• Empire Earth
  • Miscellaneous

NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Talk about anything EE related and doesn't belong in another forum. Gameplay, chit-chat, or any questions you have -- it all belongs here.

NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Jodocus » Sun Nov 13, 2016 12:30 pm

Hello guys!

Now that player identification using CDKeys is back, the upcomming NeoEE patch will mainly focus on the introduction of a ranking system. I already succeeded in adding four new symbols to the lobby's user list: bronze, silver and golden ball + a crown icon (which was quite challenging without having the source code):
Image

Here is my proposition:
  • You will only get a (visible) rank after you absolved a minimum of X ranked games (X ~ 10²) and your W/L ratio is >= 50%.
  • Each player only can join the ranking system once: For example, if you have 4 accounts and your first one hits the threshold amount of games, your ranking will be adopted by all other accounts as soon as they hit the threshold.
  • There is only one user with the champion crown which he has to defend.
  • The rating system will use some implementation of ELO (as known from e.g. chess) in the backend.
  • Only 4-star games will be counted as rated game.
  • There certainly will be some sort of automatic ELO-decay: if you won't play at least say once a week, you will gradually lose your ELO. The higher your ELO is, the stronger is the decay (I suggest exponential decay).
  • At certain threshold values of ELO, you will get the silver or gold status.

In future, I may add more ELO values for different game modes (1v1, Team game, FFA). The one shown in the lobby will be the best of the three then.

Any suggestions?
Jodocus
NeoEE Developer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:24 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Samuel » Sun Nov 13, 2016 12:33 pm

I totally agree with this! SOUNDS AWESOME!
Samuel
Senior Member
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:26 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby _DavE_ » Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:33 pm

Fair one Jodocus! I am very much in support of this idea!
Question: Is there anywhere that will show the ladder table with maybe recorded statistics I.e wins/loses.
_DavE_
Full Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 5:23 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby AEnima » Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:21 pm

_DavE_ wrote:Fair one Jodocus! I am very much in support of this idea!
Question: Is there anywhere that will show the ladder table with maybe recorded statistics I.e wins/loses.


woah this would be DOPE dude.

champion crown, second me 1vs1?. ushed. ow, making new patch =). priority, good luck bro. er icons to lobby. you but my knowledge is crap
AEnima
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:24 pm

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Omega » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:01 pm

My only suggestion would be to use Glicko2 instead of ELO. Adding RD and volatility is a very significant improvement to ELO, and the additional work to implement it over standard ELO is trivial.
Image
User avatar
Omega
Administrator
 
Posts: 1805
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Washington, DC / USA

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Samuel » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:03 pm

Whats RD and volatility?
Samuel
Senior Member
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:26 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Jodocus » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:07 pm

Omega wrote:My only suggestion would be to use Glicko2 instead of ELO. Adding RD and volatility is a very significant improvement to ELO, and the additional work to implement it over standard ELO is trivial.
Thanks for the suggestion, I will look it up more. I just came up with ELO on first hand because I didn't know any other up to know.
Jodocus
NeoEE Developer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:24 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Jodocus » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:11 pm

_DavE_ wrote:Question: Is there anywhere that will show the ladder table with maybe recorded statistics I.e wins/loses.
Well, it's too much work (for me) to integrate this into the EE lobby. Even if I had the code, it would be a lot of work.
It would be less (but still) much work if one made a statistics website. Still a bit too much for me alone.
Jodocus
NeoEE Developer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:24 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Arntzen » Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:10 pm

Probably not a surprise to anyone, but I completely agree with this! Would be amazing. Definitely think it would raise activity level.

Right now a lot of the time when a lesser player asks for 1v1 I struggle to find a reason to join.. But if I suddenly could get points then why not :D

I think adding different rankings for team game or 1v1 would be good very well, and let the best rank be shown.. So if you're a silver 1v1 player but a gold team player, I think the gold rank should be shown in lobby.

Can't really see myself joining a ranked team game if that means I'll lose important points for the crown.
A Good Place to Start: viewtopic.php?f=75&t=3884
Click to download: eC Civilization
User avatar
Arntzen
Administrator
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:13 am
Location: Norway

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Omega » Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:42 pm

Samuel wrote:Whats RD and volatility?


RD is Ratings Deviation (Glicko recognizes that rating is a point estimate, and as such there is some uncertainty attached--that uncertainty increases under certain circumstances, such as if you haven't played for a long time), and volatility is rating volatility (a measure of expected rating fluctuation for the player).

A brief explanation of some advantages of Glicko(#1) over ELO: https://www.chess.com/blog/kurtgodden/e ... -explained

Example of glicko2 implementation: http://www.glicko.net/glicko/glicko2.pdf

The difference between Glicko(#1) and ELO is that ELO just uses r (rating), where Glicko(#1) uses r and RD. The difference between Glicko2 and Glicko is that Glicko2 uses r, RD, and sigma (volatility), whereas Glicko uses only r and RD.

Pretty much all Chess ratings are either Glicko or Glicko2 now, since they're both quite superior to ELO. Glicko2 is better than Glicko, but not by the extent to which Glicko is better than ELO. The only reason everyone isn't using Glicko2 already is because of complacency.
Image
User avatar
Omega
Administrator
 
Posts: 1805
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Washington, DC / USA

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby herik » Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:16 am

All for it!
Btw, hey Omega, how are you?
herik
Momma's boy
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:40 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Lancelot5 » Mon Nov 14, 2016 4:43 pm

Hey,

First I have to thank you for the effort u put into improving EE.

Towards adding a ranking system I think it’s a cool Idea. Maybe a bit too late since there are not so many player left. Personally I wouldn’t care so much what my rank is because I know I am quite good at pre and doing okay at mid, islands ok ... etc. as players know how good kaz, samuel, nafrayu etc are. So the impact on giving a rank won’t be that huge with small player base. But it could lead to more played games played at all. Which should be our goal. But will that be the Case? Probably.

For me the major point EE and actually the entire current gaming scene has is the lack of competition. Players barley want to have that hard matches anymore were they struggle. After hard work some maybe just want relax and chill with friends... You can’t judge them for that. Although several players putting themself under too much pressure like it’s a shame to lose a game. Basically u sometimes win and sometimes lose nothing wrong about it.

I think the lack of competition is also a reason why there are players play on GR instead of Neo-lobby. I can´t find another reason tbh if it’s not that. Or maybe someone else got another idea why u would play on GR although the best players of MID,MOD,PRE,LIGA ... are on NEO-Lobby? Wouldn’t u just play on NEO to have proper games? GR u can smurf, have not so strong players and players have an equal status. (everyone can smurf and shit, all same) But again its nothing to judge about. But its leads to an interesting question. Could a ranking system catch players to move from GR to NEO ? Again I just can say maybe or referring to what I wrote about GR even probably Not. It would definitely much more successful the more players are in the ranking system so they can face players on an equal rank/level. That’s leads my first suggestions

    Everyone should get a Rank on NEO. Instead of bronze, silver, gold icons maybe use the skill-level icons. It’s easier to understand. Like every player gets 1 star even if they never play ranked then 2, 3 up to 4 and best maybe get the crown. Then the system should work for each skill level. So if 1 star player see a 1 star game hosted he should join there. It’s more logical. Only games without Skill-level hosted should be unranked then.

Again about gaming and lack of competition. Like when Save-EE was about to die we lost several players to League of Legends. Why? Because it’s quite easy to win there and achieve something in Solo-Q. (Sure its good game too) If u look at the Datas i think the average winrate was arround 50% for everyone. Maybe 55% if Top player and 45% if worse. But that makes the players feel good because they nearly win on average every 2nd game. While not players skill achieved that but the Matchmaking system. The Developpers just know if players have to bad winrates they struggle = lose attraction and could leave which leads to less money in their pockets. That also count for Heart Stone, Dota 2 and other games like this. Also if u look at World of Warcraft, Diablo 3, Counterstrike and nearly all Steamgames. Everyone can climb there some ranks or get achievements, cool weapons skins etc... Quite Easy. With adding ranking system towards EE u give good players a good rank although everyone already know that they are good but automatically tell other players basically they suck. (I go here a bit extreme and exaggerate on purpose). This leads to some other suggestion:

    Instead of adding a pure rank system there should be a reward system as well. In Many games a rank system is actually there to entertain the weaker players since the biggest playerbase is always in the lower stages. And they needs to be entertained. So maybe adding something like weekly taks to solve. Like "play 10 liga games" " win 3 games in a row" "win game before f11 xx" "play a game in nano" "kill 300 units" "convert 20 units" and player gets points for it. Like a goal everyone can achieve. Also something that they just get some points whenever they play a game while being in specific elo range. (I know u said already it’s not programmable but I still want to mention it here)

Smurfing:
I think smurfing is always an issue for several reason. Smurfing lead to unbalanced teams, shitty behavior, newer player get kicked out for claimed to be a smurfer, (sure if too bad they still have struggle join good players game but maybe some will treat them more nicely) it also barley brings the community that much together. Like I switched due to work and less pre players over to mid setting. I just know that nearly everyone there is smurf or "ohh hey i got new Name this year" etc... which just lead towards that u don’t care so much about the smurfing but additionally also don’t care so much about the players there either. Smurfing also waste a lot of time but that maybe just count for me. I simply hate this stupid discussions around that ingame over and over again.
Then referring to Omega who said that it was always a part of the community. Well when I joined save-ee lobby the players had to deal with it while all the moderators/admins barley had to. They had the fun around the drama. That was actually something that was handled there quite bad because of the different status Moderator/Admins towards community had on that. While giving kaz now the power to ban players that were join arise for some reason u solve a problem.But on the other hand I just think u either allow smurfing totally and everyone has to deal with it or u do something against it. (Except ghosting that should be stopped always because it ruins other player reputation).

    Adding a ranking system is a quite smart way to decrease the impact of smurfing a bit. New players won’t get kicked for smurfing anymore, Games won’t be stacked and it saves time. And players that want chill still can smurf. It’s just like players will see the rank, not their names.

All in all I think there is so many stuff that could be said about and it’s hard for me to draw a conclusion or something like that. I think a lot depens on the players behave and how many players will play EE with rank. While having too many different settings, then different ranks, then as it was suggested maybe only 4 star skill-level games count it barley works. I think a rank system needs to have a specific amount of players to work and bring players together.
Additionally maybe there must be thought more about the average, weak players to get them more games played.

But it’s definitely something to look into, think about it and try it out.
Lancelot5
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Jodocus » Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:48 pm

Hi Lance, thanks for your exposé!

Lancelot5 wrote:Towards adding a ranking system I think it’s a cool Idea. Maybe a bit too late since there are not so many player left. Personally I wouldn’t care so much what my rank is because I know I am quite good at pre and doing okay at mid, islands ok ... etc. as players know how good kaz, samuel, nafrayu etc are. So the impact on giving a rank won’t be that huge with small player base. But it could lead to more played games played at all. Which should be our goal. But will that be the Case? Probably.
The primary reason for adding a rating system is not increasing the game numbers. It's a tool for the skilled players to actually quantitatively measure their strength relative to each other. In a fight for rank, it may even rise the dedication put into the games in order to win, leading to new strategies being developed.
Lancelot5 wrote:For me the major point EE and actually the entire current gaming scene has is the lack of competition. Players barley want to have that hard matches anymore were they struggle. After hard work some maybe just want relax and chill with friends... You can’t judge them for that. Although several players putting themself under too much pressure like it’s a shame to lose a game. Basically u sometimes win and sometimes lose nothing wrong about it.
A rating system changes nothing about it. Nobody is forced to participate. Nobody will be judged for not participating. And no new player will be insulted when he is confronted by the fact that he is not the best player in the world.
Lancelot5 wrote:I think the lack of competition is also a reason why there are players play on GR instead of Neo-lobby. I can´t find another reason tbh if it’s not that. Or maybe someone else got another idea why u would play on GR although the best players of MID,MOD,PRE,LIGA ... are on NEO-Lobby?
That's another discussion. The major reasons are, that they simply don't know about NeoEE, they don't like it (despite never trying it), that there is a cultural border (South-American playerbase in GR, mostly incapable of comprehending basic English) and finally time zone conflict: The (Europe-based) NeoEE has its peaks some 3-4 hours earlier than GR. And last but not least, as I am not so sure about, the skill level in GR is way lower than the one in NeoEE, as NeoEE is rather home of the traditional players. Most GR players don't even know EE ever had a multiplayer lobby before.
Lancelot5 wrote:Wouldn’t u just play on NEO to have proper games? GR u can smurf, have not so strong players and players have an equal status. (everyone can smurf and shit, all same) But again its nothing to judge about. But its leads to an interesting question. Could a ranking system catch players to move from GR to NEO ? Again I just can say maybe or referring to what I wrote about GR even probably Not. It would definitely much more successful the more players are in the ranking system so they can face players on an equal rank/level. That’s leads my first suggestions
Well, it would be a strong argument for those players in GR to come to NeoEE that would like to play competitvely or just want to see their quantitative skill level.
Lancelot5 wrote:Everyone should get a Rank on NEO. Instead of bronze, silver, gold icons maybe use the skill-level icons. It’s easier to understand. Like every player gets 1 star even if they never play ranked then 2, 3 up to 4 and best maybe get the crown. Then the system should work for each skill level. So if 1 star player see a 1 star game hosted he should join there. It’s more logical. Only games without Skill-level hosted should be unranked then.
You think it's easier to understand? Bronze-Silver-Gold is well established by any typical sports event. And what do you mean by "should"? That's like it is now - except that people almost never use the skill option when they host games. Finally, what would be the point to separate bronze or unranked players in 1-star games from those players in 4-star games? It becomes like some sort of "skill-apartheit" if we encouraged that.
Lancelot5 wrote:Again about gaming and lack of competition. Like when Save-EE was about to die we lost several players to League of Legends. Why? Because it’s quite easy to win there and achieve something in Solo-Q. (Sure its good game too)
It was a modern game, it was (or is) en vogue and it was a new experience. It may be easier for you to win there because you are behind a noob-protection in ranked games. I think this sucks. Playing with better people can be an inspiration for oneself and LoL pretty much cancelled out this option, maybe on purpose.
Lancelot5 wrote:If u look at the Datas i think the average winrate was arround 50% for everyone. Maybe 55% if Top player and 45% if worse. But that makes the players feel good because they nearly win on average every 2nd game.
The ELO matchmaking system there ensures that every player will tend to 50% W/L ratio, just on different levels of skill.
Lancelot5 wrote:While not players skill achieved that but the Matchmaking system. The Developpers just know if players have to bad winrates they struggle = lose attraction and could leave which leads to less money in their pockets. That also count for Heart Stone, Dota 2 and other games like this. Also if u look at World of Warcraft, Diablo 3, Counterstrike and nearly all Steamgames. Everyone can climb there some ranks or get achievements, cool weapons skins etc... Quite Easy. With adding ranking system towards EE u give good players a good rank although everyone already know that they are good but automatically tell other players basically they suck. (I go here a bit extreme and exaggerate on purpose).
If people constantly lose right now, without a rating system, they also won't stay for long, I am pretty sure. I don't know how adding a rating system would have any influence on this.
Lancelot5 wrote:This leads to some other suggestion:

Instead of adding a pure rank system there should be a reward system as well. In Many games a rank system is actually there to entertain the weaker players since the biggest playerbase is always in the lower stages. And they needs to be entertained. So maybe adding something like weekly taks to solve. Like "play 10 liga games" " win 3 games in a row" "win game before f11 xx" "play a game in nano" "kill 300 units" "convert 20 units" and player gets points for it. Like a goal everyone can achieve. Also something that they just get some points whenever they play a game while being in specific elo range. (I know u said already it’s not programmable but I still want to mention it here)
Please allow me as well to exeggerate: NeoEE customer service also may offer free hot chocolate or Play D'oh to calm sad and/or mad players. ;)
My point is: since when is EE a kindergarden? I mean, if people want to play some phone app, Minecraft or farm simulator, they can do it. There they can build up and achieve something. But I don't think EE was meant to be like that. Just watch the old game trailers again. Its intention was different, at least as I interpret it.
About the smurfing I may lose some words later on or somewhere else as this would lead too far now.
Jodocus
NeoEE Developer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:24 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby _DavE_ » Tue Nov 15, 2016 1:34 am

I think we all have to accept EE for what it is. It's an old game with old graphics but exceptional game play. We will never have a brilliant player base. It's quality over quantity and that's what we have.

Jodocus: There needs to be something in place that prevents whoever it may be with the crown, that can sit happily at the top by beating bronze skilled players etc

Basically, in order to keep that crown you have to play the best players.
_DavE_
Full Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 5:23 am

Re: NeoEE Ladder Ranking

Postby Jodocus » Tue Nov 15, 2016 7:35 am

_DavE_ wrote:Jodocus: There needs to be something in place that prevents whoever it may be with the crown, that can sit happily at the top by beating bronze skilled players etc

Basically, in order to keep that crown you have to play the best players.
Systems like ELO or Glicko are working like that. You gain close to no points at all if you win and are way better than your opponent. You will lose a hell of a ton of points if you lose, though.
Jodocus
NeoEE Developer
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:24 am

Next

Return to EE General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests