I really wish LFS had some type of rating system. I know that TOCA had something based on the ELO system used for chess, and worked quite well. I dont really think it would be hard to put in. It would also be nice if you could see everybody's rating in the connections list.

The ELO system is very accurate and hard to manipulate. It is not just a mtter of winning and losing, but also a metter of how strong the players are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELO_rating_system

http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2006/01/ranking_systems.html

Vinny

The simplest formulation for an ELO rating looks like this:

R' = R + K * (S - E)
R' is the new rating
R is the old rating
K is a maximum value for increase or decrease of rating (16 or 32 for ELO)
S is the score for a game
E is the expected score for a game

Much of the trick is in figuring out what the (E)xpected score of a game is. ELO uses the following formulas for players A and B:

E(A) = 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( [R(B) - R(A)] / 400 ) ]
E(B) = 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( [R(A) - R(B)] / 400 ) ]

It's a good model because, using the two formulas, it means that a great player gains little from beating an average player, but an average player gains a lot from beating a great player. Take the following example:

R(A) = 1900
R(B) = 1500
E(A) = 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( [1500 - 1900] / 400 ) ]
= 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( -400 / 400) ]
= 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ -4 / 4 ]
= 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ -1 ]
= 1 / 1 + .1
= .91
= 91%
E(B) = 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( [1900 - 1500] / 400) ]
= 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ ( 400 / 400 ) ]
= 1 / [ 1 + 10 ^ 1 ]
= 1 / 11
= .09
= 9%

Player A is expected to score .91 in an average game, which is to say he should win 91% of the time, and will be punished accordingly if he loses to player B:

R' = 1900 + 32 * (0 - .91)
R' = 1900 - 29.12
R' = 1871

Conversely a win nets him very little:

R' = 1900 + 32 * (1 - .91)
R' = 1900 + 32 * .09
R' = 1900 + 2.88
R' = 1903

If There are 4 players in a race. Let's name A the winning player, B the second one, C the third one and D the last one. We consider that there were 6 duels: A won against B, C and D. B won against C and D. C won against D. We compute independently the new scores for each duel, and then we average the values for each player.

It's a fairly elegant answer that not only rewards or penalizes all players separately, but also encourages playing for second place, or even third, if first isn't possible.

Why would this rating be needed? What would it add to the online experience?

The ELO formula can only be used for when there are three outcomes - Player A wins, Player B wins, a draw.

Can't be used for racing - and it wouldn't take in to account a plethora of other variables (wind, track, cars) ... it does more handwaving than calculation for racing, and it isn't being used by the English Chess Association (or whatever they are called).

The only reason I know some of this crap is because a friend of mine plays in chess tournaments - I suck badly at chess.

I think it would be a good judge of what your skill level is at vs others. It can be used with more then 3 outcomes, as i showed in my last post.
And FIDE and the USCF, the two biggest bodies of chess use it.

Like i said, it seemed to work well in TOCA. I just thought a number that could give an idea as to the relative skill of a player would be nice. That is all. I sometime go into a room looking for a close race, only to find out that everybody is either much fatser or much slower. Rooms could be set up with rating limits, to keep out slower or faster player for mor even racing. Leages could also use the rating system to determine how to place racers. There are endless ways it could be used. As the chess comunity already does.

As far as other varibles, since we all play under the same varible conditions, over time the rating would count for that.

You can just look at laptimes of someone and stuff.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

You can just look at laptimes of someone and stuff.

This is one of the few suggestions I could actually support wholeheartedly. Even if it does mean it will be harder for some people to find servers to race on.

You can look at laptimes, but that can only be done AFTER you join a server, so you might be too late to find out the server is full of noobs or pros.

I suggest using the exact system NR2003S used. What this does is give people ratings for each type of racing (rallyX, or TBO, or S-S) from 0 to 10. Servers can be set up with a rating ranging from 0-10, all the way to 9-10, so that only players with a rating higher than x can join, or like 0-5 so that only players with a rating below 6 can join. This has the advantage of putting equal drivers against equal drivers mostly, and keeps the wreckers off the higher ranked servers. It also gives you incentive to improve yourself online. You want to race with the best? You earn your spot on the grid instead of just joining the server, wreck everyone at T1 and get your ass banned. Unfortunately it also means that sometimes you'll be a little hard pressed to find a server that allows you on.

For those that don't know what the NR2003S rating system looked like, see here

Quote from TagForce :

Unfortunately it also means that sometimes you'll be a little hard pressed to find a server that allows you on.

That's an over-riding reason NOT to have any form of system like that whatsoever.

Keep it how it is. FFS, if you want a rank of how fast a driver is, there's good old MHR and Nutter Rank.

E: The ELO is such a shit formula FIDE shouldn't even use it. And what else, something like the NASCAR weekly series confusing and unfair formula? All ranking formulas are rubbish in one way or another. QB Ratings, for example. They inflate ratings for QBs that play in West Coast Offences (short passes mean more completions, completion ratio having equal imporance in the formula compared to everything else) and QBs that play in domed stadia (Also, high completion ratio. It's easier to through a ball to a guy 10 yards away indoors than in the howling rain and snow).

I think ELO is a joke, and It's horribly broken as the Xbox 360's live service is proving every day. Nice Try Microsoft, but no cigar.

I'd much rather when someone is in game when you show the list of connecting people that it would also show their best lap time for their currently selected car and the selected track. Also allow grids/qualify results to be setup based on their times, best to worst or reverse for grid positions. Good to have the info in game and the options, if you so choose to use em.

Maybe put some of the best in the back to give them a little challenge..

Quote from duke_toaster :

That's an over-riding reason NOT to have any form of system like that whatsoever.

Keep it how it is. FFS, if you want a rank of how fast a driver is, there's good old MHR and Nutter Rank.

Is it? It's not like there's a million and one choices when you want to race now. In fact, it's HARDER to find a suitable server now simply because there's never anyone around of the same calibre on the same servers... The racing on the STCC servers has been excellent on the Silver and Gold server simply BECAUSE it uses a kind of ranking system.

Don't get me wrong... I don't want a rank that shows you I'm a faster driver than you, or you are a faster driver than so-and-so... I want a ranking restriction option on servers, so that if I have a ranking of 9 on the FXO at street circuits, I can look for, and join, a server that has the same ranked drivers on it, or at least a closer field (say 5-10). Just so that I don't have to join servers only to get upset because all of my 'fun' racing is ruined by people who can't drive the combo.

I even think that such a ranking will spread people out over multiple servers more, so that there's not only a couple full servers, but that there are a lot of almost full servers.

EDIT: Actually, it's harder to throw a ball accurately in domed arena's when you're the away QB because of the enormous amount of extra noise the crowds make. Ask any NFL europe quarterback after they played in the Amsterdam Arena.

Ranking of some sort is a good idea, but i'd steer clear of using one figure to sum up a driver.

I think PB restrictions on servers might work. Ordering grids by PB worked wonders in the OWRL, some of the best and closest racing I've had. PB restrictions should obviously work both ways keeping slow drivers off fast servers and fast drivers off slow servers .

I believe LFS uses some kind of rating when you host a server, OK, QUICK, PRO, etc. Perhaps, that can be extended to WR+1, WR+2, etc only allowing racers on that have an appropriate PB. Since LFSW is already there why not use the stats there as a licensing system of sorts.

Most will argue that the only way you become fast is by racing other fast drivers. I agree with that but at times I'd like close competitive racing, not lapping alone on a server full of drivers out of my league .

Quote from TagForce :

EDIT: Actually, it's harder to throw a ball accurately in domed arena's when you're the away QB because of the enormous amount of extra noise the crowds make. Ask any NFL europe quarterback after they played in the Amsterdam Arena.

Theoretically (and this is never enforced - but it bloody well should be) the defence can be charged a timeout if they fail to control the volume of their fans. BTW, I guess you're an Admirals fan

NFL Europa (which it is now called) is a joke anyway, should rename it NFL Germany since they removed the Monarchs and the Claymores. The only reason why the Monarchs went down was because of shit stadia (Ashton Gate, The 93 yard pitch at White Hart Lane, Crystal Palace?!) - maybe if the team had stayed at Wembley for a bit or moved to Twickenham (which is not used for club rugby every week AFAIK so there wouldn't be an issue there.

And this thread ought to be split since we're rabbiting on about football not ELO scores.

I would really encourage the creation of some type of rating system. I don't believe using pb times is a good idea though because for example I do most of my FOX racing on the same two circuits/server usually (that's just the way it ends up for me, I don't do it on purpose) So if I were to try racing online on a new track/car combo, I would not be allowed simply for that reason. I try my hardest to race as clean as possible, but I'm usually anywhere from 1 to 2 seconds off of the fastest racers on the server. That usually means I'm not competing for top three spots, but does that make me a racer not good enough to be on that server?

Some sort of rank over all with a general set up (street cars, gtr, open wheel, rally, autox, oval something like that) would be nice. I still play Grand Prix Legends alot, but I never got into playing online, so I don't completely understand the GPLEA rankings, but from the outside looking in, that seemed like a good setup, though I think that went strictly by best lap times.

I do agree that forcing "lesser" racers out of some servers would spread out online racers and possibly make it easier to find a race in your ability group.

Well thats my :twocents: but I don't think we'll see anything like this anytime soon.