All of us that are high-up climbed there primarily by noobsniping or even if we didn't we climbed in a far more liberal rating era and environment. If this update is to actually stop people climbing by noobsniping, the only way to do that is to completely reset the entire rating system to 1.5k for all (or whatever the new seed for default rating is).
Does the owner not realise that the entire update is unfair unless he resets elo for all users?
Posts
Total:
51
-->
@DebateArt.com
I am @ing you as sometimes you don't notice threads.
My idea was to introduce the concept of seasons, where the top performers during the season would get some recognition and prizes (no specifics yet) and then the season would be reset. But this is just a idea, I haven't done any proper thinking about it.
Let's get back to it a bit later, now the priority is to get back all the features that disappeared with the update.
Let's get back to it a bit later, now the priority is to get back all the features that disappeared with the update.
-->
@DebateArt.com
When Oromagi and Novice are set to default rating you must let me know, it will give me a laugh.
-->
@RationalMadman
This is just an idea atm, maybe it's a terrible one, I don't know. But the "winners" of the season would have some unique and worthy prizes and bonuses and it's not like they would just lose everything and be reset. But the problem is that such system would be rather complex and we'd have a lot of work thinking it through, if we decide to go for it.
-->
@DebateArt.com
I'd personally like that idea. Add some competition element and really create a pressure for users. As for the prizes, maybe just some personalised perk or decoration.
-->
@ComputerNerd
Yeah, I think the idea is definitely worth investigating but it ain't gonna be a quick thing, can take a while to implement
-->
@DebateArt.com
I agree with ComputerNerd, personalized perks or decoration would add some competitiveness to this website.
If this idea were to be put into action (hopefully), who would be considered as top performers? Top five on the leaderboard?
-->
@Bella3sp
I have no idea about the implementation, I really didn't put any thought into it. I just noticed that they have something similar in World of Warcraft and I figured we might borrow the idea 😁
-->
@DebateArt.com
Oh, alright. Sounds good.
The new updates were a good thing apparently.
I had two victories over you in the past week.
At the very least, I should be able to claim your Elo.
-->
@DebateArt.com
I agree with the concept of seasons. Honestly, it's kind of annoying to see all the people sitting at 1700+, considering that every single one of them got there only by noobsniping and winning over half their debates by full forfeits. The only exception is whiteflame, who won over 80% of his debates legitimately. I'd like to see a solution that doesn't disadvantage new users too much, while also discouraging excessive noobsniping.
-->
@DebateArt.com
I always love suggesting features and designing new systems, I might send you a list of my ideas later.
-->
@AustinL0926
I agree with the concept of seasons. Honestly, it's kind of annoying to see all the people sitting at 1700+, considering that every single one of them got there only by noobsniping and winning over half their debates by full forfeits. The only exception is whiteflame, who won over 80% of his debates legitimately. I'd like to see a solution that doesn't disadvantage new users too much, while also discouraging excessive noobsniping.
Most of the ratings that get people to 1700 are unearned because of noob-snipes and forfeits.
But any advances at that new starting point are perfectly earned because you earn very minimal elo from any noob-snipes once you reach 1700. That’s when noob-snipes officially plateau.
You’d have to triple the noob-snipes just to consistently increase rating as rapidly as before.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Barney got to 1795 with 41 debates. Let's statistically break them down:
- 8 full forfeits
- 20 noobsnipes
- 9 ok debates
- 4 good debates
So 13/41 of his debates were against competent opponents. Even that is in question: of his 13 decent debates, 10 were against people with a win-loss ratio of less than 50%.
So it is possible to get to almost 1800 almost solely by noobsniping.
-->
@AustinL0926
Nobody knows at what point Barney reached 1700. And inbetween the time he was 1700-1790, the “noobs” he was debating could have had a high rating, which significantly raised his Elo.
His opponents’ current rating is unreliable because it’s not an indicator that their ratings weren’t higher during the time of debating because their rating could’ve tanked from future losses.
So yes, while it is certainly possible to level up to 1800 by relying primarily on noob-sniping, it is difficult and timely. Getting to Novice or Oromagi’s level by relying mostly on noob-snipes requires a god-tier amount of patience and freetime.
-->
@DebateArt.com
You could run a standard elo vs seasonal elo. Just separate the tabs. Most competitive games will do this to incentivize competition.
Leave standard as a legacy elo. Just don’t touch the current ones
Set up seasonal Elo that runs in 6 month intervals you could do a lot with this and do themed seasons or badges for winners
Honestly should look at making mafia ranked, and capitalize on that community if you are looking at ways to drive traffic.
-->
@DebateArt.com
@RationalMadman
"The Owner"
Very Orwellian.
My compliments to The Owner.
On a job well done.
-->
@Mikal
Those are very good points, thanks, I will definitely look into those.
-->
@DebateArt.com
I don’t know coding but if you need help with ranked formatting, lmk. I have played enough competitive games to have an idea of how you could implement it on here. Especially if you are serious about a mafia elo.
-->
@Mikal
How would a mafia elo work? If it's just for bragging rights I'm all for it, but I don't think we can have any sbmm. We rotate between the same 20ish people here.
-->
@Mharman
If you started it, I would blow your fucking mind with the elo I would achieve.
-->
@Mharman
There is no way for the site to read a win or a loss without massive overhaul. You would have to give a user or a few users access to input the data and have the leaderboard update after the data is input. Same as debating, start everyone at a base elo and a win (either as town or mafia) counts as a win and would raise your elo.
The debate would be how to calculate the elo that is gained or lost because traditionally it’s easier to do it with debate because it’s 1 v 1. Assuming how it works in traditional team games is that it places you in an elo that is close to you.
If you are 1500 , it will match you with people around the same elo. Then likely calculates an average elo for your team and the enemy team. If enemy team average is 1555 and your Elo is 1500 then the loss or win is against the 1555. (This is me assuming)
In mafia you could come up with an average Elo for the lobby. Average all the Elos in the lobby, and let’s say it’s 1530. Your 1500 would be weighted against the 1530.
That’s my initial thoughts at least, may be a better way that I’m not thinking of but would be a fun addition that would promote mafia and possibly get some others from diff sites to play it. Could run seasons, legacy, etc.
ELO doesn't work. First of all, no player base. ELO requires massive amounts of players. I mean it probably barely works for debates here, but for mafia it'd be a joke because team game. Second, we play sandbox mafia. Skill expression isn't going to translate to wins half as much as it should.
If you want to measure mafia skill here, this is what you do: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8804-flash-mafia
You could build mafia friendly threads for us though, if you liked, benevolent DebateArt.com. Like threads that keep count of votes, show a list of players at the top and their last seen online times, things like that.
Being able to write notes on players in game would be cool too. Like you can do on poker apps.
Would also be very cool to be able to replay just the votes. Click a button and get a time lapse of votes sort of.
-->
@Mikal
If you are 1500 , it will match you with people around the same elo. Then likely calculates an average elo for your team and the enemy team. If enemy team average is 1555 and your Elo is 1500 then the loss or win is against the 1555. (This is me assuming)
My point is I don't think we have enough players for elo to be a factor in matchmaking. Most of our games are 9-12 players, and it usually takes a while to fill just one game to get it off the ground.
We could start an elo system to attract more players from elsewhere, but we're not going to be able to use it for matchmaking until our playerbase increases in size.
Ya know, you could probably train an artificial intelligence to play mafia if mafia games spat out cleaned data, like excel data.
-->
@badger
for mafia it'd be a joke because team game.
Oooooooh good point. Nobody is going to be happy losing elo because their teammate threw.