Why the Current Rating System is Failing Top Players: A Call for Change

[gooseontilt]

Hello duelists and Devs!

I've been playing on this platform for quite a while now, and while I really enjoy the game, I've noticed some issues with the current rating system that I think could be improved. Specifically, the system seems to favor grinding over actual skill, which can make it difficult for highly skilled players to climb the ranks without putting in an excessive amount of time.

For example, in the format I primarily play, I have a 4:1 win rate over a sample of 100 hours played, which is the highest on the site. However, despite this, I'm currently ranked #11 with a rating of 1400. I often get paired with low-rated players, which means that even with a consistent win rate, my rating increases very slowly. To reach a rating closer to 1700 (where the top player is), I would need to put in significantly more hours, not necessarily because I need to improve, but because the system seems to reward volume over efficiency.

Additionally, in another format, there's a player with a 3.5:1 win rate and 200 hours played. They have 1600 points, which is far from the 2000 rating that a 3:1 win rate should theoretically reach. This suggests that even with a strong win rate, the rating system makes it challenging to achieve the rating that would accurately reflect their skill level.

I believe that the rating system could be adjusted to better reward players who consistently perform well, rather than those who simply play more games. Some possible changes could include:

Adjusting the K-Factor: Increase the impact of each win/loss for players with higher win rates, so that skilled players can climb more quickly.
Dynamic Rating Adjustments: Implement a system where ratings are adjusted based on the relative skill of opponents, with greater rewards for beating higher-rated players and smaller penalties for losing to lower-rated ones.
Cap or Normalize Points for Lower-Rated Opponents: Reduce the impact of wins against much lower-rated opponents to prevent excessive grinding from skewing ratings.
I think these changes would help ensure that the leaderboard more accurately reflects player skill, rather than just time invested. I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this and see if we can make the ranking system more balanced and fair for everyone.

Thanks for considering this!

[Cromat]

You are playing at Edison Format. You've detected a win condition at that specific time line, and stacking your point during your Duels. And to this, you are treating yourself talented player? You are wanting to create a new account and reach to 10000 rating point at 1 hour, you are living in a dream world. You are wanting that when you won your Duel, you want to get 30-50 points but when you get loss you are wanting that your points mustn't be decrease because "I am talented player." regarding your nonsense idea. Start to play at Duelist Pool and reach the same rating points you just have at Edison Format, without caught by MarshieDemon and their sub-accounts or their (non-corrupt) staff(s), or Li-Ming and their sub-accounts past scan application or the staff(s) who are defended by (Li-Ming) them, or random Senior Judge who bored that day and decided to enter DuelingBook dat com to freeze you or punish you just because they did think as "Oh, I didn't punish any one at here for a while, let's login there so I can discharge myself." Then we may talk again whichs are must be change or fix immediately or whichs are mustn't. I really do not understand that when PAK won his tournament at their local with their "Unchained" Deck, and then he shared it on their YouTube channel, people are started use PAK's "Unchained" Deck that time, but I obliterated those Decks so easily at DuelingBook's Duelist Pool. If PAK is talented player if we consider their success at that local tournament, and if I am beating his Deck's and its variations; that means PAK isn't a talented player or I am more talented player than PAK? Also, while VNLs is at rank 1 at both type of Duel (at Single and at Match Type), I was beating VNLs too. So, VNLs is too talented therefore they reached rank 1 at both type of Duels (Single and Match Types)? Or VNLs's opponents are too idiot and therefore VNLs stacked all those points and reached rank 1 at Duels of Singles/Matches? If VNLs is really too talented like you, why I obliterated him, too, so easily? [■ Click to see replay]

[GXEra]

Hello duelists and Devs!

I've been playing on this platform for quite a while now, and while I really enjoy the game, I've noticed some issues with the current rating system that I think could be improved. Specifically, the system seems to favor grinding over actual skill, which can make it difficult for highly skilled players to climb the ranks without putting in an excessive amount of time.

For example, in the format I primarily play, I have a 4:1 win rate over a sample of 100 hours played, which is the highest on the site. However, despite this, I'm currently ranked #11 with a rating of 1400. I often get paired with low-rated players, which means that even with a consistent win rate, my rating increases very slowly. To reach a rating closer to 1700 (where the top player is), I would need to put in significantly more hours, not necessarily because I need to improve, but because the system seems to reward volume over efficiency.

Additionally, in another format, there's a player with a 3.5:1 win rate and 200 hours played. They have 1600 points, which is far from the 2000 rating that a 3:1 win rate should theoretically reach. This suggests that even with a strong win rate, the rating system makes it challenging to achieve the rating that would accurately reflect their skill level.

I believe that the rating system could be adjusted to better reward players who consistently perform well, rather than those who simply play more games. Some possible changes could include:

Adjusting the K-Factor: Increase the impact of each win/loss for players with higher win rates, so that skilled players can climb more quickly.
Dynamic Rating Adjustments: Implement a system where ratings are adjusted based on the relative skill of opponents, with greater rewards for beating higher-rated players and smaller penalties for losing to lower-rated ones.
Cap or Normalize Points for Lower-Rated Opponents: Reduce the impact of wins against much lower-rated opponents to prevent excessive grinding from skewing ratings.
I think these changes would help ensure that the leaderboard more accurately reflects player skill, rather than just time invested. I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this and see if we can make the ranking system more balanced and fair for everyone.

Thanks for considering this!

I am not familiar with the formula used to calculate rating in Duelingbook. I know one of the best rating system is Glicko 2 http://www.glicko.net/glicko/glicko2.pdf (which is used, for example, by lichess) and I can only reccomend it to the developers if they are looking for a new more fair and statistically based rating system.
However, I would like to point out that decreasing penalty when losing to lower rated players would favour grinding, which is exactly the opposite of what you, from my understanding, want. Penalties should be higher when playing against a lower rated opponent.