The FGM Ladder - Countdown to the End of 2015

Ithikial

Ithikial

FGM 2ND IN COMMAND
Staff member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
4,720
Reaction score
2,700
Age
40
Location
Perth, Australia
Listen up!
image013.jpg


We're closing in on one month left before the we say goodbye to 2015 and the end of this year's Combat Mission Ladder. If you want any battles counted against 2015 then you'll need to have them posted on the forum in the usual space no later than 11:59pm 31st of December! Going to be stricter on this point this year! Any late entries will be carried across to the start of 2016's race.

To keep it a bit interesting in the closing stages I ask @Bootie to take some time off, put his feet up and not update the ladder graphic on the website. :D

Keep getting those game results in so we can crown the winners of 2015. (Hint hint: There's more than just the one ladder that you've seen all year).

Finally, the month of November is only 2 games away from equaling the most games ever entered for a single month. Finally CMBS is making an appearance!
 
Are there planed any improvements for ladder 2016? My major dream is some way of ELO system;) And my minor dream is possibility to see who played against who - I click on nick in ladder and can see results of the player.

My dreams... :)
 
Pekische said:
Are there planed any improvements for ladder 2016? My major dream is some way of ELO system;) And my minor dream is possibility to see who played against who - I click on nick in ladder and can see results of the player.

My dreams... :)
Click to expand...

ELO? Electric Light Orchestra? :p

Well the second one is already possible. Just don't know if it's possible to embed Excel Pivot tables into the website.
 
Pekische said:
Are there planed any improvements for ladder 2016? My major dream is some way of ELO system;) And my minor dream is possibility to see who played against who - I click on nick in ladder and can see results of the player.

My dreams... :)
Click to expand...
I second his first point:confused:
When looking at the ladder now it is just a reflection of who plays the most. Unless Ith has something behind the scenes
(Hint hint: There's more than just the one ladder that you've seen all year).
 
eniced73 said:
I second his first point:confused:
When looking at the ladder now it is just a reflection of who plays the most.
Click to expand...

Agreed :D ELO would be great to have. I'd like to know how I really stack up against other players. I have such a high game count cause this was my first year playing PBEM games ever and I think I got a little too excited about it lol
 
Pekische said:
Are there planed any improvements for ladder 2016? My major dream is some way of ELO system;) And my minor dream is possibility to see who played against who - I click on nick in ladder and can see results of the player.
Click to expand...

Several of us agree. An ELO system would make the Ladder results more reflective of the skill level of the players, rather than a tally of who has played the most games, IMO.

 
eniced73 said:
On the other hand, most of the guys that play more games are better players. Practice makes perfect.
Click to expand...

That is true, to a degree. However, the current ladder points system rewards playing games more than winning games. I know it is designed to be "friendly", but I submit that is akin to the "everybody is special so let's give a trophy for showing up" mentality that I am starting to see in school team sports these days. There is nothing wrong with competition, in fact it is quite fun.....IMO.
 
The problem with ELO is it is based off of chess which starts with each player having the same chance of winning when you consider spaces on the board and units. Always the same.

CM has many more variables thrown into the mix. I did some reading on threads at the Blitz and some other sites discussing their ladder systems. Even though they state ELO systems they basically run the same, the more you play the higher your rank. So I think unless you really get into the nitty gritty and add some insane amount of variables it will be hard to make it work.

Another issue is that the turn over rate is pretty high. Very FEW of us GM have been around for an extended period of time. To get an accurate rating I cannot just play 5 or 10 games a year. Just not enough data points. Just my opinions as I am no mathmagician or ladder expert.
 
Me either, but I think there is plenty of room for improvement to our current system. I know it is late in the year for making major changes for the 2016 ladder, but may I suggest awarding 0 points for a loss? That will still reward those who play more games, but at least they have to win to gain points.
 
I had the same thought Meat. Still keep the scaling for different types of victories though.
 
The negative thing about ELO's is that top rated players will not want to play lower rated ones because they will lose lots of points so something to think about.
 
Edit: Oh and Bootie hand-balled all ladder duties to me when I became Cmdr Riker of the FGM so annoy me first. :p



I posted a similar response to Pekische via PM earlier today but will flesh it out here for discussion.

I've been aware of the 'more games = win' problem since this ladder's inception and altered the rules a little bit to help combat this at the start of 2015, but obviously it hasn't been enough judging by these comments.

There's already an alternative method running behind the scenes that I favour (but isn't official). It entails:
Average out the points scored against the number of games that individual has played for that year. (Minimum five games a year, which most of our ladder participants would meet by the end of a calendar year). The points scored for each game is the same as what's in place now, battle result + battle size. I'd also encourage to publish the ladder standings but not scores. This keeps the tension up and people interested in chasing down the leaders. When they see one player out in front and six months have gone by there's little incentive to start a chase. The averaging method will also place a greater emphasis on results and battle sizes, not the number of games you can play during the course of a year. As a leader you also won't be able to afford to slack off. :)

If this method was in place the top of the ladder would look sort of similar but the order would be very different. As a result, no I'm not adjusting rules now for 2015 as that wouldn't be fair to this year's participants.

Finally, keep in mind this newer ladder database system (good old MS Excel) it's very easy to edit behind the scenes and keep the ladder running 24/7, 365 days a year. It is also building up a database of details about members CM multiplayer habits and preferences, which may assist us plan or inform interested members wanting to run tournaments or campaigns. Not to mention it's also a record for all time about how you track against your fellow FGMers. Should have enough after two years of action to 'show off' these cool features at the end of this year.
 
One thing I like about The Blitz ladder is the record keeping of it, what scenarios you played, record against players that kind of thing. Is that something on the table for us or is that too hard to implement?
 
Floki said:
One thing I like about The Blitz ladder is the record keeping of it, what scenarios you played, record against players that kind of thing. Is that something on the table for us or is that too hard to implement?
Click to expand...

Very possible but when the initial web form was designed Bootie didn't want it to be too long for players to fill out. :) I wanted more questions like forces each player used. :p
 
@Ithikial

Obviously, you are in charge of the FGM Ladder.

I respectfully submit that anything you can do to make the FGM 2016 Ladder favor skilled play is good.

My suggestions:

(1) Negative points for losing. This is a biggie. You lose a game, you lose ladder points. How can this even be a point of contention? I honestly don't understand how anyone can argue against this.

(3) Continue with the scaled positive points for winning. No argument here. Big game...more points for winning. Total Victory = more points than Minor Victory. Kinda self explanatory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom