Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[WanderingWinder]

If the rating system is an ELO-type rating system, which I believe someone from Goko said it was in a FAQ,

Well, they said this, but in actual practice, it doesn't seem to have almost anything in common with the Elo system (by the way, I don't know why people capitalize all three letters of this name, but this is an aside), other than they are both rating system where higher numbers are supposed to represent better players.

Well, it's hard to say without more information, but it does have some similarities, in that defeating an opponent ranked higher gives more points than defeating a lower ranked opponent, and vice versa with losses.

Two problems with this: first, this is true of, well, virtually every rating system, so it doesn't really make it Elo-like. Second, it isn't true! (as has been shown in numerous examples; generally, yes this happens, but only generally).

[qmech]

YOUR RATING IS



"ROCKING"

[Stealth Tomato]

At what rating would you say that a player stops sucking? (hoping that I no longer suck too hard - my pro rating is currently 4098 and fluctuating wildly. I pretty consistently beat all the bots in 2-player, but lose just about whenever I play humans, part of the explanation for that is that I play far too quickly for my own good against humans, because I don't want to make them wait for me to consider my options).

With no bots, I would guess about 5000 pro, 4000 casual. The casual ratings appear to be naturally depressed somewhat, and it's extremely difficult to get past 5000.

Bots make it strange because they're not players and they're naturally predictable.

[ashersky]

At what rating would you say that a player stops sucking?

Best guess? 10,000.

Don't you mean more than 9000?

[ashersky]

At what rating would you say that a player stops sucking? (hoping that I no longer suck too hard - my pro rating is currently 4098 and fluctuating wildly. I pretty consistently beat all the bots in 2-player, but lose just about whenever I play humans, part of the explanation for that is that I play far too quickly for my own good against humans, because I don't want to make them wait for me to consider my options).

With no bots, I would guess about 5000 pro, 4000 casual. The casual ratings appear to be naturally depressed somewhat, and it's extremely difficult to get past 5000.

Bots make it strange because they're not players and they're naturally predictable.

With enough games, my guess is that the "halfway point" from iso (I think lvl. 25) ends up somewhere around 4800 on Goko.  The problem is, 9600 isn't lvl 50, because I don't see anyone getting up that high yet.  I expect WW, et al. to push 7500?  Is that feasible?

[qmech]

At what rating would you say that a player stops sucking? (hoping that I no longer suck too hard - my pro rating is currently 4098 and fluctuating wildly. I pretty consistently beat all the bots in 2-player, but lose just about whenever I play humans, part of the explanation for that is that I play far too quickly for my own good against humans, because I don't want to make them wait for me to consider my options).

With no bots, I would guess about 5000 pro, 4000 casual. The casual ratings appear to be naturally depressed somewhat, and it's extremely difficult to get past 5000.

Bots make it strange because they're not players and they're naturally predictable.

With enough games, my guess is that the "halfway point" from iso (I think lvl. 25) ends up somewhere around 4800 on Goko.  The problem is, 9600 isn't lvl 50, because I don't see anyone getting up that high yet.  I expect WW, et al. to push 7500?  Is that feasible?

If 1000 is zero we get 50 being 7600 and 40 being 6280.  In the early days of Iso 40 was pretty much the ceiling, with the 50s only coming once the number of players had increased.

Your 7500 seems a reasonable guess.  If it's smashed then the rating systems likely aren't comparable in this way.

[heatthespurs]

My general feeling is that the Goko rating does not reflect player's strength as good as Iso did.

I am ~6000 in Goko and ~30 in iso. Back in the iso days, if I automatch and select "+/-10 rank", I could generally be able to play with someone that have roughly similar skill level with me (well, the lv.38 player is generally better and lv.22 is generally weaker than me. Though it is still very possible to beat a lv.38 or lose to a lv.22 in a game)

Now in Goko, I could be playing a 5500-6000 player which has skill level of roughly lv.15-20 in iso. And it happens quite often. Maybe it could be that everyone is still not familiar with Dark Age? (but so do I)...

[Stealth Tomato]

Now in Goko, I could be playing a 5500-6000 player which has skill level of roughly lv.15-20 in iso. And it happens quite often. Maybe it could be that everyone is still not familiar with Dark Age? (but so do I)...

Note that even a good rating system typically takes some time to stabilize, since new players on the system start at zero even if they are already very good.

[ooksoo]

I was around 5.6k until I decide to get to the top, My friend BrotherJay was on top for pro for a few day I think, and he is around 6700 ( i remeber this because it suprise the XXXX out of me when I heard he has highest ratting on pro) And I took him Down,when i played him, for the first few games i get about 100 points per game, when I loss is about 30-40, when I got up to 6200 and he is down to 5800 i get about 10-20 per game, and I started playing random people from there.

[ooksoo]

My general feeling is that the Goko rating does not reflect player's strength as good as Iso did.

I am ~6000 in Goko and ~30 in iso. Back in the iso days, if I automatch and select "+/-10 rank", I could generally be able to play with someone that have roughly similar skill level with me (well, the lv.38 player is generally better and lv.22 is generally weaker than me. Though it is still very possible to beat a lv.38 or lose to a lv.22 in a game)

Now in Goko, I could be playing a 5500-6000 player which has skill level of roughly lv.15-20 in iso. And it happens quite often. Maybe it could be that everyone is still not familiar with Dark Age? (but so do I)...

never played on iso, but I experienced more then a few games with iso players and they left for no reason, ( how do I know there are from iso? a lot player that have a very high rating with not that many of games,for example 5800 with 123-46-2 when I see players like that I would ask are you from iso?) and often iso players comes into goko and trash talk on the chat room saying how bad goko is, rofl

[ftl]

I don't know whether I trust the goko rating system right now. I'm #3 on it right now, and I really don't think I'm particularly good - on iso at least, I wasn't remotely close to the top 10 players, my rating was fairly unremarkable. So I suspect that me being #3 on the leaderboard is a symptom of some sort of problem with it, but I don't know what that problem is or how it affects everyone else.

[SCSN]

often iso players comes into goko and trash talk on the chat room saying how bad goko is, rofl

What's even funnier is that they're right 

[Stealth Tomato]

I don't know whether I trust the goko rating system right now. I'm #3 on it right now, and I really don't think I'm particularly good - on iso at least, I wasn't remotely close to the top 10 players, my rating was fairly unremarkable. So I suspect that me being #3 on the leaderboard is a symptom of some sort of problem with it, but I don't know what that problem is or how it affects everyone else.

My rating has relatively stabilized (I typically play 4500-5500 range players with occasional higher ratings, I'm around 6300 myself). I'm curious whether this is due to good design or if the ability to change your rating decays over time. I do know that my willingness to play matches against 4000-level players is likely hurting me overall, since it is difficult to beat competent Dominion players at the rate required to move up in level (some boards are sufficiently high-skill that a better player will thrash a lesser one; others don't offer much advantage for nuanced play).

The ratings are naturally going to be screwy with new-to-Goko players entering the system, since these players have a massive mismatch between actual skill and results available to the rating system. However, I don't see reason to declare the ratings are particularly bad.

[Fabian]

I don't have a strong opinion if the ratings are "bad" either, but it does seem like it's pretty necessary to avoid playing low rated players if you want your own rating to stay high. Like, I feel like it's pretty weird to have a rating system in 2p Dominion where one player gains 7 points after a win and loses 120 points after a loss. That seems kinda harsh, although maybe that just means you're not supposed to have a rating that high, or something, though that seems pretty weird too.

[WanderingWinder]

I don't have a strong opinion if the ratings are "bad" either, but it does seem like it's pretty necessary to avoid playing low rated players if you want your own rating to stay high. Like, I feel like it's pretty weird to have a rating system in 2p Dominion where one player gains 7 points after a win and loses 120 points after a loss. That seems kinda harsh, although maybe that just means you're not supposed to have a rating that high, or something, though that seems pretty weird too.

This is *potentially* fine, but it means that you should have a win percentage of... 94.5% against that other player.

The problem is that they don't have the system scaled right. To be fair to them, it's really hard to do - you have to have it be right for someone 5 points away from you and 500 or 50000 point away, and that's hard to scale properly. However, I think it is also fair to say that it's incredibly clear that they are way off, and they could adjust this....

[Schneau]

At this point, the only thing I'm convinced Goko does wrong with their rating system is report the changes after every game. It actually makes sense, as far as I can tell, that if you play someone much lower rated than you that you won't gain much by winning and will lose a lot by losing. I believe this happened on Isotropic as well, but since people couldn't check their rating changes until the next day, no one ever complained about it.

There may be other problems, but I'm not convinced of them at this point.

[Fabian]

I definitely don't think the imbalance was as big on isotropic. I do think there were plenty of competent lvl 25-30ish players which any 45ish player would have had a hard time staying even on in the long run (my RL friend who I played a ton being a good example), but it wasn't even close to the kind of stuff you encounter on goko when you're 7150. With that rating, it seemed pretty much every opponent was just impossible to keep your rating against in the long run. Imagine playing some top15 or top20 player and having to score 75-80% to break even, it's ridiculous (in the context of Dominion, anyway, obviously something like chess would be a whole different story).

Edit: Basically, this "it's incredibly clear that they are way off, and they could adjust this"

[dondon151]

My cumulative winrate on Iso was probably about ~75%, and most of that was playing opponents in the L25-35 range.

[Fabian]

75%? Councilroom link? I was at ~60% for all my isotropic life (past the first couple months) and that was good enough to be near the top of the leaderboard, although admitedly I played much stronger opponents (average level ~35.6).

[Stealth Tomato]

I definitely don't think the imbalance was as big on isotropic. I do think there were plenty of competent lvl 25-30ish players which any 45ish player would have had a hard time staying even on in the long run (my RL friend who I played a ton being a good example), but it wasn't even close to the kind of stuff you encounter on goko when you're 7150. With that rating, it seemed pretty much every opponent was just impossible to keep your rating against in the long run. Imagine playing some top15 or top20 player and having to score 75-80% to break even, it's ridiculous (in the context of Dominion, anyway, obviously something like chess would be a whole different story).

Edit: Basically, this "it's incredibly clear that they are way off, and they could adjust this"

Then again, 7150 would put you at #1 on the leaderboard, correct? A #1-on-the-leaderboard rating should be incredibly difficult to maintain. That's kind of like complaining it's difficult to sustain Level 50 on Iso.

Also, how far apart do the ratings have to be to require a 95% winrate? Because there are a lot of players against whom I really should win 19 out of 20 games.

[Fabian]

Yeah I was #1 literally for 1 or 2 games, that didn't last very long heh. What I mean to say by that is that 7150 on goko last week seems much tougher to maintain than level 50 on isotropic 2 months ago. The whole "lose one game, win 8 in a row to get the rating back" thing didn't exist on isotropic, I'm sure other top players on isotropic will agree with me. No one expects you to win 8 out of 9 games against half competent opponents, it's just not sustainable in dominion.

I haven't played a single "I should win 19 out of 20" opponent on Goko so far, and it surprises me you think they exist in abundance.

[qmech]

75%? Councilroom link? I was at ~60% for all my isotropic life (past the first couple months) and that was good enough to be near the top of the leaderboard, although admitedly I played much stronger opponents (average level ~35.6).

70%, which is still very impressive.

[ftl]

Heh, I guess we're not going to figure out whether the rating system is good or bad just by abstract talk... I'd assumed the opposite, that it was too easy to gain rating by playing low-level people, I don't think I've played many of the people in the top 20, just a few games vs them, but my rating got pretty high.

I have *got* to find time to join in council room development and pull in goko logs, then I can poke at their ranking system and compare actual win percentages and such... ...my thesis defense is on may 16th, I think after that I'll have time to devote some evenings to it.

[dondon151]

75%? Councilroom link? I was at ~60% for all my isotropic life (past the first couple months) and that was good enough to be near the top of the leaderboard, although admitedly I played much stronger opponents (average level ~35.6).

I played more often on an alt: http://councilroom.com/player?player=cbaka

And since I played fewer games and most of those games were spent going up the leaderboard, there's no doubt that I played weaker opponents on average. Even so, I "only" had a 72.6% win rate on this account, which justifies your dissatisfaction with Goko's rating system.

[qmech]

Heh, I guess we're not going to figure out whether the rating system is good or bad just by abstract talk... I'd assumed the opposite, that it was too easy to gain rating by playing low-level people,

That's how I got my rating high.  You don't want to play anyone rated 2000 because the fluke losses set you back too much, but you can definitely get over 6500 grinding out wins against weaker players.

As soon as I start playing WW rated games my Goko rating takes a hit.