Proposal: New Clan Ranking System

[uniquinous]

We have been facing an ongoing problem which has lead to quite a bit of trash talking, disagreements, and restlessness within the community, and that is the ranking system. There currently is no objective way to determine which clan is best. While some may say no such method could exist, I would like to elaborate and propose one that might be better suited for this community.

Currently we determine clan rank by the total number of points each clan has from ranked players. The problem with this is that there can be a large array of possibilities to get top ranked spots. On one extreme, a small handful of the very top players can easily be in the top 10. For example, iceman just moved his two 1700+ accounts into a joke clan, and is currently in the #9 position. On the other end of the extreme, a large amount of people can secure the lower spots of the player rankings and thus also secure a top clan ranking. Neither of these extremist situations (a few Elite players or vast quantities of barely ranked players) should necessarily be called a great clan. We must find some way of objectively quantifying a happy medium.

As such I would like to propose we change our system to one that very closely resembles individuallized team sports (such as track, swimming, etc). In those situations, a ballance between the extent of the competitors' ability and the number of competitors creates the final team ranking, despite the fact that each person competes individually.

I propose that the scores of the top 7 ranked players of each clan be used to calculate clan ranking.

This would eliminate the drive for clans to become powerhouses by trying to obtain as many ranked players as possible. This would also mean we don't have a repeat of Dape, who tried to just assemble a small amount of highly ranked players to overthrow the boards in a short amount of time. It would focus clans on truly improving individual abilities.

Among other normal feedback, I would ask for other recomendations for the method of scoring while staying within this general limitation concept. For example, you might think that 6 would be a better cutoff. My other thought would be that the top few positions of each server would use their top 10 players to really fine-tune the rankings. Ideally I would like to use top 10 for everyone, but on most servers this possibility doesn't even exist by time you get to the 3rd position.

So I've laid out the general concept, but I can see where it could use a bit of work. I look forward to community feedback.

Sincerely,
-uniquin

[Soda]

Not a bad idea, I don't really look at clan ranking and don't think anyone else does. I judge the clan more by the kind of people are in the clan, not by the stats they got. I love SI, because they have some of the nicest people, same with NJ and many other clans. I also don't like the system we use now and was thinking of like have a ladder, where clans challenge each other to wars and each war they win they move up the ladder and if they loose they move down the ladder. Interesting concept Uni, but I am stil la bit confused what you are suggesting, it is like the old system, but only top 7 people are used?

[Cosmo88]

I love SI, because they have some of the nicest people, same with NJ and many other clans.

Oh! I see how it is! So CG is just one of the "others"?!

Sodanoob! :mad:

But for the topic, I think its an "okay" idea, still a tad confuzzled about what you're trying to say, though.

[iceman2001]

I think that the top 7 should make the varsity team, but only top 5 should score.

[Memnarch]

I agree with ice. By the way ice, where have you been?

[Hatchet Klown]

Or after the TAL gets underway somehow use those points to implement a new system. ;)

[uniquinous]

iceman, being a runner, understands the concept well. TAL probably wouldn't help much as it's an individualized event.

But yes, it's exactly like the current system but only uses the top 7 players from each clan. That was a clan that is founded on 7 really good players will come out better then a clan that has 15 mid-ranked players. Alternatively, that clan of 15 mid-ranked players comes out over a clan of 3 top ranked players.

[DOCTOR DEVICE]

Uniq, but its the best overall clan, how do you expect to get that if its only the top 7. Some people assemble 7 ranked players, and may have a higher rating that a clan with 20+ ranked players with great golds and greys. 7 High golds < 20+ ranked players with good greys? Yet the ranking system would say the 7 high golds are better, yet which is the better clan?

[Noda]

naa, i dont see how what ur doing gets away from "the extreme of having a few top people ranked", i agree ith hatchet though, the league should play a huge roll in it right now because the problem with the system were using now is simply the same problem as there is with the stat system in general, the league will better determine how good people actually are.

[The AIDS Virus]

naa, i dont see how what ur doing gets away from "the extreme of having a few top people ranked", i agree ith hatchet though, the league should play a huge roll in it right now because the problem with the system were using now is simply the same problem as there is with the stat system in general, the league will better determine how good people actually are.
What he said. Good idea though Uni.;)

[EatMine]

No, it is not a good idea!
We are already pretty limited to calculate clan rankings with only 100 players per server, and restricting the number even more definitely won't improve the quality of the rankings.
Just an example: With this 7 players-restriction, the currently strongest TAO clan <Strategic Insomniacs> wouldn't even be listed, since on 2 servers they have only 6 players ranked at the moment ...

Ok, the following is maybe a bit complicated, but i am not able to express myself better in english:
The currently used system - Thargor's system - is actually ingenious!
It is effective, it takes all available information into account, but it is still "simple". A true masterpiece in my opinion, which only a great mind could have thought of.

Now, if you take out its calculation base by restricting the number of players, you put a flaw into the system (the 101-part would not be accurate anymore), and thus the quality of the information content would be reduced...
Which brings me to the important point:
Thargor's system - like every ranking system - has a specific information content!
This is its strength, but at the same time obviously its weakness:
Neither of these extremist situations (a few Elite players or vast quantities of barely ranked players) should necessarily be called a great clan.
...
I would ask for other recomendations for the method of scoringThe question is: what is a great clan?
If you don't agree with Thargor's definition of good clans, come up with your own.
Explain (verbally!) what makes a clan better than another in your opinion, and then the math-part is actually pretty simple.

[Hatchet Klown]

:eek:

[uniquinous]

sorry forgot about this for a bit...

naa, i dont see how what ur doing gets away from "the extreme of having a few top people ranked", i agree ith hatchet though, the league should play a huge roll in it right now because the problem with the system were using now is simply the same problem as there is with the stat system in general, the league will better determine how good people actually are.
TAL might rank players better, but this still won't set *clans* straight. The point of this is not to simply rank which players are better - it's to accurately rank which group of players is better. Again, not everyone need participate in TAL, meaning it yet again has a rather large hole that doesn't accurately accomodate non-participating players.

EatMine brings up the idea that SI wouldn't even be a top clan in this system because they only have 6 players. First, truth. Absolutely. They need more then just 6 to be truly competitive. *However*, notice the quality of those 6. Chances are, those 6 still have a better score then 7 of the clan below them. Thus, they wouldn't go too far. Having all 7 is not a requirement, nor does it completely knock you out of a shot at a good ranking, if the <7 ranked players you have are some of the best. Thus, comprimise. Quality compensates for sheer number.

[Kill Dragoon]

I'm in the middle of this issue.
I think that it would be advisable to adjust the clan rankings so that the "best clans" could make a stronger showing and not just the ones with the largest powerhouses.

If we were to change the system I would think the best way would be to weight clans by three categories:
1) Overall ranking. This would incorporate the ranking of all top 100 players using the current system. It makes up 50 percent of the score using skill as an option.
2) Member ranking. This would be an actual count of members who are in the top 100 and are gray. Let's face it if you are gray and can get that high you deserve bonus points. It makes up 25 percent of your score. The grey bonus is 20 points per gray.
3) Um? I guess clan size? This would be the final 25 percent. I would weight this by numbers of clan members who are active in the clan and in the top 100. Also use 20 points per ranked clan member.
So just having one or two powerhouses wouldn't have as great a score as those with multiple members.

Here's my thoughts on the numbers:

Say CLAN NO.1 has earned 450 points with six members in the top 100. None of them are grey. Their score would be:
450*0.50 +0+120*0.25=
225+30.12=255.12

Say CLAN No. 2 has earned 400 points with 10 members, two grays. Their score would be:
400*0.50+40*0.25+200*0.25=
200+10+50=260

You can see by this that yes clans with more points can be ranked high. But those who rank high, use gray players and have a large number of players can influence the scores more.

Well that's what I came up with. I'm not sure if this kind of formula could be plugged in easily though for a quick update?
Whatcha think guys?

[uniquinous]

erm...

:huh:

I think I have to disagree with that. The proposed system is exactly what every track and racing team in the US uses to ballance ability with sheer number. It works, I can promise you that, based on history.

[Kill Dragoon]

Well, I was just adding input. I like approaching things from different angles. This was my angle I could find. It still uses the old system, but it puts emphasis on numbers in the top 100 and on gray players who make it in as well.

It would shift the ranking only slightly and only if clans were naturally close.
As far as your comment about this system working, well yes it works.
However the idea on this thread - and it was yours - was to change it in someway and adjust the system.

So I've had my say now :D
Good luck with whatever proposals come up.

[Jeffery]

We have been facing an ongoing problem which has lead to quite a bit of trash talking, disagreements, and restlessness within the community, and that is the ranking system. There currently is no objective way to determine which clan is best. While some may say no such method could exist, I would like to elaborate and propose one that might be better suited for this community.

Currently we determine clan rank by the total number of points each clan has from ranked players. The problem with this is that there can be a large array of possibilities to get top ranked spots. On one extreme, a small handful of the very top players can easily be in the top 10. For example, iceman just moved his two 1700+ accounts into a joke clan, and is currently in the #9 position. On the other end of the extreme, a large amount of people can secure the lower spots of the player rankings and thus also secure a top clan ranking. Neither of these extremist situations (a few Elite players or vast quantities of barely ranked players) should necessarily be called a great clan. We must find some way of objectively quantifying a happy medium.

As such I would like to propose we change our system to one that very closely resembles individuallized team sports (such as track, swimming, etc). In those situations, a ballance between the extent of the competitors' ability and the number of competitors creates the final team ranking, despite the fact that each person competes individually.

I propose that the scores of the top 7 ranked players of each clan be used to calculate clan ranking.

This would eliminate the drive for clans to become powerhouses by trying to obtain as many ranked players as possible. This would also mean we don't have a repeat of Dape, who tried to just assemble a small amount of highly ranked players to overthrow the boards in a short amount of time. It would focus clans on truly improving individual abilities.

Among other normal feedback, I would ask for other recomendations for the method of scoring while staying within this general limitation concept. For example, you might think that 6 would be a better cutoff. My other thought would be that the top few positions of each server would use their top 10 players to really fine-tune the rankings. Ideally I would like to use top 10 for everyone, but on most servers this possibility doesn't even exist by time you get to the 3rd position.

So I've laid out the general concept, but I can see where it could use a bit of work. I look forward to community feedback.

Sincerely,
-uniquin
The easiest way to refute that is simple:

The top seven ranked players of all clans are not known. And will not be without the Admins installing a new script to retrieve rankings.
The current method is the easiest way to calculate a score based upon information available. Is it an accurate count of a great clan? No. But no ranking ever will be.

Take the "joker score" thats JW used to apply. A member could be in the top ranked players, and not be in the top twenty. Anytime you attempt to manipulate raw data, you skew the data where you want it to.

[uniquinous]

Sure they are - we have the top 100 rankings list - we have the clan of each person on that list, meaning we can extract who the top 7 of each clan are that happen to be on that top 100 list. This doesn't mean we figure out the best 7 of each clan, it means we only look at the top 7 *that are ranked* of each clan, and use their scores.

[Jeffery]

And what about those in the clans with only 3 people in the top 100? Now they are automatically closer in rank to those with 15?

So, basically you just want to punish large clans by taking away some of their ranked members, while not changing how the clans are actually ranked in any way shape or form.

If you had an actual original idea for calculating the ranking, it might be worth it, but being stupid and just discarding part of the data for no reason is just that. Being stupid.

Your examples of sports teams is not even close to this, because they don;t go "oh gee, this team we'll only count 1 person, while in this other team we'll count seven" when they do their rankings. Without full access to the top seven of EVERY clan, your ranking mean even less than the current ones.