Player Ranking System Discussion

[Corrosive]

I feel there should be a universal ranking system to determine where we all stand as far as overall skill level. It would serve two beneficial purposes,

• Generally just for ranking everyone, giving people a concrete goal and incentive to work toward. Example being: Breaking the Top 50.
• To clearly define and categorize people's skill levels so that we can put restrictions on teams to maintain a balance of power amongst them all. Example: Maintaining a maximum of two "Elite" players per team. The different tiers of skill levels can be labeled later - something like: Grand Master class, then Ultra class, Elite class, etc. or there can boringly be no labels at all.

After collaborating with perfectclear, jkwon, caffeine, Aaron, and others on the shoutbox, the consensus is that the ideal player ranking system will be determined by two different components:

40 Lines and Dig Challenge (Real-Time)

Based on those values, the end result will need to look something to the effect of this:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070211085627/...com/?page=stats

Aaron will update and maintain the records atleast once a week or ask for help accordingly.

A formula that is being looked at right now is Dig Challenge((time+score)/40 Lines(40L+7))"

Leave your feedback and thoughts and also start submitting your Dig Challenge and 40L records here so that we have data to work with. I encourage you to work at improving these records on Nullpomino considering that there is no lag factor (no internet connection is even required.)

[div align=\\\"center\\\"]**Submit your Records HERE**[/size]


Hard Drop Tetris Rankings[/font]
[/div]

[perfectclear]

currently looking at (dig score+ time)/ (40l time+ some constant), everything being in seconds. I like (score+time)/(40l+7) but need more data to determine if its an accurate model or not.

edit: if you are posting data, please post BEST time and BEST score, not necessarily from same run.

[CaptainPaul]

At first glance, this looks pretty good. Though, PerfectClear, I feel like it would generally make more sense to use (dig score + time) / (40L TIMES some constant). Addition wouldn't work as well for all ranges of scores.

PS: In case it helps to have more data, I'll start the data train.
40L: 23.78
Challenge: 296 score at 258 seconds

[perfectclear]

At first glance, this looks pretty good. Though, PerfectClear, I feel like it would generally make more sense to use (dig score + time) / (40L TIMES some constant). Addition wouldn't work as well for all ranges of scores.

times some constant literally doesn't do anything at all to the order of players. adding a constant acts as a counterweight.

edit: I see you posted data. post your best time if its from a different run

[Antifate]

Is there any difference to realtime vs. normal? I've always played normal...

[perfectclear]

in normal you can delay the end by spinning a piece over and over. realtime the floor rises gradually, not just coming up when you place a piece

[Corrosive]

DC score 116, time 03:34.20
40L 26.67

[CaptainPaul]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]times some constant literally doesn't do anything at all to the order of players. adding a constant acts as a counterweight. [/quote]

Haha, yeah that wasn't very clever of me, sorry. I'm just trying to recommend using a system that will let you scale scores of different ranges more cleanly. I'm not sure that there's any great way of doing so, however, because people have traditionally played a *lot* more 40L than Dig Challenge, so there's a huge variety in Dig Challenge compared to a pretty tight group in the former.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]edit: I see you posted data. post your best time if its from a different run[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification; they're from the same run.

[CaptainPaul]

Just one last thought to throw out there: what if we combined the scores by viewing them as proportions to the world records? This might make it easier to compare qualities of scores in completely different events.

Ex. .50 *[ (your Dig Challenge combined score/ world record score) + (WR Time / your time)

Or, in my honest but biased opinion: .45(your Dig Challenge combined score/ world record score) + .55(WR Time / your time)

This (the one that places equal weight on each event) would give a player with world records in everything a 1.000 and according to the records I found give
me a .7782
Corrosive a .6057
and Blink a .8444

Thoughts?

[Antifate]

Crud I'm below CaptainPaul

[jkwon23]

Just one last thought to throw out there: what if we combined the scores by viewing them as proportions to the world records? This might make it easier to compare qualities of scores in completely different events.

Ex. .50 *[ (your Dig Challenge combined score/ world record score) + (WR Time / your time)

Or, in my honest but biased opinion: .45(your Dig Challenge combined score/ world record score) + .55(WR Time / your time)

This (the one that places equal weight on each event) would give a player with world records in everything a 1.000 and according to the records I found give
me a .7782
Corrosive a .6057
and Blink a .8444

Thoughts?

Dig Challnege WR score + time isn't available since challenge can be played offline. Qmk and jixsoo told me their best were played while they played offline.

Here is the best score+time I have seen without many all spins. The korean player uses many many combos. It's 3wide over and over again.    

[Blitz]

I feel there should be a universal ranking system to determine where we all stand as far as overall skill level. It would serve two beneficial purposes,
Generally just for ranking everyone, giving people a concrete goal and incentive to work toward. Example being: Breaking the Top 50.
To clearly define and categorize people's skill levels so that we can put restrictions on teams to maintain a balance of power amongst them all. Example: Maintaining a maximum of two "Elite" players per team. The different tiers of skill levels can be labeled later - something like: Grand Master class, then Ultra class, Elite class, etc. or there can boringly be no labels at all.

Wait what exactly are you trying to calculate?
The true overall skill of a player, or just an estimate of how well a player can do in guideline multiplayer?

Your formula does not account for randomizer, previews and that kind of stuff.
If you are looking for a way to calculate the true overall skill of a player you can not exclude this.
I have seen some very good guideline players fail hard when challenged to downstack 100% hole change garbage with no hold, no ghost, one next piece and memoryless randomizer. Doing this requires different skills than playing with bag randomizer and lots of previews.
If you really want the formula to calculate the overall skill of a player it must be significantly more comprehensive and the player must play at least 15-30 different game modes to get a measurement of all the other skills that are not challenged in guideline dig challenge and 40 lines.
Otherwise your current formula might work if all you are looking for is to estimate how well a player can perform in the guideline multiplayer modes.

[Corrosive]

Both. To get a impressive 40L time means you've become very swift and efficient at stacking and most importantly block placement which is what Tetris is all about. For the most part large differences in speed distinguishes veterans from noobs. Faster people have advantage on all the games especially Nullpomino which imo is the only game with no downsides or handicaps that slow you down. Dig Challenge is the same task of block placement and also incorporates how well you deal with garbage and down stacking and trains your endurance for multiplayer. Getting an optimal DC score demands efficiency at sending lines via spins and tetrises. These two most important solo game types are enough to go by and if someone trains at and masters them they will become very effective at multiplayer. 40L and DC was the unanimous decision on the shoutbox with several people's input involved.

P.S. Reiterating the above from a personal perspective:
Before Digital retired from Tetris he told me on Blockbox to start playing lots of survivor mode and I would become better. Also if I never made tons and tons of attempts at 40L I wouldn't have become as fast as I am today.

[myndzi]

I don't know how useful this truly is, but if you're going to do it anyway, this is a prime candidate for a logarithmic scale.

[Corrosive]

I'm not a math person like Aaron is so if you want to come up with something better then go ahead. People will spend a lot of time trying to improve their ranking, several of us were playing Dig Challenge last night. A lot of people who don't normally play DC will put hours into it and become stronger players. It's all a win.