Announcement

**Stavros** · October 10, 2000, 18:26

I hate to be a party pooper, but just look at how many PBEM threads have ended in a winner. At best, people give up when the winner is clear... If I have missed something, I'd love someone to show me a thread where a PBEM has produced a winner.

But someone has a site up and running that has some some statistics of the PBEM games. I can't remember where/who has it. It had things like time between turns, and stuff like that. Can anyone remind me where that is?
[This message has been edited by Stavros (edited October 11, 2000).]

**Flandrien** · October 11, 2000, 07:26

I think most PBEM's just die out of lack of interest.
Anyway, does anybody know any of these wonderful games and what has happened to them ?

- Modquick
- Burchill
- Tronn1
- Tronn2
- England vs. Australia

About the statistics, I think you mean this site :
http://slaamp.virtualave.net/ctp/stats.html
It is very old though.

**Solver** · October 11, 2000, 09:18

I might consider that players resign, but I hate dying PBEMs. Is CTP so boring? No, it's great. So, I like PBEMs and I don't play online multiplayer, only PBEM.

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

**Lung** · October 11, 2000, 20:40

In order to get clear results in PBEM games, i created the Lungmatch tournament. We have had a couple of results so far, but the point comes where the result is certain, and the opponent/s concede defeat. I don't think the last unit or city needs to be conquered for a result, as long as the result is beyond reasonable doubt.

The first modern deathmatch game finished in a total win by Keygen, which led to my deathmatch tournament, as this seems the best path to a result. Small maps with in-your-face neighbours seems to all but guarantee a result!

And as for my other pbem games, they're all alive and kicking still

**deleted** · October 11, 2000, 23:48

Slamp won Modquick: he won it by conquering the World. It was on a small map and was a scenario started in the Modern Age.

Two of the Deathmatch Moderns finished and Im sure some of Lung's Deathmatches finished with complete extermination of all but the winner.

AFAIK as I know those are the only games which ended with a non-conceded win.

**quinns** · October 22, 2000, 20:32

Solver, I think this is a great idea!

Here's one way it might work.
Once the game starts and is agreed to by all to be a "rated" game, then the CTP PBEM Administrator, (I nominate Solver!), is notified by the "game starter" that a rated game has started (on such-and-such date and time). The courtesy turn around time would be 24 hours, from the time one turn is sent to the next player. The turn is delinquent if it goes past 72 hours. As soon as the turn becomes delinquent, the "game starter" would contact both the delinquent player and the CTP PBEM Administrator to warn of pending ejection (if it is the game starter that is delinquent, then some other player would notify the Administrator). If the turn around time exceeds 168 hours (one week), the delinquent player is automatically resigned from the game and that player's nation is "permanently" replaced with a Computer player (AI).

The last "human" player remaining wins the game. Order of finish is in order of elimination (either by conquest or resignation). If more than one human player remains when the game ends, then those remaining human players are ranked according to the civilization score (regardless of what the AI did). For example, in a 5 player game, the first player ejected comes in 5th place, the second player ejected comes in 4th place, etc.

This way there will "always" be a finishing order to the game, no matter how short or long.

I own a site called "World Tennis Ratings" http://www.worldtennisratings.com . I am very familiar with ranking and rating systems. I could fairly easily modify that tennis rating system to adapt it to work with multiplayer games. We could start everyone off with a rating of 15.000 to begin with, then have the Administrator initially rate new players as they join the CTP PBEM Rating system. Ladders are then easy, as they are just sorted by descending rating.

If there is any interest in this, I would be happy to elaborate on how the rating system would work.

Steve Quinn -- steveq@gte.net

[This message has been edited by quinns (edited October 23, 2000).]

**Solver** · October 23, 2000, 06:06

Quinns, thanks. I can be CTP PBEM Admin, as I have some admin experience thanks to Age of Empires II. So, perhaps we should make the game we just started (how about some?, I mean) a first rated game. If you want, I will post my ideas about ranking system, but these are not very good, so I want your ideas. I would be happy to see more support, as your idea about how to make each game finish is great. My idea is great, too

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

**Solver** · October 23, 2000, 06:46

Aha, I have fond something. Again, I invented it some time ago and I don't say this is what we should use, just a s an example. It's in HTML, so I will now transfer it here.
Then, when you win a game you get:
100 pts if you wan by conquest,
150 if you won by having highest score and 200 points if you won by
creating an alien. If map size was middle, you get extra 50 points,
if it was big, you get 100 and if it was largest, then you get 150
pts. If difficulty is Warlord, you get 25 pts, 50 for Prince, 100 for
King, 150 for Emperor and 250 for Deity.
If there were 3 players in the
game, you don't get any extra points, but you get 10 pts for 4
players, 20 pts for 5 players, 30 pts for 6 players, 40 pts for 7
players and for 8 players you get 50 points.
Example: If you won by Conquest
on Prince difficuly, with 6 players in the game on Middle size map,
you get 100 + 50 + 30 + 50 = 230 points.
Example: If you win by creating
an alien at Deity level with 3 players on the biggest map, you earn
200 + 250 + 0 + 150 = 600 points. Makes difference, doesn't it?
Also, if you lose, points are deducted.
If you were conquered, 200 points
are reduced, if your enemy had the highet score win, 150 points are
reduced and if he created an alien, 100 points are deducted. For big
map, extra 100 points are reuduced and for largest map 150 points are
deducted. For Warlord you lose 200 points, 150 for Prince, 100 for
King, 50 for Emperor. For Deity no extra points are taken. If there
were 3 players, you lose 50 points, 40 points for 4 players, 30
points for 5 players, 20 points for 6 players, 10 points 7 players,
and you lose no extra points for 8 players.
Example: If you lost, because
your enemy created an alien, on King level, largest map, with 4
players in the game, you lose 100 + 100 + 150 + 40 = 390 points are
deducted from your rating.
First of all, sorry for the spelling mistakes (it must be full of them), but take a look at this.
Quinns, haven't you by chance played games on MSN Gaming Zone?

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com
[This message has been edited by Solver (edited October 23, 2000).]

**quinns** · October 23, 2000, 14:03

Here is my take on the CTP PBEM Ratings.

Make them as simple as possible. I would strongly recommend using rating adjustments, similar to World Tennis Ratings (as this is tried and true, and in the process of possibly replacing the existing professional system). World Tennis Ratings is loosely based on the International Chess Rating system, but much simpler and cleaner.

Modified Proposal:

Player CTP PBEM
Level CTP PBEM Rating Ratings Color

E 0 through 9.999 RED
D 10 through 13.999 ORANGE
C 14 through 16.999 YELLOW
B 17 through 19.999 GREEN
A 20 through 22.999 BLUE
OPEN I 23 through 25.999 BRONZE
OPEN II 26 through 29.999 SILVER
OPEN III 30 and above GOLD

If we use this structure, I already own the programs that I could modify slightly to work with PBEM games.

We could give the following initial ratings to players that have honestly defeated the AI at different levels:

Defeated Initial
CTP AI Rating

Chieftain 14.000
Warlord 16.000
Prince 17.000
King 18.000
Emperor 19.000
Deity 21.000

The ratings would change using the formula: Probability of Lower Rated Player Defeating Higher Rated Player =
Prob = 1 /(2 + (player1 - player2)^2).

If the higher rated player defeats the lower rated player, then the Change in Rating = Prob./2

If the lower rated player defeats the higher rated player, then the Change in Rating = (1 - Prob.)/2.

see www.worldtennisratings.com/wtr_info_formulas.html for a better explanation of the formulas.

Example:

Before Game After Game
Player Rating Finish Order
Joseph 17.000 2
Michael 20.000 1
Samuel 22.000 3

The above formula is applied each time a player is defeated or resigns, using the CURRENT ratings.

1st Pass -----
Samuel was ejected first, so the first pass calculation goes as follows:

Joseph Defeated Samuel:
Prob. = 1/(2 +(22 - 17)^2) = 0.037
Change = (1 - 0.037)/2 = 0.482

Joseph's new rating is 17.000 + 0.482 = 17.482
Samuel's new rating is 22.000 - 0.482 = 21.518

Michael Defeated Samuel:
Prob. = 1/(2 + (21.518 - 20.000)^2) = 0.232
Change = (1 - 0.232)/2 = 0.384

Michael's new rating is 20.000 + 0.384 = 20.384
Samuel's new rating is 21.518 - 0.384 = 21.134

2nd Pass ---

Michael Defeated Josesph:
Prob. = 1/(2 +(20.384 - 17.482)^2) = 0.114
Change = (0.114)/2 = 0.057

Michael's new rating is 20.384 + 0.057 = 20.441
Joseph's new rating is 17.482 - 0.057 = 17.425

---- End of Calculation

After Game
Player Ratings

Joseph 17.425
Michael 20.441
Samuel 21.134

--- End Example

The computer program will do all of the above work each time a player is ejected from a rated game. I could help you with this part of the administration.

I would also recommend using these same exact formulas regardless of what scenario is played. Because it prevents tampering and abuse. As you mentioned earlier, if we give more points for complexity and level, a group of players could initiate a game with the highest possible point levels, then just have everyone quit after one turn. All the players would reap the benefits of the higher point game without really playing. With the above proposed system, players could play one turn or one-thousand turns, and the system would still calculate fairly. The only real variables are the players' ratings and players' finishing order. (At least one turn must be played in order to be considered a valid game).

So much for my long winded explanation.

Let me know what you think

[This message has been edited by quinns (edited January 19, 2001).]

**Solver** · October 24, 2000, 05:12

Amazing, Quinns! Are you a programmer? If so, and the program is your, please send the source code to me, or if it is in Visual Basic, send all the project to me, as I can understand it. Well, I guess I'm not so good at understanding all the formulas, however, this seems very good. Just a question: with how many rating points should everyone start, so that this seems fair and good. And, how do americans type four thousand: 4.000 or 4000? I'd like to know this, as in Europe putting . means it's part, i.e. 2.5 means 2 1/2 , so let me now. Well, I guess our game How about some? should be the first rated, I really want so. Ideas? I will wait for email with the code and reply here.

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

**quinns** · October 24, 2000, 16:28

Hello Solver, I'm glad you approve! To answer your questions:

Question: "Are you a programmer?"

Yes. I program/analyze for a electronics manufacturer in California. The languages I used for the World Tennis Ratings site are a combination of PickBasic, HTML, JavaScript, and Perl. I know only a very little Visual Basic. (At work we use PL/SQL only, now )

Question: "With how many rating points should everyone start, so that this seems fair and good?"

As stated above, I think that, at first, everyone should honestly state what level they believe they play at, Chieftain, Warlord, etc. Then, you (The Administrator), will make the official determination of what Initial Rating they should have. (See above rating guide.)

Question : "How do Americans type four thousand: 4.000 or 4000?"

We type it just as the Europeans do. In America, 4000 is written as 4,000 or 4000. 4.000 means four decimal-point zero zero zero (or the number four exactly). I think the British use a comma to represent a decimal point, but not the Americans. In reference to the rating point range, it should run from about 5 to 40. I can't imagine anyone attaining a rating higher than 40.

Comment: "Our game, "How about some?" should be the first rated game, I really want so. Ideas?"

I agree. Let's see with the other players think. If they all agree, then let it be so

[This message has been edited by quinns (edited October 24, 2000).]

**Solver** · October 25, 2000, 06:31

Unlucky. Well, I guess I can understand codes for all the Basic programming languages,as they all are similar to VisualBasic, however, I can't understand Perl. Actually, I've never seen it, so perhaps I will understand something.
Well, Quinns, I want you to post in our How about some? game thread and ask the others would they agree, and direct them to the thread. I would do this myself, but I'm in a great hurry now.
I will wait for further posts by you.

------------------
Solver - http://www.aok.20m.com

**quinns** · October 25, 2000, 11:42

Okay Administrator Solver! Will do. Forums posted.

**quinns** · October 25, 2000, 14:24

Re: "How often to post?" -- How does once a week, on Sundays, at 2300 GMT sound? In the beginning, I could just manually calculate it, but if this gets popular, I'll have to create a new program or maybe you could do it. (If you want to see an example of the rating change calculation in JavaScript, use your Browser to go to -- http://www.worldtennisratings.com/wtr_info_calcrtg.html and click "View -- Page Source". You'll see the JavaScript code for calculating rating changes and odds for two given players' ratings.)

Yes, a new topic under this forum sounds good.

If Arthur and St Jon agree, we need to establish initial ratings. How did my earlier idea sound? That is, regarding initially rating a newly rated player dependant upon what level of CTP AI the player has honestly EVER defeated, (in a single human player game). (See above thread).

For example, the highest level that I've ever honestly defeated the CTP AI was EMPEROR that would give me an initial rating of 19.000 (or 19 exactly). This would, of course, be subject to approval from (you) the Administrator of CTP PBEM Ratings.
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited October 25, 2000).]

Announcement

PBEM Ladders?

PBEM Ladders?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment