@Tbest

Minor Bug:

The Leaderboard for "Least Vetoed" shows 1, when in fact it should be 0.

Thanks for the catch. I was making another incorrect assumption as well which lead to incorrect data. This should be fixed now.

@Dogberry

Or they'll give up bothering with any of the awesome new stats because they aren't anywhere close to competing for a top 10 spot in any tracked category. It would be a much greater benefit to a much larger number of players to include access to complete rankings for these categories.

Fair enough. The leaderboards will now show a larger number of players. However, I imposed certain restrictions to feature in a leaderboard. This is to make the standings more meaningful.

Restrictions:

• Longest Win Streak requires a minimum of a three games.
  
• Least Templates Vetoed requires you to be active on the ladder.(Or people will cancel all their vetoes and leave the ladder.)
  
• Requires a min of 20 total games.
  
  • Most Unexpired Games
    
  • Most Games Played
    
  • Most Wins
    
  • Best Win Rate

Edited 4/16/2017 03:42:30

People near/close/middling might be encouraged by seeing their stats approaching the top 10. What about the people near the bottom? Not everyone will care, but I can't think they would be encouraged.

If you don't show it as a top 10, what if it was something amounting to around 2/5 or 1/3 of the active base? Obviously, you could also have an all-time section.

(at the risk of looking like an idiot, I haven't been keeping up with this thread. I'm only dropping comments)

For ranks, could you consider displaying ties (or I guess using explicit tiebreakers)?

Edited 4/16/2017 04:54:12

Your ability to deliver stats gave me the idea of something else that could help attract wider players : add rankings per template. So mid range players could play in order to score well on a specified template. Ofc, forcing them to play on other templates will limit their interest, but at least, they may find something attractive in this ladder.

Ideally, unlimited vetoes would help, at least on a regressive way (like the better your ranking, the less veto you can use). But this has been discussed before, and has been refused, which makes me think as it stands this ladder is for top (who need less time to learn new templates) and bored (who have unlimited time available so can easily spare some in this ladder) players, rather than the mid range players, those trying to make an achievement on 1v1 ladder for the time being.

We have to be honest, this ladder with so many templates forced to be played after the vetos is not designed for the mass.

Edit : I forgot about the template packs. They may address this, but first pack should stay long enough, have few templates, and only standards settings (no LD, no WR, and so on). So the challenge would be to adapt quickly to maps only and a few of them only. Then this may work.

Edited 4/17/2017 14:07:50

Nice idea Mike :P

@Ekstone

Can be constantly updated ranking lists for every templates for example! :O
So perhaps will be a good feeling for somebody who is, for example 15th in the main Rankings, but first in one of the 51 template rankings, and this can be a cause that not quit the ladder and continued to play. I don't know.
But again, MotD's possibilies is infinite because he owned the database and "only" need write some queries :P

Nice idea. I will consider it.

And I have a good news for you Mike, MotD will implement this:

I think you forgot to highlight something in the picture.
As I know, you are the first player who break the 1900 limit :O
(ah, and forgot to create this type of leaderboard (highest ranks) too where I would check this ;) )

Yes. I have a work item for adding highest ratings achieved on MDL.

I'm looking to add most of the items on this list. If you have any other suggestions, let me know!
https://goo.gl/O7AdZp

Check the Template Page section in the link above ;)

Anyway, you should read more (or more carefully) before you write :P
I think, you don't understand well the template packs neither (or I don't :D )

Rankings per template are going to be nice to observe but I don't think they'll be that accurate unless you match people based on their rankings on each template too. Part of the validity of the Elo system is the matchmaking, so while getting per-template rankings won't be completely invalid it'll be susceptible to a lot of random variations as a result of matchmaking occurring based on people's general ratings and not their template-specific ratings. Then again, how pronounced this effect will be depends largely on how people's skill level varies across templates- if it's roughly consistent, it's a moot point.

Part of the validity of the Elo system is the matchmaking

Is this true? You see Elo ratings of professional sports teams where obviously the matchups are completely unrelated to Elo.

Edited 4/17/2017 18:48:11

@ Beren: yes that's true. ELO for sports teams also assumes a fair matchmaking otherwise it doesn't work well. ELO itself doesn't determine the matchmaking, but, like most systems, it needs a fair matchmaking algorithm to work well.

As a counterexample: ELO doesn't work all that well for NCAA as the matchmaking isn't balanced there.

Although, in some cases, a fair matchmaking algorithm could actually increase your error. If you have a field of equally-matched teams (i.e., with the same "true" Elo rating) and keep matching them using an algorithm that tries to match teams with other teams at or around the same rating, your system will actually be further off from reality than a system that just pairs teams randomly.

FiveThirtyEight does seem fond of Elo, though, and Elo does provide them with information but ratings are very much influenced by matchups. You could have two teams with the same 'real' rating end up with drastically different ratings at the end of an NFL season because of the sorts of opponents they get.

Updates:

• Name changes and clan affiliations are updated every 2 hours.
  
• There was a bug where clicking login would automatically join you to the ladder and give new games. This has been fixed. Clicking login will just authenticate the session going forward. Players have to "join" the ladder after they login(similar to the experience on WL ladders).
  
• Fix bugs in the stat queries.
  
• Fix broken video link on Rad Osil's template page.
  
• Add favicon.
  
• Add a feature for collecting feedback from users. This will help me organize comments received and ensure I have a record of them in one place, so that they are not overlooked. Feel free to use forums, skype, PM etc to communicate as well if needed.
  
  
  

Edited 4/18/2017 07:06:49

Clan Leaderboards	#Players on MDL			
100
		% Players on MDL			
101
		#Games played			
102
		Win Rate per clan			
103
		Most Wins			
104
		Peak rating by clan			
105
		Average rating by clan			
106
		4.. #Players who have held #1 on MDL	Only in the last 5 months

seems a bit short, make it a year or all time for now?


edit: is that a boot sheet?

Edited 4/18/2017 08:42:44

seems a bit short, make it a year or all time for now?

Yeah. Can play around with the duration(maybe a year). Shouldn't be all-time though.

edit: is that a boot sheet?

I don't understand. What are you referring to?

the now hidden secret master sheet named sheet 2.

Oh.. Nah that was just a temp sheet I needed to order the results for CL reporting purposes.

Suggestion: Could the game name also include the template? Potentially there would be too many characters but...

It already contains it, if there are enough characters left. Player names get priority atm.

I found a mistake in a map. Two territories used to be connected, but they aren't.
I don't know who I can tell about this problem so I leave it here...

Check the chat: https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=13362637

Yeah that sucks. The map creator is Apollo who has retired from WL as far as I know. I don't think we can get that fixed.

So my question to you guys would be - Should Oxfordshire stay on MDL with this bug or should it be removed from the ladder?

Edited 4/25/2017 15:39:28

Well, in my game I moved there to get a double border to break my opponent. In this game I still broke him, but if I didnt I would really be pissed I think. So maybe it should be removed...

yeah i had a problem whit it to and i think it should be removed since it will decide many matches. Add two other in its place :)