I hear this a lot, but I'm curious as to how exactly this would manifest itself for the end user in Quake Live.
What would the ideal scenario look like?
What would the ideal scenario look like?
26851 Hits
>>> and get raped into oblivion
QL doesn't use ELO. I can assure you.
tier 1 safety net then the remainder split -
25% lowest
50% mid
25% top players.
Why not have a player go through some ranking matches?They do. The first games a newbie plays are his ranking matches.
It may be a bit hard on their server though (depending on what solution you come up with)That's what they tried before, and it brought the whole system down Iirc.
Well... I do know most technical aspects, and I also can't figure out what's so difficult about it.
Most algorithms used to find integers close to eachother are in an order of magnitude of (N^2) where N is the number of records you have. So if you have a list of 1.000 people trying to play a game at one point in time you'd have to make at least (1000^2) 1.000.000 calculations.
How hard can it be to create a webservice which takes as input "userID, gametype he wants to play and his elo/rank" then stores this in a hashmap or multidimensional array.
And each minute, or just whenever there are enough people of similar elo in it, it gives a list of matches linking the "closest people in elo wanting the same gametype".
FAR too many players expect it to give them either a win with little effort, or games with only 1 or 2 frag margins all the time
I hear this a lot, but I'm curious as to how exactly this would manifest itself for the end user in Quake Live.
>> the "average player" (1200 elo)In my example the 1200 is the starting rating for a first time dueler.
>> ehhh in Elo rankings you let all people start on the average.
(or rather you let everyone start on the same number and that is the average ...
what are we complaining about?
In my example the 1200 is the starting rating for a first time dueler.
(And this does not need to equal the average rating of the whole player-base. Actually: it shouldn't be. A new player would realistically be much weaker than the community average.
It sounds as if he thinks that within all elo systems the average would be the same as it is in chess. (around 1900)That does not make any sense. I may sound stupid to you, but I'm not that stupid. One rating pool can be totally different than another, even within the same game if they never mix.
>>> Because in the simplest form of Elo's rating system the starting value is the average value. But as you said, a real newbie is typically overestimated at the average/starting value and will quickly drop.
>> Yes, using such techniques can lead to a different average.Ok. So I was right after all, the average can be higher than the start value, it just depends on the implementation.
>> As for QLRanks... look at this the section "Top 50 Countries by No. of Players" :Holy crap! Didn't expect that.
http://www.qlranks.com/duel/
>> I thought the average in qlranks was 1500 myself, not entirely sure though.There you go. Even in cases where the average DOES equal the start value appearances can be deceiving.