Game Development Community

Rating Think Tanks Players

by slugthog · in ThinkTanks · 10/29/2003 (11:28 pm) · 53 replies

RATING THINKTANKS PLAYERS

Well, Kiddies, I know you have been waiting with baited breath for Granpa Sluggy's next post so here it is.

Since there is a size limit on posts, and as everyone knows Granpa Sluggy is a long winded old coot, so, this will certainly take up two.

IF YOU DON'T WANNA WADE THROUGH ALL THAT VERBAGE THEN JUST IGNORE IT AND GO READ SOMEONE ELSE'S POST.

RATING PLAYERS

Every once in while there is a flurry of "How do you rate so-and-so" posts. People start throwing out numbers like, I rate FP as an 18 and I rate Flea as a 16. Eighteen what? Sixteen what? Eighteen out of twenty, someone posts. Eighteen out of twenty what? What correspondence is there between Dev's rating of Tanky at 19 and FP's rating of Tanky at 17? None.

In order for a rating to have any value it must be pegged to something understandable. It must be pegged to a scale that everyone knows. Yeah, I just made these things up out of the addled depths of my slowly decaying brain. It really doesn't matter what that scale is as long as everyone uses the same one and these look okay to me but as we say: YMMV. OTOH, if you think you have a better set of criteria post them and we can discuss it.

First how does it work?

You rate a player from 0 to 4 in each of 5 categories: Maneuver, Marksmanship, Blocking, Scoring and Ball Handling. You then add the five values to generate an individual player rating between 0 and 20. Keep the details to yourself. All that matters is the final value.

Oh yeah, AND ya can't rate yerself.

Okay. Here is a preliminary set of criteria for a ThinkTanks Player Rating Scale.

THE SKILLS SCALE

MANEUVER
0 Generally maintains a course, uses jumps & bounces poorly
1 Sometimes collides with other players & obstacles, avoids jumps & bounces
2 Generally avoids obstacles & other players, rarely uses jumps & bounces
3 Avoids obstacles & other players, uses jumps & bounces well
4 Skillfully avoids other players, uses jumps & bounces with precision

MARKSMANSHIP
0 Shoots & employs power-ups randomly
1 Sometimes hits target, employs power-up poorly
2 Often hits target at medium range.
3 Frequently hits target, uses one or two power-ups well
4 Nearly always hits target, employs all power-ups skillfully

BLOCKING
0 Seldom blocks or steals
1 Blocks poorly and positions poorly, rarely steals
2 Positions & executes blocks well, sometimes steals
3 Blocks and/or positions well, sometimes steals
4 Blocks & positions skillfully, steals frequently

SCORING
0 Rarely or never scores
1 Sometimes scores, among lowest scorers in game
2 Often scores, among average scorers in game
3 Frequently scores, generally among top scorers in game
4 Scores frequently, always among top scorers in game

BALL HANDLING
0 Never passes or hands off, often fumbles
1 Passes or hands off poorly, sometimes fumbles
2 Can pass & hand off, generally does not fumble
3 Passes & hands off well, rarely fumbles
4 Passes & hands off with precision, never fumbles

slugthog the continued in the next post...
Page «Previous 1 2 3 Last »
#1
10/29/2003 (11:28 pm)
Topic: Rating Think Tanks Players
Part: the Second

After you have rated a player's skills then you can rate him on THE OTHER SCALE.

Again each attribute has a value between 0 and 4. These values are added to generate a number between 0 and 12.

When you have finished rating a player he will have two values. One between 0 and 20 and one between 0 and 12. If you wish you can add the numbers and create an aggregate value between 0 and 32.

For instance rating ZippityDooDog who maneuvers okay (3), is a great marksman (5), a pretty good blocker (3), sometimes scores (1) and is a poor ball handler (1) [yields 3+5+3+1+1 = 13] often hits the wrong target (2), frequently sacrifices for the team (4) and swears & bad mouths opponents (1) [yields 2+4+1 = 7] for an aggregate of 20/32, or 13/20 if you decided to ignore THE OTHER SCALE. (It's import to include the base 20 or 32 when you rate a player)

THE OTHER SCALE

TACTICS
0 Ignorant of terrain advantages & disadvantages, frequently attacks the wrong opponent
1 Understands terrain advantages & disadvantages, sometimes attacks appropriate opponent
2 Employs terrain, generally attacks appropriate opponent
3 Employs terrain well, generally attacks appropriate opponent
4 Always in the right place, always attacks appropriate opponent

TEAMWORK
0 Selfish, oblivious to team objectives, rarely cooperates
1 Self important, may or my not recognize team objectives, seldom cooperates
2 Recognizes team objectives, frequently cooperative
3 Recognizes & pursues team goals, generally cooperates
4 Always intent on team objectives, always cooperates

SPORTSMANSHIP
0 Frequently rude, brags, insults opponents, criticizes team mates, spams chat, often uses offensive language.
1 Often rude, sometimes brags, sometimes insults opponents or criticizes team mates, sometimes uses offensive language.
2 Rarely rude, rarely brags, seldom insulting to opponents or critical of team mates, rarely uses offensive language.
3 Hardly ever rude, never brags, never insulting to opponents or critical of team mates, almost never uses offensive language.
4 Never rude or insulting, always compliments team mates & opponents, frequently helpful, never uses offensive language.



Awaiting yer slings and arrows.


slugthog the semi-precise
#2
10/29/2003 (11:40 pm)
New name coming - semiprecise, semiaccurate, semilongwinded, semi senile. Sorry Sluggy us oldsters can kid each other.
DanMac the Older (not oldest)
#3
10/30/2003 (4:41 am)
Can we add point to our score for each year of age? (might help
some of us a little long in the tooth.)
#4
10/30/2003 (5:50 am)
Man that is some complacated scoring forumula.
#5
10/30/2003 (6:55 am)
With those catagories Ben is a 15! Could you make one more applicable to BTM?
#6
10/30/2003 (9:13 am)
@Ben

I didn't notice the bias. I suppose because I mostly play scrum.

As I see it the only categories that don't apply to BM are Blocking & Ball Handling. Let me consider for a while.

@Racer

I see it as rather straight forward.

There are only five categories to consider and a small range of numbers involved. If it is the verbage that you find confusing consider that all I did was identify each value with a definition. That way you and I both know what we mean when we rate someone as a 3 Ball Handler.

Without definitions there is no way for me to know what you mean when you rate someone as 3 and converselly no way for you to know what I mean when I rate someone as 3

slugthog the sometimes short-sighted but generaly precise
#7
10/30/2003 (10:15 am)
Perhaps we should make two scales, one for Battlemode adn one for scrum. Little less complicated. That way, good battlemoders don't get a 14-15 while good scrum AND battlemoders get top marks in every category.

Ben(SA) - I just love these threads of slugthog. Works my brain.
#8
10/30/2003 (12:15 pm)
@Ben

As a former BM-only player, I certainly understand where you're coming from. However, I believe what Sluggy has set up should stay as is. It defines the complete TT player and may add incentive to those with lower ratings to improve their skills in certain areas of the game.

I certainly know that my BM skills have diminished since I became a "Srum Head". But then I look at someone like #1TANKSTER. He can leave a heated scrum match at the drop of a dime, go beat Dan MacDonald 6-0 in BM, and come back like it was all in a day's work. It only makes me want to get better. Moreover, it expands the community into a multi-platform affair whereby we can have tournaments or leagues (TT Olympics, CTF/BM/Scrum ladders etc.) with more players involved.

jangles

P.S. Good work, Sluggy!
#9
10/30/2003 (1:07 pm)
True.. the well rounded player is the dream of most of us, certainly me. I'm trying to make up for my appalling scrum skills in battlemode. Scrum is the "ideal" game on ThinkTanks for some reason. It certainly does involve a different set of tactics than the ones I open up for a battlemode game, combining the need to kill while trying to do somthing entirely unconnected with fighting, driving a ball through a goal. It is more challenging in certain respects.

I haven't even tried a scrum game for days now, guess I should try again...

Ben(SA)
#10
10/30/2003 (1:12 pm)
Lag and team makeup are often a factor in your individual score for a game, but they do not affect how good a base player you truly are. I lose a lot of team games with my own individual score at the top, but my teammates at the bottom. Or, as in team scrum, you'll never score a goal, but you'll give the scrum version of a basketball assist. Just some examples.
#11
10/30/2003 (2:23 pm)
A thorough scale but to much addition for me, and these posts is loooong. come on people i have a life. ill just stick to the who's hott and who's not scale
#12
10/30/2003 (2:32 pm)
Ben, it was nice to see you in a scrum game today. I thought you played really well and you definitely have the skills to succeed. You might want to check out some of the earlier threads about team play. For us team scrum fanatics, it's the only game to play - defeats the randomness of single scrum (the constant bottle-necking at the goal you experienced today) and the kill-only attitude of BM.

@Flea
Why you in Grandpa Sluggy's hair? Obviously, the ratings will be highly subjective. And there may be nothing to gain from this. Who cares? But certainly, if we can sift through Filbert's assinine posts day in and day out, this can't be that bad.

By the way, I thought your ratings had improved over the last month. But now, I'm afraid they're right back to where they once were. You might want to try different makeup for your team, something better than a 28k modem, and a younger lady with tissue paper.

jangles


Edit: Just saw your post. Kiss? That ain't tank behaviour! 0 Stars!
#13
10/30/2003 (3:15 pm)
Sluggy you forgot one category.

REACTION TO BEING VICTIMIZED BY THE JANGY SWIPE
0 Says N1 Jangles
1 Sheepishly marvels at the move and logs off
2 Sheepishly marvels at the move and continues play
3 Tries to emulate
4 Shakes fist, pounds desk, circles Jangy and smokes 'em

Az
#14
10/30/2003 (3:35 pm)
ROFL Az!

I'm honoured that the Jangy Swipe has now become part of TT jargon. But all credit goes to Hugo. It was he who coined the term as it applied to his previous ability to constantly swipe from me. Out of humiliation, I adapted and made it my own.

jangles
#15
10/30/2003 (5:11 pm)
@baklava

Please note the third paragraph in the first post.

@Flea

Woof, woof, arf, bark ;^)

Certainly a player's style may vary from game to game but his overall skill does not. We shouldn't expect to rate a player from only one or two games. As Jangles said this rating system is rather subjective as are most rating systems. All I have attempted is to assign a few definitions so that we all have a kinda, gerneral idea of what we are discussing. I admit it. I just made these up. Well, kinda I mused a bit on what might make some reasonable criteria, attached some labels to them, hashed out comprehensible definitions and normalized the values. It ain't perfect. I'm willling to include anyones suggestions as long at those suggestions take into consideration:

A) A maximum score should be in the 20 to 30. More than that and people and the numbers not intuitive.

B) Each criterion should measure a discrete element of game play. Try to avoid overlaping.

C) Each criterion should have a reasonable range of values. Reasonable ranges generally limit to 3 to 5 choices. There should be an odd number of options to permit an "Average" value to be chosen.

I came up with five basic criteria and decided upon a range of 5. I chose zero to four because I wanted the final score to be similar to the 20 point rating that has popped up on the past. And I neglegted Battlemode. Okay, I'm still thinking on it.

@All

What I would like to do now is to test my hypothesis that this rating system is fair and kinda measures somthing.

How about all who are reading this thread rate any or all of the following SCRUM players and on x/20 or x/32. Please be fair and honest. Don't discuss anyone else's score before you are finished. When you have finished rating, post a notice to this thread then we can all post our ratings at the same time to avoid influencing each other. I'll tabulte the values and post the results.

If the rating system appears a bit daunting consider each criterion separatly and apply to each of the players you are rating. That is a lot easier than evaluating the list for each player independently.

Here are the players to rate:

FoulPlay
Tankster
Devestator
Mess
ShootMe

That's right I didn't choose anyone who has posted to the thread. No feelings will be hurt.

sluggy the curious.
#16
10/31/2003 (12:37 am)
This is all very interesting. My academia life is creating distance between myself and the boards. I'll try to chip in, perhaps even do a little recon.
#17
10/31/2003 (10:36 am)
Can you help me find the calculator on my computer? I'm going to need it!

Here's an idea. Why not rate players on how well the finish in tournaments? Being that I'm new and haven't played in one yet, I would be ranked on the bottom. A player that has won a couple of tournaments should be ranked on the top. A formula (shouldn't be a problem, take a look at the BCS or ATP ranking systems) could be incorporated. Inactive players lose rankings for missing tournaments.

Destroyer
#18
10/31/2003 (11:23 am)
How well someone finishes in tournaments doesn't necessarily tell how well they play. Someone who plays block-and-tackle a lot isn't going to have as high a score as the runners.

I think Sluggy's scales cover a broad swatch of things and they look pretty good, but I'm not up for doing the math. Plus, I'm really in the game for fun -- I simply don't win enough to make it imperative that I look great all the time. :)
#19
10/31/2003 (1:35 pm)
I have noticed that battlemode skils can carry over quite succesfully into scrum. Of course, against players who have the entire scrum mindset firmly pasted into their heads, this won't be as succesful, but on the whole, shooting everyone you see can occasionally work in scrum. Mostly, you should pick and choose your targets, such as the guy with the ball and the one chasing him the closest if its not you.

Angles seem to be very important in scrum, and since I'm a tennis player for 8 years now, I know a good deal about angles. My scrum game of yesterday gave me some interesting insight into this. One steal I sat on top of a hill and waited for the player with the ball to come past. He drives right on over the hill, and I'm blocking him. Steal, followed by my death. Still got some work to do.. a lot of work to do...

And sorry sluggy but I don't play enough scrum to rate those guys.

Ben(SA)
#20
10/31/2003 (3:09 pm)
Er, folx,

There isn't all that much math here. I've done all the work for ya. All ya need ta do is add 5 (or 8) single digit numbers each of which has a value between 0 and 4. Heck, the instructions are more complicated than that.

It is not my intention to coerce anyone into an activity that he might find unpleasan but come on now. I remember learning how to add in the First Grade and in those days we had to scribe the answers in clay tablets with broken sticks. Why I remember it rained on day on the way to shool and dissolved all of my homework. I had to erase all the blackboard every day for two weeks; which is not easy when you consider that the teacher carved the lessons _into_ the wall with a stone chisel and a hunk of mammoth tibia. If someone hadn't invented fire about that time I don't know what I would have done. Well, I probably wouldn't be here, that's for sure. I'd probably be a saber-tooted tiger coprolite
somewhere in Central Europe.

In any case, if ya don't wanna you don't hafta.

slugthog the apalled
Page «Previous 1 2 3 Last »