|
NEWS
Couple bugs need fixing. Added map statistics at http://templesiege.com/mapstats.php
Welcome to Birdie's Accurate iCCup Ladder Rankings! After seeing how inaccurate the iCCup ladder ranking system is, I decided to try my hand at copying all the information off the iCCup website and re-ranking it using the Glicko 2 ranking system, which is far more accurate. You can consider it an ELO-style ranking system, if you prefer. Players are given a points ranking based on the system's guess at where their skill is, and an accuracy rating (currently hidden) which represents how confident the system is in the player's points being accurate. In the future I may add more cool stuff like ranking history, and so on. But for now I think this is adequate.
Please note that there may be bugs, such as matches not being added to the database or ranked. In addition, it doesn't update immediately so you will have to be patient in waiting for your ranking to update. Finally, note that the system is NOT the same as Fish server's ranking system, and the points bear no relation to Fish.
Oh and one more thing, the Temple Siege site is unrelated to the iCCup ranking system. I may move the ranking elsewhere but for now we're piggy backing off the site, as I'm also one of the developers of that map (A SCII MOBA).
Patch notes:
Added map statistics at http://templesiege.com/mapstats.php
Added plus/minus sign after the points, displaying the deviation (accuracy) of the points. Lower points is more accurate, higher points is less accurate.
|
Was watching this come up to speed last night and I already use it to spy on people and see how scared I should be of my opponents. Truly a great effort, thank you!!
Interesting idea for later:
Having a column that compares players' ICCup ranking vs. their Elo ranking (like +100, -32, etc.)
Use it to say definitively who is good for what league, cut out the drama ^^
|
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ?
|
On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ?
I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
|
This ranking will keep all data and rankings across new iccup seasons? If yes, awesome!
|
On March 06 2013 04:46 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ? I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do.
I believe I heard someone say that one of the advantages of the ICCUP system is that you can include MOTWs - which is harder to do in an elo rating. However, I don't really know anything more about it.
|
On March 06 2013 04:46 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ? I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do.
I don't answer on that stuff anymore, it's pointless. No matter what you write, people will start to argue against you. It's like being the messenger and being nuked.
Other than this, I like this topic quite a lot.
|
please fix the font or the background image.. but it's unreadable if you scroll down ;/
edit: this occures around rank 960 or so, the main frame just stops there as if it has a max-height
|
Is the ranking calculated per season? Or does it take into consideration previous seasons?
|
On March 06 2013 05:04 Gecko[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 04:46 L_Master wrote:On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ? I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do. I don't answer on that stuff anymore, it's pointless. No matter what you write, people will start to argue against you. It's like being the messenger and being nuked. Other than this, I like this topic quite a lot.
Ah, that's a shame (that people attack you either way). I've never actually heard the reasoning though, but from what you say it sounds like ICCup has it reasons.
Makes me wonder if their could ever be a system like Birdie's used for match-making, and then the main ICCup ranking for determing ladder ranks and champions?
|
|
|
On March 06 2013 05:20 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 05:04 Gecko[Xp] wrote:On March 06 2013 04:46 L_Master wrote:On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ? I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do. I don't answer on that stuff anymore, it's pointless. No matter what you write, people will start to argue against you. It's like being the messenger and being nuked. Other than this, I like this topic quite a lot. Ah, that's a shame (that people attack you either way). I've never actually heard the reasoning though, but from what you say it sounds like ICCup has it reasons. Makes me wonder if their could ever be a system like Birdie's used for match-making, and then the main ICCup ranking for determing ladder ranks and champions?
The MOTW System is a copy of the PGTour system, a lot of the senior admins worked on both portals. It was the in-thing the new thing really, compared to what WGTour and Neo Game-i used. One was more or less similar to ICCup, the other was ELO. Why they changed it, dunno. The advantage is that you can easily assign MOTWs, which in theory should people get to play different maps. That the majority plays Python and Fighting Spirit regardless of what we set up is a different topic. It would, theoretically, be possible to add MOTWs for an ELO based system (or Glicko), using different weights - however, that'd be a delicate issue in my eyes. Or you could remove and add maps to the pool per week, but that'd erase the option to play on non-MOTWs for casuals, which again is quite bad.
Then there's the issue - even if the super admins and the head admins would agree on an ELO or Glicko based system - we have no access to the source code or the server. The devs are busy to fix their shit on DotA and WoW, we're glad to get the most important fixes in a short time frame. Note, only very few tech people are left over and these are already old and thus have limited time. Also, for some reason, YelloAnt turns down many non-dev people. Up to some point I get that, other times I don't. You have to earn his trust first, apparently. This slows down a lot of things and we're basically always in the middle between the users and the higher ups.
I mean, I don't want to blame the guys that still keep up the server, despite it being very, very small compared to all the other games on the portal. We are only about 2% of the entire user basis. So I have a hard time to blame the devs too much. I can't force the new people to care for our game, even though I often tried to talk to them. The only upside is that Ant, Unk and x64 really won't shut down the portal until everyone leaves. "weeeee" 
|
I love this ranking system I have to say
|
United Kingdom3685 Posts
|
Cool but this is still really inaccurate. It's a ladder system so you can really use elo systems with so many unknowns.
|
Thanks Birdie, this is pretty cool  Hope it starts getting more accurate as team goes on...
|
On March 06 2013 05:56 dRaW wrote:
Cool but this is still really inaccurate. It's a ladder system so you can really use elo systems with so many unknowns.
Well, there are known knowns and there are known unknowns and then there are unknown unknowns; things we don't know that we don't know.
|
On March 06 2013 07:04 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 05:56 dRaW wrote:
Cool but this is still really inaccurate. It's a ladder system so you can really use elo systems with so many unknowns. Well, there are known knowns and there are known unknowns and then there are unknown unknowns; things we don't know that we don't know.
whatever you say, donald
|
On March 06 2013 05:31 Gecko[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 05:20 L_Master wrote:On March 06 2013 05:04 Gecko[Xp] wrote:On March 06 2013 04:46 L_Master wrote:On March 06 2013 04:39 krzych113 wrote:
why isn't iccup ranking a ranking of elo ? I'd think that would be a good question for ICCup staff, no? Not sure they have ever explained why they use the methods they do. I don't answer on that stuff anymore, it's pointless. No matter what you write, people will start to argue against you. It's like being the messenger and being nuked. Other than this, I like this topic quite a lot. Ah, that's a shame (that people attack you either way). I've never actually heard the reasoning though, but from what you say it sounds like ICCup has it reasons. Makes me wonder if their could ever be a system like Birdie's used for match-making, and then the main ICCup ranking for determing ladder ranks and champions? The MOTW System is a copy of the PGTour system, a lot of the senior admins worked on both portals. It was the in-thing the new thing really, compared to what WGTour and Neo Game-i used. One was more or less similar to ICCup, the other was ELO. Why they changed it, dunno. The advantage is that you can easily assign MOTWs, which in theory should people get to play different maps. That the majority plays Python and Fighting Spirit regardless of what we set up is a different topic. It would, theoretically, be possible to add MOTWs for an ELO based system (or Glicko), using different weights - however, that'd be a delicate issue in my eyes. Or you could remove and add maps to the pool per week, but that'd erase the option to play on non-MOTWs for casuals, which again is quite bad. Then there's the issue - even if the super admins and the head admins would agree on an ELO or Glicko based system - we have no access to the source code or the server. The devs are busy to fix their shit on DotA and WoW, we're glad to get the most important fixes in a short time frame. Note, only very few tech people are left over and these are already old and thus have limited time. Also, for some reason, YelloAnt turns down many non-dev people. Up to some point I get that, other times I don't. You have to earn his trust first, apparently. This slows down a lot of things and we're basically always in the middle between the users and the higher ups. I mean, I don't want to blame the guys that still keep up the server, despite it being very, very small compared to all the other games on the portal. We are only about 2% of the entire user basis. So I have a hard time to blame the devs too much. I can't force the new people to care for our game, even though I often tried to talk to them. The only upside is that Ant, Unk and x64 really won't shut down the portal until everyone leaves. "weeeee"
MOTW wasn't some "new in-thing" at all developed by PGT. Cloud/Cloria Ladder, which existed around the time WGTour did (while WGT was still French), used MOTW as well. The only difference is that those only used 1 or 2 (to ensure that there was a map for both 1v1 and 2v2).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/X2o8xVi.png)
