killer ranking system query
Viewing forum thread.
Back to Game Queries.
Back to Forum List.
14:39 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
Just wondering if someone can explain how the ranking system works in killer, ive pasted part of a result from earlier here:
"player A" 829.5 (-5.0), adam_147 825.7 (-5.1),
now do the maths and before the game "player A" was ranked 834.5 and i was ranked 830.8, so player A was ranked higher than me and yet i lost more ranking points than he/she did.
I must have missed something in how the system works, so can someone explain please .
Thanks.
"player A" 829.5 (-5.0), adam_147 825.7 (-5.1),
now do the maths and before the game "player A" was ranked 834.5 and i was ranked 830.8, so player A was ranked higher than me and yet i lost more ranking points than he/she did.
I must have missed something in how the system works, so can someone explain please .
Thanks.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
14:50 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
http://www.funkysnooker.com/help#rankings
You might want to try and make sense of that if you haven't already.
You might want to try and make sense of that if you haven't already.
15:15 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
Ive read that but basically all the maths there shows that, if 2 players are beaten at the same game by someone with rank X, the player with the higher ranking loses more...
Take player A and player B beaten by player C, with ranks a,b and c respectively and with a > b > c. Difference is calcutaled as winners rank - losers rank. So let c - a (diff between A and C) be M and c - b (diff between B and C) be N. So N > M.
Ranking system calculations:
so player A loses 2 - 2^(M/100) and player B loses 2-2^(N/100)
N > M therefore (N/100) > (M/100) therefore 2^(N/100) > 2^(M/100) therefore 2 - 2^(N/100) < 2 - 2^(M/100) (inequality sign changes due to negative multiplier -1).
This shows that player B, the lower ranked one, loses less points than the higher ranked one. Including point 1) about ranking for game types in the link James posted is merely a scalar multiplier so has no effect, and point 2) about newbie modification is the same. Both players were <900 so edge modification does nothing.
So applying the maths in James' link still doesnt explain what happened...
Take player A and player B beaten by player C, with ranks a,b and c respectively and with a > b > c. Difference is calcutaled as winners rank - losers rank. So let c - a (diff between A and C) be M and c - b (diff between B and C) be N. So N > M.
Ranking system calculations:
so player A loses 2 - 2^(M/100) and player B loses 2-2^(N/100)
N > M therefore (N/100) > (M/100) therefore 2^(N/100) > 2^(M/100) therefore 2 - 2^(N/100) < 2 - 2^(M/100) (inequality sign changes due to negative multiplier -1).
This shows that player B, the lower ranked one, loses less points than the higher ranked one. Including point 1) about ranking for game types in the link James posted is merely a scalar multiplier so has no effect, and point 2) about newbie modification is the same. Both players were <900 so edge modification does nothing.
So applying the maths in James' link still doesnt explain what happened...
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
15:38 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
stop moaning and part wiv ur points greedy ;p
19:00 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
Naming and shaming will not be tolerated
adam_147 said:
adam_147 825.7 (-5.1)
Naming and shaming will not be tolerated
19:04 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
Naming and shaming will not be tolerated
he's a complete newbie though, worst player ive ever seen. its just stating fact really...
On topic, anyone got an explanation?
virtuoso107 said:
adam_147 said:
adam_147 825.7 (-5.1)
Naming and shaming will not be tolerated
he's a complete newbie though, worst player ive ever seen. its just stating fact really...
On topic, anyone got an explanation?
19:28 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
I could be wrong...
But doesnt killer take points off on position?
You always lose less if you go out earlier...if you come 2nd you get hit the heaviest...
thats how i see it :S
Or its this...
Edited at 00:30 Sun 28/03/10 (GMT)
But doesnt killer take points off on position?
You always lose less if you go out earlier...if you come 2nd you get hit the heaviest...
thats how i see it :S
Or its this...
D + E - R - R = Y.....is.......G - O / D?
Edited at 00:30 Sun 28/03/10 (GMT)
20:16 Sat 27 Mar 10 (GMT) [Link]
it may go on position, that would be a reasonable explanation. except i went out earlier .
But it doesnt mention that anywhere i can see.
But it doesnt mention that anywhere i can see.
04:52 Sun 28 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
Made me laugh!
adam_147 said:
Ive read that but basically all the maths there shows that, if 2 players are beaten at the same game by someone with rank X, the player with the higher ranking loses more...
Take player A and player B beaten by player C, with ranks a,b and c respectively and with a > b > c. Difference is calcutaled as winners rank - losers rank. So let c - a (diff between A and C) be M and c - b (diff between B and C) be N. So N > M.
Ranking system calculations:
so player A loses 2 - 2^(M/100) and player B loses 2-2^(N/100)
N > M therefore (N/100) > (M/100) therefore 2^(N/100) > 2^(M/100) therefore 2 - 2^(N/100) < 2 - 2^(M/100) (inequality sign changes due to negative multiplier -1).
This shows that player B, the lower ranked one, loses less points than the higher ranked one. Including point 1) about ranking for game types in the link James posted is merely a scalar multiplier so has no effect, and point 2) about newbie modification is the same. Both players were <900 so edge modification does nothing.
So applying the maths in James' link still doesnt explain what happened...
Take player A and player B beaten by player C, with ranks a,b and c respectively and with a > b > c. Difference is calcutaled as winners rank - losers rank. So let c - a (diff between A and C) be M and c - b (diff between B and C) be N. So N > M.
Ranking system calculations:
so player A loses 2 - 2^(M/100) and player B loses 2-2^(N/100)
N > M therefore (N/100) > (M/100) therefore 2^(N/100) > 2^(M/100) therefore 2 - 2^(N/100) < 2 - 2^(M/100) (inequality sign changes due to negative multiplier -1).
This shows that player B, the lower ranked one, loses less points than the higher ranked one. Including point 1) about ranking for game types in the link James posted is merely a scalar multiplier so has no effect, and point 2) about newbie modification is the same. Both players were <900 so edge modification does nothing.
So applying the maths in James' link still doesnt explain what happened...
Made me laugh!
12:05 Sun 28 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
im doing a degree in maths, i cant help myself .
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
12:08 Mon 29 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
I'm presuming the winner was a newbie...
Then to work this out it needs a slight bit of explanation and an example.
Lets say (for the sake of it) there were 5 players, A B C D and E. Say player A was a newbie and he won. The ranking scale would calculate the ranking points gained from each player and a loss for the others and put it down as 1 win from each player...
So, he would take X amount of points off player B, C, D and E. However, after each "game won" with a player, the newbie modification affecting each player would reduce, thus the result in losing more ranking points than another player if 2 different players were the same rank (Or very similar rank)
It's the only way I can see this situation happening. Sorry if its hard to understand, not that easy to type.
Then to work this out it needs a slight bit of explanation and an example.
Lets say (for the sake of it) there were 5 players, A B C D and E. Say player A was a newbie and he won. The ranking scale would calculate the ranking points gained from each player and a loss for the others and put it down as 1 win from each player...
So, he would take X amount of points off player B, C, D and E. However, after each "game won" with a player, the newbie modification affecting each player would reduce, thus the result in losing more ranking points than another player if 2 different players were the same rank (Or very similar rank)
It's the only way I can see this situation happening. Sorry if its hard to understand, not that easy to type.
20:15 Mon 29 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
killer doesnt work like that on the games won though does it? you still have to play 100 games to lose newbie, and playing 11 x 10man killers doesnt make you lose your newbie tag, you have to play 100 games (and yes i know 11x9 is only 99). So i dont think the newbie modification would come into effect mid-game. I may be wrong, ill have to ask Nick or someone.
However if it did work like that, then the later you went out, the more points you would drop because the newbie modification gets less as they play more games. However i went out before the player in this scenario so that doesnt explain it .
He also wasn't a newbie if i remember correctly (thought i would point that out at the end...)
However if it did work like that, then the later you went out, the more points you would drop because the newbie modification gets less as they play more games. However i went out before the player in this scenario so that doesnt explain it .
He also wasn't a newbie if i remember correctly (thought i would point that out at the end...)
20:23 Mon 29 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
Lmfaoooo!
Adam you really are a donkey!
Heeeee Haaaaaaw!
Adam you really are a donkey!
Heeeee Haaaaaaw!
10:13 Tue 30 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
that i may be, but im still above you in killer rankings derry .
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
11:03 Tue 30 Mar 10 (BST) [Link]
Yes it does. If you win a 10 man killer game you get 9 wins put onto your profile.
adam_147 said:
killer doesnt work like that on the games won though does it?
Yes it does. If you win a 10 man killer game you get 9 wins put onto your profile.
Unable to post | |
---|---|
Reason: | You must log in before you can post |
killer ranking system query
Back to Top of this Page
Back to Game Queries.
Back to Forum List.