Leaderboard

Previous topic - Next topic

SkyHard

Quote from: Ingix on 05 April 2017, 02:52:24 PM
I would definitely support ranked play with Bots, at the moment and in the foreseeable future with a separate leaderboard.

Same here.

Polk5440

Quote from: Stef on 05 April 2017, 11:41:41 AM
Quote from: markus on 05 April 2017, 08:58:51 AM
I'm adding this thought to the "general discussion" of leaderboard: I would allow to have rated games against the bot, if they are drawn randomly (like in "find a game"). The bot would then also get a rating - and could be shown on the leaderboard.

I don't think I like this idea.

....

I agree with Stef. Ratings are primarily used to improve matching when seeking games. There is a danger that including the AI as a player would mess this up more than it helps right now (As Stef mentions, we have seen this in the past).

Rabid

I think some sort of alternative positive feedback for playing bots would be a good idea.
Some ideas:

1) Campaign progress
2) Recording your wins / losses
3) Bot only leaderboard
4) Win X games, unlock access to a promo card
5) In game achievements, Councilroom style.

Jacob Marley

I feel that bot games should never be part of the PvP leaderboard.  A separate leaderboard for bot games would be ok, but I personally would have no use for it.

Polk5440

Quote from: Rabid on 05 April 2017, 07:56:18 PM
I think some sort of alternative positive feedback for playing bots would be a good idea.
Some ideas:

1) Campaign progress
2) Recording your wins / losses
3) Bot only leaderboard
4) Win X games, unlock access to a promo card
5) In game achievements, Councilroom style.

I would love 1, 2, and 5 to be implemented.

Sharajat

I know instant updating is less accurate and more spiky than batch updating, but it's also more satisfying.  Can we just instant update every game and let people's rank spike up and down?

SkyHard

Quote from: Sharajat on 06 April 2017, 12:57:34 AM
I know instant updating is less accurate and more spiky than batch updating, but it's also more satisfying.  Can we just instant update every game and let people's rank spike up and down?

Either that, or at least show the played game since last update.

markus

Quote from: Polk5440 on 05 April 2017, 06:56:24 PM
I agree with Stef. Ratings are primarily used to improve matching when seeking games. There is a danger that including the AI as a player would mess this up more than it helps right now (As Stef mentions, we have seen this in the past).

I think it's the opposite: I can see that you don't want people to claim top spots in the leaderboard, when they are only/mostly playing bots. But for matching quality it should help to also use the data from bot games, and the possible downside is quite limited: if the rating coming from bots is really wrong AND this player decides to play a human at some point, he'll lose the game(s) and quickly lose in terms of rating. I think the leaderboard / match quality gets more distorted by not all games being played with all expansions.

Once you have bots of different quality, however, this rating would also help to get the best suited bot for those players that only play bot games.

So I think it would be fine to have an additional rating that takes into account both bots and human games.

katie_mi

I haven't seen an update on the Leaderboard for 2 days now. Is there a problem? My rank and the number of played games hasn't changed on the board.

markus

The tab hasn't been updated, but you see the new level, when you start a game. You can also check your progress here:
http://dominion.lauxnet.com/scavenger/?user=katie_mi

tufftaeh

And you can see the updated full leaderboard there as well: http://dominion.lauxnet.com/leaderboard/?full=true

Ingix

Still there seems to be a mismatch between the games I played according to the in-game client and that website linked to by tufftaeh.

According to the game client, I have played 24 games now (2017/04/23). That number was 23 games when I had last checked in, 2 days ago. I played one game on that day, so that would make sense. But why am I then finding that I have currently 28 ranked games when looking at lauxnet.com?

markus

Quote from: Ingix on 23 April 2017, 08:10:17 PM
Still there seems to be a mismatch between the games I played according to the in-game client and that website linked to by tufftaeh.

According to the game client, I have played 24 games now (2017/04/23). That number was 23 games when I had last checked in, 2 days ago. I played one game on that day, so that would make sense. But why am I then finding that I have currently 28 ranked games when looking at lauxnet.com?

I think the official leaderboard misses the games from last Wednesday and Thursday. In your case, those are the 4 games currently marked as 5 days ago in "Scavenger". Therefore, the official count is 4 lower than the sum of games on Scavenger.

Ingix

Thanks for the feedback. Is everybody missing those 2 days or is it just me? I'm trying to get my head around what happened: As I understand it, each day (or night) the ranked games are evaluated and everybody gets an updated ranking. If that evaluation is not done one night, the ranking in the game will not change, it will based on data that is at least a day old. But how can the system work if some games *in between* are not taken into account?


markus

Everybody is missing those days.
I don't understand your other question. Obviously, that is a bug that shouldn't happen. But you can just pretend that these two days didn't exist and the system can continue to "work" on from there.