EPTIntroducing the SC2 World Ranking - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BlackGosu
Canada1046 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 07 2012 14:43 Entirety wrote: Create a formula for exponential decay so that it reaches 50% in one year. Here, I'll even do it for you: Points = (Original Point Value) * 0.99810276865159^(# of days that have passed) Maybe better with a gaussian? Exponentials start to fall of at a quite steep rate from day one, which doesn't feel really fair. Let the player keep the full points for at least while before you start taking it back. A gaussian starts flat but falls of faster after a long time. And I'd make it reach 50% well before 12 months. is 2 NASL wins 10 and 14 months ago really worth as much as a NASL win today? Maybe 50% after 6 months is a better number. Which means only 6% left after a year, but 84% left after 90 days. That would be points = (original point value) * 0.9999792^((#days)^2) or equivalently (original point value) * e^((#days/219)^2) | ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
Older events must lose their weighting over time. An event eighteen months ago cannot have as much merrit as an event last week. You have a good foundation, but it needs improvements to be legit. And no Nestea??? And there's no need to give points for anything outside third place for an event with the exception of GSL. Nobody cares who came 10th at MLG. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16125 Posts
The rankings correlate almost exactly with the people with the most money to travel to the most events having the most points. Those who compete more, have more points. Not saying DRG or MC don't deserve to be so high up, they definitely do, but this list just has an objective flaw in it in that it rewards participation more than skill. For example Huk is at 9 above players like Taeja, Nestea, Leenock, Genius, aLive, and Symbol. There's no objective reason for this ranking aside from the fact that he's had more opportunity to compete at foreigner events where the competition was less than the GSL and he was able to place high enough to accumulate points for this ranking system while players in Code A couldn't. That's my critique. | ||
|
Dodgin
Canada39254 Posts
| ||
|
kochanfe
Micronesia1338 Posts
| ||
|
ThePlayer33
Australia2378 Posts
| ||
|
Dodgin
Canada39254 Posts
On August 07 2012 14:40 opterown wrote: http://sc2earnings.com/?year=2012 this isn't a bad ranking either :p This is probably the best ranking we have imo, look at the top 6. MC, Mvp, Nestea, MMA, Dongraegu, Marineking. pretty much what I would consider the six titans of SC2 and its most legendary players. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 07 2012 15:14 Vindicare605 wrote: I don't like this ranking system at all. The rankings correlate almost exactly with the people with the most money to travel to the most events having the most points. Those who compete more, have more points. Not saying DRG or MC don't deserve to be so high up, they definitely do, but this list just has an objective flaw in it in that it rewards participation more than skill. For example Huk is at 9 above players like Taeja, Nestea, Leenock, Genius, aLive, and Symbol. There's no objective reason for this ranking aside from the fact that he's had more opportunity to compete at foreigner events where the competition was less than the GSL and he was able to place high enough to accumulate points for this ranking system while players in Code A couldn't. That's my critique. Yes, this is definitely a big problem with this approach, that doesn't really exist in tennis where all the players have money to travel as much as they want. ELO is better in that way, but the problem with ELO is that it rank a win in a GSL finals as high as a win in a ESV weekly round of 16 (see for example uproar about taeja being ELO rank 1 when liquid got him). While we find a better ranking I think it could be useful to have both this and ELO. As their drawbacks are quite different, I think the two complete each other well. Possibly you could argue that this approach is very similar to the price money ranking, and a bit redundant for that reason. | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Edit: Also requires point deterioration. | ||
|
alukarD
Mexico396 Posts
Its not flawless, but its a great start! Just a few minor improvements and should be even better! Its hard to rate GSL, because YES it weights more than the rest of the tournaments, but it puts all the Koreans so much ahead of the rest, just for being in GSL for a few seasons. So its hard to find the right balance. I think thats why the TLPD is separated, because the Korean scene is just different. To put it in another way, you think players like Supernova and Keen and Curious and Genius are great players! And they are! But in a tournament outside Korea, you wouldnt consider them favorites..? Or even in past experiences, they dont even get to the finals, or even semifinals! Or drop way down the road.. So that means there are foreigners who really can put a fight and beat them, but just because they are not in GSL they arent considered top players. I hope I made my point clear. Longstory short! Loved it(: but its gonna be hard to find the right balance! | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 07 2012 15:25 lichter wrote: I disagree with a lot of the weights. That's fair enough, but not very helpful.  If you feel like helping out, you are welcome to go a bit more in detail on how you would distribute the points. | ||
|
SigmaoctanusIV
United States3313 Posts
| ||
|
zylog
Canada943 Posts
| ||
|
j0ker
275 Posts
On August 07 2012 14:28 goswser wrote: HAHAHA Mana is higher than nestea. most of nesteas success was more than a year ago | ||
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
the system they use is a lot slower to move than ELO (i think ELO moves a bit too fast and sc2charts a bit too slow o.O) | ||
|
NHY
1013 Posts
And if you are going to skip Code A, then you'd also need to do the same for MLG arena, non-WC IEM, WCS nationals, etc. IMO, x2 GSL points, add points for Code A, x1/2 for everything else but MLG. | ||
|
Aterons_toss
Romania1275 Posts
If you were able to get the stream number from each event ( just avg stream numbers ) and than award every single event points based on stream number ( maybe prize pool as well ) than that would be something. But unless you want to do that please retain from starting random bull shit storms like this just to get people arguing over the fact that they would have awarded those random numbers in a different way. | ||
|
Evangelist
1246 Posts
| ||
|
Metalteeth
United States115 Posts
1) If you are going to criticize this project, please read all the material in the OP. Asking "Why isn't Jinro in the top 10?", when he has barely done anything in a year, is a waste of time. 2) It seems like a lot of people want a regression, I'll work on getting that in. Cascade, with the Gaussian he gave, thank you. I'll try adding that in! :D 3) To people complaining about the tournament ratings, some of it is valid, some of it is useless: "I don't like the point values!" Well that is nice, what would you change? It seems most people think GSL should be worth more. But as someone said in here, if it gets too high, the system will overvalue mid-level Koreans who do well in GSL and nothing else. But too low, and GSL success isn't worth the difficulty that is has. What I'm thinking is bump GSL up to 4000 points for winning it. Keep MLG/IPL/Dreamhack/ASUS/IEM WC/etc (the non-GSL Grand Slams) at 2000. Drop IEM tour stops to 1500. Keep everything else the same, for now. 4) Team Leagues. The problem with team leagues is the concept of regression to the mean. In Individual tournaments, over a year, enough random draws will happen such that a players "true" skill should be determined. But team leagues are a lot less random, due to team lineups. If we reward bonus points for success in Team Leagues, how should we do it? Points for All Kills? That hurts players on good teams. For example, MC will probably never get an All Kill in GSTL, because the team he is on is so good, and MC isn't the lead. Points for winning an overall match? But that rewards bad players. Should the lower members of Liquid get bonus points for simply being on the same team as Taeja? Points for winning single games within a team match? This works best, but honestly, the amount of work I would have to put in, tabulating EVERY match from EVERY team league....that is insane. 5) "You have to include every tournament." Thing is, that seems virtually impossibly. The place where tournaments are the most congregated with easy to access results is Liquipedia, so that is what I'm using. And since it DOES include every Grand Slam event (which are worth much more than a minor event), it was just so much easier to use it instead of searching out there for every tournament. As for weekly/daily cups, the problem is point inflation. Points have to be big enough that winning a weekly cup is worth something, but not enough that winning a string of cups is equal to a major tournament. 6) "You reward players who travel." Yes....that is how competitive SC2 works....There is a reason players like MC, MVP, and DRG are at the top. They don't travel to every event (well, except MC), but they get top finishes pretty much every time. The system doesn't reward going to many events, just look at how fast the points drop the further down you finish. You have to finish well at every event to get points that matter. Things to do today: Revise the points structure (see above in this post, revised a bit, GSL is better). Add in point regression. Hopefully I should have a revised standings tonight. | ||
| ||
