Announcement

**quinns** · November 14, 2000, 14:35

Indeed it is!

slamp, it's as easy as that. You're now rated (see above chart). Now, you need to convince at least one other player in each of your games to become rated, and have all rated players declare each game "rated".

Designate someone as the official score keeper (usually the LAST player in the game as they can send a screen shot of the power graph to me (and Solver) on their turn 9, 19, 29, etc. I will then calculate the ratings based upon the power graph and send them to Solver for final approval.

Welcome to the ratings!

Quinns
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited November 15, 2000).]

**slamp** · November 14, 2000, 18:06

Jon, are you ok to rate Dutcheese pbem and APQS pbem ?

I usually play at standard size, except when I play against more than 8 civs.
[This message has been edited by slamp (edited November 14, 2000).]

**St Jon** · November 14, 2000, 19:01

I'm OK about LC, I don't know about the rest of the Players, but I think APQS is too near the End to be fairly judged. The Player, Swissy, who led for so long has been sent to the bottom of the PG by a combined attack from everyone else and we also have the collapse of the Eco-System to deal with. DC is also very well advanced but still has a lot of life left, if everyone can be bothered to play their Turns that is, but it really is up to Frazer if he wishes to include it.

**Stavros** · November 14, 2000, 20:24

I would be OK with LC.... if the other players decided to join... As it stands now Jon and I are no. 1 & 2 (me being no. 2) of 6 players.... If the others aren't in, then I am losing points, although I'm in second place in the entire game.... a bit unfair, I'm sure you'll agree...

**quinns** · November 14, 2000, 20:41

Regarding LC Being a Rated Game:

Did you forget about me Stavros? I know I'm not up there very high but you will GAIN points for being ahead of me. You're right though, the net effect would be that you would lose a few hundreths of a point if you are behind St. Jon. We need to get Mobius, Rick, and TheTrueD rated. Maybe you could convince them to become rated, then LC would be a "full" rated game (with ratings first changing at the end of turn 49).

**TheBirdMan** · November 15, 2000, 01:55

Thats a very good record Slamp !

Specially if you play on "standard" sizes maps, where the AI tends to be a lot more aggressive than on selfmade supergigantic maps.

**Solver** · November 15, 2000, 09:28

Quinns, the power graphs need to be sent to you and me . I am the PBEM Administrator, and keeping
the track of all scores I need it. You perform the calculations, but I do yet need the copy of it, as I have
made a ratings table in Excel, and it also contains te chart. It will be interesting to see players' progress
over time, perhaps I will publish the chart here somewhen.
[This message has been edited by Solver (edited November 15, 2000).]

**slamp** · November 15, 2000, 09:53

About DC, I will post a proposal on the forum, asking player if they want to be rated.

Is-it possible to use old graphs to rate a game ?
For example, DC is about 120 turns and the power graph changed from time to time
[This message has been edited by slamp (edited November 15, 2000).]

**Solver** · November 15, 2000, 10:09

Slamp, the question for ratig LC with old graphs should be addressed to me, CTP PBEM Ladder Administrator. Yes, if all the players agree for the game to be rated, and you have the powergraphs for this game, send them to Quinns with a copy to me. Quinns will use his software to calculat the new ratings, I'll take a look at it and enter in my charts.
Please post the URL for that game, as I haven't the time to seek for it now.

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

**quinns** · November 15, 2000, 10:47

Sorry Solver. I hadn't heard from you in so long, I thought this rating system would fall apart if I didn't step in and take responsibility and answer the players' questions.

Yes, Solver is our CTP PBEM Ladder Administrator. Please direct questions regarding CTP PBEM Ratings and Rankings to him. He will make the final decision on any rulings or changes to the system.

**quinns** · November 15, 2000, 12:01

When should the screen shot of the Power Graph be taken? On the LAST player's turn of turn 9 or the FIRST player's turn of turn 10?

I would think the fairest would be the LAST player's turn of turn 9 because then ALL players would have had their civ updated for 10 turns (including turn 0).
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited November 15, 2000).]

**Solver** · November 15, 2000, 14:15

Regarding Power Graph: sorry, you're right. I wanted to take it in the end of turn 10, but I comletely forgot about the turn 0.
So, when last player of a game finishes 9, 19, 29, 39, etc. turn, he should take a screenshot of it and send it to both quinns and me.
Then, I have one more suggestion. It was a nice idea to add delinquent turn count to the ratings. But, I think we should reduce player's rating for it, to encourage them playing instead of stucking. I think 0.2 per a delinquent turn will be enough. If we agree with that, my rating would now be 17.8 and Arthur's rating would be 17.6. Comments?

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

**quinns** · November 15, 2000, 17:12

My opinion -- A pretty stiff (strong) penalty for being delinquent... but it WOULD encourage promptness! I think that both would be good, though. If we remove the TNS DLQ column, we don't know whether or not the player is prompt. This is a good column to use when deciding who to invite to a fast game.
[This message has been edited by quinns (edited November 15, 2000).]

**Solver** · November 16, 2000, 09:40

When I was thinking about the penalty we should apply, I though what the numbers should be. Penalty would force people to play their turns, otherwise they might want to play later, then completely forget it and make the game stuck. So, I yet think we need to apply a penalty here, but I want your suggestions on the exact number of penalty points. Perhaps 0.1 then? If you're out of turn 10 times - you get one point fewer, I think this would be fair, to make the differnece.

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

**quinns** · November 16, 2000, 12:41

Okay. Negative one-tenth (-0.1) penalty per delinquency. I still think we should record the delinquency, also, in the TNS DLQ column. Two of these delinquencies would be about equivalent to losing one ten-turn round to one player of about equal rating. That sounds about right to me.

Any other opinions/suggestions from anyone are welcome, of course.