New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

General topics, questions, suggestions, bugs, or anything Star Wars Commander related.
User avatar
Winnie
Major General
Posts: 317

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#81 » Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:44 pm

Thx Sir!
---------------------------------
I _ ShadowCompany _ I
---------------------------------


User avatar
DeathStriker
Moderator
Posts: 4029

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#82 » Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:36 am

ANNOUNCEMENT: Squad Ranking Website URL Changed

The former website http://sod.lonegunman.ws/squadranking has been switched off (no longer being updated) and the data has been fully moved to former alternate URL (now the Primary).

Everyone should start using http://ksod.us/squadranking when they want to view current Squad Data.

Keeping Everyone Informed...
 
Image
Death_Striker is looking for ALL Rebel Commanders
Sons_of_Death is looking for Level 8+ Rebel Commanders
If YOU Want to War - Apply Now!


RCM
Commodore
Posts: 152

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#83 » Sat Aug 26, 2017 8:26 am

Thanks DS
Empire squad: WAR247 232/4/8 W/L/D


User avatar
ObiTwo
Commodore
Posts: 242

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#84 » Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:10 am

Thanks for the update. Great to have this resource. Nice domain change, easy to remember :)
http://www.YouTube.com/ObiTwo (tips, strategies and layouts for rebels)


DarkRebel
Admiral
Posts: 766

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#85 » Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:54 pm

Have another wacky one:
Our squad, AncientWarriors was ranked #3610 (56W, 6T, 16L) coming in
Our opponent, KenobiForce, was ranked #112 (126W, 7L, 25L)
This was an even match, even though the 2 squads were ranked miles apart. It should have never been like this to begin with.

It just happened that we had an epic battle, and ended up with a 44:44 TIE (we had one no show, but hey that's part of the game)

Because of the tie, our rank jumped more than 3500 places and we are now ranked #108.
Our opponent was also rewarded with points, and moved up to #108 even though they tied with a squad that was ranked 3500 places behind them.

This showed how broken the ranking system is.

I am sure we'll move down to #6000 after a couple of weeks, lol.
Last edited by DarkRebel on Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.


JDD
Major General
Posts: 377

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#86 » Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:13 pm

Can never understand why the fuss over rankings & medals. It's just info, so enjoy Warring without that dang Armoury (except on OPs) spoiling the fun.


User avatar
Midge
Admiral
Posts: 856

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#87 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:35 am

DarkRebel wrote:Have another wacky one:
Our squad, AncientWarriors was ranked #3610 (56W, 6T, 16L) coming in
Our opponent, KenobiForce, was ranked #112 (126W, 7L, 25L)
This was an even match, even though the 2 squads were ranked miles apart. It should have never been like this to begin with.

It just happened that we had an epic battle, and ended up with a 44:44 TIE (we had one no show, but hey that's part of the game)

Because of the tie, our rank jumped more than 3500 placed and we are now ranked #108.
Our opponent was also rewarded with points, and moved up to #108 even though they tied with a squad that was ranked 3500 placed behind them.

This showed how broken the ranking system is.

I am sure we'll move down to #6000 after a couple of weeks, lol.


It is because non-45 ties (since they have been programmed to not count at all) give the system MORE information about the two squads. Since they don't care about score (A 45-44 win is as good as a 45-0) then wins and losses don't actually give as much info about how "equal" a pair of teams are like a tie does.

ALSO ... your ranking was greatly impacted by the amount of time you take off between wars (the aging algo) including a rather long May to June break.

This means it realized you are both probably around the same and it adjusted accordingly. You won't drop again without a long layoff or losses to sub-3000 teams.
Leader of The Mob Syndicate

Home of TheMidnightMob, TheMorningMob, TheMiddayMob and TheMobWantsYou

Level X Rebel : Medal Maxed


DarkRebel
Admiral
Posts: 766

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#88 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:13 am

Midge wrote:
DarkRebel wrote:Have another wacky one:
Our squad, AncientWarriors was ranked #3610 (56W, 6T, 16L) coming in
Our opponent, KenobiForce, was ranked #112 (126W, 7L, 25L)
This was an even match, even though the 2 squads were ranked miles apart. It should have never been like this to begin with.

It just happened that we had an epic battle, and ended up with a 44:44 TIE (we had one no show, but hey that's part of the game)

Because of the tie, our rank jumped more than 3500 placed and we are now ranked #108.
Our opponent was also rewarded with points, and moved up to #108 even though they tied with a squad that was ranked 3500 placed behind them.

This showed how broken the ranking system is.

I am sure we'll move down to #6000 after a couple of weeks, lol.


It is because non-45 ties (since they have been programmed to not count at all) give the system MORE information about the two squads. Since they don't care about score (A 45-44 win is as good as a 45-0) then wins and losses don't actually give as much info about how "equal" a pair of teams are like a tie does.

ALSO ... your ranking was greatly impacted by the amount of time you take off between wars (the aging algo) including a rather long May to June break.

This means it realized you are both probably around the same and it adjusted accordingly. You won't drop again without a long layoff or losses to sub-3000 teams.

Thanks Midge, but the point here is the ranking system does not accurately reflect squad true strength. The delay between wars shouldn't have been factored in that much. We had a string of 12 straight undefeated matches, and scored max points (45) on every single match. Yet we were rank in 3600th coming in, and it's not because we were a new squad. We warred pretty much since the beginning with close to 80 matches so there should have been enough data for the system to figure out, if they had chosen the right data to look at and considered.
I am just giving an example of 2 squads with ranking 3500 places apart can actually be equal in squad war strength (and it was proven by the 44:44 tie). Sure the system corrected it because we were fortunate to find a high ranking squad to battle against, and we were fortunate enough to tie and not beat them.
Our main problem is that we barely have enough player to fill the war roster. If one or two players go on vacation, or busy for whatever personal reason, then we can't war. This doesn't mean we suddenly become worse. It just means that we don't war as often as some other more active squads.

Anyway, the KSOD site is an excellent resource for researching/scouting your opponent. And it has tons of valuable statistics. For this, I love it. Just that the ranking system is broken, that's all.


User avatar
Midge
Admiral
Posts: 856

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#89 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:25 am

DarkRebel wrote:
Midge wrote:
DarkRebel wrote:Have another wacky one:
Our squad, AncientWarriors was ranked #3610 (56W, 6T, 16L) coming in
Our opponent, KenobiForce, was ranked #112 (126W, 7L, 25L)
This was an even match, even though the 2 squads were ranked miles apart. It should have never been like this to begin with.

It just happened that we had an epic battle, and ended up with a 44:44 TIE (we had one no show, but hey that's part of the game)

Because of the tie, our rank jumped more than 3500 placed and we are now ranked #108.
Our opponent was also rewarded with points, and moved up to #108 even though they tied with a squad that was ranked 3500 placed behind them.

This showed how broken the ranking system is.

I am sure we'll move down to #6000 after a couple of weeks, lol.


It is because non-45 ties (since they have been programmed to not count at all) give the system MORE information about the two squads. Since they don't care about score (A 45-44 win is as good as a 45-0) then wins and losses don't actually give as much info about how "equal" a pair of teams are like a tie does.

ALSO ... your ranking was greatly impacted by the amount of time you take off between wars (the aging algo) including a rather long May to June break.

This means it realized you are both probably around the same and it adjusted accordingly. You won't drop again without a long layoff or losses to sub-3000 teams.

Thanks Midge, but the point here is the ranking system does not accurately reflect squad true strength. The delay between wars shouldn't have been factored in that much. We had a string of 12 straight undefeated matches, and scored max points (45) on every single match. Yet we were rank in 3600th coming in, and it's not because we were a new squad. We warred pretty much since the beginning with close to 80 matches so there should have been enough data for the system to figure out, if they had chosen the right data to look at and considered.
I am just giving an example of 2 squads with ranking 3500 places apart can actually be equal in squad war strength (and it was proven by the 44:44 tie). Sure the system corrected it because we were fortunate to find a high ranking squad to battle against, and we were fortunate enough to tie and not beat them.
Our main problem is that we barely have enough player to fill the war roster. If one or two players go on vacation, or busy for whatever personal reason, then we can't war. This doesn't mean we suddenly become worse. It just means that we don't war as often as some other more active squads.

Anyway, the KSOD site is an excellent resource for researching/scouting your opponent. And it has tons of valuable statistics. For this, I love it. Just that the ranking system is broken, that's all.


I agree that it has its issues, but to call it flat broken is mistaken. I mean ... you even said it has you in a fairly logical spot now ... how it got there is irrelevant. That is not "broken."

There are only two ways to really measure as large a group as this is (24000 squads) and it is either using True Skill or ELO rating algorithims. They chose True Skill ... I would have chosen ELO ... but they would not end up as different as people think.

I mean if you think it is broken ... are you arguing that Dark Brigade, Starbender, ByDesign, Stingray, etc. aren't th best squads in the game? Simply because you got hit by the aging algo?

And the aging algo DOESN'T hit that hard. You took off THREE WEEKS. Anyone who does that should be dropped to unranked IMO ... it is easy enough to climb back up. The draw algo is the weirdest thing with true skill besides it just straight up means you are equal in their mind, so they equalize you. It normally benefits BOTH by making the sigma more predictable and giving more strength to the mu.

The general rule on it is if you play long enough you end up somewhere in the correct vicinity of where you should be. And in general, I find it difficult to point to a large sample size of this being incorrect right now.
Leader of The Mob Syndicate

Home of TheMidnightMob, TheMorningMob, TheMiddayMob and TheMobWantsYou

Level X Rebel : Medal Maxed


DarkRebel
Admiral
Posts: 766

Re: New Squad Ranking Website - Discussion Thread.

Post#90 » Fri Sep 08, 2017 10:02 pm

How it got there is absolutely relevant.

Squad war ranking needs to be based on squad war performances, not attendance record.

One match should never have moved a squad up 3600 places. That is just bogus, doesn't matter how you look at it. (Now, the exception is with newly formed squad, as there is not sufficient data to properly measure the strength. But squad with 80-100 matches should never have this problem.)

It's like the Phillies suddenly moved to 3rd place in the power ranking because it tied with Houston Astro in the latest game. How ridiculous is that.

There have been many complaints about the medal system ranking, but sadly the Disney developed medal system, even with many short comings, IMHO, is still way better than this squad war ranking system, which somehow takes attendance record into the formula.

Anyway, I know this was done by players, not for profit, but for pure love of the game. So, I respect that.

But it is what it is.

For what it's worth, I don't think we should be ranked that high either (108th). We should be around 150-300th. (that is where is are currently ranked based on medals.)

I am willing to bet that if squad war ranking adopts the current PVP medal system, that the outcome would be much more accurate than the current system which somehow placed a very high emphasis on attendance record.


Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 37 guests