Clan Elo Rating Suggestion

Originally posted by Russ
Regarding suggestions about clan player rating - this is not going to happen. After considering how to prototype it, I realised that clan members with low "clan ratings" could leave and then re-join a clan to reset their rating to the starting default. Of course, this could be protected against, creating a record of the clan rating for every departing clan ...[text shortened]... ex anyway.

So, I'm ruling out any idea based on clan member "clan only" ratings (like clubs).

Russ.

Can you post the clan rating in the clan details screen.
The clan rating currently shows in the clan table only.
But if you open up the clan, the rating is not visible.

Additionally, showing the clan rating in the challenge screen would be a nice to have.
And more importantly, the clan rating should appear in the Pending Challenge screen.
Otherwise the clan leaders will be flying blind.

Additionally, in the spirit of levelling the playing field, I would like to submit an additional proposal.

All challenges will have the same timeout and time bank settings.
I suggest 3 day timeout, 7 day time bank.
In the collusion fiasco of 2016, the participating clans set their time banks very low so as to recycle the challenges quickly.

Despite your assurances that collusion has been solved, I still think that some clans can "nickel and dime" their way to an inflated rating.

Having one set of time controls will help alleviate that.

Originally posted by mghrn55
Russ.

Can you post the clan rating in the clan details screen.
The clan rating currently shows in the clan table only.
But if you open up the clan, the rating is not visible.

Additionally, showing the clan rating in the challenge screen would be a nice to have.
And more importantly, the clan rating should appear in the Pending Challenge screen. ...[text shortened]... e" their way to an inflated rating.

Having one set of time controls will help alleviate that.

got to disagree with you about time controls, you could set it 21 days with 50 days timebank, that will not stop collusion, the cheats will just resign quicker just like last year
only a points removal will stop them, no system is possible.
now we see strategic ultimatum have had points removed, surely the easy riders must suffer the same fate, their collusion was far greater

no time limit on justice
no amnesty

Originally posted by Russ
Regarding suggestions about clan player rating - this is not going to happen. After considering how to prototype it, I realised that clan members with low "clan ratings" could leave and then re-join a clan to reset their rating to the starting default. Of course, this could be protected against, creating a record of the clan rating for every departing clan ...[text shortened]... ex anyway.

So, I'm ruling out any idea based on clan member "clan only" ratings (like clubs).

Oh no. This is bad news.

Why would the rating reset for any player, ever? The rating should follow the individual. The rating is for games in clan matches. It is mainly intended to stop people from using non-clan games for sandbagging.

Without it, the system remains too easy to game.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Oh no. This is bad news.

Why would the rating reset for any player, ever? The rating should follow the individual. The rating is for games in clan matches. It is mainly intended to stop people from using non-clan games for sandbagging.

Without it, the system remains too easy to game.

I agree ,isn't it possible to have a clan rating like the normal rating
They would both be the same to start with and then split
one for tournament games etc and one for clan games only

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Oh no. This is bad news.

Why would the rating reset for any player, ever? The rating should follow the individual. The rating is for games in clan matches. It is mainly intended to stop people from using non-clan games for sandbagging.

Without it, the system remains too easy to game.

That exact question had already crossed my mind.
I didn't want to ask it right away.
Because I have a list of questions on the clan ranking system.

If a player leaves a clan, he takes his clan games rating with him/her.
When he/she rejoins the same clan or another clan, that rating comes back with him/her.

I think Russ should just have told us he already spent time and resources on the first system.
And he wasn't going back to the drawing board.

Originally posted by roma45
got to disagree with you about time controls, you could set it 21 days with 50 days timebank, that will not stop collusion, the cheats will just resign quicker just like last year
only a points removal will stop them, no system is possible.
now we see strategic ultimatum have had points removed, surely the easy riders must suffer the same fate, their collusion was far greater

no time limit on justice
no amnesty

Inactive players usually don't resign games .
So a shorter timeout/time bank setting means the challenge gets completed faster and allows a new challenge to be set.

That's how Carrobie kept the collusion conveyor belt moving after Russ put in the 3 challenge limit in Jan 2016.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Oh no. This is bad news.

Why would the rating reset for any player, ever? The rating should follow the individual. The rating is for games in clan matches. It is mainly intended to stop people from using non-clan games for sandbagging.

Without it, the system remains too easy to game.

a certain type of player would join or even start a clan just to lose that way lowering their rating for the main clan they play for, easy to sand bag
now Russ has said it's too complicated to do. i agree this new ELO system still makes no sense, do you do challenges by clan v clan or player v player rating? or both?
still does nothing to stop collusion, did you notice strategic ultimatums points have been removed from 2015 after collusion.
no time limit for punishment
plenty of time to sort out the 2016 fiasco, easy riders arrow anti metallica and breaking bad, points removal at the very least

no time limit for justice
no amnesty

Originally posted by roma45
a certain type of player would join or even start a clan just to lose that way lowering their rating for the main clan they play for, easy to sand bag
now Russ has said it's too complicated to do. i agree this new ELO system still makes no sense, do you do challenges by clan v clan or player v player rating? or both?
still does nothing to stop collusion, di ...[text shortened]... lica and breaking bad, points removal at the very least

no time limit for justice
no amnesty

There are no points to remove.
The clan rating will be the metric of record.
As of Jan 1st, 2016.
Easy Riders for all their cheating have been pushed all the way to 4th place.

Besides, the clan statistics are now a mess.

Russ needs to sort through that first.
Every clan can look through their own statistics.
But Metallica did NOT win 1980 clan challenges in 2016.

What a mess !!!!

Like Vespin says, let's all congratulate Carrobie for causing this mess !!

Originally posted by roma45
a certain type of player would join or even start a clan just to lose that way lowering their rating for the main clan they play for, easy to sand bag
now Russ has said it's too complicated to do. i agree this new ELO system still makes no sense, do you do challenges by clan v clan or player v player rating? or both?
still does nothing to stop collusion, di ...[text shortened]... lica and breaking bad, points removal at the very least

no time limit for justice
no amnesty

Sandbagging cannot be completely prevented.

But at least a separate clan rating would make it more obvious to other clan leaders. (It would also remove the incentive for sandbaggers to ruin banded tournaments.)

At some point the clan leader has to exercise some judgment. The system cannot do all the work of making reasonable matches.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Sandbagging cannot be completely prevented.

But at least a separate clan rating would make it more obvious to other clan leaders. (It would also remove the incentive for sandbaggers to ruin banded tournaments.)

At some point the clan leader has to exercise some judgment. The system cannot do all the work of making reasonable matches.

if the ELO cant stop sand bagging or more importantly collusion
what is the point in changing to it?
my plan to make adjustments to the scoring system and remove points for those who cheat will work

Originally posted by roma45
if the ELO cant stop sand bagging or more importantly collusion
what is the point in changing to it?
my plan to make adjustments to the scoring system and remove points for those who cheat will work

Once again, your response is simple-minded.

There is value in DISCOURAGING bad behavior even if it cannot be completely prevented.

Your plan of removing points will not work, because Russ moves at a snail's pace on those things, and tires of doing them too often, which is what points removal would require, given that collusion can be done again and again.

Originally posted by Russ
Regarding suggestions about clan player rating - this is not going to happen. After considering how to prototype it, I realised that clan members with low "clan ratings" could leave and then re-join a clan to reset their rating to the starting default. Of course, this could be protected against, creating a record of the clan rating for every departing clan ...[text shortened]... ex anyway.

So, I'm ruling out any idea based on clan member "clan only" ratings (like clubs).

I think you have misinterpreted the meaning of a clan rating.
That to be the rating of any player with a particular clan.

Our definition of a clan game rating was to be the rating of a player in clan games only, irregardless of which clan he may belong to.
Or how many clans that player belongs to.

A clan game rating is a rating derived from performance in clan games.

Russ,

I know everything is experimental at this point, but can you give us your thoughts on how the clan rating may be used to determine the yearly outcome?

I'm curious to to know if both net points and the clan rating will both be factored into the equation.

The answer will help me make better choices when I'm creating challenges.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Once again, your response is simple-minded.

There is value in DISCOURAGING bad behavior even if it cannot be completely prevented.

Your plan of removing points will not work, because Russ moves at a snail's pace on those things, and tires of doing them too often, which is what points removal would require, given that collusion can be done again and again.

you again ignore the main point, you are siple-minded or for some personal reason seem to stick up for the easy riders every time there is a suggestion of a points removal,
when collusion takes place, three point plan
1] first offence remove points
2]second offence suspend clans
3] third offence boot players involved.

in chess bad behaviour should never have to be DISCOURGED but thanks to a few on here punishments must be handed out.act as a warning to all players

Further on the inaccurate clan statistics.

I looked at Metallica's clan challenge won lost record.
Counting the challenges from Jan 1st 2017.

Actual record is 45W 12L 9D
Yet the statistics show 167W 42L 36D.

Other clan members can look at their own clan statistics.
But this is really out of whack !!

I haven't really looked at the clan standings lately other than to pull data for the defect report to Russ.

Clan standings carry no meaning at the moment.