Massive Assault Official Forum
   
It is currently Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:07 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2007 7:53 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:06 am
Posts: 1338
Karma: 1

Location: USA
This topic is becoming pretty bloated :) Hard to really make any progress with so many threads of conversation going on in the same topic.

See this post on how to analytically determine the value for a map:
http://massiveassault.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12755

If I'm totally off base let me know. Several have mentioned ideas related to analytically determining the value of a map. Lets talk them out somewhere besides this topic :P

Anyways, on guderian27 and Shadow_D's comments, I totally agree that we can use some kind of measuring tool to determine what the value of a map should be, trying to get an end result with a similar spread to Storm's list.

But the inclusion of your opponent's skill is already handled by the glicko system pretty well, with the problem being that in Glicko right now, all maps are being treated equal, when they definately are not. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're trying to determine a scaling factor for the points from games based on the map played, both for the glicko based skill rating and the experience rating.

_________________
Founder of The New World Order, and moderator for the Andromeda Clan War.

NWO website:
http://www.freewebs.com/massiveassault-nwo/index.htm

Clan War website:
http://www.massiveassault.com/clans/nwo/ClanWar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2007 11:57 am 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:43 pm
Posts: 245
Karma: 0

Location: ITA
Maelstrom wrote:" Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're trying to determine a scaling factor for the points from games based on the map played, both for the glicko based skill rating and the experience rating."

Yes of course, we should try to give a value to the maps that is an objective value.
Then, in order to have a right assignation of points/victory, we should conciliate this value with a value deduced by glicko and experience rating (subjective value). Correct?

_________________
DIES IRAE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2007 4:50 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 4:11 am
Posts: 23
Karma: 0
I liked Placids idea to calculate the luck-factor of a map out of the statistics of the games played on the map, that will always be more accurate, than any thought out/guessed numbers.

one easy idea to achieve this would be to take the ratio of wins from PL/FNU. As you can clearly notice, people win more often with PL, as its the first side to make the turn. this is especially true in the statistics of good players.

on the thesis that PL has some advantage, it means those maps where you have a fair balance of wins between PL/FNU, the PL advantage is minor to the skill and the match is decided primary by strategic skill. so they should count more. those maps where PL wins most of the time, the impact of the side you are playing on is much bigger than the impact of skill you have, so they are no good to determine the better player and should count less.

Even small differences of this ratio gives lots of informations, as we have thousands of games recorded. We need a developer though to give some proofs in numbers and statistics...
But think about it! the more you do, the more it makes sense.

the other part to determine the winning points should be the average length off matches on maps, or even better the average amount of troops build, as the more work you put into a game, the higher the reaward should be. and the the work you put in is directly connected to the size of armies you have do order around.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 9:55 am 
Offline
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:53 am
Posts: 259
Karma: 0
Massive Assault Network 2: New Demo Presents Dual Rating System

New Orleans, LA - May 15, 2007 - Wargaming.net, Inc. release the v249 Demo version of its turn-based strategy game Massive Assault Network 2 (MAN 2). It features the innovative dual rating system, which caters to both hardcore and casual players.

The Demo can be downloaded at:
http://www.massiveassaultnetwork.com/do ... n2demo.exe

The patch to v249 available at: http://www.massiveassaultnetwork.com/do ... 9patch.exe

With this new version players are able to select from both skill-based and experience-based systems, matching the most appropriate opponent for a battle. Thus the newbie players can be content with experience-based system, as for them the ranking reflects their growing experience, which grows with every battle, no matter whether they win or loss; while skill-based system can give the best fit to MAN 2 hardcore players, who are able to evaluate the real skill level now. In addition, the new Demo evolves the Mentoring system aiming to stimulate rookies to learn battle tactics from the strongest players of MAN 2 universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2007 4:34 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Posts: 209
Karma: 8

Location: Australia
THANK YOU !!!!!

All is right in the universe once again...


Did all games count towards the skill based rank? or only the ones before the new (old) system was implemented....?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 10:02 am 
Offline
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:53 am
Posts: 259
Karma: 0
OK, all the games BEFORE this patch (even with trial players) are counted toward your Glicko rating.

Starting from this version:
1. Games with AI are not counted in Glicko
2. Games with trial players are not counted in Glicko
3. You need to check box "Rating game" when posting new challenge in order to get this game counted toward your Glicko rating.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:24 am 
Offline
Tough Nut
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:55 am
Posts: 39
Karma: 0

Location: Russia
Thanks for the patch!
I am begginer and where i can read about rules of this Glicko rating system? And that means "subscription points"? How i can use this points for prolongation of my lifetime membership? :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:47 pm 
Offline
Supreme Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:40 pm
Posts: 1980
Karma: 6

Location: Moscow, Russia
Alliance wrote:
Thanks for the patch!
I am begginer and where i can read about rules of this Glicko rating system? And that means "subscription points"? How i can use this points for prolongation of my lifetime membership? :)


As dar as I know it's points in the "Nicko"-rating. 5 points for each turn in the battle with trial player, if he will subscribe (you'll get points for all your turns in the battles with this player BEFORE he purchase subscription).

_________________
Massive Assault Clan "Tiger's Galactic Empire"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2007 4:07 pm 
Offline
Supreme Marshal
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:40 pm
Posts: 1980
Karma: 6

Location: Moscow, Russia
These are new coefficients of maps in the Glicko Rating:

Micronesia 1,0
Butterfly 1,2
Bizarria 1,3
V6 Demo 1,6
V6 1,6
Station 'Thunder' aka Iron 1,7
San Fernando 1,7
Lion's Eye 1,7
Brimstone 1,7
Emerald 1,8
Antarcticus 2,0
Midgard 2,4
Crateus 2,6
Treasure Island 2,6
Eden 2,9
Beotorum 3,0
Noble Rust 3,1
Anubis 3,5
Inferno 3,6
Wasserland 3,7
Swamp 3,7
New Paradise 4,5
Twin Islands 4,7
Trinity 5,1
Sea Switzerland 5,9

Coefficients were based on empirical data.

_________________
Massive Assault Clan "Tiger's Galactic Empire"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:03 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
while i would make a few small changes in the placement of some of the countries, overall i think that you have come up with a good system. Am i correct in assuming that if you play a map rated "1" your score will be whatever is listed while if you play a map with a "5" rating you will receive 5 times the points listed?

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2007 8:07 pm 
Offline
Sea Wolf
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 4:14 pm
Posts: 424
Karma: 10

Location: Michigan
also, i am curious as to how twin islands ranked heigher than new paradise? Pretty much every post had trinity, sea swiss, wasserland and new paradise at the top of the list.

_________________
Archers! But sir, will we not hit our own men? Yes, but we'll hit theirs too, and we have reserves!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2007 8:13 am 
Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:22 am
Posts: 94
Karma: 0
I shall agree with storm440

As a whole I am happy with system.
But it seems to me, as New Paradise Wasserland it is much more difficult than Twin Islands


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2007 3:35 pm 
Offline
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:15 pm
Posts: 135
Karma: 8

Location: Bern
IMHO Twin Islands is rated much too high. Actually I would swap Wasserland with Twin Islands.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Karma functions powered by Karma MOD © 2007, 2009 m157y