Official forums for BZFlag.org

The current ranking system shows some weaknesses.

News teams normaly loose matches, the get killed by loosing points and falling back behind newly created teams.
Inactive highly ranked teams returning at the peak only for playing a single match.
Is a team is born , it should play matches without get punished for loose matches.
So give them a single point for just playing a match. Its for the activity.
If a team win, it get at minimum of 24 points,or more like the present ratio.
Every team loose every weak 4 points. Teams starting with 1200 points after descending below 1000 points them reaching the status of inactive.
(team can not edited anymore, every member left that team automaticly). That means if a new team loose every match but play more than 4 matche a weak it stays at it was. Activity is a plus. Highranked but inactive team are descending.
Better teams having more time to avoid to reach the final status. (perhaps we introduce a bigger number for higher score).

Teams loosing points for inactivity seems to have been decided against in
several posts, to see them read the comments on Activity Issues section 1
and 5 of sportchicks summary post.

Activity rewards for new teams, or teams in general is a good idea, and has
also been discussed by many people, see ELO-related changes in
sportchick's post cited above. To be specific, I completely dissagree with
the idea of deleted points from a team just because they are not matching
at that particular point in time. But there is no need for me to rehash my
own views on the subject:see here.

Deleting teams, and dumping players into the open pool if their team goes
inative, seems very unfair to me. There are many circumstances that would
cause inactivity, and deleting teams for that does not treat the players fairly
nor with respect. Yes, I know life is not fair, but we can try can we not?

Better teams having more time to avoid to reach the final status.
(perhaps we introduce a bigger number for higher score).

I am sorry sussi, but I can not make out what you are referring to here.
Are you talking about team ELO scores? which have no upper limit I think,
or in game match scores, which have no upper limit so to speak of. If yuo
could clarify this for me, that would be nice.

looks like, do understand the idea isnt so easy. Loook twice.
low Ranking teams dont loose points for playing.
High ranking team win points for playing.
If a team is inactive for at least 50 weeks it die.
Thats the solution for a everlasting scoring.
AND it will ASSIST ACTIVITY!

Thats the solution for a everlasting scoring.
AND it will ASSIST ACTIVITY!

I dissagree, high ranking teams, after loosing enough points, will just give
up instead of becoming more active. Atleast thats what I would do if
I was in a top team. But this discussion has already been made, I had
thought that using a seasonal system of resetting scores and not using
an activity scaleing factor (or cutting points for inactivity) had been dropped
for the seasonal league type.

Basically, I view match rating points as the most accurate evaluator of strength we have. Granted, it's not perfect but until we get someting better...

If you start changing the rating based on something other than wins and losses, such as activity, nicest team, prettiest team captain, etc, the points rating then becomes pretty much useless as a gauge for how likely a team is to win against another team.

I think that a number of bzflag players (not just ducati, but all leagues) have to give up the idea that you can somehow control when players show up. Simply put, I'll show up when I show up. Losing points on my team score simply aren't going to influence whether or not I go on a dinner date with my wife at the local Indian restaurant, not to mention work.

But this discussion has already been made

when?
Isn't that 1 point from the issue list what is to decide.
(tokimi if u didn't understnd me, don't hestitate to contact me)[/quote]

sussi wrote:

But this discussion has already been made

when?
Isn't that 1 point from the issue list what is to decide.
(tokimi if u didn't understnd me, don't hestitate to contact me)

For the discussion about losing points for inactivity:

5. Inactive teams should lose points until they reach 0, and then be deleted.(Ares)
For: Decreasing scores over time is a good idea. Finding a definition of "inactive" that reflects the current state of the league shouldn't be too difficult. (Admirarch)
For: It rewards activity and allows active teams to climb in the rankings. (quantum dot)
For: All teams should lose 4 points a week for not playing and become "inactive" when they drop below 100 points. All players should automatically be kicked from inactive teams. & it cannot regain active status. (sussi)
Neutral: Activity is the most important aspect in a league (Thonolan)
Against: This might make some of the older, inactive teams disappear completely.(tokimi)
Against: This means that a team that hasn't matched since long will have a low rating, though they still might be hard to beat. (mistake)
Against: In this way, only active teams can climb up in the rankings and inactive teams have no motivation. (Xell)
Against: This would kill activity completely. People DO have a life outside of bz. (longhair)
Against: Inactivity shouldn't be reflected in rankings and score. (birdie)
Against: Reward activity, don't punish inactivity (Zongo)
Against: Activity is important, but punishing inactivity will drive away players. (Xell)
Against: Removing all players from an inactive team and deleting the team does not seem fair. (tokimi)