Arimaa Forum - Print Page


    
      
        Arimaa Forum
        (http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi)
      

        Arimaa >> General Discussion >> Arimaa.com titles
        
(Message started by: omar on Mar 11^th, 2010, 2:12pm)

Title: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 11^th, 2010, 2:12pm

For awhile I've been thinking of awarding titles to players who achieve various levels of skill in Arimaa. The database even has a column for titles, but hasn't been used yet :-)

Just as the bot ladder provides an incentive for new players to play against the bots, I think the title system will provide an incentive for established players to participate in HH and event games.

Some things that are needed before we can have titles are:

1. need players to get good at Arimaa
2. need a good rating system to measure skill
3. need an official body to award the titles
4. need well defined rules for awarding titles

I think we've definitely crossed #1. I have no doubt that we now have players who should be awarded titles. Even in the WHR rating system the top players now have incredible ratings.
http://home.scarlet.be/~woh/whr/whrh.htm

Item #2 has been a hang up for a long time. The gameroom ratings are great for giving players instant feedback on how they are doing, but we know that players can easily inflate or deflate them by playing against bots. Herve (woh) has setup the WHR rating system which uses only HH games and give a much better estimate of the players skills. However, these can still be manipulated since the players get to choose their opponents. Herve also made another WHR list but using only event games:
http://home.scarlet.be/~woh/whr/whre.htm
This seems even better and also includes the bots, but the problem is a lot of players don't have enough event games to have accurate ratings on this system. But still I think the WHRE system is good if a player builds up enough event games and could be used for awarding titles. I also like that the developer bots are included in this system; I think bots should also be eligible for titles. So I think if we use the WHRE to measure player skill and require say 100 games before the rating is considered valid I think it could serve well as a basis for awarding titles. The key thing about event games is that since they are arranged, the players do not have a choice in who the opponent is, so one cannot boost the rating by repeatedly playing opponents they know they can defeat. This means we definitely should have more events during the off season to allow players to build their WHRE ratings (more about this in another post).

It would be nice if we had an organization like the International Arimaa Association (IAA) in place already that could define the rules for the titles and award them, but we're not quite there yet. So in the mean time I can define the rules and award the titles :-)

So, that only leaves the rules for how to award the titles as the only remaining bottle neck. I am going to start writing up the rules for this soon, but there are things that I am undecided on and other things that I have an opinion about but would like to double check. So this is basically a request for comments.

1. What should the titles be? Should we use word titles (like "master") or number titles (like dan 3).
I am undecided on this. I kind of like word titles, but it will have an English basis to it. So number titles would work better, but they don't sound as cool.

2. Should developer bots also be eligible to receive titles?
I think they should be allowed. Anyone see a reason why maybe they shouldn't. I know other game organizations intensionally exclude bots; is there a good reason why they do that and I'm missing something.

3. Should women have different titles than men?
I know they do this in chess, but not sure why. I would prefer not to have gender based titles.

4. Are the titles life long once granted, or does one need to maintain their skill to keep the title?
I tend to like having the titles be granted for life and not requiring any maintenance.

5. What should be the achievement for the titles?
I am quite undecided on this, but I'll propose something just to get the ball rolling. I am going to use generic title names since I haven't decided on those yet.

Title A - maintain a rating of 1800 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 100 WHRE games

Title B - maintain a rating of 2000 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 150 WHRE games

Title C - 2200+ rating; 200+ games and so on.

Keep in mind that whatever I chose to go with, these are just Arimaa.com titles and not IAA titles. The IAA titles would probably require games to be played physically and in the presence of a tournament director. These titles are for games played on Arimaa.com.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by The_Jeh on Mar 11^th, 2010, 2:38pm

This is an interesting idea. I hope you make sure the highest title means something. In chess, there are so many grandmasters that the term has become diluted, and the spectator community has adopted the inelegant term "super-GM" to refer to the truly world-class players. In Xiangqi, the title "grandmaster" is apparently restricted to "fewer than one hundred people," according to Wikipedia. I kind of wish FIDE would adopt this.

I don't think you need special titles for women.

Should the title be life-long or maintained? Well, there is a certain distinction between a "title" and a classification. For example, in the USCF you are in the "expert" class if you are rated 2000-2199, but "expert" is a classification, not a title, and can be lost if you fall below 2000 again. I do agree that true titles should be for life, but they should be given out sparingly.

I tend to disagree with giving bots titles. I would not address one as "Mister" or "Doctor," and to me a title such as "Grandmaster" should be in the same vein.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Mar 11^th, 2010, 3:56pm

1. I like word titles rather than numerical titles. The ratings are sufficiently numerical already. Titles are intended to serve a different purpose than ratings. A title should be an honorific indicating lifetime achievement, whereas a rating should be an accurate measure of current playing strength.

2. I would not feel slighted if a machine could earn the same title that I could, but a lot of people would. Most folks would not feel the same pride or respect to be a "super-expert poobah" if bot_clueless could be one too. To me titles are all about feelings anyway, so there is no point in arguing that it is irrational to feel a title is cheapened by giving it to machine. How people feel is how they feel.

3. Having separate women's titles is demeaning, as if we don't expect women to be able to achieve the same intellectual heights that men can. That's my feeling, anyway.

4. Definitely titles should be lifelong. Past achievements should be honored regardless of current playing strength.

5. I would prefer not to base titles entirely on ratings. If they must be based only on ratings, then the emphasis should be far less on the peak rating and much more on the length of time and number of games for which the rating is maintained. A player with true skill of 1600 would find it more difficult to maintain a rating of 1600+ for 100 games than to maintain a rating of 1700+ for 20 games.

But I would rather titles include a component of winning or placing well in specific events, including the World Championship, Postal Mixer, Arimaa Challenge, and future events that we create. This would have the effect of limiting the number of people who could achieve the highest titles. The effect is intentional.

The_Jeh points out that the chess title of GM has been cheapened over time. I believe that most of the explanation is that there are now more excellent chess players in the world than there ever were before. That is to say, the bar for becoming a GM has lowered only slightly; mostly there are just more people passing the same bar.

For Arimaa that problem will be ten times as severe. If the top players of chess are getting better at a pace of (say) 5 Elo points per year, we can expect top Arimaa players to be getting better by 50 Elo points per year. Right now we could say that someone consistently rated over 2500 is a grandmaster of Arimaa, and have that feel about right since only chessandgo and myself would qualify. Twenty years from now, however, so many people will be "grandmasters" that the title will appear ridiculous.

I see several possible solutions:
A) Set up a system of ratings-based titles at such high ratings that nobody can possibly achieve them for many years to come. For example have chessandgo be the only "expert" now, with idea that "master", "senior master", and "grandmaster" are reserved for future generations.
B) Plan in advance to invent new titles (e.g. supergrandmaster, superdupergrandmaster, superduperpoopergrandmaster) once achieving current titles becomes commonplace
C) Make the supply of the top titles finite by making them event-based, tied to specific achievements that can only occur once per year.
D) Make the supply of the top titles finite by stripping people of their titles if they can't keep their rating at a specified percentile of all active players.

I don't like (A) because it implies that nobody's present achievement is worthwhile, and I don't like (B) because the names start to get ridiculous when you try to top "best" with "better-than-best". If we choose (D) then a title is nothing more than a glorified rating which you can lose at any time. Therefore I advocate (C).

Some will argue that winning a World Championship in 2005 isn't worth as much as winning a World Championship in 2010 or 2025 when the field is larger and the level of play is much higher. I would respond that I had to figure out Arimaa strategy on my own that everyone else got to read in the Wikibook.

Of course the level of play (and also our ratings) will be on a continual upward trend, but that doesn't mean our creativity, ingenuity, and effort is on an upward trend too. Maybe Nevermind plays just as well now as Belbo did when he won the 2004 World Championship, but giving them both the same title belies the different difficulty of their respective achievements. If titles are based only achieving certain rating levels, then a given title will get easier and easier to achieve over time, period.

If people want titles to be based on ratings only and not on placement in events at all, then I would suggest (D) with the caveat of making the titles permanent. You could take all the event games of the past two years, rate them as having occurred simultaneously, and then give the top title to the top one percent, second title to the next three percent, and third title to the next ten percent. You must play forty event games over the two years to qualify. Over the next two years you can try to get an even better title, but you can never go backwards from the highest title you achieved.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Eltripas on Mar 11^th, 2010, 6:13pm

1. What should the titles be? Should we use word titles (like "master") or number titles (like dan 3).
I like word titles better.

2. Should developer bots also be eligible to receive titles?
See number five

3. Should women have different titles than men?
No

4. Are the titles life long once granted, or does one need to maintain their skill to keep the title?
Life long.

5. What should be the achievement for the titles?
After reading previous post I would like to suggest that the titles be a combination of rating and World Championship achievements something like this:

Title A - maintain a rating of 1800 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 100 WHRE games and be finalist on a WC.

Title B - maintain a rating of 2000 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 150 WHRE games be in the top 3 of a WC.

Title C - 2200+ rating; 200+ games and be the champion of a WC.

Since the requirements need to be in the WC bots wouldn't have titles.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by novacat on Mar 12^th, 2010, 5:25am

1. Word titles.

2. I suggest giving bots a different title than humans as a compromise to appease either side of the argument. While some may see this as unfair to bots, we can give them really cool titles to make up for it. :D

3. No separate titles based on gender.

4. Lifelong.

5. I like Eltripas' idea of combining World Championship final standings with quality play over time. Separate titles should also be awarded for the defenders of humanity in the Arimaa Challenge. As for the bots, they can combine their final standings in the Computer Championship with the same requirements of quality of play over time. If a bot wins the Challenge, it can have a special title like "Crusher of Puny Earthlings." ;D

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Hippo on Mar 12^th, 2010, 6:32am

on 03/11/10 at 18:13:31, Eltripas wrote:

Title A - maintain a rating of 1800 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 100 WHRE games and be finalist on a WC.

Title B - maintain a rating of 2000 or more for 20 consecutive WHRE games and have played at least 150 WHRE games be in the top 3 of a WC.

Title C - 2200+ rating; 200+ games and be the champion of a WC.

Since the requirements need to be in the WC bots wouldn't have titles.

Seems to me the rating part of the proposal would be much easier compared to the WC part. Meaning ... who would be able to achieve the WC part would probably have no problems to fullfill the rating part (if intended), especially when inflation in the rating of the best players could be expected.

I thing the limits should be somehow dynamically dependent on WHRE distribution (of course it depends on what is counted for WHRE).

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by megajester on Mar 12^th, 2010, 11:02am

For titles we have two options really, choose generic master/grandmaster type titles or have themed rankings.

"Master" etc. might seem a bit plain. It could make us sound a lot like chess. Not that we have anything against chess, but we want to have a more independent image I think (not "just another chess variant"). So we would have to come up with something unique. I haven't been able to come up with much. Expert - Master - Sage?

As for themed, all I can think of is abstract (like shape names, "dodecahedron" etc) which could be too geeky, or feudal/magic type rankings, which could end up sounding like Star Wars or Harry Potter :)

I think we could perhaps maintain the Arimaa "animal" theme in choosing the titles. This would be consistent, would the game international, and make Arimaa unique-yet-serious.

Perhaps something like the system in Chinese wushu?
Eagle - Tiger - Dragon?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Adanac on Mar 12^th, 2010, 11:41am

Using rough estimates for ease of calculation, let’s assume there are 100,000,000 chess players in the world of various skills, though of course only a small percentage of those would be active tournament players. There are roughly 1000 Grandmasters (GM) and 3000 International Masters (IM) so perhaps 1 out of 100,000 chess players are GMs (and this is considered a watered down title !!) and 3 out of 100,000 are IMs. If we keep those ratios constant for Arimaa then we’ll need 100,000 players before we should award our first GM title. Keeping that in mind, if 8 different titles are eventually going to be awarded then perhaps we should only establish half of them right now and gradually phase in the 4 highest titles when the player pool grows 100 times larger or 10,000 times larger, or whatever is decided upon. Yes, some of our current players will eventually obtain those higher titles but we'll need a much larger player pool to lend them greater legitimacy. Remember, only 16 people worldwide signed up for the World Championship. We're still a tiny community.

Also, I’d prefer to wait until a few Chess Grandmasters or any dan professional Go players takes up Arimaa so that we can get a better sense of what type of rating an Arimaa Grandmaster should have. If Magnus Carlsen, or any other young super-genius, should ever decide to study Arimaa I’m sure he would attain a 3000+ rating within a year or two (based upon how quickly & easily he surpassed 99.999% of the rest of the chess world while still in his pre-teens). But if we’ve already handed out lifetime Master Titles to players that are a thousand points lower-rated then we’d have a huge chasm in our Master categories, and we’ll have a lot of people holding meaningless titles. I strongly believe that it’s best to be cautious about handing out lifetime titles and the Arimaa community will need to be many, many, many times larger before we get a good sense of what rating a “Master” player is (or “Sage”, “Dragon”, or “Guru” or whatever it will be).

PS. I really like Megajester's suggested Eagle - Tiger - Dragon titles because they fit the Arimaa theme 8) But for the highest possible title, I still like the idea of Master or Grandmaster because it will be a familiar term for the rest of the world.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Mar 12^th, 2010, 2:15pm

Well, there are only 7,000,000 FIDE members, so fully 1 out of 7000 members is a GM. I'm not sure what is comparable to "membership" for us, maybe being on the WHR active list, in which case we have 100 members. So we only need to grow 70x before having a grandmaster. :D

OK, Adanac, I take your point about being very sparing with titles at present. If we consider the chess GM title to be watered down, then giving our highest title to 1% of the players would make it seem wacky. This increases the attractiveness of my option (A) in my mind, i.e. starting with lower titles we can give out now and reserving higher titles for the future.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Nombril on Mar 12^th, 2010, 8:30pm

I don't have any familiarity with other titles, so I'm not sure what the normal procedure is. A couple of things that puzzle me:

Why would the titles be contingent on the WC - you can just state the fact that they won, or their record, etc.

Why use raw scores when we expect the scale to slide? Why not percentile?

Why shouldn't bots be given titles? They are allowed to entered tournaments, and seem to be fairly well personified in our discussions.

(Hmm, I think you were looking for answers to your questions, not more questions! ;D )

Instead of titles that will be used "forever", why not have a set of titles that are given out just for the next 5-10 years as Arimaa continues to grow? This would recognize the difficulty in developing strategy from the ground up. You could even consider including a community involvement aspect for the requirements, indicating that the person has supported the growth of the Arimaa community as well. (Of course, this is very subjective...but I think we all trust Omar's judgment.)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by chessandgo on Mar 13^th, 2010, 2:01am

I think there could be two aims to awarding titles:

1) Giving an incentive to players to play more HH games / enter more official events, and make the guys who get titles proud.

2) Set up milestones marking important and time lasting achievement in playing level.

We are way too small a community to go for 2). I am (for a couple more days) Arimaa World Champion, but I could as well say I am champion of 18, a third of which was Omar's family. I am actually very proud to be, so I'll smile happily whenever someone sneers when I say I am arimaa World Champ, but such has nothing in common with being a Chess Grandmaster or a go professional. I read in wikipedia that official GM titles were first awarded in 1950, and I think that Botvinnik, Smyslov or Bronstein would still hold their own well in nowadays chess tournaments, and honor their GM title. I am not sure when go pro dan ranks were officially created, but for example Honinbo Shusaku, 7dan, who lived in the middle of the 19th century and belongs to a line of "Honinbo", which is now a major title awarded through a yearly tournament in Japan, is still considered a great go player. His games are still studied, and he would very likely not be ridiculous if he was playing against some current pros.

We do not have the legitimacy in my opinion to award "GM"-like titles which are supposed to prove a certain level of mastery. I would say that achieving such a title should mean being somewhere far along the road to perfect play. Like meaning that spectators would enjoy watching a game between a chess GM or a go pro and a perfect player, that it wouldn't be a meaningless slaughter. Also, you need to single out players within a large pool of players to be have some legitimacy in the sense of 2). In arimaa we don't.

So I'd support the idea of titles if they are intended as 1). We wouldn't need to worry about what titles would be awarded when the community has grown by a factor 1000, because those titles would have a different purpose anyway. I'd be even more in favour of an official Postal Tournament awarding a Postal Champion title, and if we continue to have WC prelims and finals we could have a WC Finalist title.

Btw, I like Eagle, Tiger and Dragon :)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by megajester on Mar 13^th, 2010, 5:55am

As I understand it we're trying to reward commitment to the game and contribution to the community as much as achievement. Basically if I'm an Arimaa Eagle, Tiger or Dragon this should tell you I'm a card-carrying member, one of the experts around here, a battle-hardened veteran. Maybe the game will move forward, and a 2030 Dragon will thrash a 2010 Dragon hollow. But we don't think less of Newton just because Einstein came along and found something better. He was the king of his time and history will always remember him as a king...

So I think basing the titles on HvH games is a good idea. Basing "lifelong" titles on absolute ratings will devalue the title over time, so we could base them on relative ratings, ie relative to the world's highest rated player (WHRP).

You can play around with number of games, length of period and relative ratings, but you get the general idea:

Eagle: 20 HvH wins/games over a 6 month period, against players within 1500 points of WHRP.

Tiger: 30 HvH wins/games over a 9 month period, against players within 1000 points of WHRP.

Dragon: 35 HvH wins/games over an 12 month period, against players within 500 points of WHRP.

(These titles would be independent of one another. So someone who already meets the criteria for Tiger becomes an instant Tiger. The same games used to win one title can be used for another, so if I'm a fresh Eagle and I work hard I should be able to make Tiger in 3 months. But if I take a break from arimaa, the games from the beginning of the 6 months when I won Eagle won't count towards my Tiger.)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 13^th, 2010, 9:52am

Wow, thanks for all the all the comments. I definitely sense some concern about giving out titles when the size of the player pool is not big enough. I definitely agree that we cannot compare these titles to be nearly as rigorous or meaningful as the titles given in more established games like Chess or Go. The most fundamental reason being that our titles are based on games played online as opposed to games played over-the-board (OTB). It does seem a bit premature to give lifetime titles when the source of the moves can't even be verified. So perhaps we should be careful not to use too grand of title names to avoid confusion with similar titles used in other games and also to reserve such titles for use later when an official organization to oversee offline games is in place.

After reading The_Jeh's comment noting the distinction between titles and classifications, I think we might be safer to just use classifications right now. The key difference being that a classification is not granted for life and can be lost if not maintained. Also with classifications I don't think there would be any objection to letting bots be classified along with humans or any need to distinguish between genders.

Classifications typically have very boring names like "class A", "class B", and so forth, but I like megajester suggestion about using themed names and using a theme related to Arimaa.

So here what I am considering:

To be eligible for a classification one must play a minimum of 100 event games (event games are always rated games) over a period of 3 years. To maintain the eligibility one must play a minimum of 100 event games over a period of 4 years. I am open to adjusting these parameters.

The levels of classifications would be:
1400 - silver rabbit
1500 - silver cat
1600 - silver dog
1700 - silver horse
1800 - silver camel
1900 - silver elephant
2000 - gold rabbit
2200 - gold cat
2400 - gold dog
2600 - gold horse
2800 - gold camel
3000 - gold elephant
3200 - platinum rabbit
so on

Must have a WHRE rating in or above the class rating level for 10 consecutive event games to enter the class. A player is removed from the class if for 10 consecutive event games the WHRE rating is below the class rating level. I wanted the classifications to have some stability so that one is not jumping in an out of a class too easily.

I wanted the gold level to start at 2000 and used 200 points separation between the classes since that is what is generally considered a class difference (a winning probability of 76%). I would be willing to consider using a class separation of about 167 points (a winning probability of 72%) to make the platinum classes start at 3000. I purposely choose the silver levels to be only 100 points apart since 200 points would put the lower classes at levels that would not be very useful. Also it allows faster movement through the beginning classes.

If this system achieves the goal of getting more muggles (human players) and pokemons (developer bots) to join in events games than I would consider it a big success :-)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Mar 13^th, 2010, 10:15am

Hmmm, if you asked me which was a higher title, gold rabbit or silver cat, I would have thought that being a cat was better, because the silver cat can push the gold rabbit around.

Also it seems weird to me to keep with only Arimaa animals but introduce a non-Arimaa color (platinum). Couldn't we make do with twelve classifications corresponding to the twelve animals?

No achievement yet - silver rabbit
1400 - gold rabbit
1600 - silver cat
1800 - gold cat
2000 - silver dog
2200 - gold dog
2400 - silver horse
2600 - gold horse
2800 - silver camel
3000 - gold camel
3200 - silver elephant
3400 - gold elephant

I don't think we need 100-point baby steps at the start of the scale. That's another form of watering down titles; make each step easier to achieve so that players have more chance to feel good, but in the mean time you have made the differences between classifications less meaningful, so who cares? Fewer steps means that each step is a genuine achievement. Also the notion of class-interval at 200 rating points is well established from chess, so sticking with their intervals will correspond to existing intuition.

This scale uses only the twelve animals, and it won't wear out until someone gets to 3600 and needs a new classification; if that ever happens it will be far enough in the future that we might want to reassess everything anyway.

It would be great to display the miniature piece icon by the player names in the game room listing. Everyone gets to be at least silver rabbit, but I'll bet people would start participating in events just to get a higher animal.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by zhanrnl on Mar 13^th, 2010, 3:38pm

I think Fritz's ranking system would make more sense; I also think Silver Cat should be higher than Gold Rabbit. But Omar's ranking qualifications sound reasonable to me.

I also like miniature piece icons, and I agree that would be greater motivation to play more HH games, at least for me.

Omar: plural of "Pokemon" is "Pokemon" :)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by The_Jeh on Mar 13^th, 2010, 8:22pm

on 03/13/10 at 09:52:41, omar wrote:

To be eligible for a classification one must play a minimum of 100 event games (event games are always rated games) over a period of 3 years. To maintain the eligibility one must play a minimum of 100 event games over a period of 4 years. I am open to adjusting these parameters.

I note that only four players have played 100 event games at all: Omar, Fritzlein, Adanac, and (apparently) bot_ArimaaScoreP1. Surely your proposal should be relaxed a bit? Or are we planning on having that many more event games in future?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Eltripas on Mar 13^th, 2010, 8:49pm

on 03/13/10 at 20:22:06, The_Jeh wrote:

Where do you saw the number of event games each player has?

I also think it should be more relaxed, maybe 60 games?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 14^th, 2010, 7:51am

on 03/13/10 at 10:15:08, Fritzlein wrote:

Hmmm, if you asked me which was a higher title, gold rabbit or silver cat, I would have thought that being a cat was better, because the silver cat can push the gold rabbit around.

Yes, a cat is stronger than a rabbit, but a gold rabbit is worth more than a silver cat in terms of monetary value :-) If you think of it in terms of awards my ordering makes sense. Would you rather have a gold rabbit trophy or a silver elephant trophy? The gold rabbit would definitely be more valuable. Within the same material a cat would be more valuable than a rabbit because the cat would be bigger in size and require more material.

Also using the value of the material for the primary ordering makes it easier to extend the scale if we ever needed to by adding different materials.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 14^th, 2010, 7:57am

on 03/13/10 at 20:22:06, The_Jeh wrote:

Actually only Fritzlein and Omar have over 100 games. You have to use WHRE list.
http://home.scarlet.be/~woh/whr/whre.htm
But even then we may not have enough games in the last three years. Maybe we should reduce the number of games required to 50.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Janzert on Mar 14^th, 2010, 8:51am

I'd rather not have either player color out rank the other, even in the minor way that Fritzlein's ordering does. But the Fritzlein ordering where at least a silver dog out ranks a gold cat is much, much better than having the gold rabbit above the silver elephant. Unfortunately I can't really think of alternate colors that would have as widely known implicit ranking as gold and silver. :(

Janzert

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Eltripas on Mar 14^th, 2010, 9:14am

on 03/14/10 at 07:57:36, omar wrote:

That list is not updated, if you count this year games, The_Jeh is right.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Mar 14^th, 2010, 9:33am

on 03/14/10 at 07:51:50, omar wrote:

If you think of it in terms of awards my ordering makes sense.

Sure you can explain ranks in terms of weights of precious metals, but if you choose something unintuitive, you're going to be spend a lot of time telling people, "If you think of it my way it makes sense." Then you'll also have to explain to them when a gold rabbit can't push a silver elephant even though its monetary value is greater. :P

Actually I agree with Janzert that we should be thinking only in game terms, in which case gold doesn't even outrank silver for the same animals, but then we have only six ranks, and we probably need more.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by megajester on Mar 14^th, 2010, 10:59am

Why not six ranks?

Rabbit 1500+
Cat 1800+
Dog 2100+
Horse 2400+
Camel 2700+
Elephant 3000+

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Tuks on Mar 14^th, 2010, 11:07am

i like the silver rabbit gold rabbit silver cat gold cat ranking, that makes the most sense

hey woh, can you update the event whr, i have at least 10 more games, maybe we should make it 50, lots of people have about 50 and those who dont will be inspired to take part in at least the important events

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 14^th, 2010, 11:44am

I was just talking to Naveed about this and he thinks using animal names for the classes seems kind of silly. He also mentioned that in some countries like India people would not be proud to say they are in the dog class/rank regardless of whether it is silver, gold or platinum. He is suggesting we use words like: beginner, intermediate, advanced or just stick to letters.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Mar 14^th, 2010, 3:09pm

on 03/14/10 at 11:44:13, omar wrote:

He is suggesting we use words like: beginner, intermediate, advanced or just stick to letters.

Even better, lets just use numbers! Like, 1500, 1700, 1900, etc.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Eltripas on Mar 14^th, 2010, 3:55pm

on 03/14/10 at 11:44:13, omar wrote:

The animals are ok, if some people are not comfortable with being in a dog rank, they should just play more to get in the next rank.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by docreason on Mar 14^th, 2010, 4:43pm

Don't they use a Dan system for martial arts and the game of Go? I would be up for a uniformed standard for names across a range of games to be adopted. Definitely would be interested in people directing IAGO on what it should do as far as titles go.

I also would like to see there be forms of milestones to make a note of people accomplishing, or giving people that are like achievements or trophies on the XBox 360 and PS3 respectively.

As far as titles go, I see this done for Go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_%28game%29#Ranks_and_ratings

And Shogi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shogi#Player_ranking_and_handicaps

Kyu and Dan.

Xiangqi apparently follows chess:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiangqi#Rankings

Here is Chess:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess#Titles_and_rankings

Looking at Master and Grand Master.

I am personally more in favor of seeing a Kyu/Dan Ranking and title for uniformity. At least this could be used for discussion amongs different games that are played. Each game community should be able to do what it wants among itself.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 14^th, 2010, 7:10pm

Another thought on names for the classes. How about items typically made from gold or silver. Things like: ring, coin, chain, charm, medal, star, nugget, bar, etc. I think players would be proud to say they hold a silver medal or gold ring in Arimaa. So maybe something like:

2000 - gold nugget
2200 - gold ring
2400 - gold coin
2600 - gold charm
2800 - gold medal

The 1000's can be covered by similar silver awards and 3000's by similar platinum awards (if we ever get to that).

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by docreason on Mar 14^th, 2010, 9:16pm

Hey, maybe you could go with something like the fruit from Pac-Man :-)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by chessandgo on Mar 15^th, 2010, 12:56am

docreason: dan/kuy is a an alternative system to point ratings, I don't think it'd fulfil the titles aims.

And I think you should consider decorelating the titles more from the ratings Omar. With your proposals, everybody's titles will be essentially guessable from their rating.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by RonWeasley on Mar 15^th, 2010, 4:33am

I'm still waiting for the Lord of the Rings themed suggestion. In the meantime, try this:

Goblin
Boggart
House-elf
Ghost
Centaur
Werewolf
Giant
Basilisk
Dementor

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 15^th, 2010, 6:36am

on 03/15/10 at 00:56:49, chessandgo wrote:

Jean, these are not titles but rather classifications. Though I started out thinking they would be titles, but upon further consideration decided that titles should be awarded based on OTB games. See my posting of March 13th.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Mar 15^th, 2010, 6:40am

on 03/15/10 at 04:33:39, RonWeasley wrote:

I'm still waiting for the Lord of the Rings themed suggestion.

RW did you see the March 10th posting by Meneldor in this thread:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=talk;action=display;num=1260224347

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by chessandgo on Mar 15^th, 2010, 7:39am

on 03/15/10 at 06:36:03, omar wrote:

oh, ok.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by RonWeasley on Mar 15^th, 2010, 8:03am

on 03/15/10 at 06:40:24, omar wrote:

RW did you see the March 10th posting by Meneldor in this thread:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=talk;action=display;num=1260224347

Yes. I wondered why it took so long for someone to suggest this. The other commonly pervasive theme in the US is Civil War characters.

It may surprise people that for title names, I prefer them to be theme neutral, like chess, because I look at arimaa like chess. The piece theme is incidental to the game and the titles. This in contrast to internet game accounts where I think themes can be fun.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by docreason on Mar 15^th, 2010, 5:35pm

on 03/15/10 at 00:56:49, chessandgo wrote:

I believe you can choose whatever way you for each rank. You could assign an Elo or other point system to the rank.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by JoeHead on Mar 16^th, 2010, 2:24am

Think again about titles as animals or mythological beasts. This is really not going to raise credit to arimaa.
It is childish. If you say that you are GrandMaster - the word itself is much much stronger in peoples eyes than if you say you are Gold Camel.
If you talk with people who are new to arimaa "Gold Camel" means almost nothing, but grandmaster really raises respect for you.
The titles should bring respect and seriousity. Not to be just funny names of some mythological figures.
If we want arimaa to be generally recognised as a real mental sport than we have to have some kind of unumbiguous titles for achievements.
In my present state I cant think of better titles than something like -master-.
I am strongly against titles as animals, myths, things - this just lower arimaa status as a real mental sport and brings it into category of tictactoe,ludo. These games are just games, nothing serious.
We want to creat real mental sport. Keep that in mind, please.

:-)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by docreason on Mar 16^th, 2010, 8:51am

I think when you are looking to decide on the naming, consider several things:
* What are other games using? Trying to be close to what is out there helps with comparison purposes.
* What would help lead to an increased interest in Arimaa? What would be get people more interested in Arimaa if you went with it as titles?

Would going with cute names lend towards these ends? If so, go with them. If not, then don't. Think about the growth of your game in ALL things you do.

I say also that not enough of this is done. There is also an overemphasis on being taken "seriously". Yes, you want respect for what you do, BUT you also want to entertain people. I would say mirroring what they do with the Asian mindsports games, along the line of Dan rating, which mirrors martial arts is something cool, that accomplishes both.

Just my 2 cents...

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Hippo on Mar 16^th, 2010, 9:16am

Let us use animal titles. But don't forget to include hippo as the most dangerous animal :D.

No seriously I don't thing there is time for making the titles.
Their main reason is when you met someone unknown to you, knowing his "title" informs you what skill level to expect.

The ratings (except hanzack's) does the same well. And we know each other well (at least 30 most active players) ... so waiting for arimaa be played by 100000 active players seems to be good choice.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by starjots on Apr 1^st, 2010, 3:28am

I'd have to agree with those saying animal titles may come off as childish.

If you go that route though, the pieces give you six gradations which should be more than enough and would make perfect sense to arimaa players.

A second way would be to borrow from Chess, which looks like it has four titles, candidate master, master, international master, grandmaster and tack 'arimaa' onto the front end (e.g., Arimaa Master). This sounds nice and solid.

Given the small base but the hope that the game will continue to grow, it might be good just to initially have a few ACMs and maybe AMs, leaving the top two rank or three ranks unfilled for now.

-- as far as machines go, i'd give them slightly different names such as Arimaa Machine Master, Arimaa Machine Grandmaster etc - which really has that Borg quality to it.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 1^st, 2010, 8:36am

on 03/16/10 at 09:16:27, Hippo wrote:

It think the main reason for titles on Arimaa.com will be to provide an incentive for players to participate in event games. It will also push us to provide more opportunities for event games. The titles on Arimaa.com will not mean the same as real world chess titles. For Arimaa titles of that caliber we should wait until there are physical tournaments, an official Arimaa organization and many more players. But we don't need to wait for that for Arimaa.com titles.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 1^st, 2010, 8:43am

on 04/01/10 at 03:28:40, starjots wrote:

A second way would be to borrow from Chess, which looks like it has four titles, candidate master, master, international master, grandmaster and tack 'arimaa' onto the front end (e.g., Arimaa Master). This sounds nice and solid.

I am tending to not want to use title names like those given by official chess and Go organizations on Arimaa.com so that we don't dilute the meaning of those titles and also reserve such names to be given later by an official Arimaa organization.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com classes
Post by omar on Apr 1^st, 2010, 10:20am

Some more thoughts on the classifications:

1. I think it is important to have class ranks which are easily understood. Although using Arimaa animal names, objects or characters is clever, it is not good at conveying the order to anyone who is not familiar. So I'm tending to prefer number over names. Maybe something like the rating divided by 200 would be the class rank. So if you played enough event games to establish that your WHRE rating is above 1800 then you would be a class 9 Arimaa player.

2. I like the idea of anyone being able to earn a class rank regardless of what their ability is. Using numbers makes it possible for anyone to earn a class rank as long as they have played enough games.

3. I want an established component to the class rank as well to signifying how many event games you have played. I might never get higher than a class 10, but by playing more event games I can become a class 10 gold player rather than a class 10 silver player. To add a silver distinction you have to play 250 games, 500 for gold, 750 for diamond, and 1000 for platinum. These distinctions are life time achievements and are not lost even though your class rank can go down if you don't play as well.

To be eligible for a classification one must play at least 100 event games (event games are always rated games) within a period of 3 years. To maintain the eligibility one must play a minimum of 100 event games over a period of 4 years. A player must have a WHRE rating in or above the class rating level for 10 consecutive event games to enter the class. A player is removed from the class if for 10 consecutive event games the WHRE rating is below the class rating level.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by megajester on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 7:47am

on 04/01/10 at 08:36:48, omar wrote:

It think the main reason for titles on Arimaa.com will be to provide an incentive for players to participate in event games.

I think I know why you want to say 100 event games over 3 years, you want the titles to say something about the player's commitment to the game. But as a new player, the thought of having to wait 3 years for any kind of recognition is not an incentive, in fact it's rather off-putting. I don't know what will happen in my life even one year from now. What if I work my socks off for 2 years and then something happens to me that stops me from playing for months? The pay-off is too far away to make it something to purposefully work towards.

Why not make it 1 year, or 6 months even? I can see ahead 6 months. Knowing I could get a title 6 months from now if I work hard at it is exciting instead of disappointing. And my title would still prove my commitment, especially seeing as I can only keep the title if I keep on playing.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 10:21am

on 04/02/10 at 07:47:47, megajester wrote:

Why not make it 1 year, or 6 months even? I can see ahead 6 months. Knowing I could get a title 6 months from now if I work hard at it is exciting instead of disappointing. And my title would still prove my commitment, especially seeing as I can only keep the title if I keep on playing.

Maybe I didn't say it right, but I didn't mean that one must wait 3 years before being eligible. What I meant is that if I pull up a players history of event games for the last 3 years there should be at least 100 games played to earn a classification. Once it is earned then to maintain it there should be 100 games in the last 4 years of history.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Sconibulus on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 10:33am

How many event games are there a year? It seems like you can expect maybe 5-10 from participating in the world championship, another dozen from the postal mixer, and maybe this year another dozen from the world league.

Throw in maybe 15 more from one-day tournaments and the like, and you've still only got about 50 games in a year if you participate in everything.

Is my math wrong, or are there things I'm not counting? If not, I think 100 games over three years would require a fair amount of luck to be available that often.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Eltripas on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 10:36am

on 04/02/10 at 10:33:36, Sconibulus wrote:

Autopostal games are event games.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by megajester on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 11:32am

Would it work to shorten the timeframes and still maintain the same ratios? For example, instead of say "100 games within the past 3 years" say "50 within the past 18 months".

In any case I think it's a great way to get us all thinking of new events...

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 5:30pm

on 04/02/10 at 10:33:36, Sconibulus wrote:

Yes, maybe 100 is too high. Perhaps 50 in 3 year to become eligible and 50 in 4 years to maintain might be more reasonable.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Sconibulus on Apr 2^nd, 2010, 6:49pm

Actually, if autopostals count than 100 doesn't seem too difficult, you could easily get through a couple dozen of them in a year.

That being said, if your change of heart isn't at all related to my faulty maths, smaller requirements might not be so bad... although maybe the ratings wouldn't be all that accurate necessarily after only 50 games...

Maybe we'd like multiple criterion; at least 100 HvH games in the past 3 years, at least 50 of which must be event games.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Tuks on Apr 13^th, 2010, 9:58am

how about making titles based on ranking?

that would truly distinguish a person based on how good that generation is, everyone knows that chess masters now would beat chess masters, or even grandmasters 100 years ago but at the time they were the best and didn't have the opportunities to study the games as thoroughly as people do now (another difference is that there probably wasn't much of a reward for being the best back then, but now you can enter huge tournaments, etc.)

or that could be a separate title maybe

as the community of arimaa players grow there will be more and more people achieving higher ratings up to the point where titles based on ratings don't quite get the same recognition

obviously, there should be some ground requirements, like you cant be ranking top 10 for a whole day and then go back to #30 and expect to get lifetime title

ideas?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 14^th, 2010, 5:51am

Quote:

Maybe we'd like multiple criterion; at least 100 HvH games in the past 3 years, at least 50 of which must be event games.

Only event games would be used for the class rankings. Otherwise players could pick their opponents and more easily boost their ratings.

Quote:

Actually, if autopostals count than 100 doesn't seem too difficult, you could easily get through a couple dozen of them in a year.

I was thinking that we should probably have different categories of rankings for Blitz, Regular and Postal since there can often be 100's of rating point differences in a players performance depending on the speed of the game. Also some players tend to play only one type of game, so a 2000 rating based on mostly Blitz games can't really be compared to a 2000 rating based on mostly Postal games.

Quote:

That being said, if your change of heart isn't at all related to my faulty maths, smaller requirements might not be so bad... although maybe the ratings wouldn't be all that accurate necessarily after only 50 games...

I think the convergence rate for WHR is pretty fast. After 50 games I wonder how much the maximum change in a players rating can be. If it is not more than 30 points than I think it is pretty stable after 50 games. There is a bit of a trade-off between giving players a target that is not too hard to achieve and having the achievement be accurate.

Maybe we should also lower the number of games to earn a distinction. Maybe 100 games for silver, 200 for gold, 400 for diamond and 800 for platinum. Initially we should just pick something and after a few years of experience we will have a better idea on what to set these to.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Fritzlein on Apr 14^th, 2010, 6:01am

on 04/14/10 at 05:51:31, omar wrote:

Like the game room ratings, the stability of WHR depends both on how many games total one has played, and on how many games one has played recently. If you have played hundreds of HvH games, but none in the past six months, your WHR can still move pretty rapidly when you start playing again. My impression from watching rating changes in both systems is that WHR is presently less stable than game room ratings, but I think that is because WHR is based on many fewer games; I don't think it is an inherent property of the system.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 14^th, 2010, 6:08am

on 04/13/10 at 09:58:34, Tuks wrote:

For now I've decided to hold off on titles like 'master' because we don't want to dilute its meaning and importance. I think we need a larger community and face to face games before we start giving such titles. For now we are just considering a system where players can earn a classification based on ratings from event games.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 14^th, 2010, 9:31am

on 04/14/10 at 06:01:01, Fritzlein wrote:

Yes, I'm just wondering how much those fluctuations are. It would be interesting to do some simulations to find out.

Woh, I know you mentioned that there is a windows executable for calculating WHR, but I won't be able to run that on the arimaa.com server. If you could either post or email me the source, I would like to try some experiments. Thanks.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by tfitzgib on Apr 17^th, 2010, 7:00pm

I have an idea for avoiding the dilution of (non-event based) titles: limit them to a fraction of the community. This is an example of the ranking system I have in mind:

Top 20% of players: Noble

Top 10%: Ducal

Top 5%: Royal

Top 1%: Imperial

I will admit that aristocratic titles don't fit as well into the theme of the game as the proposed "Elephant/Tiger/Dragon" ranks, but I thought I'd throw out the idea.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by JoeHead on Apr 18^th, 2010, 7:45am

Hey, thank you. Great idea...

Lets see what will evolve from that...

Much better than rating as: animals, things, myth figures, numbers (its not clear wheather rating with nubmer 1 is higher than 9) and other ambiguous stuff...

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Apr 19^th, 2010, 8:31am

on 04/17/10 at 19:00:50, tfitzgib wrote:

Thanks for the suggestion. This will be something to consider when we think more about titles. For now I want to at least get a classification system in place. I like the idea of everyone being able to earn a class rank regardless of ability. Please see my posting of Apr 1st, 2010, 11:20am.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by AJRys on Apr 25^th, 2010, 4:32am

1. In my opinion, it would be better to have simple (i.e., non-gimmicky) words as titles. Though numbers are logical, they could be ambiguous to a newcomer. For example, would 9 be the highest (as in 9th dans), or would 1 be the highest (as in 1st class)? Personally I'd avoid using a title like "novice," just because it has a rather amateurish connotation.

2. I am entirely for awarding titles to bots. After all, one of the main purposes of Arimaa is to inspire someone to design a bot that is better than a human.

3. I don't think there should be separate titles for men and women. Anyway, in a game that's played primarily online, verifying everyone's gender could be a pain.

4. Though in principle I'd like titles to be awarded for life, I can imagine it eventually leading to absurdity in practice. For example, someone awarded a high-ranking title might end up easily beaten by a relative novice 20 years from now, when Arimaa theory is more developed and available for study.

5. I'd prefer awarding titles based on standard deviation. That would probably result in demotions at times as other players improve, but it would prevent the problem of a higher rank awarded early on becoming inferior to a lower rank awarded years later. I'd also suggest keeping the number of possible titles low--no more than eight. In the martial arts world, at least, awarding a lot of different ranks (some McDojos have about 20!) is an easy way to discredit your group.

The system I'd like most would look something like this:

Probationary: Any player who has played fewer than 50 event games.
General: Lower 68% of players. If there were a million players, the bottom 680,000 would be in the General class.
Advanced: Players between 68% and 95%. Out of a million players, there would be 270,000 Advanced-class players.
Expert: Players between 95.4% and 99.7%. Out of a million, there would be 43,000 Experts.
Master: Players between 99.7% and 99.99%. Out of a million, there would about 3,000 Masters.
Grandmaster: Players over 99.99%. Out of a million players, there would be only 100 Grandmasters.

The higher titles would be awarded only as the number of registered players allow. So for example the first Grandmaster title would be awarded as the 10,000th player is added. A second Grandmaster could not be named until there are 20,000 players.

In addition to this system, I think there should be an additional requirement for attaining the title of Master or Grandmaster. I would suggest that players apply for these titles when they reach a sufficient rating, and that applicants for these titles be reviewed by a panel, which would spend some time analyzing the applicant's recent games and contributions to Arimaa theory. Master rank would be awarded only to players who achieve the requisite rating and demonstrate considerable proficiency and creativity in the opinion of the panel. Grandmaster rank would be awarded only to players who achieve the required rating, demonstrate prodigious proficiency and creativity, and have made considerable contributions to Arimaa theory.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by JoeHead on May 13^th, 2010, 7:57am

I recommend titles according to computer game Heroes of Might and Magic 4.
Skills are divided into five absolutely clear categories:

Basic , Advanced, Expert, Master, Grandmaster.

Simple, easy to understand, clear who is stronger. What do we want more? Now just add rules how these titles are acquired. And maybe to adujust words "basic" and "advanced" to be clear that we are talking about people.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by Arimabuff on May 13^th, 2010, 8:44am

How about: rabbit, cat, dog, horse, camel and elephant?

A rabbit would be someone with little to none knowledge of the game and an elephant the equivalent of a grand master.

Plus it'd be a perfect metaphor. The stronger you get the more people you can push around. ;)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by JoeHead on May 15^th, 2010, 1:55am

I understand you. Your proposition is absolutely clear to me. I want the titles to be absolutely clear to anybody - even people outside arimma...

That is my main intention.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by clojure on Oct 2^nd, 2010, 6:46pm

Has there been any progress on this matter?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Oct 7^th, 2010, 12:21am

No further progress on this. We had a lot of good discussion and many people provided their views.

Just taking a bit of a break from this so that when I come back and look at it my ideas will seem foreign to me :-)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by starjots on Oct 13^th, 2010, 10:47am

on 05/13/10 at 08:44:30, Arimabuff wrote:

I really like this - nothing pretentious, absolutely clear and a lovely metaphor.

I'd venture that the proportions might be reasonable as well. From a base you choose for being qualified for a title (I'd submit even being a rabbit should be some sort of accomplishment - played minimum number of games etc.), the first 50% are rabbits, 12.5% cats, 12.5% dogs, 12.5% horses, 6.25% camels and 6.25% elephants.

If you take the Active Player list (50 games played) as your base and qualifying marker, I count ~480 players on the list. That would break out as:

Elephants - 30 2040+
Camels - 30 1860+
Horses - 60 1678+
Dogs - 60 1593+
Cats - 60 1524+
Rabbits - 240 < 1524 and 50 games played

When the player base is larger or whenever desired the Elephants can be further stratified either using conventional chess like titles or (weirdness incoming) a recursive naming structure.

Again, using active players, this would work out for the top tier as

Elephant Elephants (EEs) - 2 (guess who)
Camel Elephants (MEs) - 2
Horse Elephants (HEs) - 4
Dog Elephants (DEs) - 4
Cat Elephants (CEs) - 4
Rabbit Elephants (REs) - 14

You see, an EE is the top 1/16 of the top 1/16 or the top 1/256 qualifying players and so forth.

When the player base goes up by a factor of 16, stratify the EEs, rinse and repeat as needed.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by 722caasi on Oct 13^th, 2010, 6:45pm

I like this newest idea. I'd be an ED (rating 1670). Who could implement it?

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by starjots on Oct 14^th, 2010, 9:29am

on 10/13/10 at 18:45:22, 722caasi wrote:

I like this newest idea. I'd be an ED (rating 1670). Who could implement it?

No, you'd be a dog. I'd be a cat. Meow. We can all aspire to be elephants someday, but its not easy getting to the 'big' leagues :)

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by 722caasi on Oct 14^th, 2010, 6:08pm

I'd be an elephant dog under the recursive system. Actually, I'd be a cat horse now. As you can see, the recursiveness is confusing.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by clojure on Oct 14^th, 2010, 6:30pm

I think "real" titles should be achieved only with event games. That would make them more respectful and it would be harder to cheat the system. Also fast games are very different in nature than slow games.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by 722caasi on Oct 15^th, 2010, 12:04am

I would be in favor of multiple ratings, such as general (current), event, slow, fast/blitz, postal, etc. Each could have its own title.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Oct 15^th, 2010, 9:30am

on 10/14/10 at 18:30:28, clojure wrote:

I agree. I posted earlier in this thread that I don't think we can have titles until the playing population is larger and we have OTB games.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by qswanger on Oct 15^th, 2010, 9:56am

on 10/15/10 at 09:30:48, omar wrote:

... I don't think we can have titles until the playing population is larger and we have OTB games.

I am so ready and willing for this! I'd even be able if I only knew of and had opponents in my area. SO.... anyone in the Central NC area wanna help me organize OTB Arimaa games? I would love to be able to call this a club, but just getting 2-4 people together every blue moon would be a huge accomplishment, I think.
:-/

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by omar on Oct 18^th, 2010, 9:05am

on 10/15/10 at 09:56:17, qswanger wrote:

You can use the 'Local Players' link in the gameroom to get a list of players that are near you. I just added a new feature to send a message from the users profile page. So you can use this to contact them and try to get something going.

Title: Re: Arimaa.com titles
Post by clojure on Oct 18^th, 2010, 10:09am

on 10/18/10 at 09:05:29, omar wrote:

I just added a new feature to send a message from the users profile page. So you can use this to contact them and try to get something going.

Excellent! I have wished for this functionality.