Evaluation System

[flu]

Old rank system was quite unfair. It must be rating system. Need more than fair rating system. So many players are sharing on same place or someone plays extraordinary run but doesn't change anything.
must change this situation: "last map winner is defrag winner"
Take a look at the rating system list below, its very easy and quite fair.

http://img8.imageshack.us/i/ranksystem.jpg/

PS: Elimation will be same, last 5, last 10 etc...

[<hk>]

That's the system I came up with, too. It has a flaw, though.

The longer maps are the more the times will spread apart, which is not a problem.
Imagine a player that is extremely good at strafing but sucks at everything else.
Now imagine all maps but one are around 30 seconds.
One strafe map is 6 minutes.
That player can set rank1 and have like 5 seconds to rank2. That should be enough to win the comp.

That's why you have to normalise the points relative to the fastest time.

[flu]

Other;
Maps length should be from 1 to 40 sec. If the map is combo ( >3 guns ) the length may be more.

[MidiMightyMoe]

In every racing sport the system is just something like : 1st/10 points, 2nd/8 points, 3rd/6 points etc 4th/5 points etc.

It works well and we don't need to get the thing overcomplicated, getting seomthing proportional to time difference has just too much flaws and will favor some maps over others.

[flu]

In every racing sport the system is just something like : 1st/10 points, 2nd/8 points, 3rd/6 points etc 4th/5 points etc.

but no one can share to same place, you know.
1.
2.
3.
3.
3.
6.
...
wtf

[<hk>]

Of course we won't have a 6 Minute map. That was just an example to show the effect.

If all maps are close in length everything is alright, but that's impossible to achieve.

[TittenIgnition]

if you use that simple point format, then there could be an extra couple "tiebreaker" maps, should two people have the same amount of points

[<hk>]

We already decided on a evaluation system. It will be time difference based similar to what "flu" suggested but without the problem I stated above.

We already have the "tie"-map. I so hope there will be a tie.

[MidiMightyMoe]

We already decided on a evaluation system. It will be time difference based similar to what "flu" suggested but without the problem I stated above.

As I said, it's not a good idea IMO, even if it's normalized/whatever it favors too much cuts or different routes and the fact you can score more based on other player performance may just give too much importance too a particular map. Once again, simple systems have proved to be good in many other sports, we don't need to do everything again from scratch.

But if you choosed already ... at some point it doesn't matter that much, the fastest guy is still the same .

[<hk>]

Just simple is not always good.
Two players 1 frame apart have practically the same skill. That's why the 2nd player should get just as mutch points.

even if it's normalized/whatever it favors too much cuts or different routes

good!
If you find a short and are 1 second faster you deserve that second.

the fact you can score more based on other player performance may just give too much importance too a particular map.

I don't see a "fact" here. Actually, that's simply not the case.

Every evaluation system needs two points of reference, so you can see what's considered good and what's bad.
In all systems I know the first reference is the fastest time(including the simple Discrete Point system you suggested).

You could put that 1st reference on 0:00:000. That means all players get negative points. The one with the least wins. That is the same as putting the reference to the best time on a map. All you get is an offset. So no point doing that.
You could also simply make up a time. Same thing. Just an offset.



You might be right in the end though. Maybe we are tying to be fair too hard. Maybe it's not worth it. I could settle for the simple time adding system without any normalisation; that's easy enough. One should adapt the maps though.
It's not entirely my decision to make in the end.

It's funny how the very same flaws you dislike so much are in the system you suggested.