Print

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

[Jeebus]

I tried the new platform for the first time a few days ago, and saw that my rating there was around 4500. My rating on the last day of the Goko platform was about 5100, and through this year it's been somewhere between 5000 and 6000, usually around 5400 I guess. So I can only conclude that they took my rating at some point in the past, and since I haven't been playing on the new platform at all, it's been steadily dropping.

This seems to me mostly like a bug. I shouldn't be forced to play on the new and unfinished platform as long as Makingfun themselves deemed it not good enough to take down Goko. What they should have done is either: (1) Let everyone start at zero; or (2) export the ratings (at whatever point) and freeze each user's rating until that user actually plays a game on the platform, or at least until that user actually logs in. In the meantime don't even include that rating in the leaderboard.

Or maybe there's another reason for my current rating, some bug not related to a steady decline over x amount of weeks or months.

[SCSN]

They transferred the Goko accounts including their rating somewhere in June I think, and if you haven't been active your rating has been slowly declining since then.

I agree that both of your suggestions would probably have been better, but right now it is how it is and they aren't going to change it anymore.

[Jeebus]

Then I wonder how the Isotropish leaderboard handled this. I'm not even on it any more. Don't tell me it was handled in the same stupid way...

[JW]

Then I wonder how the Isotropish leaderboard handled this. I'm not even on it any more. Don't tell me it was handled in the same stupid way...

There are separate leaderboards for 1.0 and 2.0.

use http://gokosalvager.com:6080/leaderboard/ for old 1.0
use http://gokosalvager.com/leaderboard/ for 2.0

[Jeebus]

There are separate leaderboards for 1.0 and 2.0.

use http://gokosalvager.com:6080/leaderboard/ for old 1.0
use http://gokosalvager.com/leaderboard/ for 2.0

Thanks. Well, the old one is defunct now of course. So I'm looking at the new one, and I see I'm at level -28. I just started playing like 5 days ago, and I only played like 5 games, but I haven't lost a single one. How can I be below 0? I guess this leaderboard was handled the same way as Makingfun..?

[JW]

Thanks. Well, the old one is defunct now of course. So I'm looking at the new one, and I see I'm at level -28. I just started playing like 5 days ago, and I only played like 5 games, but I haven't lost a single one. How can I be below 0? I guess this leaderboard was handled the same way as Makingfun..?

The leaderboard only updates once a day, so you may have games that don't show up yet (only 1 game showed up so far for you when I look at it).

Second, your level is based on the estimated mean ranking - 3 * the standard deviation of your ranking. When you have few games that 3-standard deviation is a big penalty! I'm 3-0 and still below level 0 for the same reason.

[Jeebus]

The leaderboard only updates once a day, so you may have games that don't show up yet (only 1 game showed up so far for you when I look at it).

Second, your level is based on the estimated mean ranking - 3 * the standard deviation of your ranking. When you have few games that 3-standard deviation is a big penalty! I'm 3-0 and still below level 0 for the same reason.

I didn't really get that, but thanks for replying anyway. (I thought you would be at exactly zero (50 minus 50) if you haven't played, but maybe that was how Isotropic worked and that could be different.) I've played two or three games before today though, but I guess it doesn't matter much.

[Mic Qsenoch]

The leaderboard only updates once a day, so you may have games that don't show up yet (only 1 game showed up so far for you when I look at it).

Second, your level is based on the estimated mean ranking - 3 * the standard deviation of your ranking. When you have few games that 3-standard deviation is a big penalty! I'm 3-0 and still below level 0 for the same reason.

I didn't really get that, but thanks for replying anyway. (I thought you would be at exactly zero (50 minus 50) if you haven't played, but maybe that was how Isotropic worked and that could be different.) I've played two or three games before today though, but I guess it doesn't matter much.

isotropic didn't display levels below 0, even if the actual level was negative.

[qmech]

The leaderboard only updates once a day, so you may have games that don't show up yet (only 1 game showed up so far for you when I look at it).

Second, your level is based on the estimated mean ranking - 3 * the standard deviation of your ranking. When you have few games that 3-standard deviation is a big penalty! I'm 3-0 and still below level 0 for the same reason.

I didn't really get that, but thanks for replying anyway. (I thought you would be at exactly zero (50 minus 50) if you haven't played, but maybe that was how Isotropic worked and that could be different.) I've played two or three games before today though, but I guess it doesn't matter much.

isotropic didn't display levels below 0, even if the actual level was negative.

But you also began at 25+-25, so I'd still expect you to have a non-negative rating if you lost zero games.

[Jeebus]

isotropic didn't display levels below 0, even if the actual level was negative.

But you also began at 25+-25, so I'd still expect you to have a non-negative rating if you lost zero games.

Right, it was 25+-25, not 50+-50. I know that Isotropic didn't display negative levels. Yes, on Isotropic I'm pretty sure you had a positive rating if you lost zero games.

[assemble_me]

I've just checked the leaderboard

37.46   ±   66.33   6377   1   Jeebus

I think you can't expect reasonable values after a single rated game anyways. (the "1" is the number of games, so it's actually one game, not 5 - maybe you've played some unrated games?!)
You'll need a lot of games for an accurate value but despite what I wrote in previous threads, it looks like some people actually have a reasonable rating after 30-50 games. I also think that this kind of rating is the same as in the Goko/Iso thing

[Psyduck]

I would  suggest the following:
Take one week to play on the new client. Don't look at the leaderboard, just enjoy playing. Then, after one week, one of these will have happened:

* You have played quite some games. The leaderboard will reflect your skill and level quite well. Not perfect, but okay.
* You haven't played many games, in which case I don't know why the leaderboard would matter at all.

[Beyond Awesome]

I think the new isotropish leaderboard is working well. I am pretty much the same level as before. Mic Q and Stef are towards the top. There are some anomalies probably from people who have not played enough though.

[Jeebus]

I've just checked the leaderboard

37.46   ±   66.33   6377   1   Jeebus

I think you can't expect reasonable values after a single rated game anyways. (the "1" is the number of games, so it's actually one game, not 5 - maybe you've played some unrated games?!)
You'll need a lot of games for an accurate value but despite what I wrote in previous threads, it looks like some people actually have a reasonable rating after 30-50 games. I also think that this kind of rating is the same as in the Goko/Iso thing

I had played at least two games before yesterday. Yesterday I played another 3 games, and two of them are now reflected in the Leaderboard. I noticed yesterday that one of the games was against Villagebot (Villagerbot?) though, so that explains why it didn't count I guess. That seems to be a bug from Makingfun, because I never clicked the bot icon, and it wasn't selected afterwards either. Maybe the same thing happened with one of my earlier games.

[qmech]

I've just checked the leaderboard

37.46   ±   66.33   6377   1   Jeebus

I think you can't expect reasonable values after a single rated game anyways. (the "1" is the number of games, so it's actually one game, not 5 - maybe you've played some unrated games?!)
You'll need a lot of games for an accurate value but despite what I wrote in previous threads, it looks like some people actually have a reasonable rating after 30-50 games. I also think that this kind of rating is the same as in the Goko/Iso thing

I had played at least two games before yesterday. Yesterday I played another 3 games, and two of them are now reflected in the Leaderboard. I noticed yesterday that one of the games was against Villagebot (Villagerbot?) though, so that explains why it didn't count I guess. That seems to be a bug from Makingfun, because I never clicked the bot icon, and it wasn't selected afterwards either. Maybe the same thing happened with one of my earlier games.

If you return to the setup screen after finishing one game, there's no guarantee that it's remembered the settings you chose before.  I don't think I've had it flip from human to bot, but it might have happened for you.