I suppose another question is: What about gunboats? Are they factored in or filtered out? I ask simply because once mid to late game is reached, solos in gunboats are a LOT easier to get than a solo in a full press game due to the difficulty in organizing an effective multi-country defense.

Well, these look a little more sensible. I don't understand how I've dropped to 90th though :( Ah well, gives me something to aim for, I guess...

Smething got all out of whack there. Im 151? Behind players with terrible records?

I think this system needs a lot of games played to work well - until then, everyone's going to be fairly closely packed and it's not going to be that accurate. However, it will work eventually and it's good to have something to look to improve until then.

I think Oli said there is a programming error.

Oh, I thought these were the fixed numbers... Sorry. Here's to hoping I'm a little higher up on the real rating then :)

I had thought the change to the rankings meant Oli corrected the mistake he found as well. However, the HoF page keeps changing, so Olis still on the case.

Drano, I am not sure what the status is. I am just going by what his last statement was. However, if he corrected the programming error, then I am fairly certain there is an error in the formula.

Finally found a working formula on the web.
Actual score is with a K-value of 15. Maybe this need some more experiments.

Can you post the formula's?

On the wiki

I like the final results... I'm in 3rd place!

But I think the formula's are incomplete.
How does the calculation to get "re1" factor into the final result?
It looks like you calculate it, then ignore it in the Edif formula.

Is re1 supposed to be just re?
That way it would factor into the Edif formula.

Here's my question.. Who's Talrus, and how does he have 14 wins out of 24 games played?

Where are you going to find the results?

The current results are here: (but the formula's may change)
http://www.vdiplomacy.com/halloffame_elo.php

Good question Leif,

I'm surprised at how high I ended up also, but I think the formula might still be wrong.

Yes, I believe something must be wrong.

Retillion only has 4 games completed, and is in 6th place. That doesn't seem like it should be possible.

He completed:
First War in Africa (8 Player variant) - He won
Clockwork Angels,(35 Player Variant) - He drew
What happened to WWIII?, (35 Player Variant) - He survived
epic - 901 (15 Player Variant) - He won

I'm not picking on you Retillion, but you seem to be a very good example of the argument that you made earlier: That ELO is not well suited for multi-player games.

Either that, or the formula is still wrong.

4th! :D

I think playing games with a large amount of people initially gives you an advantage here, at least to start, because you'll be ranked against everybody in the game when you have a low Velo, so your Velo will rise dramatically when that game finishes. If you play lots of small games, your Velo will rise by a small amount each time, making the expected result slightly more in your favour next time, so you won't get as many points - thus, you would gain more Velo by playing and winning 1 WWIV immediately than playing 35 1v1s. I think this is why Retillion (and, indeed myself) is so high up the table.

Again what does a Draw mean ?

Yes, I had only a Draw in the Clockwork Angels game. But if you look at the game, you can see that I have finished it with 69 SCs !

Should that be taken into account ?

RUFFHAUS_8 wrote earlier :

"if you outperform The Ambassador, Bozo, Cypeg, or Guaroz, in a variant game then you've really earned your wings."

For your information, in that Clockwork Angels game, I personally fought and eliminated (with my allies of course) Cypeg.

That game was also played by several other highly ranked players.

Should that be taken into account ?

Again what does a Draw mean ?
In the Clockwork Angels game a Draw means you scored 12 Draws with other (high rated) players and 23 wins against good rated players too... This was (and should be) a good boost to your rating. And this win was no easy task (IMHO).

Oli, to be precise, I scored 11 Draws and 23 Wins : indeed, I had 34 opponents.

Oli, correct me if I’m wrong; I thought I had lost a passage then I found it in your words:
how does the Won/Draw/Lost rating algorithm take into account a multiplayer game? The algorithm on the wiki is written for duels… are those formulas calculated for every couple of players each game? Namely 3 couples for 3 players, 21 couples for classic… 595 couples for WWIV?
“In fact a 3-palyer draw is all thre players getting a draw against each other and a win against all the rest.
Basically you compare each player one by one against each other player.”

I assume the answer is “Yes it does”.

Using the current formulation, by a player’s point of view:
After a duel my rating can change +/- 15
After a classic my rating can change +/- 15*6 = +/- 90
After a KW_901 my rating can change +/- 15*14 = +/- 210
After a WWIV my rating can change +/- 15*34 = +/- 510

I remind that using the coefficient of 400 in the exponential model means this:
+400 : ten times more skilled
+95 : three times more skilled
+60 : twice more skilled
+15 : 20% more skilled
+0 : equal skilled
-15 : 20% less skilled
-60 : twice less skilled
-95 : three times less skilled
-400 : ten times less skilled
BTW a player can still run out of points

But apart from this, I think that the core idea of the current algorithm is wrong: modeling a multiplayer game into a series of isolated duels.

skill-points of couse

"For your information, in that Clockwork Angels game, I personally fought and eliminated (with my allies of course) Cypeg."

Well, let's all give you a great big medal, then Retillion. Maybe that will offset the solo that you dumped a while ago in a tantrum because you couldn't have your way. I think that the operative word in the above quoted statement is "personally". Your use of allies across games is rather interesting, as is your personal targeting strategy of players with more VDip points with you. But once the word gets out and around on your style of play, the law of averages will take it's effect. Yes, you deserve credit for this game. But remember that this is the also the game that you blocked at least one highly rated player from joining.

RUFFHAUS_8, you cannot help but being unpleasant, can you ?

Does your previous comment help to find a good way to calculate an alternate scoring system ?

And what you say is WRONG : I do not "target" players who have many DPoints. I play the position.

Finally, yes, I have blocked you, like several other players have. And you are the only player that I have blocked. Maybe you should question yourself ?

Repsectfully yours,

Retillion.

Decima, you uncovered one problem.

Then there is another problem. What rating do you use to check the skill level of a player.
This is a time stamp issue: Use the rating of the start of the game, or the one when it ended.

If a player has never really appeared anywhere and then wins a chaos or WWIV game there will be a massive difference.

As I said at the beginning of the thread. Keep it simple and transparent.

In my opinion: when the game ends.

But you're running iLLuM.

That's the step 2 of the discussion. I already had it in mind.
First of all we have to detect a good algorithm