Currently i dislike just a few things about our ELO system
So i did some recalculation of all games with a modified formular with includes a variable K-factor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_...e_K-factor), calculated in my case by k(ELO) = -0.2 * ELO + 500, so it is between 500 and 20 (capped minimum). Also i change the entry ELO to Zero (which is why i made that K-factor varies so much)
The backup is about one week old, this would be the ranking:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/60170936/btl_recalc_ranking.htm
and this how the last few games would look like (the only ELO and Δ (delta) have change)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/60170936/btl_rec...tgames.htm
Links won't work on those static saved pages
My first impression: i like it more how the players are distributed
- players are too close together
- no progress (if u win a game and lose the next it is almost the same like not playing at all - which is directly correlated to the fact that the people too close together)
- u start in the middle
So i did some recalculation of all games with a modified formular with includes a variable K-factor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_...e_K-factor), calculated in my case by k(ELO) = -0.2 * ELO + 500, so it is between 500 and 20 (capped minimum). Also i change the entry ELO to Zero (which is why i made that K-factor varies so much)
The backup is about one week old, this would be the ranking:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/60170936/btl_recalc_ranking.htm
and this how the last few games would look like (the only ELO and Δ (delta) have change)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/60170936/btl_rec...tgames.htm
Links won't work on those static saved pages
My first impression: i like it more how the players are distributed
Marvin Wrote:The first ten million years were the worst and the second ten million years, they were the worst too. The third ten million years I didn't enjoy at all. After that I went into a bit of a decline