| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 00:09:00 -
[1]
Original message
The proposion is: A category where the top players from each other category are ranked togeather by their places in those categories (did that make sense...)
Anyway, so goes. Player 1 is the leader in spaceship command, has the most skillpoints there but is only ranked 40 in mechanic skill category. Player 2 is ranked 2 in the Industry category and 30th in the science category.
How "obvious" is it that player 2 has combined higher rankings than player one (only these categories calculated) - how much more does being classed as nr1 over nr2 vs being nr30 over nr40.
The simplest solution would be to class each seat in each category by a descending value, nr1 having the highest, for example 100. Then you count down until you reach 0, not bothering counting players that dont make the top 100.
After calculating all the categories you rank in the top 100 your point totals are added and compared to all the other top 100 ranked players and the one with the highest points is ranked nr1 in this new category (not used to calculate for rank in this category (recursive buggery (like these parenthesis)))
Some might not like it, preferring the nr1 to get like 2x the points nr2 gets because the "winner" is supposed to be ... uber ...
This might favour characters that train lots of skill categories over characters that specialize, but reviewing that a bit... specialized characters get their top rank awards by being top of their chosen specialization. This category would then be a category for jack-of-all to get a top 10 listing :)
so... I say top 100 count and nr1 gets 100 points, nr2 gets 99 etc...
. |

Sara Dawn
BIG
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 00:48:00 -
[2]
:) I would like to extend my thank you to Ravenal for helping and starting this thread. I appreciate and encourage people's participation and feedback. After some discussion on this topic has been done and and there is a sort of agreement, i will implement this feature.

(PS: I have a BIG surprise to be released on the site soonish, something that isnt in the changes being done until reaching the next milestone, i just want to say you'll LOVE IT)
 ___________________________________ BIG member :: inEVE.net Skills Showroom |

Dr Caymus
Gallente Applied Technologies Inc
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 03:10:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Dr Caymus on 06/01/2007 03:13:04
Interesting idea. Players with alot of skillpoints and with balance... training in a broad range of skill categories... would show well here. This would be a good indicator of EVE's players with the strongest all-round skillsets.
A straight-line weighting of rank where, for each category, player #1 gets n points, player #2 gets n-1 points, and so on down the line to player #n who gets 1 point is probably the simplest and least biased way to run the calc. And, if n = total population, everybody in the Showroom knows where they stand.
Groovy 
|

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 13:27:00 -
[4]
Thanks for the support :)
Yeah sure if you want to take everybody in the skill database into account that sounds fine.
Total points could then perhaps be a bit... unreadable. Scaling that number perhaps to a modulus of 100.reminder could be comfy. . |

Zoltaris
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 14:52:00 -
[5]
The problem actually with this is that 2 players at the same position aren't actually ranked the same, just look at the Learning category, many people have maxed their skills in this but we then get our position by alphabetical order
So, 2 players with exactly the same ammount of SP in learning are almost 200 positions appart (ex: A Brr is at the 6th position with 5,376,000 SP and i am at the 203th position with 5,376,000 SP too...)
-----
 > Order Falcon & Pilgrim |

Rakor Tang
Minmatar The Jinxed Inc
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 15:07:00 -
[6]
I have thought about 'was there a way to give the showroom some kind of ranking feature ?' because as has already been pointed out, in Learning alot of people have maxed out yet the ranking goes in alphabetical order, the way Ravenal suggests would give a better all round rank of how players in the showroom stand.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy themselves. Sun Tzu |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.06 19:43:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Zoltaris The problem actually with this is that 2 players at the same position aren't actually ranked the same, just look at the Learning category, many people have maxed their skills in this but we then get our position by alphabetical order
So, 2 players with exactly the same ammount of SP in learning are almost 200 positions appart (ex: A Brr is at the 6th position with 5,376,000 SP and i am at the 203th position with 5,376,000 SP too...)
yeah, thought about that. Its easy enough really to average out the point value of equally ranked characters. nr1 and nr2 getting average values of their ranks.
As the skill categories go the learning one is a bit of a bastard. . |

Femintaki
Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
 |
Posted - 2007.01.07 09:34:00 -
[8]
I like this idea - but to be honest it would be good for me with the way my skills are trained.
Perhaps the Learning category should be left out of calculations or all people with max skills given the same points for it - given that it is a special category.
Fem
300 Skills Level 0 - None Level 1 - None Level 2 - 18 Level 3 - 117 Level 4 - 86 Level 5 - 79
Quote: Do or do not - there is no try!
 |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.07 15:23:00 -
[9]
would probably be a good category for you yeah. It does mean a category where we jack of all trades might make it to the top 10 (...number of skills is a "similar") category but simply training for lots of skills doesnt make you a very rounded skillset.
anyway - again thanks for the support :) . |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.10 09:22:00 -
[10]
This seems settled then.
n nr of points for top ranked, n-1 for second etc...
average nr of points for equal places (please fix those silly people that are posting more skillpoints than its possible to have in the learning skill category)
uhm k? . |
|

Sara Dawn
BIG
 |
Posted - 2007.01.10 14:38:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ravenal (please fix those silly people that are posting more skillpoints than its possible to have in the learning skill category)
uhm k?
Those people suffered from a well known and confirmed bug that skills did not end after reaching lvl5 causing people to have more skillpoints. Those values you see are true and not caused by xml editing. ___________________________________ BIG member :: inEVE.net Skills Showroom |

Zoltaris
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
 |
Posted - 2007.01.10 21:58:00 -
[12]
Is it possible to rank equally many players that have the same number of skills, or the same total of SP in a category?
It wouldn't be fair otherwise...
-----
 > Order Falcon & Pilgrim |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.10 23:48:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Sara Dawn
Originally by: Ravenal (please fix those silly people that are posting more skillpoints than its possible to have in the learning skill category)
uhm k?
Those people suffered from a well known and confirmed bug that skills did not end after reaching lvl5 causing people to have more skillpoints. Those values you see are true and not caused by xml editing.
yeah, but 6,4m? . |

Ravenal
The Fated
 |
Posted - 2007.01.11 00:04:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Zoltaris Is it possible to rank equally many players that have the same number of skills, or the same total of SP in a category?
It wouldn't be fair otherwise...
As it is now in the learning group, top five would get: 4068 4067 4066 4065 4064 and the sixth to 211th would get 3960,5
because of a "well known bug" that has them at a few more points up to 10k more points. Not "fair" because these points do not matter in ranking the "jack of all trades" category. So yes, once you reach the max amount of skillpoints for a category you shouldnt be listed as having more - bug or no bug. . |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |