Win percentages figured into score?

[josta59]

Ouch, what a losing streak! Don't take this post too seriously, now, because I'm just thinking out loud.

I was a corporal-first-class at one point, some time last year, before I got married. I took a year off Conquer Club, since I was partly afraid that it had cost me my job. You know, when you lose your job and don't get a really good explanation, all kinds of things go through your mind. Now I have a new job, as well as a wife, and I'm much more successful now. I have allowed CC back into my life, and it didn't take long to get back up to speed.

However, after a long losing streak, I have just been demoted all the way to cadet. I can't help but think about how this would have played out in real life. Now, I know practically nothing of military matters, but let's say, hypothetically, a corporal-first-class took a year off during war time; perhaps I was wounded during a military campaign in which I had experienced a good deal of success. I'm not a subscriber, but I can't think of a good parallel for a freemium in real life, except that I'm given much less responsibility than others of my rank for whatever reason. Maybe I didn't do so hot on the ASVAB.

So after a year of healing up, I return to my duties, but I have a string of failures, resulting in the loss of dozens of good men. By all rights I should probably be demoted, though my success rate has only fallen from 33% to 31%, of 182 total games completed, and I've seen a lot worse success rates on players with higher ranks than mine.

I can see such a corporal being demoted all the way back to private. I don't know if it's ever happened, but I could understand it, maybe. But all the way to cadet? Isn't a cadet essentially a "new recruit"? It's just a bit embarrassing, and it would be nice if there were some system set up by which an experienced player (100 games or more?) can preserve some dignity and not be able to fall below private, or even private-first-class. It would be really nice if our win percentages could somehow be figured into our score to give a better perception of how good we really are. I realize this would complicate things more than they are now; I'm just saying it would be nice.

I guess someone might say, "That's what the medals are for," but honestly, my little medal doesn't make me feel that much better, especially when one has to look at my profile in order to see it. I want my success to be a little more obvious.

[MeDeFe]

Your rank is to the left of your username on the scoreboard and consists of between one and five numbers depending on what your score is. That pretty symbol next to your name is just something flashy to let others know roughly how many points you have.

This is not the military, it's a gaming site and does not have to bear any resmeblance to reality.

[josta59]

Your rank is to the left of your username on the scoreboard and consists of between one and five numbers depending on what your score is. That pretty symbol next to your name is just something flashy to let others know roughly how many points you have.

This is not the military, it's a gaming site and does not have to bear any resmeblance to reality.

MeDeFe, you've won 39% of your games. Would you not like that fact to be reflected in your rank? That 39% just sits there doing nothing for you.

And what if you were the one on a losing streak? You're clearly better at this than I am, but you haven't played that many more games than I have. Someday you could be a cadet!

I would just like my win percentage to be figured into my score to protect me from falling so quickly in rank during losing streaks.

[The Neon Peon]

Your rank is to the left of your username on the scoreboard and consists of between one and five numbers depending on what your score is. That pretty symbol next to your name is just something flashy to let others know roughly how many points you have.

This is not the military, it's a gaming site and does not have to bear any resmeblance to reality.

MeDeFe, you've won 39% of your games. Would you not like that fact to be reflected in your rank? That 39% just sits there doing nothing for you. I would just like it to be figured into my score to protect me from falling so quickly in rank during losing streaks.

Actually, that 39% is doing the thing of getting his rank up.

Here is the thing. You have not played CC for a year. Well guess what? You are not as good as you once were anymore, even with a bad luck streak. If you do not run or play chess for a year, do you expect to come back and be in full form?

I was a colonel... I think 5 days ago. Now I am a captain. Why? Because I played a bunch of doodle assassins. I should not be able to keep my rank if I do that because of my 38% win rate on other maps.

[josta59]

I was a colonel... I think 5 days ago. Now I am a captain. Why? Because I played a bunch of doodle assassins. I should not be able to keep my rank if I do that because of my 38% win rate on other maps.

Well, I disagree, but if the majority of players are happy with it, then fine.

[owenshooter]

I was a colonel... I think 5 days ago. Now I am a captain. Why? Because I played a bunch of doodle assassins. I should not be able to keep my rank if I do that because of my 38% win rate on other maps.

Well, I disagree, but if the majority of players are happy with it, then fine.

yeah, you had 2 responses out of a community of over 20,000... the majority has clearly spoken... *rolling my eyes*... if you really want to truly suggest this, go to suggs & bugs and fill out a form. good luck!!-0

p.s.-i would love my 61% win percentage to help keep me from losing rank so quickly and easily. but you haven't really outlined it that well...

[josta59]

p.s.-i would love my 61% win percentage to help keep me from losing rank so quickly and easily. but you haven't really outlined it that well...

So you agree with me. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about gaming-type stuff, and I'm not much of a math guy. I just wanted to get the idea out there, if it wasn't out there already. I forgot about the suggs and bugs thing, but you're right, I should have a clearer idea of how it would work before I post it there. I don't think that's going to happen, though. Especially when I'm supposed to be thinking about my job!

[Twill]

Moved this to the Suggestions and Bug Reports forum for you

[Jeff Hardy]

i think the problem is that some players play mostly 1(team)vs1(team) and others play only 4-8 players games

in the top 20 there are only 2 players that have a higher win % than me but that is simply because they play different games and not because they do worse in the games they play

[THE ARMY]

i took a look at all your games and you are a good player indeed. So don't worry about it, your rank will swell in time. CC is like the stock market, filled with ups and downs in the short run but what is the overall picture looking like.

I recently went on the worst streak of my CC career, before Christmas i lost 18 out of 20 games!!!!! so i took a couple weeks off to regroup and i ended up going on the best winning streak i have ever been on winning 10 straight big games gaining nearly 600 points!!! ...it will even out don't worry.

[Bones2484]

Win percentage means nothing without any other information attached to it.

Someone, like me, may show a 40% winning percentage but what does that mean? Obviously, at the basic level, it means I've won 40% of my games. But that would "technically" mean I lose more than I'm supposed to. Looking deeper you'll see that I mainly play games with a large amount of players making a 40% look great.

As you can see, unless everyone played the same amount of every game type, the win percentage means nothing.

What is better? A 70% for a 1v1 player, or a 40% for an 8-FFA player? You aren't comparing apples to apples.

[josta59]

What is better? A 70% for a 1v1 player, or a 40% for an 8-FFA player? You aren't comparing apples to apples.

Come to think of it, my losing streak did start when I decided to play more games with multiple players so that I wasn't spending so much time playing instead of working. I was a lot more successful when I was only playing one-on-one games. So you make a good point, Bones.

I also experimented with doubles and triples during that streak, since people in the forums were saying that you can win more games with partners. Bad advice. My partners were so bad that I decided to go it alone from now on. But I am playing with more opponents than I used to, which naturally makes it harder to win. So I guess I have to agree with your apples-to-apples statement.

[The Neon Peon]

Here is how the percentage system could be adjusted:

Win Rate in Y Sided (2v2 counts as 2 player etc.) Games / Y x Games played with Y players
For every amount of players, add those all up. Divide by total games played.

This gives us a percentage that shows how far one of us is above or below the normal. For example, a 100% would mean that you win as many games as probable. 200% would mean that you win twice as many games as probable.

I showed calculations for myself below, so you can see how it works.

Standard, Terminator and Assassin

47% x 2 x 682 = 641.08
49% x 3 x 61 = 89.67
26% x 4 x 135 = 140.4
25% x 5 x 40 = 50
20% x 6 x 66 = 79.2
0% x 7 x 8 = 0
16% x 8 x 214 = 273.92

2v2, 3v3, 4v4

42% x 2 x 24 = 20.16
60% x 2 x 10 = 12
78% x 2 x 9 = 14.04

2v2v2

50% x 3 x 2 = 3
100% x 4 x 1 = 4

Add all those up... 1327.47 / 1255 = 106%

This means that I win 6% more games than probable.

And if you want to make it EVEN MORE accurate, take that same equation and multiply your relative rank in right after the percentage of games won on a certain amount of players.

[josta59]

This gives us a percentage that shows how far one of us is above or below the normal. For example, a 100% would mean that you win as many games as probable. 200% would mean that you win twice as many games as probable.

...

This means that I win 6% more games than probable.

"As probable" or "as possible"?

[The Neon Peon]

As probable" or "as possible"?

Obviously "as probable."

You can't win more games than possible. The post explains everything.

[captainwalrus]

Think of it this way. IN the amarican revolution the british won a larger percentage of battles. They only lost several key battles towards the end of the war but they lost even though after loosing those battles at the end didn't make there "win percentage" change by that much. Your the british. Don't worry you bounce back.

[josta59]

As probable" or "as possible"?

Obviously "as probable."

You can't win more games than possible. The post explains everything.

Oh, duh. *racks himself silly*

Think of it this way. IN the amarican revolution the british won a larger percentage of battles. They only lost several key battles towards the end of the war but they lost even though after loosing those battles at the end didn't make there "win percentage" change by that much. Your the british. Don't worry you bounce back.

I see what you mean, but I doubt the British officers in charge were demoted to privates for losing those battles. That's a bit different. They gained experience and battlefield wisdom and were thus more valuable to the army than before. There should be punishment for losing, when punishment is called for, but not a punishment that is costly to the entire army.

But I wish I had looked up what a cadet is before my original post. It's actually an officer-in-training, which is not as bad as I thought. I can't help but think of Wesley Crusher whenever I hear the word "cadet". *shudders*

[joecoolfrog]

I only have a 27% win record because I play 6 player games against good opponents - are you saying my rank or score should go down !

[Bones2484]

Peon, how would you propose to handle terminator games, then?

Currently a "win" is considered taking out the final opponent still in the game. However, I've seen 8 person games where one person took out 6 only to lose to the 7th. The 7th is considered the "winner", while I'd consider the 1st player to have been more successful that game according to the rules of terminator.

[The Neon Peon]

Peon, how would you propose to handle terminator games, then?

Currently a "win" is considered taking out the final opponent still in the game. However, I've seen 8 person games where one person took out 6 only to lose to the 7th. The 7th is considered the "winner", while I'd consider the 1st player to have been more successful that game according to the rules of terminator.

Why I don't like terminator that much. You can suicide into the high rank and gain points.

I don't know, maybe kill/death is the amount of wins you get? So two kills gives you a victory.

[josta59]

I only have a 27% win record because I play 6 player games against good opponents - are you saying my rank or score should go down !

I think ideally any percentage above 0 should help rather than hurt a player. The higher your win percentage, the better your score. If yours were 30% rather than 27%, you'd have a higher score than you do now in my little fantasy world.

I'm assuming that's what NP's suggestion would do...but clearly it went right over my head.

woo-oop, there it went.

[sully800]

Here is how the percentage system could be adjusted:

Win Rate in Y Sided (2v2 counts as 2 player etc.) Games / Y x Games played with Y players
For every amount of players, add those all up. Divide by total games played.

This gives us a percentage that shows how far one of us is above or below the normal. For example, a 100% would mean that you win as many games as probable. 200% would mean that you win twice as many games as probable.

I showed calculations for myself below, so you can see how it works.

Standard, Terminator and Assassin

47% x 2 x 682 = 641.08
49% x 3 x 61 = 89.67
26% x 4 x 135 = 140.4
25% x 5 x 40 = 50
20% x 6 x 66 = 79.2
0% x 7 x 8 = 0
16% x 8 x 214 = 273.92

2v2, 3v3, 4v4

42% x 2 x 24 = 20.16
60% x 2 x 10 = 12
78% x 2 x 9 = 14.04

2v2v2

50% x 3 x 2 = 3
100% x 4 x 1 = 4

Add all those up... 1327.47 / 1255 = 106%

This means that I win 6% more games than probable.

And if you want to make it EVEN MORE accurate, take that same equation and multiply your relative rank in right after the percentage of games won on a certain amount of players.

This is a good idea! It's really the only way I've seen to factor in win% because generic win% ignores the number of players in the game as everyone knows.

[joecoolfrog]

Here is how the percentage system could be adjusted:

Win Rate in Y Sided (2v2 counts as 2 player etc.) Games / Y x Games played with Y players
For every amount of players, add those all up. Divide by total games played.

This gives us a percentage that shows how far one of us is above or below the normal. For example, a 100% would mean that you win as many games as probable. 200% would mean that you win twice as many games as probable.

I showed calculations for myself below, so you can see how it works.

Standard, Terminator and Assassin

47% x 2 x 682 = 641.08
49% x 3 x 61 = 89.67
26% x 4 x 135 = 140.4
25% x 5 x 40 = 50
20% x 6 x 66 = 79.2
0% x 7 x 8 = 0
16% x 8 x 214 = 273.92

2v2, 3v3, 4v4

42% x 2 x 24 = 20.16
60% x 2 x 10 = 12
78% x 2 x 9 = 14.04

2v2v2

50% x 3 x 2 = 3
100% x 4 x 1 = 4

Add all those up... 1327.47 / 1255 = 106%

This means that I win 6% more games than probable.

And if you want to make it EVEN MORE accurate, take that same equation and multiply your relative rank in right after the percentage of games won on a certain amount of players.

This is a good idea! It's really the only way I've seen to factor in win% because generic win% ignores the number of players in the game as everyone knows.

Yes but it ignores the quality factor, it would simply encourage even more farming of noobs/low ranks . Win percentage means nothing taken out of strict context, its a vanity thing plain and simple so lets just leave it at that.

[The Neon Peon]

And if you want to make it EVEN MORE accurate, take that same equation and multiply your relative rank in right after the percentage of games won on a certain amount of players.

AHEM

[joecoolfrog]

And if you want to make it EVEN MORE accurate, take that same equation and multiply your relative rank in right after the percentage of games won on a certain amount of players.

AHEM

Surely that would simply take us back to where we are now, players would have high win percentages but gain nothing extra because of choice of opponent - forgive me if I am missing something