Player Rating System...?

mepbmlist
#1

Well Laurence, you stated in a previous post that this was not the
time to get into the details of a Player Rating System. So I
started a new thread for you! :wink:

With the much talked about "2nd Edition", etc, and all the other
high minded wishes, I believe the most common thing we heard about
is the Vote. You mentioned it yourself last time.

I sent off a discourse calling for a Weighted Victory Point system,
that scores the nation against averages for that nation, using the
current Victory Points (NOT Conditions...) as they are now calculated

My argument against a Vote is:

1-players running the nations move in and out of games. Who ends
the game is usually different than who begins it. Who votes?

2-popularity contests.....

3-ignorance of the voters vs quantifiable actions...

So, what kind of measures have you devised? Love to hear about them!

Regards,

Brad Brunet

路路路

On Sun, 01 July 2001, "Laurence G. Tilley" wrote:

I don't really think well intentioned words will make much
difference. A player rating system, which recorded and rewarded
good team play, might.

Regards,

Laurence G.

__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com

#2

I sent off a discourse calling for a Weighted Victory Point system,
that scores the nation against averages for that nation, using the
current Victory Points (NOT Conditions...) as they are now calculated

My argument against a Vote is:

(snip)

So, what kind of measures have you devised? Love to hear about them!

Hi Brad,
Nothing so refined as "devised", just rough idea which would need
refinement through debate. I understand your points about the problem
with a voting system, no system is perfect, but a system can be "good" if
there are appropriate checks and balances.

There are 3 main ways of rating players:
- Self rating
- Game results
- Voting

And here's the good news... I see absolutely no reason why we can't
have the best of all worlds. The ratings are expressed as a simple chart
on a web page.

Inclusion in the player rating system would have to be by a voluntary
opt in.

"Self rating" would ask players to say how many years they've been
playing, and how many games they've completed - self rating of course
relies on people's honesty.

"Game results" would record scores achieved since the rating system
began. You might argue for the VPs and placings to be included.
Personally I would prefer a simple 1 point for being on a winning team
at the end of a game.

"Voting" is the measure of team play. It would have to have strong
checks and balances recorded in the house rules. They would be
something like this:-
The voting system depends on your honesty and the integrity of your
opinion;
Please do not discuss your voting with other players
Please do not trade votes
A player might have 10 or 15 points to allocate to other players, or they
might vote for the best 3 players on their team, and the best player on
the opposition. There's actually lots of ways.

Once the system had run for a while, the web page would look like this
             
                    Y G W V
B Brunet 1992 30 2 6
L G Tilley 1993 20 0 0
M Mouse 1999 6 1 3

Where Y= Year started; G= Games, W= Wins since system started;
V=Votes

But it _could_ have other comments, even (if you must) VPs and
placings. The beauty of a detailed and comprehensive system would be
that different parts of the table can be used according to preference. I'd
be looking at Y G W and V if I was looking for guys to form a team,
you might be more interested in their VPs or whatever.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

路路路

BBrunet <ditletang@canada.com> wrote