More Scoring Changes
by Xxav on July 9, 2009, 2:05 am, under World of Warcraft
I’ve made a few more significant changes to the scoring system that will reward guilds more from progress rather than quantity of achievements. The site is called guildprogress.com after all 
- See http://wow.guildprogress.com/US/Ysondre/Exodus/score for the latest scoring schematics ( or your own guild’s scoring breakdown page ).
A new algorithm is now being applied that grants a percentage of the above values based on kill order. This algorithm is NOT applied to minor achievements. It is roughly as follows:
- World 1st – 100%
- World 4th – 90%
- 18th – 80%
- 76th – 70%
- 326th – 60%
- 1385th – 50%
- 5884th - 40%
- 25000th – 30%
Special thanks to Wasserjunge for coming up with the algorithm. Thanks for the feedback so far!
July 9th, 2009 on 3:44 am
I like the changes, but I do still have some suggestions. Supermassive is indeed a hard achievement, but it is not a progression achievement. Also, your setup for progressive hardmodes could still use some adjustment. As it stands for instance, a person gets a total of (150+120+110+100=480) for FL+4, this achievement is on par with the difficulty for Lose Your Illusion, so the TOTAL should be closer to 200). Same with Freya’s hardmode progression. The TOTAL should be 400 (as this hardmode is about equal in difficulty to Firefighter). Same thing with the Molegeim and Steelbreaker ones. You have also left off “Observed.” I understand that this is a bosskill, but it should probably have a +500 AND bosskill points (+100 for all bosskills under your system), and then of course.
For Yogg, the total for 1 Light, 2 Lights and 3 Lights should probably be +400 or +500, but Alone in the Darkness should probably be like you have it now, as this achievement has ONLY been accomplished by an Asian guild at this time, and is a whole new bossfight essentially.
Basically, as I outlined in your other posting…there are three basic levels of hardmode difficulty, and TOTAL points for the hardmodes should be roughly the same within each bracket…then Observed and Alone in the Darkness go beyond those…
Easy:
*Orbit-uary
I Could Say That This Cache Was Rare
Lose Your Illusion
Medium:
I Love the Smell of Saronite in the Morning
Heartbreaker
*I Choose You, Steelbreaker
Hard:
*Knock, Knock, Knock on Wood
*One Light in the Darkness
Firefighter
Fu%$^!g Hard
Observed
REALLY Fu%$^!g Hard
Alone in the Darkness
For the ones marked with (*) though, these are progressive hardmodes, so you don’t want the points from previous steps to interfere with the total. To do this, you can either set them to replace when the next step is taken or give them less points making sure their total comes out to the same. The only one where the totalling system would not work is Steelbreaker, however, I am not aware of ANY guild that has Steelbreaker and not Molegeim…so that may be irrelevent to worry about trying to figure out a way to code a replacement setup.
July 9th, 2009 on 3:46 am
Either way, I really like the system changes, and I am seeing ALOT more accurate results in terms of progression rankings now…great job, this site is really coming together! Thank you!
July 9th, 2009 on 3:51 am
The system isn’t set up right now to add weights to the boss kills (ie. Observed). I will make that change in the near future.
July 9th, 2009 on 4:04 am
You don’t need to add weight to the bosskill here. Just give the achievement (the normal bosskill has an achievement called “Observed”) those extra points.
I am more concerned with how you have progressive encounters set up, WAY too much weighting is being given to the lower parts of them, as well as too much total points. For example, I will VERY well agree with you that Firefighter and 3x Knock on Wood are both 400 point achieves (under your system). However if you set it up to where
1x Knock on Wood=75
2x Knock on Wood=125
3x Knock on Wood=200
then your system would reward a person 400 points for that achievement. As it stands now, instead you are rewarding 730 points for that achievement. Does what I am pointing out make sense? More disturbing is the example I point out in the my first response with FL+4, that is perhaps the easiest hardmode since the HP nerf, yet it is worth 480 total points, you could change that to be
Orbital Bombardment= 25 points
Orbital Devastation= 35 points
Nuked from Orbit = 45 points
Orbit-uary = 55 points
and the total achievement would be worth 160 total points, a much more reasonable value. Or you could adjust that based on what total you think it should get.
For Yogg, I would set that one up exactly like Freya’s
using +75,+125,+200 for a total of 400 as it is on par with Freya +3 and Firefighter in difficulty.
July 9th, 2009 on 4:07 am
Right but the way the system is set up that would require me to track Observed twice which would be redundant. Tracking once for the “boss” and again for the achievement. I adjust the points and am in the process of editing the above post to show the new values. It slipped my mind that the progressive achievements would stack and be worth way too much. I’ll post the edit in a sec.
July 9th, 2009 on 4:16 am
Awesome, just another thing to help you figure out some of the issues with world rankings.
If you eliminate Supermassive (which is something that CAN be obtained unintentionally) and also remove credit for Alone in the Darkness from Exodus (they had this achievement stripped from them) you will likely find that some of your rankings begin to fall more inline with other progress sites (especially once you make the progressive achievement changes).
As for your tracking of Observed, I don’t really know how your crawler works. Does it look for changes in the stage of progress of certain achieves? For instance, do you determine that Mimi has been killed by looking at the status of people’s “The Keeper’s of Ulduar” achievement? In either case, the crawler’s efficiency at finding these changes seems pretty solid. This site finds alot of things quicker than the site that I use for ranking purposes. (I have been using your site for tracking new boss kills, but because I didn’t previously like your ranking system another one for ranking…with these changes, I may be able to use just this site…I am excited about that). I will see how effective your changes are once applied. And, I appreciate the late night back and forth.
July 9th, 2009 on 4:18 am
I am going to rerun part of the calculations right now to see how everything works out.
I will, however, need to implement a way to block out exodus’ Alone in the Darkness achievement. I’ll manually delete it in the mean time.
July 9th, 2009 on 4:30 am
Thanks a lot for your input. I am just starting to get back into the raid scene so I am not as well versed on Ulduar as I should be
I definitely want to do whatever I can to improve the site for everyone.
July 9th, 2009 on 8:58 am
OK, now, I have a suggestion for your regression function used to weight the order in which people receive these progression achievements or bosskills.
I derived this equation based on the following information. There are not likely to exceed 25,000 guilds between US and EU servers that will be honestly taking strides into progression content (meaning, they may pug a couple bosses beyond this number but not more than this number of guilds will be pushing the content). Therefore, I need a logarithmic regression curve that will scale greatly for the first few guilds, and cap out at some percentage of my choosing.
The equation I came up with is as follows:
let # be the world order in which person got the kill
let c=the log base=4.248906204920
let A be the number of maximum points awarded for the achievement or bosskill.
#(1-.1*logc(c*x))
would give you the amount of points to award. I use a log function to make sure that there is STEEP differentiation for the top few guilds, but that differentiation becomes less important as more guilds conquer the content. This allowed me to set my “capping point” at 30% of max value for the 25,000th guild to take down the boss.
Basically, with the way this function works
Guild 1 gets 100%
Guild 4 gets appx 90%
Guild 18 gets appx 80%
Guild 76 gets appx 70%
Guild 326 gets appx 60%
Guild 1385 gets appx 50%
Guild 5884 gets appx 40%
Guild 25000 gets 30%
I can rescale this equation if you like, just tell me how many increments you want etc.
I would assume it is relatively simple to use a basic logarithmic function though with the stated base. To adjust this equation, the information I would need to post is:
# of legit potential contending guilds (I think 25000 is accurate)
minimum %age points that you would like given of the total.
Mostly, what this will ensure is that a guild that has the most significant world firsts (Ensidia would be the current guild) most likely pops as number one. To make sure of that, you will obviously need to make sure that hardmodes are all scaled correctly, but it appears that your recent changes have done that.
Feel free to contact me at my email if you would like direct feedback, otherwise, I can continue to provide input here.
July 9th, 2009 on 9:00 am
err sorry, in that equation
# = maximum number of points for achieve or kill
x = world order of the kill
c=log base=4.2890620492
was pulling from something else when I posted that and didn’t copy variables down right
July 9th, 2009 on 9:13 am
Just a note , some of the achievements that called “fun” require some skill in order to do em . Progress means dedication and means the whole Package sometimes . Having Achievements like “Champion of Ulduar” on 10points seems wrong to me . and much more of course . Anyway just a suggestion to think about it .
July 9th, 2009 on 1:26 pm
I figure I will explain where I got all this so it doesn’t look like I am pulling shit out of my ass (although, I still messed up on the way I posted the equation and didn’t notice…
To do this, I drew the following conclusions:
There are roughly 25,000 legit or semi-legit guilds trying to run progression content at any given time (EU+US). I want to make sure that the top few kills reduce points quickly, but the curve merges at some percentage of the total around 25,000. I chose to use 10% increments down to 30% of maximum value of a kill or achievement, which seemed to me a reasonable value…I will accept feedback on this, but I feel 30% to be more reasonable than 0 after 6 months (which is the system that WoWProgress.com uses).
With that in mind, I created my log root based on this..
I wanted y values on graph to be in 10% decrements so
x=c^(a-1); y=1-.1(a-1)
x=c^(1-1); y=1
x=c^(2-1); y=.9
x=c^(3-1); y=.8
x=c^(4-1); y=.7
x=c^(5-1); y=.6
x=c^(6-1); y=.5
x=c^(7-1); y=.4
x=c^(8-1); y=.3
To determine the value that will yield these numbers I take my end value at 30% of 25,000 and raise it to the inverse of the desired power.
So, I want the function c^(8-1)=25,000 so c must be 25,000^(1/7)=4.248906204920
Now, I have to implement my 10% regression setup for each logarithmic increase in my x value on this graph, which I have already shown above as y=1-.1(a-1). For each increase of a, the value of y will decrease by another 10%. But, I need a in terms of x for the function to work. x=c^(a-1)=c^a/c therefore x*c=c^a so a=logc(x*c) where c=4.248906204920. Plug this in for a in F(x) and we have F(X)=1-.1(logc(x*c)-1) where c=4.248906204920
and x is the actual world rank of the kill. This gives you a multiplier between 0.3-1.0 to then multiply by whatever value you have set for the hardmode achieve or bosskill.
The implications of this are as follows for the following guild ranks to achieve a bosskill or hardmode kill:
1. 100%
2. 95.21%
3. 92.41%
4. 90.42%
5. 88.87%
6. 87.61%
7. 86.55%
8. 85.63%
and so on forever reducing the decrement as follows
…
…
18. 80%
…
76. 70%
…
326. 60%
…
1384. 50%
…
5883. 40%
…
25000.30%
Now, this equation can continue, and essentially, it will function until nearly 2 million guilds get the achievement at 0% value, so that is not really a concern as the wow population would have to be over 100 million for that to even be considerable, as this tracking is only for US and EU guilds, I don’t think this will ever actually go under 30%.
July 9th, 2009 on 2:58 pm
Awesome. I am going to give this a whirl right now
July 9th, 2009 on 3:28 pm
It works very nicely. I tried to implement a better regression algorithm a long time ago but was never satisfied with it. Thanks again!
July 9th, 2009 on 7:50 pm
OK, with that in place, I still think we need to scale the points better. To do this, I would consider the following.
Hardmodes need to have more significance compared to boss kills compared to minor achieves.
Easy hardmodes should account for about 150 total points each(FL+4, Thorim, Hodir)
Medium hardmodes should account for about 250 total points each (XT, Vezax, IC)
Hard hardmodes should account for about 400 total points (Mimi, Frey+3, Yogg-3)
Normal bosskills, should be reduced to about 50 total points.
Observed +600
Alone in the Darkness +750
Other minor achievements should be reduced to 1 point (unadjusted by world order)
The reason behind these point changes. Each difficulty level must be more greatly represented point-wise. Failure to do that will cause highest level content to be less and less well represented over time.
Test these values, and tell me if it gets the world top 3 end up as follows:
1. Ensidia
2. Method
3. Premonition
If those come out correct, than we know that the Algalon weight is accurate compared to other kills. If not, they will need to be scaled even more greatly.
July 9th, 2009 on 10:51 pm
Revised again. Will wait for rankings to calculate at 3am.
July 9th, 2009 on 11:14 pm
I have readjusted decisions on difficulties of hardmodes based on the number of guilds that have completed them.
Index:
♦EASY =150 total value
♣MEDIUM =250 total value
♠HARD =400 total value
♥VERY HARD=600 total value
☼INSANE=750 total value
♠1 light: 139 guilds
♠3x knock: 163 guilds
♠firefigher: 181 (most post-nerf)
♣Saronite/morning: 377
♣Steelbreaker: 815
♣Illusion: 1215
♦Heartbreaker: 2793
♦Orbit-uary:2928
♦Cache/Rare: 1928
♥Observed: 28
☼Alone/Darkness: 0 (at least in US/EU)
To break up 1 light and 3x knock further, we can look at the rates of each.(#s based on inverse of remaining guilds as an appx)
-1x knock: 1787 15%= 60
-2x knock: 474 25%= 100
-3x knock: 163 60%= 240
The recording I have for two lights is messed up
-3 lights: 765 10%= 40
-2 lights: 223 35%= 140
-1 lights: 139 55%= 220
and finally firefighter, which is more simple…
-Firefighter: 400
For the Medium hard modes you can possibly scale their value based on significant differences in quantity of guilds in the mid range. (note I have swapped heartbreaker to easy and illusion to medium…I really thought it was other way around based on my own server, without looking at others)
Perhaps as follows
Saronite: 300
Steelbreaker: 250
Illusion: 200
The easy ones are all pretty well grouped in difficulty, so those can all be 150 without issue. However, we still need to break up the value of Orbit-uary progress. (I will need better numbers, I don’t have a way of overtracking progress on this.
Orbital Bombardment: 13450 10%=15
Orbital Devastation: 7342 20%=30
Nuked from Orbit : 5393 30%=45
Orbit-uary : 2928 40%=60
Then we just have:
Cache: 150
<3breaker:150
All other achievements should not weigh more than a bosskill in the end, if you figure that a boss kill approaches 30% of 50 later on, then you can assume no more than about 15 points from the extra achieves before they begin to throw off other numbers. As many of them occur naturally or unintentionally, I think it is safe to assign each of these “fun” achieves 1 point, and it should not overwrite progress…but it WILL provide a nicer representation among two guilds that have same bosskills at appx same times…basically, it will act as a tiebreaker in those cases.
Please give these values a shot and tell me what you get as a result.
July 10th, 2009 on 5:55 am
I can’t edit post, but, it looks like your current values for Algalon and for Alone in the Darkness will work…still need to adjust the others to make sure there is enough down-scaling.
Bosses still need to be brought down in value to 50, they are too high to be practical in terms of everything else, you want the system to be semi-geometrically progressive. If you do not make sure that each level is a very specific amount, yet at some scalar interval to previous accomplishments, your whole system breaks (as does any other).
To illustrate this, this is from WoWProgress.com…
“Kalecgos 2
Brutallus 5
Felmyst 10
Eredar Twins 15
M’uru 25
Kil’jaeden 40 ”
when WoWProgress started, the creator wanted to make sure that it would be nigh impossible for prior rankings to interfere with most recent ones. So he created a scalar system…doubling value of each tier of boss. Now SP had a definately route and therefore a direct way to measure this, it is not quite so clear with new material.
Minor Achievements-1 point unadjusted (keep in mind, a bosskill if set to 50 will be around 15-20 points for most people, so we don’t want total achievements to overshadow the bosskill.
Bosses-ALL bosses of non-hardmode save maybe yogg are of the same relative difficulty. So we set our base here. Non Hardmodes: 50
Yogg was the exception, so we grant that fight: 100
The Easy Hardmodes are only of slight greater difficulty, but we still must maintain geometric scaling so we give those: 150
The Medium Hardmodes are the next step up, still not outrageous, but not simple either: 250 (or the variance I have listed above…which is even more accurate.
The Hard Hardmodes are all of rough equivalence as can easily be viewed by the numbers of guilds that have each achievement: 400
Your Algalon numbers and Alone numbers will work, they are a clear interval over the previous tiers of accomplishment, you just need to balance those lower tiers a little better.
July 10th, 2009 on 6:02 am
Just as a final cap on this before I call my number simulations for the night…with this, I have plugged in numbers from data I could gather, and this should have all of your rankings semi accurate. It will rank some things differently, and cause different means of tie-breaking than other sites I have seen, but at least it will be consistant with the notion of progression ranking, in that, ultimately, the first few to get the highest achievement should be the top few guilds, irregardless of prior rankings.
Also, once you have this all databased, you can even set your site up to no longer “calculate” and instead use real time updates. Guild order for each achievement will be from database, regression curve is pure equation, and the points for each accomplishment are stored. That will mean real-time rank updates at the end of every day without downtime actually recalculating it.
July 10th, 2009 on 12:15 pm
Just some input. I believe a few of these are not reflective of their magnitude of difficulty.
Highest to lowest (that I’ve completed, I have no input on the others)
Lose Your Illusion > Orbit-Uary > I could say that this cache was rare > Heartbreaker > I choose you Steelbreaker.
The point totals shown at the top seem pretty wonky and not reflective of their actual difficulty for those particular achievements, particularly Orbit-Uary only being worth 75 points when the others have been ramped up so very much in their relative worth.
July 10th, 2009 on 12:16 pm
Although I think you have done a great job with developing an algorithm for calculating the points in dependency of the world rank this achievement/boss kill was done, I have to agree with Infiberous in terms of the fun-achievments.
While f.e. “Crazy Cat Lady” or “With Open Arms” are not technically hardmodes, because they don’t reward extra loot or unlock something, they are still remarkably harder than the normal version of the boss. In my eyes completing this achievements is also some kind of progression, which in some cases demand more time to learn and execute than killing the normal version of the boss itself. Therefore I think they still deserve more points than for example the /kiss-achievement at Yogg-Saron, which needs no skill or execution at all.
I liked the ranking you had previously, where every achievement rewarded points according to its difficulty. The problem was that the reward of the fun-achievements were in no relation to the true hardmodes. But I think giving the most difficult fun-achievements 30-50 points (or even slightly more) and the easier ones 10-30 points would be a nice bonus for guilds, who also focus on fun-achievements, but wouldn’t really mess up the ranking of the top-guilds (because of the newly implemented algorithm).
July 10th, 2009 on 2:26 pm
I will tinker with the numbers more later tonight.
July 10th, 2009 on 5:18 pm
Updated yet again. I am keeping normal bosses at 100. Just because 100 is a nice number to work from. The “hard” hard modes are worth about 800, medium around 500 and easy around 300.
Minor achievements are worth between 1-10 points and are not lowered based on kill order. These values are assigned based on the achievement survey a while back.
Also, I can not run the rankings real time. Due to the fact that kill order matters in the scoring this is not something that can be done on the fly. Since the crawler may record kills that happened long ago and not simply +1 to the kill order, the entire kill order has to be re computed. With over 5 million kills and achievements, this is a lengthy process. It is probably akin to why the WoW honor was once computed only once a week.
Lastly, I am going to add a column to the tables that shows hard mode achievements completed. Since the classic linear zone progress model no longer works, I will probably make more changes to better display progress without having to click through too many pages.
Oh, and by the way, the latest scoring schematic changes are not reflected in the charts. This will happen when calculations are ran at 3am est (unless I get antsy and run it before then).
July 10th, 2009 on 7:21 pm
On your second page, can you set up each box to somehow display Hardmode kills without having to screen a persons achievements…maybe even use a different color other than your green or blue to indicate when a guild has a new achievement that is also a hardmode kill?
Flame Leviathan
Razorscale
Ignix
XT
Orbit-uary
Heartbreaker
as opposed to only showing the kills themselves, show the actual hard mode kills as well. It would be really handy..as a matter of fact, that on the second page would do it.
July 10th, 2009 on 10:08 pm
And, I have looked at your point setup, that looks pretty solid…reserving final judgment to see how effective it is in rankings later tonight. I like how you have implemented achievements and rescaled everything else to make room for them…
IF there is a change that will need to be made, it will simply be to stretch the higher levels of the scaling…but as I said, I think with the algorithm in place and the system being used, that this might work as you have it. VERY nice work so far, and thank you for working so hard to satisfy my desires for this site… This site is coming together very nicely, and I do believe with a little more work, this will be the only site people reference for this kind of information.
If it is possible, can your ranking page (front page of a query) show more specific boss details? For Naxx (as an example) saying 3/4 in Construct quarter meant something very specific. You had to kill the bosses in each wing in order, so you knew right off that the three bosses were Patchwerk, Grobbulus and Loatheb. This is not the case in Ulduar, 3/4 Siege means that Flame Leviathan AND two of the three remaining bosses have been taken down. So, in order for me to update my progression thread using this information, I have to actually go to the next screen. Then for Hardmode tracking, I then have to review their achievements…yet another bit of browsing. I wouldn’t want the secondpage to go away, because this gives kill dates. But I would like (somehow) to be able to view specific kills and hardmodes from the front page. This would cut my daily upkeep of my progression thread on my server by about 10 minutes. 10 minutes every coulple of days adds up pretty quick as you can imagine.
In either case, if the point system you have in place does work as I think it will, at the very least, you will have saved me hours having to bounce between sites. Your prior ranking system was FAR from accurate…so just getting your ranking system in order will have been a huge burden lifted from me, and I again, thank you.
July 10th, 2009 on 10:20 pm
Ya, I know what oyu mean about the rankings not showing specific data. I will probably add it to the tooltips so you can just mouse over 3/4 and see exactly what 3 they’ve killed. The new hard mode column does have a tooltip with specific info but come to think of it it is only showing the final achievement (for instance, it doesn’t show 2x knock). Is that what you would like to see on the front page as well?
July 10th, 2009 on 10:29 pm
In getting back to the point values, you may consider bumping Algalon up to 1500 (this is a MAJOR ranking point) and Alone in the Darkness up to 2500. Remember increases must be semi scalar, so jumps need to be more considerable each tier. Your easy hardmodes 400, med 600 and hard 800 is prolly fine (though you still have firefighter set to 700…is that intentional?) The actual difference between these achievements and the next level of progression (Algalon and then Alone/Darkness) must be enough points under the system that ultimately (at least for the top 20 or so guilds to get these down) the points from those achievements alone are significant enough to basically reset all prior rankings. The only way to ensure that is to make sure that each new achievement is EXTREMELY significant in change of point value. Basically…no matter how many world firsts one guild has, if they get beat on the next level of progression, they are then behind the guilds that beat them. Ultimately, there will always be some hiccups. For instance, if a guild always finished stuff top 20 and then took an extra couple of weeks to get an achievement, they MAY still outrank a guild that beat them in most reacent kill, but the circumstances for this to happen are semi rare, and it will only slightly effect world ranking spots (may place people a few places off, but not significantly ever).
Anyway, as I said, I will reserve judgment until I see how these numbers float, I actually like how all of the other stuff is scaled now..so I will wait and see how the other stuff works tonight…but if there are misranked guilds in the top 20, this is the reason.
These are the world top 20 (Paragon got Alone in the Darkness today)
1 Paragon (r) EU-Lightning’s Blade
2 Ensidia (r) EU-Magtheridon
3 Method (r) EU-Sylvanas
4 Premonition (r) US-Sen’Jin
5 Wraith (r) EU-Ysondre
6 For the Horde (r) EU-Nazjatar
7 Inner Sanctum (r) EU-Silvermoon
8 Refuge (r) EU-Aegwynn
9 Last Resort EU-Kazzak
10 Blood Legion (r) US-Illidan
11 Exodus (r) US-Ysondre
12 Juggernaut (r) US-Mal’Ganis
13 Fusion (r) US-Turalyon
14 Tsunami (r) US-Frostmourne
15 Vigil (r) US-Mal’Ganis
16 UndisputeD (r) EU-Azshara
17 The Legacy (r) EU-Mazrigos
18 Placeholder (r) EU-Taerar
19 CUTIES ONLY (r) US-Kil’Jaeden
20 Drama (r) US-Korgath
Other than paragon, the others are organized in order of when they took down Algalon first…if the system works, these will be your top 20 as well.
July 10th, 2009 on 10:34 pm
And, to respond to your last comment, yes, I just want to be able to see what point of progression a person is from that front page (I only need latest progress)
For my progression thread, I track only bosskills, hardmodes, and “marker achievements” toward hardmodes like 2x Knock on wood, 2 lights in the darkness or orbital devastation as examples. Whether mouseover, or individually displayed, not having to navigate to another page would be very helpful. Mouseovers would definatley help. I still think though, that you should make new hardmode kills provide a (New!) flag that is a different color than the other achievement flags (I like red ;p) That way, there would be three “New!” flags, and they would indicate more specific information when I am investigating. Basically, any achievement that is worth more than 10 points in your system could be marked with a red indicator.
July 10th, 2009 on 10:39 pm
We’ll see how it pans out tonight when the calculations run. I will also look into reworking the main pages so it displays the data more efficiently. Currently, the Hard Mode column will display the light-blue “new” when there is a new achievement there. But this is not counting the “marker achievements” which would be a bit trickier to work into the current system without making some changes.
I’ll probably mess around with this in a few hours.
Where would you like to see the marker achievements appear? Within the hard mode column tooltip? Or in their respective zone tooltips?
July 10th, 2009 on 11:15 pm
“Where would you like to see the marker achievements appear? Within the hard mode column tooltip? Or in their respective zone tooltips?”
Either or. The idea is that I can see all pertinent information for update purposes form the main page. Also, you may just give those “New” flags a mouseover, so you can see what they are referring to. But ultimately, whatever makes it easiest on the coding end. If I knew shit about scripting, I would have made my own page to do this stuff, so I have no idea the difficulty of different methods…
There does seem to be an error in your algorithm…as far as I understand, you have Ensidia databased as the first one to get Algalon for instance, but it is only awarding Ensidia 95.24% of the points (what it should be giving them if they got the second kill.)
Make sure that the equation is set up correctly:
=1-0.1*(LOGC(X*C)-1)
where X=order they got the kill and C=4.24890620492
(if you want an EXACT value for C instead of using a string of numbers, it is 25000^(1/7)
I looked through them all, and it does seem that for whatever reason world rank of kills is just one off. This could be the way your database is sorting (maybe it is starting on line 2 of whatever spreadsheet or database your site is referencing instead of line 1). I would be quicker to assume this is the case, because the function appears to be granting the right amount of points assuming people got the kill one later than the actual order. I verified this by looking up Method and Premonition, who were receiving credit for kill ranks 3 and 4 instead of 2 and 3 as far as points.
If this setup is required because of your database’s organization (perhaps because your line one is being required to log the full amount of points possible? You can tweak the equation as follows:
=1-0.1*(LOGC((X-1)*C)-1)
where X=order they got the kill and C=4.24890620492
(if you want an EXACT value for C instead of using a string of numbers, it is 25000^(1/7)
in the short run, you can use that *tweak* to fix the problem and ignore everything else..but that will only work if the problem is what I state here (because you can’t take the log of a negative number where X=1.
Hope that helps..
July 11th, 2009 on 1:41 am
Ensidia was not the first to defeat Algalon. At least not according to the Armory.
http://wow.guildprogress.com/EU/Onyxia/Innervision/score
Is this incorrect? I even googled and verified it in a few places. Notice they are receiving 100% points for 1st kill. I believe the algorithm is working correctly.
July 11th, 2009 on 1:59 am
That is definately incorrect, if you look, they don’t even have the achievements required to have unlocked Algalon. They don’t have any of the hardmodes required to summon him….but that would explain why everyone elses kill is off by one ;p. I would verify alot of their info…make sure that they don’t have some odd things interfering with your other results.
July 11th, 2009 on 2:05 am
Strange. Will be corrected when calculations run.
July 11th, 2009 on 4:14 am
You seem to be quite receptive to feedback, so here’s some more.
The changing of the points system to this new one makes complete sense. Once you’ve got the point totals for that sorted out, should you decide to add additional gradations for other achievements, the following is a list of what I believe to be their relative difficulty. If you want to keep everything 10 points regardless I can understand your reasoning, but it seems that some achievements do differentiate the abilities of guilds outside of just the straight hardmodes.
Hardmodes: (already classified, point totals reflect it)
Top-Tier “fun modes” (perhaps make them worth a maximum of 200 points?): Herald of the Titans , He Feeds on Your Tears , Glory of the Ulduar Raider
High-Tier (100-150 pts?): Champion of Ulduar , They’re Coming Out of the Walls , He’s not getting any Older , Set Up Us the Bomb , Lumberjacked
Medium-Tier (50-100 pts?): Shadowdodger , Not-So-Friendly-Fire , Deforestation , Con-Speed-Atory , Crazy Cat Lady , Rubble and Roll , Can’t Do That While Stunned , Must Deconstruct Faster , Unbroken
All others being worth 10 points or less seems to make perfect sense as they do very little to distinguish the skill of players from one another. Those kinds of achievements have more to do with patience for tedium
I just wanted to give an impression of relative worth of achievements if you should decide to re-implement points for guilds based on difficult achievements.
July 11th, 2009 on 4:32 am
Results are certainly improved, but they are still way off. It comes down to a matter of scaling as I predicted. The gaps between levels of conquest are not increasing at a rapid enough rate.
To tier this system (ignoring achievements bc they won’t harm the system at their current values)
there are 1400 points available pre hard modes…so let’s tier the system using a 50% tiering of total previous points.
1400*1.5=2100 total given for easier hardmodes therefore each hardmode should be valued at 700.
2100*1.5=3150/3=1050 for medium hardmodes which I am rounding up to 1100 to keep these all even 100 intervals.
3300*1.5=4950/3=1650 which I am rounding to 1700
5100*1.5=7650 which I am rounding down to 7500
7500*1.5=11250 (lets call this one an even 11k)
Easy Hard modes: 700
Medium Hard Modes: 1100
Hard Hard Modes: 1700
Algalon: 7500
Alone in Darkness: 11000
I know this tiering seems steep, but it is the only way to make sure that prior stuff doesn’t overshadow new stuff. A 50% increase is used because of how quickly smaller percentages are used under this system of these actual values, keep in mind the 1384th guild only gets HALF of these points. 40% of these points (which will incorporate the majority of the active truly progressive guilds) need to be significant enough to overshadow all prior stuff. Anyway, I am perfectly confident that this will fix it…play around with what you will and get back to me.
July 11th, 2009 on 4:42 am
Makes sense. Recalculating!
July 11th, 2009 on 4:51 am
“I just wanted to give an impression of relative worth of achievements if you should decide to re-implement points for guilds based on difficult achievements.”
These already have the significance as a total to drastically differentiate guilds in the midrange. To tier these like this would upset the system. These “fun” achievements should do little more than act as a tie-breaker to differentiate two nearly equal guilds. What I WILL say for what you have here, is that it is *possible* under the numeric system I have devised above, that these sub-achieves can account for around 450 total points without throwing the system out of balance. I agree that it would be cool to find a solid way to utilize those points to construct a valid system to incorporate those into rankings, I will do my best to take your ranking order and put a tiered system together to do just that. Whereas I recognize that this will still mean that some VERY difficult achievements are undervalued with respect to hardmode kills or bosskills, it is important to realize that these achievements are more for “tie-breaker” purposes rather than ranking. It is important to make this distinction…because… quite frankly, nobody will care that you were the 200th guild to get the Supermassive Achievement, they WILL care that you were the 200th guild to down Algalon.
I will post again once I have devised a use for these 450 points, I will set your list against a composite list for all achievements for heroic Ulduar, and rank them loosely as you have suggested.
July 11th, 2009 on 5:07 am
Sorry the calculations took a bit. Meant to run an abbreviated version but goofed up and ended up rerunning the whole thing.
Now complete with steeper hard mode values.
Still doesn’t match exactly with the top 20 you posted earlier but it seems pretty close.
July 11th, 2009 on 5:22 am
The scaling may need a steeper curve. But, for instance, you gave Algalon only 5000 points. If you look at Irae AoD, they have the 22nd world kill of Algalon, but are ranked 11th in your system. Ultimately, it is little things like their world first Alone in the Darkness. Let us try adjusting this to a 70% overwrite, this was the basis I used for 450 excess Achieves anyway…but…this will have to be implemented with semi exact numbers to work… (at 70% increase the value is such that the 30% assumed floor of points cannot be undervalued under any circumstances other than a MASSIVE cummulation of earlier points.)
These values are all after rounding. I will be rounding up to avoid any possible cummulative errors.
Pre-HardModes: 1400
Easy HardModes: 2400 (800 each)
Med HardModes: 4200 (1400 each)
Hard HardMode: 7200 (2400 each)
Algalon: 12250
Alone in the Darkness: 21000
Round these values off again as you wish, but try to keep them somewhat constant.
July 11th, 2009 on 6:01 am
Also, by using the 70% overwrite instead of 50%, it should guarantee greater accuracy for lower ranked guilds. Just…try to keep somewhat close to the numbers I have used here…if it goes too far over 70%, achievements will no longer have the ability to act as a tie-breaker for guilds who are very close.
Now, Achievements…using Wynd’s assessment, and noting that there are 35 attainable achievements (which are raid achieves and not personal achieves).
Herald of the Titans is technically a 10 man achieve and to be honest, isn’t all that difficult. It might as well say “Defeat Algalon.” Rumor is that this is now either iLvl 232 or that weapons don’t count…so basically the only restriction is that you can’t use the 25-man hardmode loot to do it.
Glory of the Ulduar Raider isn’t really an achievement worth mentioning either, it involves doing all the hardmodes+ a few very minor additional achievements (disarmed, crazy cat lady, iron dwarf, medium rare). It is a meta, and I am leaving those out, you should get points for having points… Onto your last “top tier” I don’t see that as anymore difficult than any of your ones on the tier below. I would however add Supermassive to your list of higer tier, and place conqueror(you have champion, so I think you are pulling these from 10 man list) to lower tier (this is not like immortal or undying..it removes most of the randomness of that by making it so that not all bosses have to be done in same lockout). I also don’t think that Crazy Cat Lady belongs on this list, a slight adjustment to your strat, and this can actually be a joke. I am also leaving off con-speed-atory, this is just a matter of one-shotting 3x Knock. I am leaving out Can’t Do That While Stunned, as this is another case of basic strategy for the fight. I am also leaving off Unbroken and Must Deconstruct Faster. ANYONE that can do XT hardmode can EASILY do the speed achieve(it is just a matter of making sure a dps call is called off when heart falls under 1 mill as it will likely fall to 300,000 virtually immediately after the call..do that twice..good game). Unbroken and Shutout can both be done together with ease, if you can do +4 then you already know how to stack blue pyrite..on easy mode, this is a joke. Finally, Rubble and Roll doesn’t really belong on that list either just gonna need a couple of people to use offspecs for this one and good game. With that in mind, here is the list and values I have come up with…
(5 Point Achievements)-125 points total
Dwarfageddon
Unbroken
Shutout
A Quick Shave
Iron Dwarf, Medium Rare
Shattered
Stokin’ the Furnace
Nerf Engineering
Nerf Scrapbots
Nerf Gravity Bombs
Must Deconstruct Faster
Can’t Do That While Stunned
With Open Arms
Disarmed
If Looks Could Kill
Crazy Cat Lady
Nine Lives
Cheese the Freeze
I Have the Coolest Friends
Don’t Stand in the Lightning
Who Needs Bloodlust?
Drive Me Crazy
Con-speed-atory
Getting Back to Nature
Rubble and Roll
25 Point Achievements: 125 points total
*Deforestation
*Not-So-Friendly Fire
*Shadowdodger
*He Feeds On Your Tears
*Conqueror of Ulduar
50 Point Achievements: 250 points total
**He’s Not Getting Any Older
**They’re Coming Out of the Walls
**Supermassive
**Lumberjacked
**Set Up Us the Bomb
The overall total of these is 500 instead of 450, but I don’t think that will be anything “breaking”
However, should be careful in how this is implemented, it is CRITICAL that these not total much more, or the WILL overshadow bosskills in progress ranking. I would highly advise that if you want to scale these, that they be scaled exactly how I have them.
July 11th, 2009 on 6:05 am
…and not before implementing the 70% tiering listed two posts up.
July 11th, 2009 on 6:15 am
I’ll revisit the scoring whenever I wake up tomorrow…err later today
Currently, it is still setup based on the 50% tiering you laid out earlier. I corrected Algalon and 2 other achievements which are not currently being reflected in the charts. I’ll probably give the 70% tiering a shot if you think that would be an improvement.
I must say I really appreciate the assistance you have given thus far. It’s been a great help.
Also, I modified the tooltips on the main chart. Hope that’s good!
Time to sleep…
July 11th, 2009 on 7:01 am
“I must say I really appreciate the assistance you have given thus far. It’s been a great help.”
Tell you what, if this ever becomes popular enough to generate good money from banners, you have my email, I will tell you where to send me a case of beer ;p
July 11th, 2009 on 7:04 am
Haha…deal!
July 11th, 2009 on 7:05 am
oh, also, remove I choose you Brundir from your tracking, technically this is more of a two part hardmode…Brundir is the normal fight.
July 12th, 2009 on 1:01 am
Wasser, your re-organization of the optional achievements and your reasoning for them is logical. Your list looks good to me.
By the way, you’re right, I had the 10 man list open when I was making my original list of optional achievement point scaling.
Xxav, thank you for being so incredibly receptive. It’s nice to see you as the author of the site being open and actively interested in feedback. It’s also nice to see you trying to tweak your system to make it as good as possible.
July 12th, 2009 on 12:00 pm
I think we wore him out so much that he is still sleeping two days later, someone should check on him. I was at Chicago +Earth, Wind and Fire last night, so I didn’t have a chance to look over things until today. As was fairly obvious, there are still significant discrepancies in the top twenty, so I am afraid that a 70% scaling will be necessary(you can reference my numbers above to see what these values are). Any discrepancies at that point are probably irrelevent. For example, if a guild was always top 20 in kills and happened to fall 23rd on Algalon, they may still belong in top 20. But at 50% there are definately some issues still, so this will indeed need to be scaled beyond the “core” 30% of each step…making 70% a perfect marker such that prior success will still impact ranking, but ultimately not dictate future ranking despite failure beyond that.
Meanwhile, I would like to have everyone out there that has been following this to add challenge to any of my assessments. I want this site to be as comprehensive and agreeable as possible, as once this ranking system is fixed, it will be how I maintain my server ranking thread..
Also, new content is just around the corner, and the more feedback that I get on my assessments, the better the point-system proposal I can devise for Xxav with the new content just around the corner. Will be nice to have this site working as people want it from week one of the upcoming content.
July 12th, 2009 on 6:17 pm
Haha, I am still alive. I’ll try to change to the 70% scaling later tonight. Currently running 10man Ulduar
July 13th, 2009 on 2:31 am
70% tiered scoring and revised minor achievement scoring is now in place. Recalculations will start at 6am. Seems to be a lot of traffic on the site at the moment so I pushed it back from the usual 3am.
July 13th, 2009 on 6:35 am
I bumped Alone in the Darkness up to 22000.