Unofficial statistics site

Discussion in 'Guilds' started by Farbs, Jan 2, 2014.

  1. Vakaz

    Vakaz Guild Leader

    I threw together a histogram of the total games played for players on the win rate leaderboard. It looks like the majority of the players on the leaderboard have less than 200 games. I think a 100 or 150 game minimum would probably be best, but the minimum could probably be lower if something like @Flaxative 's idea was implemented.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2015
    Farbs and Scarponi like this.
  2. Bandreus

    Bandreus Thaumaturge

    I think a minimum of 50-100 might work just fine, as long as you don't count matches vs the AI.

    Actually, you might just as well have a minimum rank which has to be met in order to be listed on the win% leaderboards.

    I think both measures combined together will both prevent new players from topping the leaderboards b/c of crazy win% fluctuations and also measure win % in a more reliable way (winning vs AI, even cheatotron, is relatively trivial)
     
  3. Farbs

    Farbs Blue Manchu Staff Member

    Sir Veza, Stexe and Bandreus like this.
  4. Stexe

    Stexe #2 in Spring PvP Season

    Why not just have links to 50, 100, 200, and keep the code for the ability to sort by whatever?
     
  5. Farbs

    Farbs Blue Manchu Staff Member

    That's an interesting idea, but I think it's much cooler to see your placing on The win rate leaderboard than on A win rate leaderboard.
     
    Bandreus likes this.
  6. Stexe

    Stexe #2 in Spring PvP Season

    Maybe have a default one but also links to others?
     
  7. Sir Veza

    Sir Veza Farming Deity

    Setting the number of games to 1 brings up a list of perfect players whose names I don't recognize. Cool stuff! :cool:
     
    ParodyKnaveBob likes this.
  8. Scarponi

    Scarponi Moderator

    Following Vakaz's lead (though my charts aren't quite as nice)...

    Minimum 100:
    upload_2015-1-10_7-19-51.png

    Minimum 150:
    upload_2015-1-10_7-22-58.png

    Minimum 200:
    upload_2015-1-10_7-24-46.png

    250:
    upload_2015-1-10_7-26-22.png

    300:
    upload_2015-1-10_7-28-14.png

    Personally I don't think the data starts to get interesting until at least 200.
     
  9. Vakaz

    Vakaz Guild Leader

    My vote is for 150 or 200, assuming we're not adding anymore parameters.
     
  10. Merdis

    Merdis Orc Soldier

    What is the current status of introducing players' ratings to API and [META]?
     
  11. Flaxative

    Flaxative Party Leader Staff Member

    The same as when I last said that unfortunately.
     
  12. Farbs

    Farbs Blue Manchu Staff Member

    Actually...
    It's sort of there.

    Each player request via the API now returns that player's rating, but I don't want to hit the API from the [META] server every time someone visits a player profile page, and I certainly don't have a path to storing the player rating on [META] to show on leaderboards etc. So, the most viable integration right now would involve a clientside JS call to the API to pick up a player's rating, and only on the profile page. Since I haven't worked with JS much lately this'd take me quite a while, and would be of limited use, so I'm not really in a hurry to do it.
     
    ParodyKnaveBob likes this.
  13. Lord Feleran

    Lord Feleran Guild Leader

    Is there anyone who would NOT prefer it to be 100 rather than 50? I vote for 100 also because it's a nice round number :)
     
  14. Jarmo

    Jarmo Snow Griffin

    Yeah, 100 sounds like a much more reasonable default value. It is pretty trivial for a good player to get a 80%+ win rate for her 50 first matches (which has proven to be an unsustainable win rate in the longer run) so a more realistic picture of player ability is currently sacrificed for temporary new player thrills. Which might be reasonable depending on one's goals with the statistics.

    Many might argue for even higher limits. 200 matches might not be unreasonable at all.
     
  15. Scarponi

    Scarponi Moderator

    Another "maybe someday" suggestion: Since in a 4 league grouping (the norm atm) a league is repeated every 40 hours, if the scenarios page had a 48 hour period instead of 24 to clear data, it would allow the accumulation of all the data for the 4 leagues in a given cycle over the 2-3 weeks that league cycle is active rather than holding only the data from that day's leagues.
     
    ParodyKnaveBob and Stexe like this.
  16. Farbs

    Farbs Blue Manchu Staff Member

    Oh smart! Done. Old data has been discarded already but it should start piling up now.
    I also raised the required games for win rate leaderboard to 100.
     
  17. Stexe

    Stexe #2 in Spring PvP Season

    Yeah, I've been monitoring number of league games played for a while and it always was annoying to have to re-check twice a day to compare them. Great idea and glad to see it implemented.
     
  18. Vakaz

    Vakaz Guild Leader

    Something I've been thinking about: would it be reasonable to have a scenario that confers the ability to recruit players to a guild, without making them the guild principal?
     
  19. Flaxative

    Flaxative Party Leader Staff Member

    I've asked Farbs for this... he said he didn't want to do it because it would make the Sorcererers grow even faster! :(
     
    ParodyKnaveBob and Stexe like this.
  20. dashv520

    dashv520 Orc Soldier

    Just saw this in the forum.
    How this Guild thing works?
    And also how does the standing system work?
    It seems I got negative values since this standing system launched.
    It kept almost unchanged even i climbed up the elo from 800 to 1700. :eek:

     

Share This Page