<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 9 of 9   
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 05:23:38


Mr. Gentleman*SEAHAWKSWONSUPERBOWLXLVIII*
Level 58
Report
Does anyone feel the 20 hour wait time before playing the same player is a bit to long for the RT ladder?

Edited 3/23/2014 05:23:58
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 05:50:22


Taishō 
Level 57
Report
Should be longer, but we need more players on the ladder!!!
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 14:39:49

Hennns
Level 58
Report
I think 20h is a good wait time.
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 16:42:33


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
Yeah i think it is a good idea. Need more players. I have bern on a few times and only see about 4 players on at a time. I think templates may be reason
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 16:51:56


Green 
Level 56
Report
Yup, the templates are the reason I'm not there right now. Also, do you know how long it'll take before the games begin having a negligble impact on your rating - the equivalent of the expiry times. Is there a formula/simulator somewhere?
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 22:34:59


Mr. Gentleman*SEAHAWKSWONSUPERBOWLXLVIII*
Level 58
Report
I think its about after 15 games when the modifier for your rating when the true skill deviation drops below 145. This gives the true skill forumula enough of a sample size to properly adjust your rating.
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 23:07:29


Math Wolf 
Level 63
Report
@ Green: there's no closed-form solution for this, but basically every game changes your rating when it finishes (the mean goes down when you lose, up when you win, the standard deviation goes mostly down unless the result was very unexpected). At that moment, you can only give the influence of the most recent games, the influence of all previous games has already been lowered and cannot be traced back anymore.

Your new rating (mean) is used for the next game. Since the only thing that counts in the future, is the new mean, it does not matter anymore how you got that mean.

Since the mean is always adapted by the latest game, the influence of games is technically exponentially decreasing, this implies that in theory any more recent game has more influence than any less recent game. (in practice, a win against an opponent who is much stronger will always have a bigger effect than a win against an opponent who was weaker.) It is possible to simulate this actually, Fizzer has developed a tool for this:
http://blog.warlight.net/index.php/2012/01/trueskill/

Based on my simulations with TrueSkill, the most recent games really make the difference. So depending on why you call "neglible", this actually happens pretty quickly.
Example: if you lose against a weak player, your mean (and rating) drop quite steeply. Winning against 2 players of your previous mean will be enough to put your rating back where it was. (Whereas in BayesElo those 2 players and you would each still have a slightly lower rating.)
20 hour wait time: 3/23/2014 23:10:45


almosttricky 
Level 61
Report
I think there are a few too many light fog templates, but other that that it isn't too bad.
20 hour wait time: 3/24/2014 00:56:40


Mr. Gentleman*SEAHAWKSWONSUPERBOWLXLVIII*
Level 58
Report
Really need more players I think though. As it stands now if there are 4 people playing and you play them all you wont be paired for a while.

I am a rhythm kind of player so it really sucks to have your momentum taken out of your sails when you hit a streak >.<
Posts 1 - 9 of 9