HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

Show in topic
User Avatar
Offline IronAxe
Registered:
Posts: 1,495
#97
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;60172
I disagree.
1. You took two extreme values. Why didn't you include a third player with "stable average strength" in the table? Again, it's not a complete picture... This isn't a method for analysis; we've already discussed this...
2. We calculate a player's strength rating based on their activity. But strength is still the primary factor, not activity. The aging system is designed to remove inactive players from the table, right? But with aging, you're trying to "unfairly" punish a player who made a mistake. Therefore, a single lost or missed tournament shouldn't significantly affect the result... this isn't a lottery, and the rating should be flexible...
To understand how the average value will behave, you need to consider two extremes; I looked at one, and it was bad. I'm not considering the second, which is when a player performs exceptionally well and takes high places in a tournament. With aging, I'm not just trying to punish a player who made a mistake, but also to give less strong players a chance to be at the top, even if only for a moment. Why aren't you talking about that?
The rating is, in fact, a lottery. A tire blew out – a pole was hit. Took last place – the rating dropped significantly. Do you think anyone will feel sorry? Or will this be an excuse in Formula 1? No way – don't reduce the rating; it wasn't me; it was the tire's fault :)
And there, they can cut you off and hit you – who cares? :)

Added 5 minutes later
AmberSoler;60172
I disagree.
1. You took two extreme values. Why didn't you include a third player with "stable average strength" in the table? Again, it's not a complete picture... This isn't a method for analysis; we've already discussed this...
2. We calculate a player's strength rating based on their activity. But strength is still the primary factor, not activity. The aging system is designed to remove inactive players from the table, right? But with aging, you're trying to "unfairly" punish a player who made a mistake. Therefore, a single lost or missed tournament shouldn't significantly affect the result... this isn't a lottery, and the rating should be flexible...
And in the example, I'm showing a player who, after taking first place once, then takes last place five times in a row, and you say it's a coincidence. He's giving it his all, but the rating doesn't seem to want to drop :) Although he's already taken the same place five times in a row with a guy from the third column – their ratings would have been equalized a long time ago in reality :)
0
⚖️
0
Show in topic