Patch, newbie changes: ranking, posting
Viewing forum thread.
Back to Game Queries.
Back to Forum List.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
04:51 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Thats the explantion, the reduction is 90% for most of your newbie games and then reduces only in the last few before you leave newbie status at 50.
nick said:
Ranked games played are now stored, and this number is used to calculate the newbie reduction (before friendlies would count as well here). For newbies this number is shown on their profile. This number was not stored before, so at this point your ranked games have been calculated as the total games you've played.
The minimum score change when playing a newbie is now 10% (from 20%) to protect ranks further. In addition, it now uses an exponential evaluation to find this value, staying at 10% for a while and rising to 100% sharply as user approaches the newbie period.
Playing around with a newbie versus an 800 ranked player the newbie will overtake the ranked player on the 22nd consecutive win, and will overtake at about 786 points, therefore it is quite safe to presume that a user will be approaching their true rank at around 44 games. Given this, and that friendlies no longer count towards newbie ranked, I have reduced newbie period to 50 games.
The minimum score change when playing a newbie is now 10% (from 20%) to protect ranks further. In addition, it now uses an exponential evaluation to find this value, staying at 10% for a while and rising to 100% sharply as user approaches the newbie period.
Playing around with a newbie versus an 800 ranked player the newbie will overtake the ranked player on the 22nd consecutive win, and will overtake at about 786 points, therefore it is quite safe to presume that a user will be approaching their true rank at around 44 games. Given this, and that friendlies no longer count towards newbie ranked, I have reduced newbie period to 50 games.
Thats the explantion, the reduction is 90% for most of your newbie games and then reduces only in the last few before you leave newbie status at 50.
21:45 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
But my point was that it is more difficult to get 50 games played, also calculated that playing straight, takes about 15 minutes to play a game, does for me anyway, and if every game takes on average 15 minutes, will take newbies over 12 hours of play on that game type to get tournament qualification.
Take that into consideration, I was on the other day, and only NINE people entered the straight tournament? Is that really good enough?
Also, still think gaining rank in 9ball easier than 8ball UK is wrong.
UK is more skill than 9ball in my opinion and most people's I would say, so why is the reward for winning less greater? Also, 8ball is less rewarding than 9ball
Take that into consideration, I was on the other day, and only NINE people entered the straight tournament? Is that really good enough?
Also, still think gaining rank in 9ball easier than 8ball UK is wrong.
UK is more skill than 9ball in my opinion and most people's I would say, so why is the reward for winning less greater? Also, 8ball is less rewarding than 9ball
21:47 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Only 9 players in a straight tournament? If only I'd known
21:52 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
http://www.funkypool.com/tournaments/44032
That is the tournament in question Clooney.
But still curious why it is easier to gain rank in a less skillful game of 9ball than a more skillful game of 8ball UK. 9ball games can fly by and you can gain/lose rank easily in an hour.
UK games can take a lot lot longer in particular if played tactical, so surely the reward should be greater if not at least the same.
And questioning whether it should be less than 50 games in straight to qualify for tournaments as it does take over 12 hours to qualify, takes about 2 or 3 hours for the other game types?
That is the tournament in question Clooney.
But still curious why it is easier to gain rank in a less skillful game of 9ball than a more skillful game of 8ball UK. 9ball games can fly by and you can gain/lose rank easily in an hour.
UK games can take a lot lot longer in particular if played tactical, so surely the reward should be greater if not at least the same.
And questioning whether it should be less than 50 games in straight to qualify for tournaments as it does take over 12 hours to qualify, takes about 2 or 3 hours for the other game types?
22:07 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
I can't understand why so few people are suddenly taking part in straight tournaments, presuming this has become the norm (I haven't checked). If so, I would have thought that as people notice the low number of people in a tourney, they will join it because their chances of victory improve.
22:25 Sun 28 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
tbh Clooney, I only played 70 odd games on old accounts and I entered several Straights, so people who have either deactivated, reset or just didn't play many times can't enter.
They are possible reasons why some people don't enter, because they simply can't
They are possible reasons why some people don't enter, because they simply can't
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
00:04 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
That's right - it's the 50 ranked game qualifying requirement keeping the numbers down for Straight tournaments at the moment.
00:14 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
I think it needs to be lowered to something like 25 or somet. 15 minutes per game on average for me, 25 is still a bit high, but 50 will take half a day for a newbie to complete
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
12:48 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Hi Nick
This came up in stats...
Killer Pool: You need to play -1 more ranked games to lose your newbie tag
am gonna stuggle to play a minus game
This came up in stats...
Killer Pool: You need to play -1 more ranked games to lose your newbie tag
am gonna stuggle to play a minus game
14:06 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
I've updated this to 30, inline with the snooker games.
This is fixed (it was erroneously using your total games including friendlies to calculate this stat).
warney said:
I think it needs to be lowered to something like 25 or somet. 15 minutes per game on average for me, 25 is still a bit high, but 50 will take half a day for a newbie to complete
I've updated this to 30, inline with the snooker games.
al_ said:
Hi Nick
This came up in stats...
Killer Pool: You need to play -1 more ranked games to lose your newbie tag
am gonna stuggle to play a minus game
This came up in stats...
Killer Pool: You need to play -1 more ranked games to lose your newbie tag
am gonna stuggle to play a minus game
This is fixed (it was erroneously using your total games including friendlies to calculate this stat).
14:36 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Thanks Nick, the other point I made was ranking for 8ball, 9ball and 8ball UK.
Current ranking has the increase as:
8ball: x2.0
9ball: x2.5
8ball UK: x1.5
I believe this is back-to-front as surely 9ball is the game with the most flukes, so why is the reward greater for "flukeball" than it is for a more tactical game such as 8ball UK where it can get very tactical, therefore reward should be greater perhaps?
Would either swap 8ball UK and 9ball round or have all multipliers as 2.0
Current ranking has the increase as:
8ball: x2.0
9ball: x2.5
8ball UK: x1.5
I believe this is back-to-front as surely 9ball is the game with the most flukes, so why is the reward greater for "flukeball" than it is for a more tactical game such as 8ball UK where it can get very tactical, therefore reward should be greater perhaps?
Would either swap 8ball UK and 9ball round or have all multipliers as 2.0
16:47 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
I was going to reply to this earlier but couldn't re-find your post.
The numbers are set to spread the players between the full extent of the ranking range. It is not proportional to difficulty or tactical play.
Remember rankings are a balance, setting the weights higher or lower has little effect as eventually you will approach your correct ranking.
The numbers are set to spread the players between the full extent of the ranking range. It is not proportional to difficulty or tactical play.
Remember rankings are a balance, setting the weights higher or lower has little effect as eventually you will approach your correct ranking.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
21:21 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Hi Nick
I see you have lowered newbie period to 30 games in str8 - could the same apply to killer??
I see you have lowered newbie period to 30 games in str8 - could the same apply to killer??
22:20 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
Improved now - 34 is pretty good for a straight tourny:
http://www.funkypool.com/tournaments/44101
I'm ambivalent to this as there's no killerpool tournaments.
clooneman said:
I can't understand why so few people are suddenly taking part in straight tournaments, presuming this has become the norm (I haven't checked). If so, I would have thought that as people notice the low number of people in a tourney, they will join it because their chances of victory improve.
Improved now - 34 is pretty good for a straight tourny:
http://www.funkypool.com/tournaments/44101
al_ said:
I see you have lowered newbie period to 30 games in str8 - could the same apply to killer??
I'm ambivalent to this as there's no killerpool tournaments.
Deleted User
(IP Logged)
(IP Logged)
23:08 Mon 29 Nov 10 (GMT) [Link]
bring on killerpool tournies - would love to see them!!
19:16 Sat 4 Dec 10 (GMT) [Link]
Definately, surely a system could be brought up.
al_ said:
bring on killerpool tournies - would love to see them!!
Definately, surely a system could be brought up.
19:23 Sat 4 Dec 10 (GMT) [Link]
ive never been on killerpool and i figured if you never been on it you cant gamble when money does come out
19:29 Sun 19 Dec 10 (GMT) [Link]
Coming back to rankings? Not sure how you can approach a correct ranking when you enter tournaments and you're ranking can go up by 97 as mine did once, or decrease by 16 as someone else's did.
Rankings jumping around more than a child on a space hopper, surely you cannot get a "correct ranking" when this is happening?
nick said:
I was going to reply to this earlier but couldn't re-find your post.
The numbers are set to spread the players between the full extent of the ranking range. It is not proportional to difficulty or tactical play.
Remember rankings are a balance, setting the weights higher or lower has little effect as eventually you will approach your correct ranking.
The numbers are set to spread the players between the full extent of the ranking range. It is not proportional to difficulty or tactical play.
Remember rankings are a balance, setting the weights higher or lower has little effect as eventually you will approach your correct ranking.
Coming back to rankings? Not sure how you can approach a correct ranking when you enter tournaments and you're ranking can go up by 97 as mine did once, or decrease by 16 as someone else's did.
Rankings jumping around more than a child on a space hopper, surely you cannot get a "correct ranking" when this is happening?
| Unable to post | |
|---|---|
| Reason: | You must log in before you can post |
Patch, newbie changes: ranking, posting
Back to Top of this Page
Back to Game Queries.
Back to Forum List.