| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: Change to NAF ranking - discussion thread
 Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 11:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
http://www.bloodbowl.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=2200&highlight=
Ok, of course, much of this goes right over my head (curse me for not having to use my maths since I left school   ), but I think I understand the gist of it.
All in all, I think it's probably a step in the right direction.
Of course (in case Zombie can still read this), I understand the system won't be "perfect", but at least something is happening. If it doesn't work, then it can change. If it does work, then it can (probably) be made better, but I see it as a work in progress.
Thanks to any and all the NAF staff involved in this. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
absent |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 11:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 08, 2004
Posts: 119
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dwarfcoach |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 11:58 AM
|
|
The Best Dressed Man in Blood Bowl
Joined: Apr 13, 2003
Posts: 764
Status: Offline
|
|
Ok, so I had a thought about this whole 'retroactively' business. Will it re-write all the past two years games completely? I mean, totally, all in the order that the tourneys occured?
Many weird things will happen...
Example being my Lizardmen. They have a ranking in the high 180's. A big part of that was last years BB. If all the tourneys are worked out in order the tourneys took place then there s a chance that my rating may get higher than it is at the moment? ie. subseqent players I have beaten after the BB I would have gained more NAF points from them as I actually had a lower rating...?
Hehe, I know what you mean Simon, my head just started to hurt thinking about all the permutations  . |
_________________
Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.
224th at The World Cup II
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Xeterog |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 12:07 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Texas
Posts: 73
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
|
|
Great..when I click on the link, another webpage opens up and says I need to be logged in to view the forums...but when I log in, it goes to my informaion, not the link.
(does the same thing when I click the icon to goto the last message I read in a thread)...sigh. |
_________________
-Xeterog
(formerly Gortex)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
dwarfcoach |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 12:10 PM
|
|
The Best Dressed Man in Blood Bowl
Joined: Apr 13, 2003
Posts: 764
Status: Offline
|
|
| The link leads to the announcements section of this forum, specifically the thread regarding change to the NAF ranking posted by deathwing... |
_________________
Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.
224th at The World Cup II
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tojurub |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 12:26 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 18, 2003
Germany
Posts: 1520
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
If I understand the way the system works, than it is indeed easier to have everything calculated retro-active. To my knowledge the system calculates the whole database everytime somebody hits the Update button. That way if somebody is lazy in entering results of one tourney doesn't hold off the faster people.
But for the change of the k-value....I guess from what I have seen in the discussion (even without adding anything to it) I believe that this is a good thing....(especially my hits by BB43 and the DO05 won't be that bad on my human team anymore   ) |
_________________
Dwarves rule!!! Especially when they pass!
3rd place Underworld Cup 2003
Swiss Champion 2004
2nd place Royal RumBBL 2015 and White Star Cup 2016
.....and now Ex-Vize-Prez
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Emberbreeze |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 12:35 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2004
Posts: 323
Status: Offline
|
|
I'm very confised by the whole 'apply retoractively' and 'review once a year'
are we really going to recalculate the whole thing every year from now till forever? to my it makes a bit wierd that my ranking last year will change depending on what the current calculation is.
I can understand it in this case, as the effect of the bloodbowl was dominating everything, but every time? makes a mockery of the whole thing to me.
I would propse future 'adjustments' don't apply retroactively. |
_________________
Hag Graef Dragons Tournament Record 22:9:14 NAF Record 18:7:11
Silvania Suckers Tournament Record 8:2:11 NAF Record 5:2:11
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tim |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 01:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Germany
Posts: 544
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
@Emberbreeze
that's not possible. The whole calculation algorithm is starting from the very first tournament every time. It has happened after every update after every tournament in the past two years, so it's nothing new. The algorithm has to work this way becaause the tournament results are not entered in a strict timely sequence and errors occur during entry that have to be corrected if spotted later.
Additionally, the rankings can't tell what your ranking was a year ago. You will only find the current rankings on the NAF page, so unless you save the rankings on your PC periodically, past results are wiped out. |
_________________
NAF Regional Tournament Co-Ordinator - Germany
currently somewhere in NAF Ranking ...
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tim |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 01:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Germany
Posts: 544
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
dwarfcoach wrote: ie. subseqent players I have beaten after the BB I would have gained more NAF points from them as I actually had a lower rating...?
No.
If your ranking is lower you'll get more points for a win, but always less ranking points in total than if you started at a higher level of ranking (arg ... hard to explain )
In general, i welcome this change. Everything will be closer together, but the general level of points given out will also be lowered, so no big change here. Some of the one-tournament-wonders will drop a bit, while playing through many tournaments at a constant win/loss pct will be rewarded. Non-Europeans will benefit a bit, while Europeans drop a little in comparison. Given the fact that only 3 of the top 50 are not from Europe (counting Ian's Orcs as European) and the best US coach is on #53, that's fine and fair with me. |
_________________
NAF Regional Tournament Co-Ordinator - Germany
currently somewhere in NAF Ranking ...
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Emberbreeze |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 02:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 19, 2004
Posts: 323
Status: Offline
|
|
but there is nothing stopping you picking a date, and all results before being calculated under the old method, and all results since under the new one. sure it would require a bit of work to create an archive database and the results from that one being the input TRs for the new one, but it isn't impossible.
If the only reason for calculating retroactively is that it is the way it is done atm, it isn't a great reason. I am thinking this time it is a good idea, but every year!
I do keep track of my TR after each tournament to see how I'm improving (or not), I wont even know the TR of people I've faced, when I've faced them, as everything is up in the air and all I will have now is sight of the final value.
edit: if it is all calculted from scratch everytime, can I have my Spiky 03 results entered retroactively then? I know who I played and the results, just because I wasn't NAF at the time..... |
_________________
Hag Graef Dragons Tournament Record 22:9:14 NAF Record 18:7:11
Silvania Suckers Tournament Record 8:2:11 NAF Record 5:2:11
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 03:59 PM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| Just to clear up any confusion. I didn't intend to infer that any future changes will automatically be applied retroactively. In this case it's necessary, it may or may not be necessary in future depending if and when any more changes occur and the nature of those changes. (Neither does a annual review mean that the system will necessarily change annually.) But for obvious reasons, we need to keep all options open and not set any precedents in stone. Who knows, a whole different staff somewhere down the line may come up with a whole different (and superior) ranking system and decide to implement it. |
_________________
 Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 06:20 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
dwarfcoach wrote: Example being my Lizardmen. They have a ranking in the high 180's. A big part of that was last years BB. If all the tourneys are worked out in order the tourneys took place then there s a chance that my rating may get higher than it is at the moment? ie. subseqent players I have beaten after the BB I would have gained more NAF points from them as I actually had a lower rating...?
Everyone's ranking will be recalcuated from scratch - thats because we believe the new formula will produce a ranking that is a better reflection of individual performance - regardless of which country they happen to live. So every tournament from Spikey 2002 to the most recent one will have all the matches re-calculated in order so the rankings will be "correct" according to the next formula.
If we didn't do that - and only changed the K value for new tournaments - then we'd have 5000+ games worth rankings that was continuing to distort the figures. As a teaser the top 10 will probably include 3 new faces. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 06:27 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
The primary effect of this change is to make it so that an "average" game carries a similar K value regardless of where its played. Most tournaments in Europe will hit the 30 coach boundary quite easily, but the increase for the majors has a relatively larger impact in outside of Europe - because there are fewer games played there.
This still means that there won't be too many high ranking coaches who are based outside of Europe. That's because there are more tournaments to attend in Europe, so more opportunties to play. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Xtreme |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 24, 2005 - 08:58 PM
|
|
Da Boss
Joined: Mar 12, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1096
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
Great move definatly an improvement.
Thanks goes out to all the people that are smarter then me and helped bang out the details of this.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tim |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 25, 2005 - 07:10 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Germany
Posts: 544
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
|
|
About annual changes ... the only other factor i'd love to see in the rankings soon is a race performance modifier.
Right now, someone coaching a race with a win pct significantly lower than .500 (esp. Halflings, Gobbos, Chaos) will lose CR the more he plays until he finally reaches the correct level, while a newbie coach with one loss ranked will stay around CR14x forever. That somehow inverts the performance tables for these races.
I'd love to see an algorithm where you first calculate the CR for every race (as if each race would only be played by one coach) and then use these race values for everyone as a starting value for the individual coach ranking (rather than a plain 150). The final ranking table is then calulated as a difference between race rating and coach rating.
Example: Chaos Dwarf Race ranking would be 161 (estimated), my ranking is 221, so my Chaos dwarf skills get ranked at +60 points. Let's say Norse do worse on average, so the race ranking might be 155, my ranking is 225, so i get ranked with +70 for Norse, wich is better because my results differ more from the average. Now halflings might rank at 110 as a race, so if a coach manages to get a ranking of 190 with Halfings, he beats the race ranking by +80 pts and surely deserves to get ranked above my Norse performance. |
_________________
NAF Regional Tournament Co-Ordinator - Germany
currently somewhere in NAF Ranking ...
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
