• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

The Big MI Discussion Topic

kd-

kd-

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,235
Location
Body City, BO
Also the decay system allegedly does not work (Roller gave the example of Texas's PR) and contradicts between maintaining the rank of inactive people and dropping the inactive people.

Smashfest at gameroom around 5, Awesome Bad movie night at 9 for those in Ann Arbor
 
DRDN

DRDN

Smash Master
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
3,942
Location
8623 Hickory Drive, Sterling Heights MI 48312
kd- said:
Also the decay system allegedly does not work (Roller gave the example of Texas's PR) and contradicts between maintaining the rank of inactive people and dropping the inactive people.

Smashfest at gameroom around 5, Awesome Bad movie night at 9 for those in Ann Arbor
Click to expand...
The only time inactfives matter is when they show up to random tourneys and if they are truely inactive then they wouldn't meet the requirement of being at 2 tourneys. Even with trueskill you'll need a panel to discuss rules and answer questions but if you have a true skill with depreciation for missing tourneys and have requirements to get on the pr can't you just keep the list updated and pick the top whatever eligable and make a pr image?
 
zyth

zyth

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
1,474
Location
Southfield, MI
kd- said:
Also the decay system allegedly does not work (Roller gave the example of Texas's PR) and contradicts between maintaining the rank of inactive people and dropping the inactive people.

Smashfest at gameroom around 5, Awesome Bad movie night at 9 for those in Ann Arbor
Click to expand...
the decay system for wat im usin is different from what Texas is usin im pretty sure. because if you look at the SWF rankings, it was posted in august, and I had been to tournies in july, and i was in the negatives when it was posted
 
kd-

kd-

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,235
Location
Body City, BO
My personal opinion is that Power Rankings are to determine who is generally the best in a region (should be determined hopefully unbiased by that region), and mostly for a general mix of player pride and motivation. They aren't necessarily for who-can-beat-who/who-is-more-skilled, just a list of 'hey here's our best players'.

I think the problem with point systems and decaying is that the number crunching doesn't always reflect this. What happens when an inactive player with decay comes back and can still beat everyone in the region and does the best out of state? Should he/she be low/gone from the PR even though he/she is clearly still the best? Or, the region as a whole got better than an inactive player coming back, but some people are still lower on the PR. Is that right?

With the perfect decay/point system this won't happen, but it also won't happen with the panel/residency requirement system already in place. It's much easier to accomplish my opinion's goal.

The points are nice because it gives the players a sense of what they need to do to make themselves happy. I think it's better to leave numbers for the most part out and be motivated as a player to do better and win more difficult games, rather than 'fictionally' gaining 5.28 PR points.

Not to take away from your point but

DRDN said:
can't you just keep the list updated and pick the top whatever eligable and make a pr image?
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this statement, but I think even without Trueskill + Point Decay this is already accomplished by the current system. I think the Trueskill + Point Decay system is cool as a side-by-side comparison with the current PR, but not necessarily a true PR.

In regards to numbers, it might be cool to add a few more factors in. Factors such as match-up strength and numbers of stocks won by. Say for instance I beat Carroll with 2 stocks and my match-up is 50/50, but Rob beats Carroll only by 1 stock and his match-up is 60/40. Am I better than Rob by 1.06 points? Or if I beat Rob by 3 stocks once, and the next two games I only win by one, but Roki consistently beats Rob by 2 stocks, who's the more skilled? It's not common to keep these records but I think they'd be fun anyway. Sorta.
 
kd-

kd-

Smash Lord
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,235
Location
Body City, BO
zyth said:
the decay system for wat im usin is different from what Texas is usin im pretty sure. because if you look at the SWF rankings, it was posted in august, and I had been to tournies in july, and i was in the negatives when it was posted
Click to expand...
I wouldn't know since I didn't check the source, but if that system doesn't work and yours does/at least is different, that's great news
 
zyth

zyth

Smash Lord
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
1,474
Location
Southfield, MI
kd- said:
My personal opinion is that Power Rankings are to determine who is generally the best in a region (should be determined hopefully unbiased by that region), and mostly for a general mix of player pride and motivation. They aren't necessarily for who-can-beat-who/who-is-more-skilled, just a list of 'hey here's our best players'.

I think the problem with point systems and decaying is that the number crunching doesn't always reflect this. What happens when an inactive player with decay comes back and can still beat everyone in the region and does the best out of state? Should he/she be low/gone from the PR even though he/she is clearly still the best? Or, the region as a whole got better than an inactive player coming back, but some people are still lower on the PR. Is that right?

With the perfect decay/point system this won't happen, but it also won't happen with the panel/residency requirement system already in place. It's much easier to accomplish my opinion's goal.

The points are nice because it gives the players a sense of what they need to do to make themselves happy. I think it's better to leave numbers for the most part out and be motivated as a player to do better and win more difficult games, rather than 'fictionally' gaining 5.28 PR points.

Not to take away from your point but



I completely agree with this statement, but I think even without Trueskill + Point Decay this is already accomplished by the current system. I think the Trueskill + Point Decay system is cool as a side-by-side comparison with the current PR, but not necessarily a true PR.

In regards to numbers, it might be cool to add a few more factors in. Factors such as match-up strength and numbers of stocks won by. Say for instance I beat Carroll with 2 stocks and my match-up is 50/50, but Rob beats Carroll only by 1 stock and his match-up is 60/40. Am I better than Rob by 1.06 points? Or if I beat Rob by 3 stocks once, and the next two games I only win by one, but Roki consistently beats Rob by 2 stocks, who's the more skilled? It's not common to keep these records but I think they'd be fun anyway. Sorta.
Click to expand...
ok now I can actually see wat ur saying, thnx for explaining. The way I see it, I might do a system where if a person doesnt enter a tourney for a whole season, I will hide their name. I will still keep data on their points, but that person wont be in the 1-50(just a number) ranknigs, just listed as a MI smasher.

Then if they comeback, I will put them back in the rankings with a penalty on their points depending on how long they were gone. if they miss a whole season that could be like their points*.8 or somethin. if they miss a whole year it could be *.5.

generally speaking, if the person is great anyway, like in anthers case, he can come back in and get top 5 placing and get a lot of points any way. this is just a solution that I think might work for the points system.

dont know what to say about the whole who beats who rankings part tho. cuz on a good day anyone can beat (almost) anyone. there have been times where i beat Lain in friendlies then lose in brackets in the same MU. there really isnt much you can do about one person beating another, cuz it varies too much. with losers brackets, you could be sent to losers by someone, the person u lost to loses to someone else, and another person, (so you dont face them again) then you face the person that beat the person that beat you and win. in that case, who is the better player? Its like rock-paper-scissors. thats why i prefer the points system, where everything is set in stone and theres no discrepancies.
 
Pimp Daddy Supreme

Pimp Daddy Supreme

gio 2.0
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
5,104
Location
Tristram
zyth said:
dont know what to say about the whole who beats who rankings part tho. cuz on a good day anyone can beat (almost) anyone. there have been times where i beat Lain in friendlies then lose in brackets in the same MU.
Click to expand...
if you take friendlies seriously and use them as any basis for argument, i will completely ignore your posts
 
SCOTU

SCOTU

Smash Hero
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
6,636
Location
MI
kd- said:
I think the problem with point systems and decaying is that the number crunching doesn't always reflect this.
Click to expand...
Neither do panel members voting. At least it's impossible to (reasonably) argue with a pre-announced method for determine the rankings.

kd- said:
What happens when an inactive player with decay comes back and can still beat everyone in the region and does the best out of state?
Click to expand...
Using TrueSkill, such an inactive player would have a large uncertainty value while maintaining their skill score. This means something along the lines of "We know this guy was good, but we're not very sure how much his skill has changed since he went inactive". Because you have a tourney attendance requirement to make it onto the PR, the inactive player would not be listed, but their score would still be high.

kd- said:
Should he/she be low/gone from the PR even though he/she is clearly still the best? Or, the region as a whole got better than an inactive player coming back, but some people are still lower on the PR. Is that right?
Click to expand...
Since their score remains the same but with a large uncertainty, coming back into the scene would lower their uncertainty reasonably quickly allowing them to either close in on what they deserve to be now. It quickly and accurately reflects changes in activity, that's actually one of the design goals of a system that has uncertainty.

kd- said:
With the perfect decay/point system this won't happen, but it also won't happen with the panel/residency requirement system already in place. It's much easier to accomplish my opinion's goal.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm proposing that we have a reasonably perfect point/decay system. Updating and maintaining such a ranking would require far less effort than having the lengthy discussions needed by panels that are perfectly ranking players. It's much easier to have a better numerical system than to have unbiased people.

kd- said:
The points are nice because it gives the players a sense of what they need to do to make themselves happy. I think it's better to leave numbers for the most part out and be motivated as a player to do better and win more difficult games, rather than 'fictionally' gaining 5.28 PR points.
Click to expand...
On the converse, when a player is ranked lower than they want to be on a numerical system, they can see why they are ranked that way and have direct feedback to their efforts. In fact, direct feedback is one of the strongest ways of getting people to do things well. Solidly designed reward schedules keep people grinding in MMOs for way more time than makes sense. Such Skinner-Box techniques are used throughout the gaming industry and are an amazing source of motivation. Humans are also amazing feedback control systems. Did you know that you can actually raise the temperature on a thermometer by holding it significantly better if you can see the reading of the thermometer? Entirely subconscious.

On the other hand, if a player is ranked lower than they want to be on a panel system, they have virtually no feedback. They can't tell how far away they are and they only have people's words and opinions to work on. In fact, it's faaaaar more likely that they'll simply think the panel was bias against them. Does this motivate the player to do better? No. It does the opposite. If they think they've been winning tough matches enough to be ranked higher and the panel is just disregarding their effort, then they're far more inclined to actually put less effort into performing better because it doesn't matter at all: those damn panelists aren't going to care anyways.

=======

I've been on several power ranking committees and have contributed to numerical skill systems in the past. My preference is clear.
 
Damittom

Damittom

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
950
Location
Muskegon, MI
3DS FC
4742-5811-9326
SCOTU said:
On the other hand, if a player is ranked lower than they want to be on a panel system, they have virtually no feedback. They can't tell how far away they are and they only have people's words and opinions to work on. In fact, it's faaaaar more likely that they'll simply think the panel was bias against them. Does this motivate the player to do better? No. It does the opposite. If they think they've been winning tough matches enough to be ranked higher and the panel is just disregarding their effort, then they're far more inclined to actually put less effort into performing better because it doesn't matter at all: those damn panelists aren't going to care anyways.
Click to expand...
^ This is awesome and the reason that something such as an "Unofficial" power ranking system would be helpful.
 
Roller

Roller

Smash Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
13,137
Location
Just follow the grime...
Considering the fact that nobody except WTP (who was on the panel), Blade (who lost to not very good players consistently and only beat one legitimate one), and THuGz (who KNOWS he should not be PR'd) has a single legitimate win from all of last season vs a respectable player in bracket.

Tech doesn't even really have a good win in bracket from last season. He's kinda just on there because he has no bad losses, and nobody else deserved to be on there above him. (because of the aforementioned lack of people with wins vs good players)

I actually would be interested in seeing a trueskill system implemented as what is currently listed as "The Unofficial PR". At least over the bs method he is using now. I think it would be interesting.

Also.

Zyth, put a link to the "Official" PR Thread OP on the top of your op in size 7 letters, just to make sure out of state TO's don't think the unofficial one is the only one we have if they scan the list quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom