Then, why not get rid of the points system outright? Here's why:

>As stratagos mentioned, points act as a limiting mechanism which keeps pros with the pros and the newer players playing together at their respecive skill levels as was the points system's intended purpose.

>Also, do not think that kind of behavior doesn't happen in WTA games. I might even go as far to say it happens in WTA games as much as it does in PPSC....

With the points system comes the draw backs but I think the benefits outwiegh the risks if you ask me. Where would this site be with out the points system?

So yes. I don't see much of a differnce....

Points are good in that they encourage people to play well. I'd prefer a PPSC/WTA hybrid myself, as the standard format, with WTA an option on the side.

One point that has been made is that it is easier to win a PPSC game than a WTA game. This might be statistically true. However if this is so, then it is harder to draw a PPSC game than a WTA game. I wonder if the fewer resulting draws offsets the increased wins, with regards to the ratings?

No, it still means that it will have an effect. The effect will be to allow good players to win more often, over estimating their ratings, because they can win from a good position the majority of the time.

It also means you start rewarding "compliance" to your pro-WTA view.

I agree with Centurian
You can't treat PPSC as WTA
In PPSC getting a 2nd place can give you a boost at ghost rankings.
The way the ghost rating works INFLUENCES your decision to not desperately try to stab the leading guy
Whereas in WTA you will do anything to force a draw
So, you can't just treat PPSC as WTA plainly cause it's not
Another idea: Just banish PPSC. It's stupid and it's not diplomacy...
it's just a popularity contest.

If you can't win in a PPSC game, then don't play them - but don't try to dictate what I can and cannot play, hellalt.

@stratagos "I don't care one way or another if you have another algorithm, nor do I exceptionally care how I place on it. As long as you are not asking someone else to do the work for you, and as long as you don't think your new numbers obligates me to play in a way that is more pleasing for *you* than for me, more power."

Was this directed at me stratagos? I don't have any expectation of anyone to do anything. Play how you want to play.

I'm starting to like PPSC games even more now. It'll be a ghetto where bad players can play each other and not ruin our fun :)

guys... everyone.. read what hellalt wrote above...

THAT which he is describing is EXACTLY what you are supposed to do based on the PPSC reward system... and it is exactly OPPOSITE of what the game of diplomacy is "supposed" to be. the game of Diplomacy is a SPECIFIC game... and it has gained its status as one of the pre-eminent games of all time partially BECAUSE of its very unique rewarding system that does NOT produce single winners that often...

PPSC has absolutely DESTROYED that concept... not only as a piss-poor variant but also in the minds of sooooooo many promising new dip players on this site like stevenC or dozens of others who now know Diplomacy as PPSC... that is just shameful.

now my moral superiority aside (yeah, if you dont like it, too bad), I have to agree with Centurian and Ghost on this to a degree... though I really admire spyman for trying to come up with a 'better' way to measure 'good vs better' players, this algortithim is not it. mainly because of what has been said - a PPSC win is a dime-a-dozen... its so easy and simple to come by that this new algorithm would ENCOURAGE you to play PPSC games more than WTA games...

the only solution that is worthwhile at this point, that is as long as this repulsive PPSC crap exists on this site, is to have two separate rankings. one would be the current system which has served this community very well for a long time, and which can preserve some sense of continuity for those who cant accept change... and a second, (I would suggest more elite ranking system) that ONLY includes WTA games...

yes, the WTA-only rating system would result in fewer players being ranked, and much fewer games being considered for the ranking system - but I'd be willing to make a bet that the top players on the WTA-only list would all be chart-toppers in the combined list as well.

this allows us "WTA snobs" to compare ourselves to like-minded (and better) players and thus feel a true reflection of our playing ability is being measured - while still allowing the whole community to participate in the 'combined' list that has existed since whenever.

as for the early 'wta' games that may have had silly problems (like 18 unit wins instead of 18 center wins) we can set a date of Jan 2009 or whenever that update occurred for qualifying games.

this "pure WTA" ranking could be kept as a benchmark even after other variants are added... whereas the combined list can include whatever we as a community or Ghost as the proprietor of the algorithm deems fit.

so in essence, I applaud spyman for his effort on this - but I would suggest we simply add a "pure-WTA" ranking and be done with it... none of those PPSC loving players have to play any differently - they can just ignore 'our' list and do whatever it is they like to do... and the rest of us can do what we like to do.

I actually would LOVE this idea personally - as it would let me play live and gunboat games in ppsc as it would not 'affect my ranking' in the 'pure' ranking system.


so that is my suggestion on this idea...

psst, Babak:

Some of us are able to abstract from the points system and play Diplomacy.

Acosmist -

you know - I never thought of it that way... hmm... you actually have a great point there.

damn man... this is like the 3rd thread in a row that I've appreciated your contributions to the discussion - you are on the verge of shattering my pre-conceived notions of you... please stop for the sake of my own sanity!! =P (j/k)

I've played a fair number of both and I have to say, I really enjoy WTA over PPSC. The mentality of the players is very different and I find closer to how the game was when I used to play face to face. Where if someone was winning we would team up to try and stop them. Something which seems less common in the PPSC where people are content to let them win as long as they get second.

What on earth could your preconceived notions be?

On a side note, While I look at both points and ghost ratings the prime thing I looks at for rating players is there win, loss, draw and survive rankings. It's not a very fair system as who they are playing with has no effect but I just do this. Win +2 Loss -2 Draw +2/# of players Survive +0 It gives me a basic idea of how good they are even if it doesn't tell me if they won all there games against new players.

I'm in favor of a pure wta rank as well

i say don't count ppsc in the GR, only wta. still use ppsc for points though, as it is ppsc. points are superficial anywho. the fact that i a couple of wta awards for the year may slightly affect my opinion, but it seems to mesh well...

I agree with damian but i think that draws shouldnt divide the players.. if its a 4 way draw because 2 countries are allies vs. the other group of allies then they would only get .5 ...? i think if its a WTA game there shouldnt be a Draw..... points per supply center yea allow them because the allies work together and dont stab..... in either case stabbing is the name of the game but... im just saying how i feel....

I think it's a fairly fair way of doing it myself a two way draw is a tough thing to manage, and the difficulty to come to a draw decreases as you add more countries. With a 2 way draw meaning you made it one center from a win. Yeah your score for a 4 way draw would be half a point I consider that to be quite fair myself. it's 1/4 of what you'd get for a win. Of course that's just how I do a quick ranking of people I face and isn't the most accurate.

Though I did consider making draws 1 point when I made it I changed my mind on that aspect. But for a quick example of the ratings that this throws out. Your score BusDes is -2.69

Acomist - I was refering to you x:48pm comment not your x:04pm comment which i did not see when I typed my second post.

so i was referring glowingly to your point about ghettoization of PPSC games keeping out the riff-raff in a self-selective way.

i'm glad 'some' of your are able to abstract out your whatever... but as I said before, how OTHERS play will affect YOUR result. so you can be as 'abstract' as you want and keep the points out of mind when playing PPSC, but there are always six other players whose playing will affect YOUR result. once you recognize that, then you'll see what some of us WTA purists are talking about.

as for pre-conceived notion - I always saw you as a glib, conceited, irrationally Hobbsian conservative. but now I'm coming around to the idea that i was wrong about your rationality.


damien - i think thats a good 'back of the envelope' measure. i usually add up the win+draw percentages and I figure that'll give me a good rough sketch (obviously valuing wins a bit more in my own mind)

busDespres - what you just wrote made absolutely no sense... are you suggesting WTA should not allow draw? if that is what you are saying, then methinks you have not understood the most basic concepts behind the WTA vs PPSC debate.

"as for pre-conceived notion - I always saw you as a glib, conceited, irrationally Hobbsian conservative. but now I'm coming around to the idea that i was wrong about your rationality."

I'm not Hobbesian either. Definitely Lockean.

Although you said you were surprised I was so relativist - isn't that much more Hobbesian?

Why am I asking rhetorical questions?

Huh?

But no, I am definitely a relativist about the objectives of a game, which are, after all, artifacts of the players' intentions.

@spyman, that was a 'general' you, not a specific you.

I am going to put another crazy idea out there. Some people have made some very good points about the drawbacks of a single algorithm GhostRatings

The main drawback is that it is easier to win a PPSC game than a WTA game.
Perhaps then the solution would be to down-weight PPSC wins. Thus if a PPSC win is 20% more common than a WTA win, then a PPSC win should be worth 20% less than a WTA win (something like that).
However if it is easier to win a PPSC game then, by extension, it is harder to draw. So draws would have to be upweighted.
The part that I don't agree with about the current system is for that more SCs are worth more than fewer SCs (I am referring to Ghostratings here not points).

The other draw main drawback is that some players feel they will be penalized for games they played where they actively played for second, but with a maximum of SCs. I don't have a answer to this.

This might all be too much trouble of course. And obviously the easiest way would be to measure WTA games separately as suggested by Babak.
And it would be quite good to have games that don't count towards rating. Live games perhaps. It would be good to exclude these.

I am absolutely in favour of WTA as a whole. I don't play PPSC anymore. I agree with Babak completely on this.

As Ghost mentioned, I have long advocated a hybrid system, where half the points are allocated automatically to the winner and the other half distributed according to centre (so the winner gets roughly 75% total), as a way to not off put noobs who might put effort in and still lose.

I like the idea of having a ranking system of just WTA games. I would support that completely.

My only concern was that this particular rating system, what the thread topic was about, is distortionary.

I like your idea of the hybrid system, sort of what it does do is make for a pretty fantastic way to play a game where people will try and play for a win. However the issue I have with it is that it really doesn't solve the problem, However that said I do like it and would push for it over the basic ppsc style of game. I am also in favor of a rating system built around WTA if only because then perhaps such games would be more common.

"The main drawback is that it is easier to win a PPSC game than a WTA game.
Perhaps then the solution would be to down-weight PPSC wins. Thus if a PPSC win is 20% more common than a WTA win, then a PPSC win should be worth 20% less than a WTA win (something like that).
However if it is easier to win a PPSC game then, by extension, it is harder to draw. So draws would have to be upweighted."

No, this breaks one the central points of diplomacy: one man's gain is another man's loss. You increase the value of the game by drawing.