League rankings + promotions: suggestions and ideas for change

[Samura|]

This thread is partly a repost of mine from another thread but thought it merited a discussion in its own thread, so apologies for those who've already read it, although I've now written it up in much more detail


League rankings and promotions is something that's been discussed quite heavily in many threads in the past I know. IMHO, I think it's a topic that deserves additional discussion and proper suggestions for improvements. Perhaps if we can come up with some concrete ideas for improvements, OML can then look into it.

Summary of current ranking system
There are 2 current points/ranking systems in Outwitters, one visible to us and one that's invisible.

1) The visible ranking system comprises of 2 parts:
a) which league classification we belong to (Fluffy, Clever, Gifted, Master, Super-Titan)
b) our points, which then determines where we rank within our own league.

Of these 2 parts, it is the former i.e. (a) above that better reflects your actual ranking as perceived by OML in their invisible ranking system.

The points have nothing to do with your real ranking within OML. Therefore you could find someone with 1000 points and in Fluffy league, but 0 points and in Super-Titan. And therefore being number 1 in your league group doesn't mean you're about to promoted. As your visible ranking with your own league is based purely on points, you could have a lot of points simply because you're very active rather than a reflection of skill level. And these points stay with you, i.e. if you have 1000 points in Fluffy and get promoted to Clever, you keep your 1000 points which probably means that you're already in the top 5 in your Clever league group. But your real OML ranking is probably right at the bottom of Clever league. This is why you get instances of being newly promoted but already near the top of the next league, and likewise getting demoted even though you seem to be at the top of your league.

2) The invisible ranking system is the one that determines promotions/demotions and your league classification. At present, the details of how this system works have not been disclosed to us by OML. Here's my best guess:

a) the first 5 matches you play (your league placement matches) determine your starting 'invisible points' and hence your league classification (from Fluffy to Masters, I don't think you can get straight into ST - correct me if I'm wrong)

b) these 'invisible points' are ordinarily built up over time by your Wins/Losses, and points gained in each match vary according to the invisible skill of your opponent and your own (not too dissimilar to the visible points, but I believe they are harder to gain i.e. you reach an equilibrium level of invisible points more easily, even though you can continue to gain visible points by being active). To put these 'invisible points' into numbers broadly on par with the visible points that we are able to see, I would venture to guess something like 0 points for Fluffy, 500 points for Clever, 1000 points for Gifted and 1500 points for Masters. Why do I attempt to quantify these points? Just to contextualise the arbitrary nature of how it's possible to earn so many 'invisible points' if you win your first 5 matches, but otherwise you're earnings 15-18 points one game at a time. I.e. mess up your first 5 matches, and it could take you 100 games to rectify this.

Issues/problems with the existing system

1) The visible points in fact say nothing about skill or actual rankings, yet within each league classification it is used to 'rank' players. This creates confusion and frustration certainly for newer players or those who don't take part in these forums.

2) The importance of the first 5 games appears to be the single largest imbalance in this game. Win all 5 and you could be in Masters immediately. Lose a couple, and you could start out in Fluffy. And after that it will take you about 100+(!!) games to get to Masters. That's my estimate as it's taken me about 30-40 win to get promoted to Clever, then another 30-40 to get promoted to Gifted, in each case maybe with 1 loss (plus in both cases with 3/4 games as P2)!

There are 2 separate issues here:

i) is 30-40 games with a >95% W/L ratio too slow a path for promotion?
- my belief is yes. If I'm winning just 70% of games, I probably wouldn't mind as I'm still getting some challenge. But if I'm winning virtually all my games, there should be a way to match me against better players much sooner. Implications of this? Players start getting bored of league due to the lack of challenge and the amount of time it takes to get to the right league for your skill. This is also exacerbated by (ii) below.

ii) do the placement matches create a distortion/imbalance in the game?
- even if the answer to (i) above is 'no', it seems very arbitrary the massive weighting that's placed on the first 5 games. If this game decides that every player should work their way up the rankings, then it is only fair that everyone has to do so. If the game decides that there's a 'fast-track' way for promotion, this should also be done in a fair manner. My argument is that the placement matches are arbitrary and unfair, placing disproportionate emphasis on a player's first few games, when really it should be latter games that are more important. What are the implications? Players working their way up league one game at a time wonder why they should have to go through the tedium when others can jump straight into Masters. Or have to face the choice of just quitting the old identity and starting over with a new username. Again not optimal esp if you've already established an identity in the game or in the forum.

Where does the issue lie?
I believe the key issue is that it is taking too long to be matched against better opponents, rather than an issue with how points are being awarded. I.e. the reason I'm not being promoted with 30-40 straight wins is not because I'm not being awarded enough (invisible) points for my wins, but because I'm not being matched against players above my skill level to prove myself.

So how can the system be improved?

Would definitely love to hear suggestions, but here are my first thoughts:

1) a points system based upon the currently 'invisible points', rather than our existing point system

2) rather than having placement matches, there should be a fasttrack system whereby someone on say a 10 game streak then gets immediately matched against much tougher opponents for the next 3 games (say one or two leagues). Clearly if you can win all 3 or even 2 of 3, you should be promoted immediately. Winning even 1 of these games means perhaps you should still be given a chance to 'jump' to a higher league by being matched against tougher opposition for a couple more games

3) a complete overhaul of the points/ranking system? This requires much more thought and discussion. Say something akin to a tennis ATP ranking system, whereby your performance of the current rolling 12 months determines your ranking... not sure how this can be implemented in practice given the difference in games played etc. Would still require a better skill matching system however, as winning 30 games against lesser skilled opponents shouldn't gain you a promotion. In tennis, each win automatically pits you against a significantly stronger opponent, as half of competitors are weeded out in each round.