Fixing (not only) seasonal Elo - Part 1: Resetting rating and rank divisions

Once a player reaches rank 7, his Elo should be reset to 1000 and from that point on he should only be able to duel players of rank 7 and higher. I know this disagrees with most of what I have said regarding this topic in the past, but I think that I was a bit ignorant when it came to this subject. Seemingly upgrades are such a huge factor when it comes to competitive gameplay, that high-ranks dueling low-ranks is just unfair. Another thing is that the implementation of seasonal Elo requires a quick fix.

The Elo one reached when playing in the low rank division could be saved and shown as some type of achievement in the player profile, and the ladder rankings of the 2-6 division would have to be separate of the 7-15 division.

I changed my mind because the duel-activity of atWar players wasn't high enough to prevent high-ranks who mainly play low-ranks from being rated in the top 50. High activity and consequently higher Elo-ratings would prevent this as well, but implementing rank restrictions seems like the right way to go since it's a quicker fix.

Discuss and upvote.

Its moronix,so r8 can farm r2 but r 9 cant xD
NO

Written by Kromn, 07.04.2015 at 16:39

Its moronix,so r8 can farm r2 but r 9 cant xD

Well the low ranks would have their ratings listed separately from the high ranks, so the relevant rating for competitive players would be the 9-15 one.

Wtf, now are you changing your mind?

I can´t believe my eyes jajajaj

So finally you have to give me the reason in something that i have told you several times.

That´s called farming for different issues and agree, one of them are upgrades and another one the experience.

Mixed are the perfect complement.

Written by hormigaatomica, 07.04.2015 at 16:47

Wtf, now are you changing your mind?

I can´t believe my eyes jajajaj

So finally you have to give me the reason in something that i have told you several times.

That´s called farming for different issues and agree, one of them are upgrades and another one the experience.

Mixed are the perfect complement.

It still is not farming. However I think that we agree on the unfair part.

I would set different limits:

- ranks 1 to 4 for example
- ranks 5 to 9 for example
- ranks 9 and above

The same a rank 2 can´t join in the main room or a rank 6 can´t play in the begginers room (except by links), the rank limits duel could be maked in a similar way.

Lol,so r8 cant play with r10 if he want xD its idiotic lol,if someone is scared to play against highr ranks he can set rank limits how he wants,this is idiotic

Written by hormigaatomica, 07.04.2015 at 16:52

I would set different limits:

- ranks 1 to 4 for example
- ranks 5 to 9 for example
- ranks 9 and above

The same a rank 2 can´t join in the main room or a rank 6 can´t play in the begginers room (except by links), the rank limits duel could be maked in a similar way.

Maybe from rank 2 to 4 the duels should not be rated at all, and then two rating lists for rank 5 to 9 and 9 and above respectively as I suggested.

Written by Kromn, 07.04.2015 at 16:54

Lol,so r8 cant play with r10 if he want xD its idiotic lol,if someone is scared to play against highr ranks he can set rank limits how he wants,this is idiotic

They could play, just not duel. It would remove the 'farming' so many players are complaining about and make the ratings more realistic.
Bluecher2 and Kord for example wouldn't be in the Top20.

Written by Kromn, 07.04.2015 at 16:39

Its moronix,so r8 can farm r2 but r 9 cant xD
NO

stop copying me, u faggg

Lol,i dont really care,i just tell that this rank limits are idiotic,if someone wants to play DUEL with rank 10(je is r8),he can what?Fuck himselt bcs of noobic restrictions for removing farming,its idiotic.

Written by Kromn, 07.04.2015 at 16:59

Lol,i dont really care,i just tell that this rank limits are idiotic,if someone wants to play DUEL with rank 10(je is r8),he can what?Fuck himselt bcs of noobic restrictions for removing farming,its idiotic.

Please elaborate because i don't see how it's idiotic at all. The rankings would be more realistic and the two players in your example could still 1v1 as much as they like.

No,im talking if they want to DUEL noob,example:there is a tournament about duels,so in tournament players needs to duel ,but 8 and 9 cant either duel xD
Now come to your original acc,its borning arguing with alt.......

Smaller part of me is agreeing with this, but another, bigger one, not.
Why?

This game is based on someone's skills. Definitely, there are many ranks 7 (example: Fremar, Teqilapaf, ..) or ranks 8 (example: dinoscout, Mia, ...) who are able to deal with any rank.
Also, that guy Fremar wants to duel higer ranks, like he said - to improve himself and learn moves.
He made me laugh in positive way with theory so many times and by making duels and setting rank limit from 7-15.
I dont support separating those ranks (6,7,8) from the rest of higher ranks, but I would definitely separate elo of ranks 1,2,3,4,5 from 6 and above.

Written by Kromn, 07.04.2015 at 17:05

No,im talking if they want to DUEL noob,example:there is a tournament about duels,so in tournament players needs to duel ,but 8 and 9 cant either duel xD
Now come to your original acc,its borning arguing with alt.......

No need to insult really. About the duel tournaments, it isn't that hard to think of alternative rules, e.g. for players of the different divisions a simple 1v1 would suffice.

Written by Guest, 07.04.2015 at 16:49

Written by hormigaatomica, 07.04.2015 at 16:47

Wtf, now are you changing your mind?

I can´t believe my eyes jajajaj

So finally you have to give me the reason in something that i have told you several times.

That´s called farming for different issues and agree, one of them are upgrades and another one the experience.

Mixed are the perfect complement.

It still is not farming. However I think that we agree on the unfair part.

Wow i can´t believe my eyes u are understanding the point finally

And yes is farming, the best example is what i told in another post, u said this alt acount have some upgrades and can play against ranks 3, but i told u that u have more experience, that is farming, you are not a really rank 4, u have 4 yeras of experience anow all the tips, tricks and lot of things another "real" rank 4 doesn´t know.

That´s cheating and/or farming whatever u want to call it.

You are pretending to be a rank 4 and really have the experience of a rank 11 or 12 or whatever was your higher account.

It´s like falsify the age of a football player in kids leagues.

Written by Croat, 07.04.2015 at 17:09

Smaller part of me is agreeing with this, but another, bigger one, not.
Why?

This game is based on someone's skills. Definitely, there are many ranks 7 (example: Fremar, Teqilapaf, ..) or ranks 8 (example: dinoscout, Mia, ...) who are able to deal with any rank.
Also, that guy Fremar wants to duel higer ranks, like he said - to improve himself and learn moves.
He made me laugh in positive way with theory so many times and by making duels and setting rank limit from 7-15.
I dont support separating those ranks (6,7,8) from the rest of higher ranks, but I would definitely separate elo of ranks 1,2,3,4,5 from 6 and above.

The reason I suggested ranks 9 and above is that a rank 8 with enough SP has basically all the important upgrades, of course there are rank 7s and 8s who can beat rank 10s or higher.
So yeah, maybe just separate the very low ranks of the higher ones, the main idea stays the same.

Written by hormigaatomica, 07.04.2015 at 17:12

Wow i can´t believe my eyes u are understanding the point finally

And yes is farming, the best example is what i told in another post, u said this alt acount have some upgrades and can play against ranks 3, but i told u that u have more experience, that is farming, you are not a really rank 4, u have 4 yeras of experience anow all the tips, tricks and lot of things another "real" rank 4 doesn´t know.

That´s cheating and/or farming whatever u want to call it.

You are pretending to be a rank 4 and really have the experience of a rank 11 or 12 or whatever was your higher account.

It´s like falsify the age of a football player in kids leagues.

No it isn't farming, and I made a lengthy post about why farming isn't possible in the Elo rating system. You and me arguing about this wasn't really fruitful in the past since you obviously either don't read my posts or just don't understand what I am trying to say. I don't want to type it all again, you can reread the old posts it if you need to.
This is not really the point of this thread though, so please stay on topic.

It´s the topic.

The main point of theese topics are the elo points and the farm, farmers, farming.

And a rank 11 or 12 pretending to be a rank 3 or 4 is farming.

But u don´t want to admit.

Written by hormigaatomica, 07.04.2015 at 17:34

It´s the topic.

The main point of theese topics are the elo points and the farm, farmers, farming.

And a rank 11 or 12 pretending to be a rank 3 or 4 is farming.

But u don´t want to admit.

Can we please just not do this here. Thanks.

Yes please ...don't go in circles once again.

I thought about seasonal elo problem weeks ago ...also thought that by the end of season real best duelist will pass the simple farming ones.
But obviously that might not be the case ...but the problem should not be solved by any duel restrictions.

Rather we should find a new way of counting seasonal points ...by putting the rank into the equation as well.

This is something i tried to propose when elo was implemented if you remember Cow.

Written by Goblin, 07.04.2015 at 17:50

Rather we should find a new way of counting seasonal points ...by putting the rank into the equation as well.

This is something i tried to propose when elo was implemented if you remember Cow.

Yeah I remember, but you were also a strong proponent of rank restrictions.
I would rather keep the original Elo system and work with the restrictions, because Elo is proven to work very well as it is, and figuring out and fine-tuning a modified formula for atWar would take months, if not years, and no one without a good background in mathematics would be able to really understand the way different factors influence the rating. The latter might as well be the case for Elo, but everyone knows it and there is a certain basic trust in it. A new formula would be as shady as SP, and I don't want that.

Separating ranks in two divisions, one for low-ranks, that means people who lack most of the basic upgrades and more often than not also the knowledge of basic moves and techniques, and one for high-ranks, the experienced players which also include the frequent duelists and competitive 3v3 players, really seems like a quick fix without significant downsides.

Does the formula really needs to be complicated? ...since you are proposing two divisions the formula would be based on that not on every individual rank.

Written by Goblin, 07.04.2015 at 18:27

Does the formula really needs to be complicated? ...since you are proposing two divisions the formula would be based on that not on every individual rank.

If you want me to put it bluntly, I have no idea how complicated it would have to be. And since I have no idea, I don't think that Amok&Ivan would have any (good). The Elo formula is something they could simply put in the code, nothing they had to come up with on their own. It also was invented by an expert mathematician and experienced chess player, I don't think we could simply add some random parameters and think it will all be fine. This is why I think a new formula would overcomplicate things and we should go with the rank restrictions instead.

Written by Guest, 07.04.2015 at 18:37

Written by Goblin, 07.04.2015 at 18:27

Does the formula really needs to be complicated? ...since you are proposing two divisions the formula would be based on that not on every individual rank.

If you want me to put it bluntly, I have no idea how complicated it would have to be. And since I have no idea, I don't think that Amok&Ivan would have any (good). The Elo formula is something they could simply put in the code, nothing they had to come up with on their own. It also was invented by an expert mathematician and experienced chess player, I don't think we could simply add some random parameters and think it will all be fine. This is why I think a new formula would overcomplicate things and we should go with the rank restrictions instead.

Arpad Elo, one of biggest minds that has been on the Earth....

Written by Guest, 07.04.2015 at 16:56

Bluecher2 and Kord for example wouldn't be in the Top20.

You are trying to remove people cause you are too noob for beat them?

You are a joke, sir.

Hold on, where would all the accumulation of elo go? it's like that jusicy elo just disappear out of thin air, how about the people who have less than 1000 elo, now they can't fight it back to get theri elo back. So elo point wil lbe less scarce.

Written by Guest, 07.04.2015 at 15:56

Once a player reaches rank 7, his Elo should be reset to 1000 and from that point on he should only be able to duel players of rank 7 and higher. I know this disagrees with most of what I have said regarding this topic in the past, but I think that I was a bit ignorant when it came to this subject. Seemingly upgrades are such a huge factor when it comes to competitive gameplay, that high-ranks dueling low-ranks is just unfair. Another thing is that the implementation of seasonal Elo requires a quick fix.

The Elo one reached when playing in the low rank division could be saved and shown as some type of achievement in the player profile, and the ladder rankings of the 2-6 division would have to be separate of the 7-15 division.

I changed my mind because the duel-activity of atWar players wasn't high enough to prevent high-ranks who mainly play low-ranks from being rated in the top 50. High activity and consequently higher Elo-ratings would prevent this as well, but implementing rank restrictions seems like the right way to go since it's a quicker fix.

Discuss and upvote.

what is the point of this? shoudn't i be able to duel high ranks if i want to? ELO function basically is showing how skilled the player is, it doesn't give nothing else besides that, if you are afraid of losing elo against high ranks, simply don't duel, play a normal 1 vs 1, ELO is just a way to show how skilled the player is. and in order to get better you have to play good players. winning against noob gives nothing, losing against good players makes you a better player.

Never

Why set brackets at all?

Just simply say that players are not allowed to duel players more than 4 ranks distant. So rank 9s can only duel ranks 5~13, and so on...

Written by Croat, 07.04.2015 at 18:50

Arpad Elo, one of biggest minds that has been on the Earth....

I don't know whether you mean that or not, Poe's law in action.
I think he was good at was he did and certainly wouldn't want to change his formula as a layman.

Written by clovis1122, 07.04.2015 at 19:18

Written by Guest, 07.04.2015 at 16:56

Bluecher2 and Kord for example wouldn't be in the Top20.

You are trying to remove people cause you are too noob for beat them?

That is totally what I said and the point of the thread, yeah.
People like you and homoatom should be permanently banned from the forums for not being able to read and understand simple sentences in English.

Written by Htin, 07.04.2015 at 19:44

Hold on, where would all the accumulation of elo go? it's like that jusicy elo just disappear out of thin air, how about the people who have less than 1000 elo, now they can't fight it back to get theri elo back. So elo point wil lbe less scarce.

You are right I made a mistake there.
The reason I suggested a reset is that otherwise an account like this one could accumulate even higher Elo in the lowrank division. Seems like the reset wasn't the best idea.

Written by IHavok, 07.04.2015 at 20:30

what is the point of this? shoudn't i be able to duel high ranks if i want to? ELO function basically is showing how skilled the player is, it doesn't give nothing else besides that, if you are afraid of losing elo against high ranks, simply don't duel, play a normal 1 vs 1, ELO is just a way to show how skilled the player is. and in order to get better you have to play good players. winning against noob gives nothing, losing against good players makes you a better player.

In theory there is no need for restrictions, the problem is that seasonal Elo only lasts for three months, a timespan too short for the classical Elo to work, given that the duel activity in atWar is rather low. A high rank can duel just low ranks for three months, have 1400 Elo and win the season, without being skilled.

Written by Guest, 08.04.2015 at 02:22

Never

Thank you for uttering your valuable opinion and adding further constructive content to the discussion.

Written by International, 08.04.2015 at 03:29

Why set brackets at all?
Just simply say that players are not allowed to duel players more than 4 ranks distant. So rank 9s can only duel ranks 5~13, and so on...

The problem with this is that rank 9 and above are more or less equal skillwise and also when it comes to upgrades, so restricting duels between those players doesn't make sense.

Written by Htin, 07.04.2015 at 19:44

Hold on, where would all the accumulation of elo go? it's like that jusicy elo just disappear out of thin air, how about the people who have less than 1000 elo, now they can't fight it back to get theri elo back. So elo point wil lbe less scarce.

Yes they can, always can recover their elo.