Aligulac.com changelog and feedback thread - Page 19

On February 14 2014 21:38 Jensbond wrote:
Can you guys add Random to this list?

I know theres not much Ranom players around but still theres enough to make a list about them.

Currently it kinda feels like ur discriminating agianst Random players.

On February 11 2014 16:41 slowbacontron wrote:
Also, the whole $N,one issue popped up in the earnings page again D:

On February 15 2014 12:03 slowbacontron wrote:

D:

Why does this error happen, anyway? Aligulac should be able to convert from AUD to USD, right?

On February 15 2014 20:36 Grovbolle wrote:

It happens when on a current day, the currency library doesn't have a conversion rate for the AUD to USD currency.

On February 15 2014 20:09 slowbacontron wrote:
Hey guys, I'm wondering about another thing now. When a player has a "performance" rating for a period, his/her overall performance rating is a straight average of the vP, vT, and vZ ratings but in my opinion it should be a weighted average based on the number of games they played in vP, vT, and vZ each.

For example: see Dear's page http://aligulac.com/players/1659-Dear/period/104/ As of now, 10:36 February 15 (the page will change soon), Dear's overall performance rating is 1881, which is an average of 1869 vP, 1688 vT, and 2086 vZ. However, I think it would be more accurate if his overall performance rating was 1852, which is (1869*5 games vP+1688*12 games vT+2086*8 games vZ)/(5+12+8).

Now that I think about it, the practice of taking a straight average between vP, vT, and vZ ratings to form the overall rating has been a staple of Aligulac for a long time. I've generally thought this to be okay since SC2 is made to have 3 races equally represented, but now I'm wrestling with trying to figure out which way is a better representation of a player's overall skill. I mean, overall rating doesn't affect predictions which is a large part of Aligulac's appeal, but it does affect the ranking lists, which is another large part of Aligulac's appeal. Again, I don't even know if weighing the overall average is better or not, but I think it's worth discussion.

Side note, jjakji's current overall rating would be 2090 either way :D

On February 15 2014 20:38 slowbacontron wrote:

Interesting, thanks. So would the best solution be to pick the nearest day in which a conversion is recorded?

On February 11 2014 16:41 slowbacontron wrote:
Also, the whole $N,one issue popped up in the earnings page again D:

On February 25 2014 16:56 slowbacontron wrote:
Thanks for the earnings page fix! That's super great. One tiny thing I'd like, if possible, on that page is a page counter and turner on the bottom like there is in the ratings rankings.

As for this next topic I will mention, I apologize because I know it's been discussed many times and I might have even brought it up myself but forgotten the answer. What is going on in cases like this where Soulkey had a vastly higher performance rating (overall performance, not matchup specific) than his original rating but still ended up losing points? Does it have anything to do with online vs. offline games?