RANKS AND SCORES

Point of this iiiiiiiiis?

btw add my story too

Netter, could you post a list of your game with the roles? It will be easier to add with that info  

I have already done that in the past

https://thewerewolfgame.forumotion.com/t33p255-alvarossa-realm-festival

there is the roles, good guys won and Destroya1103 was converted to bad guy side too so he was with the loosing team

Done, your game was added Netter

Also, added TWG: Castle Crisis {Original Version} - by DragonEye

How are people above 9 points when it's only really possible to have a max of 9 points in 3 games...

Black Fang wrote:How are people above 9 points when it's only really possible to have a max of 9 points in 3 games...

6 points is max per game, you get 3 points for being on a winning side, 2 points for surviving and 1 point for participating, so for 3 games 18 is max.

TWG: Secret Wars added

TWG: Night of the Dead added

Yey i dominate the leaderboards

I don't remember violating anything...

I suggest Game Mods get points too. They do a lot of work.  

Well, DE said the same about GM, but I m no really sure how many poinst they should get  

And sadly for you, in TWG: Castle Crisis {Original Version} - by DragonEye, your wolf partner used PM in order to secure his win, and because you didn't say anything about it, you became his accomplice. Maybe if shuno admits that it was all his doing, or you have proofs that show your innocence, your violation point may be erased

So is this ranking system supposed to compare skill or experience level? Just thinking of the fundamentals of it.

Well, it's in fact a very simple point system. Are those in the top, those who almost always win and live, because his luck, or because his skill? It's up to you choose it.

Oh ok, if this is a luck/skill system then I think we may need to re-look at it because if you keep it like this it will just be an activity point system. The most active players at the top.

Maybe you should try having a base line figure like 100, then as you win/survive/participate/lose your score goes up or down. Like an elo system, that way it MIGHT not turn into "the most active players are at the top" point system.

Sash wrote:

Black Fang wrote:How are people above 9 points when it's only really possible to have a max of 9 points in 3 games...

6 points is max per game, you get 3 points for being on a winning side, 2 points for surviving and 1 point for participating, so for 3 games 18 is max.

If this isn't of what you are talking about, I had no idea BF  

Räbylä. : DDDD

I'm in.

HeVi Storm wrote:Räbylä. : DDDD

I'm in.

He is alive!

TWG ~ Death's Glare - by DragonEye was added.

Also, now the Game Master gets 6 points in recognition to his/her hard work.

1. Why are the two most epically narrated games, The League of Werewolves and The terror of Mortis, not included yet?

2. I really don't think last two games, Secret Wars and Death's Glare, should be counted, as they were really far from traditional setup and very random, not really accounting for player skill.

3. I agree that GM effort should be recognized, but this scoring system is really looking messy right now, there are so many different things accounted for that we really don't know what these ranks are about. Is it the most active player? Most skilled player? Most active GM? Can't have it all at one place.

Anyways, I'll try to elaborate on what was BF talking about, and talk more about this last thing.

The Elo rating system is a method for calculating the relative skill levels of players in such competitor-versus-competitor games as chess. It is named after its creator Arpad Elo, a Hungarian-born American physics professor.
A number represents a player's Elo rating and increases or decreases based upon the outcome of games between rated players. After every game, the winning player takes points from the losing one. The difference between the ratings of the winner and loser determines the total number of points gained or lost after a game. In a series of games between a high-rated player and a low-rated player, the high-rated player is expected to score more wins. If the high-rated player wins, then only a few rating points will be taken from the low-rated player whereas if the lower rated player scores an upset win, then many rating points will be transferred. The lower rated player will also gain a few points from the higher rated player in the event of a draw. The rating system thus is self-correcting. A player whose rating is too low should, in the long run, do better than the rating system predicts and thereby gain rating points until the rating reflects his or her true playing strength.

tl;dr

This is what BF was talking about, and I will try to think of a way to implement this in a TWG game, which will require writing a formula and then making an Excel spreadsheet which will enable easier computing and score tracking.
Will try to make something by the end of this week, if I'm not too busy, but if anyone else has an idea and wants to help out, they're more than welcome to.

For starters, this system only tracks down wins and losses, so factors such as activity and GM points will have to be somehow added.
Activity can be regulated with elo decay, which should prevent people from holding their rank without playing at all, like subtracting some points after missed 2-3 consecutive games.
About GM points, I think it would be better to just award people with stars or some titles, basically cosmetics, for their efforts, without affecting the actual skill based ranks, or perhaps make a separate scoreboard where we can just vote for best GMs based on several different aspects, like innovation, narration, formatting, etc.

So lemme know what you think about all of this.

I am totally agreed with you Sash, afterall this was just my personal proposed system. The one that you explain is far more better and I will like to see something like that. At least this thread system is allowing something new and stronger to be born

Maybe a Ranked Leaderboard and a Custom Games Leaderboard?

True, Only reason I made Death Glare so much different because it seemed like you guys wanted a new style and rules. I never fully completed the beta stage for balancing trying to get the game out earlier, so there was some mistakes on my end on hosting it beside my lack of time recently which prevented me making the storyline for it. Which I will complete later for those that was interesting in it.

It'll be nice to leave the rating for the style of the game though, If you guys loved it, then I'll improve it even more to make it more even enjoyable. Suggestions to add would be nice too.  

Spreadsheet is basically done, now I'll need some help with testing, and best way I can imagine is to just create a new rank list using it, which is what it's meant to do in the first place. In order to do this, I will need someone to make a list of games here, starting with first one, and also names of winners and losers of each. For example:

TWG1

Winners: Cobalt, DE, Rhaidot
Losers: BF, Sash, Jimbo

TWG2

Winners: Sash, Destroya, Jimbo
Losers: BF, Burgundy, Cobalt

etc.

I really don't have time to do it myself, seeing that I already spent some on spreadsheet and it will take me a while to do all the calculations too once this list is complete.