PVP Leaderboards

mancom

There is a player-driven PVP leaderboard available at

http://hilbertguide.com/leaderboard/

Contact me (@mancom) if you want to help and upload your match data.

old text wrote:

Are people interested in player-driven PVP leaderboards?

If it was necessary to combatlog every match (which means that you have to enter "/combatlog 1" each time you restart the STO client) and then automagically report aggregate match data, would you be willing to suffer through the inconvenience of having to start your combatlog once per gaming session and running an automated and stripped down version of a combatlog parser?

Here is a prototype: http://hilbertguide.com/leaderboard/

Contact me, if you want to help test it.

chlamidiot

Sure, although I don't need a leaderboard to tell me I suck.

But even more than that, I'd be willing to log and run an automated parser if the data was aggregated and used for informing balance passes. Instead of, I don't know, a gut feeling about which abilities are getting used.

praxi5

Yes.

/10char

aquitaine985

To be honest, I'm not sure I am. I still have the combat parser thing installed, but I haven't used it in ages.

Is there really enough of us to make any real leaderboard worthwhile? It's a great idea of course but there's too few of us.

scurry5

Hmm....wasn't Boot Camp working on something like this?

kolln95

Yes, Boot camp is working on the project of Leaderboard, I guess here is the thread about:

http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=800551

mancom

The Bootcamp approach sounds extremely bureaucratic and with a proposed limit of three scored matches per week unlikely to produce reliable results because there are not enough results to effect convergence towards the true value.

drkfrontiers

mancom wrote: »

The Bootcamp approach sounds extremely bureaucratic and with a proposed limit of three scored matches per week unlikely to produce reliable results because there are not enough results to effect convergence towards the true value.

Thanks mate we will try and take a look at it. Perhaps you could work with Livin on it?

For a moment there towards the end I couldn't stop thinking about this!!!

livinrtb

Ya any ideas would be great what's laid out is very basic, Simple rules simple scoring technics...to get started.

Would be great to get together on Saturday PBC TS and see if we can hash out a system that would allow for better scoring.

Thnx All
@LIVIN

masterkeychnk5

Sounds great, although the end result might be more QQn.

Only real problem is /combatlog 1 but even that is easily fixed:

/bind Space "Combatlog 1 $$ GenSendMessage HUD_Root FireAll $$ +power_exec Distribute_Shields $$ +TrayExecByTray"

Although something like putting it on WASD etc would be better since it will start prematurely (From the spawnpoint) rather then right as you spacebar for the first time.

Not too hard to implement as some basic instruction Hilbert.

Anyway this makes nobody forget to enable it anymore, only huge combatlogs will be the end result so the necessity to split them up and eventually auto remove a few has got to be worked on.

mancom

If anyone wants in on testing this and provide match data, shoot me an ingame mail (@mancom).

http://hilbertguide.com/leaderboard/

maicake716

amazing how someone in their spare time is able to create a basic leader board where as the guys who made the damn game have been unable to since it came out....


ooo how could this be used for pve? if we think of a reason for that then maybe they can import it over to pvp like they said... but have yet to do.... ah never mind.

if i start pvp'ing again seriously ill give it a go.

havam

Great job thanks hilbert.

Can't wait to see how your tool measures up against the Leaderboards that were first in testing in S2 and have been refined by Mr. Tod since Season 6. I mean 2013 isn't over yet, so who knows maybe S9 and 2013 will come sooooooo soooooooooon(tm).

masterkeychnk5

Mhh the update gave me an error that it couldnt start the tool, but aftr restarting it works again apparently.

It would be nice for every update to see some sort of changelog

Yeah this is one iof the best tools yet that got released by public, awesome

mancom

Let's get this going.

ilhansk

Hm do you want us to send you our ACT logs, or how is this supposed to work?

masterkeychnk5

Was thinking about it and this might also a be nice indication of whether youre scoring higher or lower with different builds etc

How high does the scoring go ?

mancom

masterkeychnk5 wrote: »

How high does the scoring go ?

Theoretically, you could get as high as you want if you have access to unlimited DPS/HPS.

A back-of-the-enevelope calculation shows that if you have a perfect match, i.e. you do 100% of the damage in the entire match (not just your own team), perform all 15 kills yourself, do 100% of the healing, get perfect style and utility ratings and do 4.5k dps and 3k hps, then you will get 12 points for the match.

I'm currently in the process of reworking the utility and style ratings. Once that is done, maybe the formula will be sufficiently stable to give some more detailed explanations.

A big future project that I have not yet undertaken is the implementation of team-detection, so that I can better tell whether one was fighting against superior forces or merely shooting fish in a barrel and then use this to better rate a player's performance.

aquitaine985

havam wrote: »

Great job thanks hilbert.

Can't wait to see how your tool measures up

*snicker*

/10Ooh-Eee-Ooh-Aah-Aah-Ting-Tang-Walla-Walla-Post

mancom

There have been some major changes to the scoring algorithm. Testing continues.

g0h4n4

I used to play Counterstrike and there used to be a leaderboard type system from a company calling it clanbase with 1vs1 and team play leader board with verification by screnshots or using Fraps or equivalent. This sounds like a good idea

johnny111971

I've been running this forin all PvP matches. after launching and starting, all you need to do is remember to turn on your combatlog. It'll upload for you... just check the site once in a while to see your progress.

I particularly like the utility and style theories, as I understand them.

Extremely easy to use... well done bud...

kirkfollower24

mancom wrote: »

Are people interested in player-driven PVP leaderboards?

If it was necessary to combatlog every match (which means that you have to enter "/combatlog 1" each time you restart the STO client) and then automagically report aggregate match data, would you be willing to suffer through the inconvenience of having to start your combatlog once per gaming session and running an automated and stripped down version of a combatlog parser?

Here is a prototype: http://hilbertguide.com/leaderboard/

Contact me, if you want to help test it.

I'd be happy to help anytime, and I've got friends that would be happy to help too.

Contact me in-game anytime, @kirkfollower24

aquitaine985

g0h4n4 wrote: »

I used to play Counterstrike and there used to be a leaderboard type system from a company calling it clanbase with 1vs1 and team play leader board with verification by screnshots or using Fraps or equivalent. This sounds like a good idea

That brings back memories. Clanbase used to run loads of Medal of Honour tourneys too.

There really needs to be a spectator option in PVP, don't give them the ability to talk in Zone or Local, but let them watch from the same viewpoints as actual players and maybe an option to just zoom about freely. It's been in MMO's for donkeys years.

mancom

The current list shows a good mix of Tac/Sci/Eng at the top, so maybe the rating algorithm is somewhat acceptable.

masterkeychnk5

Mhhh i noticed while pugstomping rating goes up significantly fastr then when up against a good team and yourself in the minority.

I suggest to prevent abuse and warp out on matches you think will be bad for ya rating should somehow be prevented.

Hard to normaliZe this though..

But yeah i agree the list seems decently accurate so far. I love this program

Dammit hanks sci pwns my tac now xD

ilhansk

masterkeychnk5 wrote: »

Dammit hanks sci pwns my tac now xD

Hehe

mancom

masterkeychnk5 wrote: »

Mhhh i noticed while pugstomping rating goes up significantly fastr then when up against a good team and yourself in the minority.

This is indeed difficult to accurately capture, especially since I still don't have team detection in the client. There is already a dampening factor that should prevent too much point loss if you go up a against a superior team that picks on you way more than on your team mates, but so far there is nothing to punish you for being "too good". It's not entirely trivial to decide if you were simply amazing or the other team was truly bad.

There is data that I can (and intend to) use to reduce the problem a bit. Currently the importance of individual matches for the overall score is given by taking averages with the match duration as weights. I could apply some kind of exponential function to further increase the importance of long matches over short ones; also I could give matches with many kills (close to 30 in total, thus indicating a balanced score) a higher weight in the averaging process; the same goes for matches with a high overall dps/hps score which then indicates that all players were good.

But a different averaging of the individual results doesn't fully solve the problem. While it makes longer/better matches more important, it still leaves the situation where a players decides to only participate in pugstomps - if every match is the same, the weights won't change anything. To do something against that, I could apply penalties for onesided matches, but that would also hurt players who are genuinely good and perform outstandingly even against good opponents and achieve decisive wins.

The last way out which requires much more data than I currently have and which is probably only possible for weekly/monthly lists is to only include matches which look as if they were balanced and simply discard everything else. But that could still punish players/groups who are simply significantly better than everyone else (think: the TSI-QEW 15-0 tournament matches would not have been rated because they were too onesided...).

tron4eternity

mancom wrote: »

This is indeed difficult to accurately capture, especially since I still don't have team detection in the client. There is already a dampening factor that should prevent too much point loss if you go up a against a superior team that picks on you way more than on your team mates, but so far there is nothing to punish you for being "too good". It's not entirely trivial to decide if you were simply amazing or the other team was truly bad.

There is data that I can (and intend to) use to reduce the problem a bit. Currently the importance of individual matches for the overall score is given by taking averages with the match duration as weights. I could apply some kind of exponential function to further increase the importance of long matches over short ones; also I could give matches with many kills (close to 30 in total, thus indicating a balanced score) a higher weight in the averaging process; the same goes for matches with a high overall dps/hps score which then indicates that all players were good.

But a different averaging of the individual results doesn't fully solve the problem. While it makes longer/better matches more important, it still leaves the situation where a players decides to only participate in pugstomps - if every match is the same, the weights won't change anything. To do something against that, I could apply penalties for onesided matches, but that would also hurt players who are genuinely good and perform outstandingly even against good opponents and achieve decisive wins.

The last way out which requires much more data than I currently have and which is probably only possible for weekly/monthly lists is to only include matches which look as if they were balanced and simply discard everything else. But that could still punish players/groups who are simply significantly better than everyone else



(think: the TSI-QEW 15-0 tournament matches would not have been rated because they were too onesided...).

You aren't using that as an example moreso as an excuse to gloat instead. I know I can tell despite what you are going to say next to bs us. Nobody here buys your bs anyway!

ilhansk

I have been using your new parsing tool for a couple of days now, I'll give you some feedback regarding my observations soon.

masterkeychnk5

ilhansk wrote: »

Hehe

Oh nvm, i refrain from my earlier message