Global Communications > Development Media

VC's Laboratory 101226: HLstatsX best be sweatin'

<< < (3/5) > >>

Entropy-Soldier:
But the stats should be telling me what would happen in an equal match up, where both players have access to the same weapons and are at the same health.  If Rambo and Mr "I camp the armor and only play with new players" competed 1v1 on complex, the result would obviously contradict the ranking system that claims the two players are equal.

I do capitalize on the armors benefits myself, but there's a difference between picking it up frequently and sitting so close to it that anyone that attacks me needs to go through two blue gauges just to touch my life bar.  When you throw in the fact that your proposed ranking system doesn't even note the people that one is playing against, it's easy to only join the server when completely new players are on.  The stat whore would get ahead quickly, while the legitimately good player who favors competition would suffer due to competent opponents and the high possibility of spawning next to someone with a good weapon and good aim.

VC:
"But the stats should be telling me what would happen in an equal match up, where both players have access to the same weapons and are at the same health."
The rank is no longer valid because it does not reflect Goldeneye Source As Played On This Server, but rather some fantasy land where everyone stands back-to-back before walking ten paces.  You're focusing on one element of gameplay (the all-things-even duel situation) at the cost of ignoring the whole of the game.

"it's easy to only join the server when completely new players are on."
My formula does compare the players' current stats.  A high-ranked player defeating a low-ranked player is under-weighted.  That's part of getting away from the HLstatsX points system; if your rank is high and you beat a first timer, you don't get much/anything from it because that player has little/no record to prove that you actually overcame a challenge.

Let's look at the very first graph again, but at 10:1 responsiveness, which really shows real-time hot/cold-streaks instead of long-term performance.



My line (purple) quickly approaches Perfect at first, because it was basement and I was simply not dying against newbie players.  (I got my no-deaths acheivement and two 6-Awards in this session.)

Someone (red) showed up who knew how to fight, and my inflated -by-newbies rank is quickly normalized until I adapt my strategy and start winning my fights again.  Then a third player (olive) entered and started losing against me but winning against Red until the end when he adapted to Red.


Beating up newbies to inflate rank is impossible to avoid since, if the population of gameplay events is one guy beating up newbies, then he's the best player in the pool by a wide margin.  You seem to want to force all players to compete against a hypothetical metric, a perfectly matched opponent HP/AP/Arsenel-wise but with flawless gameplay as the standard.  But that both does not exist and is not seen in the actual game.

Anyway, I'm tired of arguing this.  Your vision of how players should be ranked and my vision of a way that they can be ranked practically and usefully differ.

If you wish to participate further, you could throw me some server logs.  If you have a large number of regulars with whom you are well-familiar, you could look over my results and provide feedback to tell if my evaluation agrees with how you would sort them, despite not taking AC-10 and spawnkilling into account.

Entropy-Soldier:
This was never about the best ranking system, it's simply about the fact that ranking systems don't work in regards to Goldeneye: source.  I made one quip about yours in particular because it provided contrast to HLstats, as it forgoes the point system and simply using the base data to calculate ranking.


Stats systems are inaccurate, encourage unfair play, and just motivate everyone to view their point total/skill index as proof of their ability rather than evidence of their stat whoring.  No matter how you set it up, stats just encourage people to exploit game mechanics in their favor rather than challenge themselves and enjoy the experience.


Regardless, i wasn't aware this was an argument.  I was simply giving my input that was gained over a collected 1000 total hours playing beta 4 in different servers with and without stats.

VC:
I was arguing that such stats can be a valid metric against your assertion that games that allow players to have varied amounts of health and do not have a 3, 2, 1, FIGHT countdown make objective player evaluation impossible.

V!NCENT:
VC, people claim that you are pro at GES, right? Have you tried going to ges-stats.com and sorting on skill? You're up high :)

But I like your project a lot! Example; yesterday I was pwning the shit out of everyone at wnx uk. I scored a lot of headshots and won the rounds easily, untill the wnx crew came over and I no longer ruled. I could disconnect and wait for easyer battles and not lose headshot counts and points. There is the obvious flaw with the current system.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page