Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.
Here, I calculated it with my bonus. The results are attached. The changes are minor, but they are there.
So, what's next? Here are the calculations for the same tournaments using three different systems. And yet, no one is commenting. Yes, there are distortions everywhere, but which one best reflects the players' results? My comment is the first one. Even though you call my system non-linear, in this SPECIFIC example with two tournaments, the player rankings look more linear than in other systems.
And I know why. The dependence on the position taken introduces distortions in the linear part, and AlexPanka's bonus introduces additional distortions.
OlegRS 17 48.5 59.8 63.8 19.6 24.2 37.3 41.9 19.6 20.4 40
Analyze this player's line. With my system, he has a rating of 63.8 for the sum of the two tournaments, 41.9 with Amber's system, and 40 with Alexy's system.
Your statement about minor changes is understandable. But what can be said about them when we see significant changes introduced by the linear part? What a difference, almost 22 points less, due to the fact that the player happened to take last place in the second tournament.
Compare Kyle (9th place, 68 days) and Nekto (10th place, 69 days).
In the second tournament, neither of them played. The final rating with Amber's system is 10.3 versus 5.2. With my system, it's 10.6 versus 10.4. The distortions in the middle part of the table are less noticeable, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.
If AlexPanka's system is applied only to the linear part, then it's still somewhat acceptable. I told AmberSoler about this, that the dependence on the position can be added to my system, but in such a way that this parameter does not have a dominant influence over the "Days Played" parameter. AlexPanka was interested in this, and he started working in this direction. I think he succeeded. But the calculations are more complex, and it's very difficult to check.
And the changes are minor, as AlexPanka correctly says. Now, try to ask Kyle to recalculate the ratings for all clans using your additional coefficient. Where he will have to process a lot of tournaments - let's see what he says afterwards - whether this coefficient based on position is needed or not