EPTAligulac.com changelog and feedback thread - Page 21
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Greenei
Germany1754 Posts
| ||
|
NVRLand
Sweden203 Posts
| ||
|
TheBB
Switzerland5133 Posts
| ||
|
fezvez
France3021 Posts
| ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On May 03 2014 05:16 fezvez wrote: Just popping in to say that the website is seemingly down I just tweeted about it: So this time it isn't our fault. | ||
|
RPR_Tempest
Australia7798 Posts
In this case, all the matches here http://www.aligulac.com/results/events/18389-ACL-2013-Season-2/ that are listed as 2013-08-23 need to be changed to 2013-08-10 | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On May 03 2014 13:17 RPR_Tempest wrote: If I need to change a match (some dates in this case) is there a way to do it without wading through a few pages at a time in the admin matches interface (the search function is very limited)? In this case, all the matches here http://www.aligulac.com/results/events/18389-ACL-2013-Season-2/ that are listed as 2013-08-23 need to be changed to 2013-08-10 There is. It's hidden under Results->Search. http://aligulac.com/results/search/?search=&after=&before=&players=&event=ACL 2013 Season 2&bestof=all&offline=both&game=all&op=Search Check the games you want to change and enter the new date at the bottom. | ||
|
CutTheEnemy
Canada373 Posts
Stork is 63% or so to beat Ruin in bo3, as I type this  Anyway, So aligulac's been around a long time. Overall, how accurate has it been for predicting matches? Is there a metric or a breakdown you could give us for whether results have mostly fallen within range or not? Do you feel that aligulac more or less accurately presents the top 40ish players so far? I'm curious about whether the non-korean region players hanging out in the top 40 is a sign of region equality or whether its an anomaly of the rating system | ||
|
Otolia
France5805 Posts
On May 07 2014 21:13 CutTheEnemy wrote:Overall, how accurate has it been for predicting matches? This question has been answered a number of times and the short answer is : almost perfect (Feb 2013) Series where a player has 51% of winning the series see the winner being said player 51% of the time. This rule applies up until around a prediction of 80%. After that, predictions and outcomes greatly differ and the model isn't as precise. My interpretation is that players have their skill accurately measured one compared the others as long as their ratings are in a similar bracket (thus not a very high winrate for one or the other participant in a series) | ||
|
RPR_Tempest
Australia7798 Posts
So, I was searching for this guy and his page appears to have been deleted? Missing from the cached page is also a 2-1 win over me and as of yet not in the database tourny that happened today. | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On May 26 2014 21:44 RPR_Tempest wrote: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4Icmee7FLKwJ:aligulac.com/players/7647-VeritaS/results/ &cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au So, I was searching for this guy and his page appears to have been deleted? Missing from the cached page is also a 2-1 win over me and as of yet not in the database tourny that happened today. This is being fixed as I write this. Thanks for reporting it. | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
Would it be possible to add a few more balance related stats to your page? The race distribution in recorded games can be calculated quite easily with the stats provided in your Lists (Sum of the games with the race against another race + mirror counted twice devided by the total number of games *2). For List 111 for example terran is at 24.2%, toss at 32.8% and zerg 43.0%. (The total number for games is off BTW!!; its 2086 not 2053) It would be quite interesting to have a plot similar to the winrates over time with race distribution instead. It would also be nice to see how many players from each race are active in each "list period". A value for "recorded games per active player" for each race might also indicate how far certain races make it on average in tournaments. Just some food for thought :D | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
Like can we create our own aligulac ? (like for an amateur team or ranking etc...) a aligulac for lesser player. Something we could use privatly ? I think i could submit matches but i don't want to put crap on it so i didn't tested. | ||
|
TheBB
Switzerland5133 Posts
I'll PM you my Skype. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On June 18 2014 01:03 TheBB wrote: Sure you can. It doesn't (necessarily) have to be so hard either. Helps if you know your way around Python and Linux terminal, though. I'll PM you my Skype. Yeah i added you. Talk to you soon Never done Python but i'm PHP programmer so i know my way around that kind of stuff and i have a colleague that do Python  Thanks. Talk to you soon. | ||
|
McCane
France23 Posts
Sometimes I find myself wanted to know how a player has been doing a certain map and unfortunately Aligulac doesn't provide this information. | ||
Grovbolle
Denmark3807 Posts
On June 19 2014 21:52 McCane wrote: So I look at Aligulac from time to time and I think it's a great tool nonetheless there's something that still bugs me and I don't seem to find an answer anywhere: why maps are not added in the database? is it planned to be added? or not compatible with the structure of Aligulac? Sometimes I find myself wanted to know how a player has been doing a certain map and unfortunately Aligulac doesn't provide this information. It is not planned to be added as it will up the amount of work required by a factor of 3-7. It will also require a massive effort to go through the backlog of matches to add maps, something which we have neither the resources nor the database structure to support. Finally, a lot of organizers aren't making this information easily available, while Liquipedia have been pretty good at this with some of the larger tourneys, a lot of the medium and smaller tourneys simply aren't making this information easily available. | ||
|
McCane
France23 Posts
On June 19 2014 22:12 Grovbolle wrote: It is not planned to be added as it will up the amount of work required by a factor of 3-7. It will also require a massive effort to go through the backlog of matches to add maps, something which we have neither the resources nor the database structure to support. Finally, a lot of organizers aren't making this information easily available, while Liquipedia have been pretty good at this with some of the larger tourneys, a lot of the medium and smaller tourneys simply aren't making this information easily available. I see, makes sense. Thanks for the answer! | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On June 01 2014 09:20 submarine wrote: I look at your lists from time to time and noticed lately that the number of TvTs drops quite hard compared to the other mirrors. Terran representation seems to drop of in rated games. Would it be possible to add a few more balance related stats to your page? The race distribution in recorded games can be calculated quite easily with the stats provided in your Lists (Sum of the games with the race against another race + mirror counted twice devided by the total number of games *2). For List 111 for example terran is at 24.2%, toss at 32.8% and zerg 43.0%. (The total number for games is off BTW!!; its 2086 not 2053) It would be quite interesting to have a plot similar to the winrates over time with race distribution instead. It would also be nice to see how many players from each race are active in each "list period". A value for "recorded games per active player" for each race might also indicate how far certain races make it on average in tournaments. Just some food for thought :D So? | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3807 Posts
I think we all missed your post for some reason. I have brought it to the attention of our developers and once the new design is fully stabilized we will consider your input for sure | ||
| ||
