantees that the contribution of the latest results is far higher than the contribution of the older results? Even if a commutative series of deltas are added to the rating with each game, wouldn't the size of the deltas add more weight to recent results?
Logged

DsnowMan

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
  • Respect: +26
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2011, 09:14:46 pm »
0

I don't like it. Echoing DG, I thought the rating system already had some time-decay.

If you want to something like this, I also suggest using X # of games, not days.
Logged

heatthespurs

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
  • Respect: +61
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2011, 09:19:53 pm »
+1

I believe you need to consider that there could be quite a number of player (like me) who play only 1-2 games per day on average. If the rating is based only on games in last 30 days, the rating would be constantly based on around 40-50 games. I wonder would this give a constantly high variance that would not be reduced over time? If yes, it may not give a fair reflection on the player actual skill, even over a long time?

I second that the rating could instead be based on last X games, or games on last Y days with Y>30
« Last Edit: November 24, 2011, 01:44:43 am by heatthespurs »
Logged

kn1tt3r

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 585
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2011, 01:27:50 am »
0

Maybe it is a bit late since the system might be shut down in a year or whatever, but I'd personally like to see the results on a regular basis ("seasons"), like a league systems just measuring the skill level in the span of maybe quarter of a year.

If you'd additionally could change the view to some sort of All-time ranking, which could only show, say, the top 500 without disappearing names in terms of inactivity, it would be perfect.

However, in the end I don't care very much, and I'm in principle fine with whatever change done with good intentions.
Logged

Elyv

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2011, 01:34:25 am »
0

I don't like it; I tend to play in spurts, so I'll play very little(or not at all) for a month or two, and then play a ton for a couple of weeks. I find I can still hold my own against people my level fairly well once I start again, and I'm certainly still better than a level 0 even after an extended period of inactivity.
Logged

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #11 on: November 24, 2011, 02:24:14 am »
0

I would think for the average player that should not change much. The old games diminish in TS already in 2 ways (afaik). The system does not weight the current rank with the number if games, so if you are say 25+-10 with 100 games or with 1000 makes no difference for your future. Second, when you, for historical reasons, are below your 'real' skill, say 25 instead of 35, the system will adjust your rank for a much high amount when you win again the same player, because the skill difference between him and you is more in your favour.

So there are the border cases, first the ones that exploited theirselves on top. I'm still not sure if they can maintain there rank by just playing 1 game per week, because that would increase the variance of the skill in the long run. But of course the new method gets rid of them faster.  But probably we will see some more creative skills to exploit the leaderboard in the future.
Second, the case mentioned by theory, having someone good not playing (much), dropping to 25+-25 by this. Hmm.
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9371
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2011, 03:31:43 am »
0

What if you set it to the last X games a player played, instead of the last 30 days' worth of games?

Have to second theory's idea here.  Someone who plays less than, say, 100 games in a month is going to end up with a rank no higher than, say, level 30.  On average, likely less.  Consider that people who gamed the system (e.g., Paralyzed) took 100+ games to do it.

I think the last 300 or 500 games is a better indicator than the last month.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

DStu

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2627
  • Respect: +1488
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2011, 03:49:41 am »
0

OK, I must correct myself and say the opposite: Have fallen from 34 to 23 (and even increased from 21 when you calculated yesterday ranks with the new method).
AND I must say that definitely my rank had increased (in the old system) during the last month.
Logged

octopus

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #14 on: November 24, 2011, 03:57:49 am »
+1

Here are some relatively easy ways to get a high rating:

1) play only low-level players
2) play only 3p/4p games, which implies mostly low-level players; I did this, now I'm number 5 (yay?)
3) veto cards you're no good with
4) veto boards that look scary to you
5) veto players you don't like the look of

Here are some ways to fix the problems:

1) Only count games where players are all +/- 5 levels
2) Create separate 2p, 3p, 4p leaderboards
3) Don't count veto mode games
4) Only count games with a fully blind kingdom
5) Only count blind automatch games

Yes, there's some overlap there, but I think those changes would make it much harder to game the system.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2011, 03:59:53 am by octopus »
Logged

Lionel

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #15 on: November 24, 2011, 05:20:42 am »
0

It doesn't change anything. I like playing dominion before this leaderboard change, i like playing dominion after this leaderboard change. That is the most important no?
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6035
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #16 on: November 24, 2011, 05:54:23 am »
+2

The problem with my idea (basing it on the last X games) is that you could very easily end up winning a game and going down in rank, which doesn't really make much sense.

I thought about it last night, and it seems that there's not much options beyond doing a "Top Players in Last 30 Days" leaderboard and a separate "Top Players All-Time" leaderboard.  Outside of TrueSkill's built in time decay, if you want to further encourage activity and highlight the recent stars, there's not much options other than what doug has done here. 

At the same time, the top ten of today's leaderboard has only 2 of yesterday's all-time top ten (plus Karumah, of course).  I'm currently level 27, and whoever I play with is going to have their ranking seriously distorted.  This ends up defeating the original purpose of TrueSkill, which was to promote fair and automatic matchmaking. 
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3594
  • Respect: +6035
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #17 on: November 24, 2011, 05:56:27 am »
0

Here are some relatively easy ways to get a high rating:

1) play only low-level players
2) play only 3p/4p games, which implies mostly low-level players; I did this, now I'm number 5 (yay?)
3) veto cards you're no good with
4) veto boards that look scary to you
5) veto players you don't like the look of
For what it's worth, Captain_Frisk did this with his conjecture account and made it pretty high.  I think the problem is just that the system's initial assumption of skill at 25.0 +/- 25 is too generous.
Logged

Geronimoo

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1047
  • Respect: +844
    • View Profile
    • Geronimoo's Dominion Simulator
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2011, 06:24:55 am »
0

Is this change a convoluted method to erase the Paralyzeds of the community from the leaderboard?  (the guy who played nothing but the KC-Masquerade pin)

I sure don't like this change and think the leaderboard works fine as it is.
Logged

rspeer

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 469
  • Respect: +875
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2011, 06:29:54 am »
+1

Oh god, I really don't like this change (and I'm the one who told dougz about trueskill in the first place).

This is throwing out tons of information, it's rewarding being obsessed with the game, and the worst part is the idea that you lose your entire rating if you don't play for 30 days. And this certainly didn't help the Karumah situation.


Incidentally, the 25 +/- 25 assumption isn't generous, it's arbitrary and it defines the way the rest of the numbers come out. If newbies got 10 +/- 10, then the system would be the same except elite players would be level 18. I think what's actually going on is that the number representing the amount of variance inherent to Dominion needs to be turned down. Unskilled players play with high variance, and therefore the average game has high variance. But skilled players can play with low variance, especially against unskilled players, and we notice most how the leaderboard affects skilled players.
Logged

Caprica

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2011, 06:39:25 am »
0

I really dislike/hate the change! The system worked fine.

It would be cool though, to have the all time leaderboard and a leaderboard based on the last 30 days. But before that's reality, I want the old leaderbaord back!
Logged

DG

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4071
  • Respect: +2611
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2011, 07:21:38 am »
+1

I suspect that while this might spur people in the top 20 places in the rankings to play more games it will probably discourage the other 6000 players. The ranking system will mainly be measuring the time invested in playing an on-line game over a short period, which isn't a measure that many people want to know. For those people who have invested a very large amount of time over that time period it will then measure skill playing Dominion, just for that time period.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2011, 07:34:47 am by DG »
Logged

Mean Mr Mustard

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 452
  • First to 5000 Isotropic wins
  • Respect: +118
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2011, 08:12:38 am »
+1

As an upshot, I suppose those of us who lost long-standing ranks will now be mirrored less by players who do not know us.  My standings have declined quite a bit since Hinterlands so I guess I don't mind, but I can see that I would be kind of annoyed if I had still been at the top and lost my position.

After playing 10,000 games (including a heavy stretch at BSW) I have grown a bit bored with Dominion, but as a guy with a lot of financial obligations it is hard to give up an absolutely free form of entertainment.  My play style has relaxed and I have become much more experimental and my results have been reflecting that.  Last week Geronimoo chastised me for trying to circumvent Mountebank, and I had to laugh because he was dead-on right.

I suppose that ultimately I assumed that Isotropic has an unseen self-destruct mechanism installed, and that the leaderboard would go with it, so I might as well not worry about my rank.  The shadow game that is supposedly forthcoming will provide a clean slate, and if I choose to buy it I expect to see a lot of the same people. 

Now, I can understand Dougz's attempts to keep the leaderboard sanitized of outright manipulators and I also get the frustrations of established players who may be losing rank from infrequent play.  I also am having a few doubts that a commercial Dominion online product release is eminent.  But what do I know?  It is all guesswork and speculation at this point.  I am not in the inner-circle, but I can tell you as someone who organized online tournaments I did consider the possibility of the downfall of Isotropic when planning them, and I see the DSC tourney as a good omen.  From DonaldX, the last I remember hearing was that Isotropic would be up through Hinterlands release.

Pragmatically, I guess if this leaderboard change is permanent we must play in order to defend our rank. 
Logged
Jake <a href=http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201203/17/game-20120317-030206-6456f97c.html>opening: opening: Silver / Jack of All Trades</a>
<b>IsoDom1 Winner:  shark_bait
IsoDom2 Winner: Rabid
Isodom3 Winner: Fabian</b>
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalie ar Atanatári, Utúlie'n auré!

Reyk

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #23 on: November 24, 2011, 08:54:18 am »
+1

In German there is a saying "to throw the baby out with the bath water" (in the sence of "to overshoot the mark"). Why not just manually delete "Paralyzed", "Karumah" and the likes?

Anyway thx again for hosting isotropic, dougz!
Logged

Sopenas

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Leaderboard change
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2011, 09:37:07 am »
0

Hello,
 
  In my opinion 30 days period used for counting rank is too small. I think it should be about 3 month time - 90 days. Then it would be ok. Now you go on vacation and after month you are at zero level.  :o But your skill definitely is not at zero level after months holiday  ::)

  This ranking system would be too unstable.

Bye
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5  All
 

Page created in 0.094 seconds with 21 queries.