EPTAligulac.com changelog and feedback thread - Page 24
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
edwahn
New Zealand121 Posts
I was just wondering if you had noticed that literally every single "top 5 highest ratings ever" was achieved since April 2014 under the all race section. Do you think it's really likely that the most dominating players have been seen since April 2014 this year, or is this just an uncontrolled inflation of ratings? I know that there's no point decay system here so does this contribute to this problem? Personally I would have loved to see the most statistically dominating players across time, but the highest ratings of all time basically turns out to be who's the hottest player in recent memory. I know the HoF basically performs this function, but it's less easy to compare between players/specific periods in time this way! Things I expected to see in highest ratings of all time 1. MVP's dominating TvT in the early days 2. MVP in general 3. Stephano's ZvP at his peak 4. MMA's TvZ during Slayers era etc Thanks guys and keep up the good work! | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On November 18 2014 10:04 edwahn wrote: Hi guys, long time fan of this site. I was just wondering if you had noticed that literally every single "top 5 highest ratings ever" was achieved since April 2014 under the all race section. Do you think it's really likely that the most dominating players have been seen since April 2014 this year, or is this just an uncontrolled inflation of ratings? I know that there's no point decay system here so does this contribute to this problem? Personally I would have loved to see the most statistically dominating players across time, but the highest ratings of all time basically turns out to be who's the hottest player in recent memory. I know the HoF basically performs this function, but it's less easy to compare between players/specific periods in time this way! Things I expected to see in highest ratings of all time 1. MVP's dominating TvT in the early days 2. MVP in general 3. Stephano's ZvP at his peak 4. MMA's TvZ during Slayers era etc Thanks guys and keep up the good work! This is indeed a problem with rating inflation and it's kind of sad. It is caused by a combination of things like good players playing more games than bad players and so on. The fix we are working (slowly) on will hopefully fix some of this but I don't expect us to be able to solve this problem completely. We do have a kind of decay, deviation decay. Each period we increase the uncertainty of the rating. | ||
|
freeamount
China202 Posts
Can we allow an "event" (I mean the type "event") to be a sub-branch of another "event"? Currently "category" can be put under another "category" and "round" can also be a sub-branch of anther "round", while "event" is the only type that is impossible to be organized in this way. The problem is: many tournaments have qualifiers, where each qualifier can be considered an "event". For example: It is an intuitive feeling that "IEM Season IX Toronto" is an "event", but then "IEM Season IX Toronto Qualifier" and "IEM Season IX Toronto Main Tournament" can only be of type "round". I do not think it is a good idea. If we take a look at the result page of a player, ex. http://www.aligulac.com/players/233-herO/results/ There are 2 sections showing "IEM Season IX Toronto", which is really confusing. If we change the type of the entire event of IEM Season IX Toronto to "category", then the first "IEM Season IX Toronto" will be changed to "IEM Season IX Toronto Qualifier", which is much easier to understand and navigate. But I do not think IEM Season IX Toronto can be considered a "category", while is reasonable that IEM and IEM Season IX are both of type "category". So I am wondering if we could also allow an "event" contains another "event". | ||
|
Dumbledore
Sweden725 Posts
| ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On March 04 2015 20:09 freeamount wrote: I have to raise this question: Can we allow an "event" (I mean the type "event") to be a sub-branch of another "event"? Currently "category" can be put under another "category" and "round" can also be a sub-branch of anther "round", while "event" is the only type that is impossible to be organized in this way. The problem is: many tournaments have qualifiers, where each qualifier can be considered an "event". For example: It is an intuitive feeling that "IEM Season IX Toronto" is an "event", but then "IEM Season IX Toronto Qualifier" and "IEM Season IX Toronto Main Tournament" can only be of type "round". I do not think it is a good idea. If we take a look at the result page of a player, ex. http://www.aligulac.com/players/233-herO/results/ There are 2 sections showing "IEM Season IX Toronto", which is really confusing. If we change the type of the entire event of IEM Season IX Toronto to "category", then the first "IEM Season IX Toronto" will be changed to "IEM Season IX Toronto Qualifier", which is much easier to understand and navigate. But I do not think IEM Season IX Toronto can be considered a "category", while is reasonable that IEM and IEM Season IX are both of type "category". So I am wondering if we could also allow an "event" contains another "event". I get what you're saying. The problem here is that we make some assumptions regarding events that might break if we were to change it. I've been thinking about it before and I don't feel satisfied with the way it works right now. Unfortunately we are all very busy at the moment so not a lot is being worked on. Thanks for bringing this to our attention though. On March 04 2015 21:06 Dumbledore wrote: Nay I ask how you got the database of games? o.o A lot of manual work. http://aligulac.com/about/db/ | ||
|
hewo
Norway119 Posts
| ||
|
True_Spike
Poland3434 Posts
 You deserve 10x more recognition than you get. | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3825 Posts
On April 04 2015 18:05 hewo wrote: changes 04.04.15
Great new feature I completely missed. | ||
|
Xenodore
United States38 Posts
| ||
|
freeamount
China202 Posts
I understand there could be some balance updates are more important, but it would not be the reason that we ignore other ones. List of balance updates NOT shown in Aligulac: Patch 2.0.11 BU 20 August 2013 Patch 2.0.9 20 June 2013 Patch 2.0.8 BU 13 May 2013 Patch 1.5.4 15 January 2013 Patch 1.5.3 BU 4 December 2012 Patch 1.4.3 BU 10 May 2012 Patch 1.4.2 8 November 2011 Patch 1.3.3 10 May 2011 Patch 1.2.0 10 January 2011 Patch 1.1.3 9 November 2010 Patch 1.1.2 14 October 2010 Patch 1.1.0 21 September 2010 | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On April 15 2015 23:11 freeamount wrote: I am wondering why some balance updates are NOT indicated in the Rating History Diagram? I understand there could be some balance updates are more important, but it would not be the reason that we ignore other ones. List of balance updates NOT shown in Aligulac: Patch 2.0.11 BU 20 August 2013 Patch 2.0.9 20 June 2013 Patch 2.0.8 BU 13 May 2013 Patch 1.5.4 15 January 2013 Patch 1.5.3 BU 4 December 2012 Patch 1.4.3 BU 10 May 2012 Patch 1.4.2 8 November 2011 Patch 1.3.3 10 May 2011 Patch 1.2.0 10 January 2011 Patch 1.1.3 9 November 2010 Patch 1.1.2 14 October 2010 Patch 1.1.0 21 September 2010 Thanks, but we are already aware of this. We were only planning on including "big" changes. Obviously, this feels a bit to arbitrary for a site that works with statistics and we will try to figure out a way of including all of the patches without making the graphs look too cluttered. | ||
|
Seed
Korea (South)17 Posts
| ||
|
daddykoopa
1 Post
| ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
If you find any issues or have suggestions, please post them here or on the project's issue tracker on GitHub. I've finally finished my exams so I can start working on this again. | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On May 27 2015 22:56 daddykoopa wrote: In the balance report, can you show winrate plots for regions as well? For example, the europe and korea plots separately? This is very hard to do because there is no clear definition of a region. You can see the winrates for individual events, like SSL or GSL by checking their respective event pages. | ||
|
Taari
Germany138 Posts
For example, Team changes (atm Showtime, Kane) are very slowly put into the rankings. It would be nice, if we can have a possibility to change that. I hope my english is not too bad to understand, what i mean. | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3825 Posts
On July 09 2015 22:52 Prillan wrote: Just finished some updates:
If you find any issues or have suggestions, please post them here or on the project's issue tracker on GitHub. I've finally finished my exams so I can start working on this again. I can't change language now :-P | ||
|
Prillan
Sweden350 Posts
On July 10 2015 00:38 Taari wrote: I would be glad to have an option to submit general changes/proposes, not just matches. For example, Team changes (atm Showtime, Kane) are very slowly put into the rankings. It would be nice, if we can have a possibility to change that. I hope my english is not too bad to understand, what i mean. We have been thinking about some kind of report functionality. If we implement it I'll make sure to include team changes in it. | ||
|
PickyProtoss
Ireland74 Posts
I've noticed your post Do you weigh games differently? No, I don't. Korean tournaments and players receive no special treatment. The GSL is difficult because good players play there; the players aren't good because they play in the GSL. (Huh?)... When fitting the model (deciding which parameters to use) I also don't weigh games differently, but this is something we're looking into. Since the database contains an overwhelming majority of non-Korean games, the system will tend to adapt to the non-Korean scene. We've noticed, however, that most people using the service are interested in the Koreans. We are still working on a useful solution to this problem. Couldn't you control for non-Korean versus Korean in your statistical model? Just create binary variable and use in ANOVA or Regression. Not weighting the system is far from ideal, nevertheless, super job! You guys are heros! | ||
| ||
