| 1 |
Isn't our system too small for fixed number "average" elo balancing?
|
1 |
Isn't our system too small for fixed number "average" elo balancing?
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
We
have
a
continues
stream
of
new
players
entering
ZK
and
most
of
them
leave
after
some
games
or
after
a
couple
of
weeks.
All
this
time
they
feed
elo
point
into
the
total
system.
This
means
that
the
average
of
1500
doesn't
hold
true
anymore.
If
you'd
take
the
total
amount
of
elo
points
and
divide
it
over
the
active
players
you'd
get
a
different
number.
So
over
time
the
1250
starting
elo
will
be
the
right
figure!
:P
|
3 |
We
have
a
continues
stream
of
new
players
entering
ZK
and
most
of
them
leave
after
some
games
or
after
a
couple
of
weeks.
All
this
time
they
feed
elo
points
into
the
elo-system.
This
means
that
the
average
of
1500
doesn't
hold
true
anymore.
If
you'd
take
the
total
amount
of
elo
points
of
the
active
players
and
divide
it
over
the
active
players
you'd
get
a
number
other
than
1500.
Over
time
the
1250
starting
elo
will
be
the
right
figure
though!
:P
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
I'd promote a system that keeps track of the performance of new players and calculates the average win chance of a total newb. You'd have to give the new player elo penalty to reach that number.
|
5 |
I'd promote a system that keeps track of the performance of new players and calculates the average win chance of a total newb. You'd have to give the new player elo penalty to reach that number.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
A
problem
here
is
that
you'd
need
to
keep
track
of
the
elo
penalty
/
level
for
each
player.
It
would
be
determined
of
a
players
joining
date.
|
7 |
A
problem
here
is
that
you'd
need
to
keep
track
of
the
elo
penalty
/
level
for
each
player.
It
would
be
determined
by
a
players
joining
date.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
If your statement of "1250 is still too good" is true we would see it in the results of games that include newbies. We can calculate the above mentioned figures from the difference in assumed win-chance and the real wins.
|
9 |
If your statement of "1250 is still too good" is true we would see it in the results of games that include newbies. We can calculate the above mentioned figures from the difference in assumed win-chance and the real wins.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
EDIT: Skasi, we think alike! XD We posted the same ideas
|
12 |
EDIT: Skasi, we think alike! XD We posted the same ideas
|
Even 1250 elo is too much for complete newbies