Victorious Nations/Hall of Honor - Page 23

Tyrant · #**221** March 28th, 2009, 04:18 PM

SS- This thread's for tracking strong nations and players. I'd suggest using the forum features for reputation and gratitude to recognize people for contributions to the community.

Ex- From your description it sounds like both players won, but i'm recording it as a tie so's there won't be more points than games. Let me know if you think this is unfair.

Psycho- Gratz, welcome to the Hall!

Executor · #**222** March 29th, 2009, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrant

SS-
Ex- From your description it sounds like both players won, but i'm recording it as a tie so's there won't be more points than games. Let me know if you think this is unfair.

No,no, I don't think it's unfair.
I agree with you.

ese-aSH · #**223** March 30th, 2009, 06:03 AM

hi all,

These data are interesting, yet is there a way to get a % instead of a simple nb of wins ?
I mean, ok LA ermor won 5 on 30 LA games, but how many LA games had an Ermor player ? (ermor is juste an exemple here)
5 on 30 is quite good (~17%) but 5 on 15 becomes huge (33%)

ano · #**224** March 30th, 2009, 07:25 AM

Tyrant, wouldn't HoF be more fair and have more sense if not only wins were tracked but loses as well? Yes, it will require much more work but if, say, player A won 4 of 30 games he was in and player B won 3 of 4, who should be higher in HoF? Current implementation doesn't take this into account at all, sadly

.
What ese-aSH requests also seems reasonable to me though harder to implement. For me this thread is more information about players than nations just because I may estimate nations by myself.

Psycho · #**225** March 30th, 2009, 08:11 AM

Both things seem equally feasible to me. Someone would have to go through first posts of each game reported here and extract that information.

ano · #**226** March 30th, 2009, 08:38 AM

We may collaborate on this. If I go through, say, 20 games, you do and some other people as well, it won't be too hard. After that we'll have to post information and make calculations. Also, we'll probably need 2 HoF's then - one with absolute values and one with percent values.
Really nothing impossible here, imho.

rdonj · #**227** March 30th, 2009, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ano

Tyrant, wouldn't HoF be more fair and have more sense if not only wins were tracked but loses as well? Yes, it will require much more work but if, say, player A won 4 of 30 games he was in and player B won 3 of 4, who should be higher in HoF? Current implementation doesn't take this into account at all, sadly

.
What ese-aSH requests also seems reasonable to me though harder to implement. For me this thread is more information about players than nations just because I may estimate nations by myself.

I don't think that system would really be any more accurate in the end. Wins depend on a lot of factors that you're not really considering here. And trying to count enough relevant factors to be accurate would be, well, insane. I think wins/players defeated is a pretty reasonable system. It's definitely not a completely 100% accurate measure, but I think it serves well enough.

Amhazair · #**228** March 30th, 2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdonj

Quote:

Originally Posted by ano

Tyrant, wouldn't HoF be more fair and have more sense if not only wins were tracked but loses as well? Yes, it will require much more work but if, say, player A won 4 of 30 games he was in and player B won 3 of 4, who should be higher in HoF? Current implementation doesn't take this into account at all, sadly

.
What ese-aSH requests also seems reasonable to me though harder to implement. For me this thread is more information about players than nations just because I may estimate nations by myself.

I don't think that system would really be any more accurate in the end. Wins depend on a lot of factors that you're not really considering here. And trying to count enough relevant factors to be accurate would be, well, insane. I think wins/players defeated is a pretty reasonable system. It's definitely not a completely 100% accurate measure, but I think it serves well enough.

While theoretically I'd like to be able to see the win ratio's in the HoF, (to satisfy my own curiosity if nothing else) I do also agree with Rdonj, that it would be just as open to interpretation as the current system. More importantly, I'm afraid it'll be loads of work to actually gather the information out of the multitude of game threads floating about.

For those still intrested I can provide my own stats though. (Your call whether this means I'm a neurotic control freak, or just that I've played few enough games to remember each of them individually.) I have played a total of 13 MP games in my Dominions career. One of those was a 4-player game and thus not elegible for the HoF (won by Llamabeast) and one of those is still running. (My bet's on Micah to win that one, but we'll see) So that means that out of 11 finished games you can chalk up 7 HoF losses to balance my 4 wins.

llamabeast · #**229** March 30th, 2009, 12:23 PM

Wow, 4 in 11 is good!

I think Tyrant already has enough work on without trying to list all the losing nations as well. If someone wants to do it for historical games, I say go ahead!

ano · #**230** March 30th, 2009, 01:47 PM

Hm, I currently have 2.5 of 3 here (not counting two team games which we didn't succeed in, sadly). I can't play much due to time limits and I never will. And I also know that there're people with nearly same stats who can't play much as well (Psycho is one of them, IIRC. He performed very good in one game I was a sub in).
So, if we find volunteers we may try to restore the ratios if there's a common interest in them. I think I may process 30-40 games but of course I don't want to do it alone.