Ranked Vengeful (Developing a rating system based on per game player ranking) Discussion

Archive Completed Signups
,
#82

I agree!

#83

It would be strictly better for me to retain current accuracy/level of effectiveness while surviving more yeah.

#84

I feel like someone wrote a blog post on lopsided players or something that could be relevant here :thinking:

2 Likes
#85

It would be good for water to not be wet too but it’s not possible

#86

How do you both seem less threatening and are actually more threatening?

#87
2 Likes
#88

that’s up the individual and I personally don’t do a good job of it, but managing perceptions is an integral part of the game. I think (and the system will reflect) almost by definition someone who survives every day voting to kill scum and winning is more effective than the person who seemed scary d1 and just died off.

Again, the system explicitly chooses to reward certain elements and we firmly believe hedging while still winning should be rewarded.

1 Like
#89

I know your opinion on it. And I think its nonsense. I believe getting night killed early as VT means you played well almost universally.

#90

the question isn’t if you played well, the question is if someone who correctly votes scum than gets killed performed better than someone votes scum d1 and d2 and d3 and d4 etc.

#91

Note that the guy who votes correctly and then dies performs better than anyone who makes an error at any point in the game

#92

I would say someone who voted correctly once but then died to a Mafia kill is tied with someone who performed perfectly, or nearly perfectly.

#93

Open to discussing other parts of the system but people who are universally right while staying alive being placed over universally right and dying won’t change so let’s move on from that.

A rating system needs to make choices on values over saying everything is equal and this one isn’t going to move. At the end of the day if you’re voting correctly d1 as town and dying n1, and winning your games as mafia, you’ll be one of the most, if not the highest, rated player.

#94

Well this is kind of my point, though. I think weighting getting nightkilled as the opposite of getting lynched (1 pt) is about fair. If somebody votes right and then dies, they did perform as well as somebody who votes right two days in a row, imo. And if somebody votes right three days in a row (d1 and d2 and d3), they would outrank the person who died n1, and I do think that person performed better. It shouldn’t instantly rank you #1 in the game, but it should be a point in favor.

You could only weight it n1/n2 and not later nights, though.

#95

We should also consider how players actually performed in their game. As in, the literal things that they said.

#96

That’s not going to happen, there will be 0 subjective elements considered.

1 Like
#97

haHAA

#98

What about how much someone talked? Someone who was dead silent yet deadly right would, in the current system, be valued just as well as someone who was social and was always right.

#99

correct.

#100

And someone who spoke the exact opposite of what reality held and yet mechanically performed just as well would be ranked the same as the other two.

#101

also correct