New Home for the Ladder Nov 7, 2007 1:42:02 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Nov 7, 2007 1:42:02 GMT -5
Yes we looked at the TrueSkill system, but unfortunately MS only gives you have the info for free, the real details are not public intellectual property. But I am sure that we can tweak our ante system to ensure that teamers are as fairly treated as ctons and 1v1's, but we also have to ensure that while we create a system that ensures the league is competitive across the board we also don't want to create a huge rift between new players and the top players. We have enough people screaming "elitism" as it is now. If we do this system right it should create a normal bell curve of player skill values over a few month's of reports.
Well, actually they explain it in pdf but then you need to know probability math good enough so to understand it.
More importantly, they hint on the right way to count teamers using ELO-like ranking - skill gain/loss in a teamers should depend on a total team skill (sum of skills of all members). And skill gain/loss from teamers should be lower because a variance in performance of a team is significantly bigger. They say that FFA is the fastest way to roughly measure skill and teamers are the slowest (as expected, more players - slower measurement research.microsoft.com/mlp/apg/trueskill.aspx). Well, they use their system for match-making while we obviously don't. Also, with matchmaking their FFA will have players of a close skill so that makes a difference too. So IMHO for our ladder we should give a maximum weight (skill gain/loss per game) to duels, somewhat lower weight to ctons and lowest to teamers. And use ELO or some variant of it. It will not be as good as TrueSkill (it's ELO variant with a mathematical apparatus to roughly measure a new player's skill much faster), but still better than what you "invented"