Players league ranking

The points were added mate, but you didnt achieve a solo win for the extra 4 points. In fact, nobody ever has so far in the 9 PL games that were played.

In a way winning the world map deserves extra points (also for nr 2 and 3 of course), but I have no idea how many I should allocate. And since I didnt really think about doing it, it seems unfair to all the other players to give 'us' bonus points.

Gotta keep the idea of favoritsm locked away.

Im sure I wont rank as high anymore in the next 10 games, with some players having less games then me, and have equal or more points. For instance, if I become second in the current game, Rogo as far as I am concerned is the true winner of the season. Same amount of points, less games.

Well, if you would calculate average ranking per number of games participated in, I wonder who would be a true winner...

miech wrote:

In a way winning the world map deserves extra points (also for nr 2 and 3 of course), but I have no idea how many I should allocate. And since I didnt really think about doing it, it seems unfair to all the other players to give 'us' bonus points.

Gotta keep the idea of favoritsm locked away.

Paramunac wrote:

Well, if you would calculate average ranking per number of games participated in, I wonder who would be a true winner...

Paramunac wrote:

Well, if you would calculate average ranking per number of games participated in, I wonder who would be a true winner...

I was just kidding, of course. I participated in all three consecutive league games when I learned about this league. I wasn't interested in April game because it would take too much time from me.

Paramunac wrote:

I was just kidding, of course. I participated in all three consecutive league games when I learned about this league. I wasn't interested in April game because it would take too much time from me.

Will there be a May round for the PL?

Hi, I open a new thread for the May game: click

I think we have to discuss the new points system for the ranking/hall of fame. I prefer two different lists for the future. The first list is the hall of fame. this is a eternal list with the game number and the winners names without points only the places they have at the end, like we have it now for the first two games.

The second list is a dynamic list, that displays the best players from the last 10 (or less?) games.

Xarus wrote:

Points:

I'm thinking about the points for the winning players. I most games the last three players are working together, so they fighting hand in hand, and in the end the get so much different points for they cooperation?

My suggestion for the final points are:

1. player gets 5 points

2. player gets 4 points

3. player gets 3 points

A player that win a round alone, by reaching the needed points for this map, get 4 extra points, the second player gets only 3 points and 2 points for the third player.

All other players that will be active and have minimum of one province left, get 1 point. But I promise that never will happens.

Calculation for the dynamic ranking:

ranking points = sum of points from last 10 game divide by 10

So, what did you think?

If somebody knows how the ELO system is done and willing to do the calculation each game, that would be even better though. There will only be 1 list needed then, too. The ELO is great in a way that the top player will always be challenged and balances itsself out.

In the alternative, personally I like the winner (alone or with 2 or 3) having a bit extra at all times, so its an extra incentive to go for the win. An 'even' distribution of 5-4-3 means that incentive is fairly small.

I support changing ranking system. I would suggest 6-4-3 or 7-5-4, since i agree with miech that no1 deserve a bit extra.. but 7:4 is too much in my opinion..

Not sure about elo here, i thought its only for XvsX matches, not for XvsY.. It would be hard to calculate, since 19 players would have lose points after game so 3 can get points.. How the hell are we going to spread points, since better players gain less for victory(lose more for loss) and lower ranked players gain more for victory(lose less for loss)...

But i support expending list with some new categories like total victory points, points per games played, points per total games and stuff like that..

I wait for more suggestions about the points for winning, but I think is not fair to make a big difference between the winning team. It's a team fight and only the team can win, so why make a big difference between first and third?

But if we have some more I made a poll to find the most wanted.

The ELO-System is to complicate for the PL. If you want more info click here: ELO (Wiki)

The ELO System is only good working for two opponents that playing against each other. But we have every game some old guys and some new recruits. When I look into the history of the last games the most players are gone after one or two games.

I think the hall of fame should consist of players and not the actual matches.

So a list could be like this:

List is ranked with a base calculation such as, 4 points for gold, 3 for silver, 2 for bronze (or something like that).

And then another list with the just the matches and the winners (and runner ups)

What do you think?

wildL SPQR wrote:

I think the hall of fame should consist of players and not the actual matches.

So a list could be like this:

List is ranked with a base calculation such as, 4 points for gold, 3 for silver, 2 for bronze (or something like that).

username	medals	points
xxx	2 gold , 4 silver, 1 bronze	22
yyy	1 gold , 3 silver , 2 bronze	17
zzz	1 gold , 1 silver, 2 bronze	11

And then another list with the just the matches and the winners (and runner ups)

What do you think?

Now I open a poll about the victory points for the PL. I have made 3 different kinds of answers.

Winner:

In this version for the victory points the winner get the most points. More than the second and third player together.

1. First gets 7 Points
2. Second gets 4 Points
3. Third gets 2 Points

In this version the winner get less points and the third player gets more points to honor that they made a team fight.

1. First gets 5 Points
2. Second gets 4 Points
3. Third gets 3 Points

In this version the winning team gets equal points.

1. all gets 3 points

Xarus what do you think of my earlier post?

Yes I like you last post, but we need for a ranking a dynamic point system for the last 10 games.

Look here: Hall of Fame

why?

Voted winner, but I am missing the option milostivi offered. Back then, I wanted a degressional scale in points from the winners POV, and 6 or 7 was then in my mind (in other words I am fine with 6 as well ).

It seems though, that the people who voted want a lineair point line.

Majority wins of course.

Back to Elo - its absolutely possible, I just dont know how. In S1914 the PL had a ELO (ish) ranking system that worked great. Every game had a sort of set variable based on the players in said game - the more high rankers joined, the more that particular PL game counted. So a PL game with many new (or poor) guys, would get a lower rating and the eventual winner would rise a bit less on the ELO, and vice versa of course.

How the PL manager did all this in his google sheet is beyond me though, I barely am able to do simple formulae in Excel myself.

I regret never really getting involved with the Players' League. When's your next game?

Just to be clear, though, I can't join terribly soon. I have too many games ongoing.