Seeds and Rankings
Seeds and Rankings
Awhile ago the Seeds were adjusted to take into account BOTH the Bio and Explorers ladders.
However, I realized the way it was calculating it, it was still possible for a player to top the seedings if they exclusively did really well on 1 ladder. I've adjusted the calculation now so it makes it more important to play on BOTH ladders to get a good seed.
However, I realized the way it was calculating it, it was still possible for a player to top the seedings if they exclusively did really well on 1 ladder. I've adjusted the calculation now so it makes it more important to play on BOTH ladders to get a good seed.
Re: Seeds and Rankings
GFips: Dustin, can you explain how the seed calculates actually?
dustin: sure fips
dustin: the last 16 weeks are taken into account
dustin: of both the bio and explorers ladders
dustin: so then there are 32 data points
dustin: they are all put together into a list
dustin: then the best 24 are averaged together
dustin: that's your seed
GFips: e.g. Killercatfish seeded 34th with weight 133 out of .1 8, 11, 8, 6, 19, 10, 12, 13, 16, 10, 22, 11, 25, 73, 81, 47, 22
GFips: how does that give 133?
dustin: i believe Killercatfish did not get a rank in all Explorer (or BIO) ladders in last 16 weeks
dustin: so he didn't have enough data points to get a good seed
dustin: when there's not enough data points, they are counted as a 400th spot
dustin: sure fips
dustin: the last 16 weeks are taken into account
dustin: of both the bio and explorers ladders
dustin: so then there are 32 data points
dustin: they are all put together into a list
dustin: then the best 24 are averaged together
dustin: that's your seed
GFips: e.g. Killercatfish seeded 34th with weight 133 out of .1 8, 11, 8, 6, 19, 10, 12, 13, 16, 10, 22, 11, 25, 73, 81, 47, 22
GFips: how does that give 133?
dustin: i believe Killercatfish did not get a rank in all Explorer (or BIO) ladders in last 16 weeks
dustin: so he didn't have enough data points to get a good seed
dustin: when there's not enough data points, they are counted as a 400th spot
Re: Seeds and Rankings
Why not just average the two ranks each week ? I think I know, but am curious what you will say?
Re: Seeds and Rankings
Honestly it's just how it happened, naturally expanding the way it was previously done for the existence of 2 ladders
Re: Seeds and Rankings
I think it is just difficult to understand when you take a look at the seeds.
e.g. in my own case: My actual seed weight is 68,8
'seed shows' weekly results: 4, 8, 3, 14, 7, 2, 8, 25, 3, 1, 5, 11, 49, 20, 54, 36, 63, 54, 55, 27,
compared to Bean: his weigt is 17.1
'seed shows' weekly results: 5, 11, 11, 10, 3, 12, 18, 8, 2, 11, 5, 7, 25, 37, 26, 40, 26, 3, 5, 41
It Displays 20 weeks for each player. It would be better to Display all 32 data points IMHO
Also it would be great to see which Points come from which ladder (e.g. other colors).
And the order should be more clear, so that the points on the Right side are the newest ones like in former times.
(E.g. in my case i finished 2nd in Bio last week. How is the order of the seedpoints listed?)
I think there should be more transparancy for everybody. Especially new players might be confused.
BTW: I think Bean meant, that each week should be build an avarage over both ladders and not an avarage over 16 weeks with 32 data Points.
E.g.
week 1: Explorers not ranked (=400), Bio: 2 -> avarage Point for week 1: (400+2)/2 = 201
wwek 2: Explorers 16, Bio 8 -> avarage Point for week 2: (16+8) / 2 = 12
….
Maybe that would be really easier ?
e.g. in my own case: My actual seed weight is 68,8
'seed shows' weekly results: 4, 8, 3, 14, 7, 2, 8, 25, 3, 1, 5, 11, 49, 20, 54, 36, 63, 54, 55, 27,
compared to Bean: his weigt is 17.1
'seed shows' weekly results: 5, 11, 11, 10, 3, 12, 18, 8, 2, 11, 5, 7, 25, 37, 26, 40, 26, 3, 5, 41
It Displays 20 weeks for each player. It would be better to Display all 32 data points IMHO
Also it would be great to see which Points come from which ladder (e.g. other colors).
And the order should be more clear, so that the points on the Right side are the newest ones like in former times.
(E.g. in my case i finished 2nd in Bio last week. How is the order of the seedpoints listed?)
I think there should be more transparancy for everybody. Especially new players might be confused.
BTW: I think Bean meant, that each week should be build an avarage over both ladders and not an avarage over 16 weeks with 32 data Points.
E.g.
week 1: Explorers not ranked (=400), Bio: 2 -> avarage Point for week 1: (400+2)/2 = 201
wwek 2: Explorers 16, Bio 8 -> avarage Point for week 2: (16+8) / 2 = 12
….
Maybe that would be really easier ?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 119 guests