Jump to content
GloatingSwine

New global rating system. Pad hard!

Recommended Posts

So, 8.8 will have a new global rating system integrated into its new service record tab, which WG say they've been working on for some time.

 

Anyone want to guess how long it takes before someone figures how to pad the shit out of it and it ends up useless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the 8.8 video you can see it requires 1,000 battles for their new rating system to kick in. If they need that many battles to give you a ratings, that means the formula could be pretty complicated (doesn't mean it can't be padded)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global Rating as it stands into the service record? Or a revison of Global Rating. Because Global Rating simply favors volume far too much to be useful for much. It can't touch WN* for quick evaluation and is infact...worse than Efficiency. And if your rating is worse than Efficiency...welp...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All metrics are subject to some degree of padding. 

 

I have no faith in WG's ability to create a skill metric.  If they do it right, they insult 80% of their players by telling them that the game itself thinks they are bad.  If they do it wrong, the metric is useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All metrics are subject to some degree of padding. 

 

I have no faith in WG's ability to create a skill metric.  If they do it right, they insult 80% of their players by telling them that the game itself thinks they are bad.  If they do it wrong, the metric is useless.

 

Unfortunately, Duesmortis' prediction is likely to come true. WG's new attempt at a rating system is likely to be flawed by PR reasons yet again. It's just awful marketing to tell the huge majority of your customer base: Sorry, but you suck hard!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, Duesmortis' prediction is likely to come true. WG's new attempt at a rating system is likely to be flawed by PR reasons yet again. It's just awful marketing to tell the huge majority of your customer base: Sorry, but you suck hard!

Perhaps not. It won't be shown in-game so anyone that cares is already running XVM and is already familiar with it. Displaying a static number for a player (rating=1750) is different than saying they are in the bottom 30% of the population, and they already display the WR which tells a lot of players they suck, and the players continue to deny it.

Bad players will continue to make up reasons why the rating sucks.

Good players will figure out what improves the rating, and focus on those areas.

I actually think it'll be better than anything we have, simply because they have access to everything while we have to make do with table scraps. XP is the fundamental basis for the game, and I haven't heard of any particular problems with the xp and credit earning balance. It's not usable for us because we can't differentiate between premium and non-premium accounts; if it weren't for that I'm not sure any of these rating systems would exist. Add in some correction for platoons, exclusion of CW and possibly TC, and it would be really hard to make something that is worse than what we already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm more curious to know if it will be useless from moment one, even before said padding =D

It is, and will remain, useless until the formula is known.  

And even then it might be PROVEN useless.

 

But I have high hopes for it.  they have access to much more info than we do, so they can correct some of the flaws of WNx, and they don't have to be better than WNx for the rating to matter.  

 

I'd bet it'll probably just be the existing global rating, which is worse than useless.

 

The FTR blog suggests that it is completely new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll just adjust the scaling to pat every one on the head. Our red-orange will be their green, our yellow-green will be their blue, and our blue-purple will be their purple. Every one will still have a happy color even if they suck.

If green were the lowest, would it become the shameful color?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. Could a life long association be over written by a limited experience? Needs moar psychology experiment.

 

Come to think of it, XVM should change its color scheme the same way. It might actually be nice (even if only for a while until the effect wore off) to load up and see nice happy green everywhere instead of a sea of blood/death/hate red.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt WG will do anything other than give people a number, and leave people to figure out for themselves what the good and bad numbers are.

 

Ideally they'd use some Elo variant, that would be easy enough and is really difficult to pad (because your gain/loss is based on the quality of your opposition, you can't pad at low tiers because once you reach a certain amount you can't gain from your wins but you can lose a lot from your losses against noob opponents).

 

 

They won't, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, will they actually base matchmaking around it?

 

Seems a little silly for them to come out with their own rating system if they don't tie it to something, unless they're really that upset by players coming up with their own metrics for performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. Could a life long association be over written by a limited experience? Needs moar psychology experiment.

 

Come to think of it, XVM should change its color scheme the same way. It might actually be nice (even if only for a while until the effect wore off) to load up and see nice happy green everywhere instead of a sea of blood/death/hate red.

 

But then all the "greens" would think they are good and don't need to improve. o_o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, will they actually base matchmaking around it?

 

Seems a little silly for them to come out with their own rating system if they don't tie it to something, unless they're really that upset by players coming up with their own metrics for performance.

 

 

I think most people respond one of two ways, when presented with a ranking system.  They will completely ignore it, falling back on the tried and (assumed) true maxim:  "Anyone worse than me is a pathetic noob, anyone better than me is a no-life basement dweller."  Or, they will be motivated to improve.  A good section of the WoT population has already been exposed to rankings, via XVM, efficiency, WoT Labs, etc.  But remember, a sizable portion of the players are ignorant of mods, forums, help sites, etc.  They likely fall into "above average syndrome" and assume they are good.

 

When WoT puts in a visible, server wide ranking system, ignorance takes a beating.  It will make many more people face the two decisions listed above.  Many won't care, but some will.  And those who want to improve?  I bet a lot of them will buy gold as part of their quest to move up the ladder. 

 

In the end, whether or not the system is considered genius or folly, it will likely trigger enough gold purchases to exceed its development costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...