• NCAA Football 13 - Online Rankings System Update

    EA SPORTS NCAA Football designer Michael Weisbecker has posted a new blog detailing the online ranking system and points earned from playing games and attaining wins, including some changes made post launch.

    Continue on to read the full blog from EA SPORTS.

    Hello, my name is Michael Weisbecker and I am one of the designers on NCAA Football 13. Recently, there have been some questions and concerns with online rankings and the points earned from head-to-head online games. I am here to give some insight into what we did, how it works, and to also outline a few post launch changes made.

    This year NCAA Football 13 switched our ranking system to be an Elo type ranking system. The Elo system calculates the relative skill of players and help match up players with a similar skill level. The original use for Elo was for chess rankings. Today, Elo is used for many different types of games, including other video games. In our previous system, a player could be very highly ranked on the boards with a losing or close to losing record if they played a large amount of games. The Elo system remedies that. In Elo, you can only rank up by winning.

    Here is a brief overview on how Elo works. Users have a number associated with their rating. Obviously, a higher number represents a better player based on the results of games played against other users. When two players match up, the winner will gain and the loser will lose a certain amount of points. The difference between the two player’s ratings determines how many points are won or lost by each player. The maximum number of points a player can win or lose in a Match is the “K factor.”

    Therefore, as an example, we will assume the K factor is 50 and we have two users Player A and Player B. All the numbers and results used are for the purpose of example and do not necessarily represent actual results from the game.

    If Player A and Player B have the exact same rank and are matched up, the winner will gain 25 points and the loser will lose 25 points.

    In the next examples, we assume Player A is ranked level 30 and Player B is ranked level 10.

    If Player A wins, they would only gain 10 points, Player B would only lose 10 points.

    If Player B wins, they would gain 40 points and Player A will lose 40 points.

    Since Player A is ranked higher than Player B, they are expected to win in a matchup between the two. Therefore, if Player A wins, they earn fewer points for the win. On the other side, if they lose, they lose more points than normal since they are going against expectations.

    Elo’s design is that over time, if users win more than they are expected, their rating will go up. Early on with an Elo type system, the rankings can fluctuate and be more volatile when a large number of players with varying skills are near the starting rank. Over time, players will reach their optimal rank as they play more games. The end goal is when two players with the same ranking are matched up, their skills are relatively equal and each player has a 50% chance of winning the game.

    Now that the game has been out for a little while, we looked at the feedback. Based on that, we made a few changes to the ranking system. First, we are updating the skill level thresholds. They will be more granular at the lower levels than they are now. Many players will see a significant jump in their level after playing their next online game. The second change is adding a slight point bonus for playing and completing a game. This means players will get slightly more points for a win slightly fewer points for a loss than they received previously. With these changes, lower ranked users might see themselves go up or down three, four, or even five levels after winning a head-to-head online game. This is normal for many of the lower levels and will stabilize over time as more games are played and they level up. The final change we did was to institute a point floor of 300. With the point floor, a user will not fall below 300 points if they lose a game. For any user that had less than 300 points now, it means you will not lose any points for a loss and still gain normal points for a win until you get above the 300 point floor.
    Comments 24 Comments
    1. SmoothPancakes's Avatar
      SmoothPancakes -
      Great, even more incentive for the East Room idiots to cheat and cheese.
    1. JBHuskers's Avatar
      JBHuskers -
    1. skipwondah33's Avatar
      skipwondah33 -
    1. xMrHitStickx904's Avatar
      xMrHitStickx904 -
      Cool, now my rank & stuff will look the way it should.
    1. I OU a Beatn's Avatar
      I OU a Beatn -
      I can't be the only one who finds this a bit ironic. They wanted to implement a system that relied more on skill rather than just awarding those who play a lot. Really? Is that why probably 80 out of the top 100 are either playing themselves for free wins and/or using the DC glitches and nothing is being done about it?

      I guess it's a nice update for those who actually care about that stuff. I never even look at my level or leaderboard rank so it doesn't affect me. I do know that before this fix that you would lose 10 points or so for every loss and only get 1 or 2 points per win, so you could be like 30-5 and still be a level 1.
    1. I OU a Beatn's Avatar
      I OU a Beatn -
      Played a game and won. Went from level 2 to level 12.
    1. JeffHCross's Avatar
      JeffHCross -
      FWIW, the Elo system is the exact same system Microsoft uses in their TrueSkill system, and is also used by Jeff Sagarin for his BCS rankings.
    1. CLW's Avatar
      CLW -
      Who cares? I haven't played a ranked game against a random person since the 05-06 NCAA days.
    1. JeffHCross's Avatar
      JeffHCross -
      I care more about the fact that they're using ELO than I do about what they're using it for. I enjoy seeing ELO at work.
    1. I OU a Beatn's Avatar
      I OU a Beatn -
      Quote Originally Posted by CLW View Post
      Who cares? I haven't played a ranked game against a random person since the 05-06 NCAA days.
      You're missing out. I get the most simulation style games possible by playing against random people. Press that little Play Now screen and you're in for pure football bliss.
    1. SmoothPancakes's Avatar
      SmoothPancakes -
      Quote Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn View Post
      You're missing out. I get the most simulation style games possible by playing against random people. Press that little Play Now screen and you're in for pure football bliss.
      Until they start goon kicking and all that other crap you talk about, as well as the age old methods of cheesing, handed down from father to son since the early days of NCAA Football.
    1. I OU a Beatn's Avatar
      I OU a Beatn -
      Just won another game and I'm already in the top 150. I'm pretty sure they messed it up again because I'm getting 20 points per win now. 6 wins and in the top 150? There's a guy that only has 4 more points than me and he's 50-7.

      Speaking of which and now that I've looked at the leaderboard, how the hell have people played over 200 games already? That's insane. I would think he's just free winning, but I know this guy and he's legit. That's crazy to think someone has played 200 games in a matter of 20 days(assuming he had Season Ticket). I've played like 25 and that's including against the CPU.
    1. xMrHitStickx904's Avatar
      xMrHitStickx904 -
      I get all types of good, SIM games vs. random people. It's not that hard to find at all. I'm 39-12, and 90% of games happened to have been of SIM variety. Just so happens I know how to play both & win the majority of the time. I think people get turned off just because of one bad game. EA needs to bring back Ranked & Hardcore Ranked games IMO. Those who wanted SIM played Ranked because of the fair play option that it presented. Hardcore was on Heisman, 4 min QTR & you could do anything. That by itself would help solve the problems aside from fixing glitches all together.
    1. xMrHitStickx904's Avatar
      xMrHitStickx904 -
      Quote Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn View Post
      You're missing out. I get the most simulation style games possible by playing against random people. Press that little Play Now screen and you're in for pure football bliss.
      Right. I played against the CPU yesterday & won like 45-3. It presents zero challenge to me.
    1. Big Blue's Avatar
      Big Blue -
      Out of the thirty games I have played online I have probably played only two people who play somewhat realistically. It's extremely annoying.
    1. MC1's Avatar
      MC1 -
      played a game, won....nothing!! EA Bites
    1. SCClassof93's Avatar
      SCClassof93 -
      Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
      I care more about the fact that they're using ELO than I do about what they're using it for. I enjoy seeing ELO at work.
      Could not resist
    1. SmoothPancakes's Avatar
      SmoothPancakes -
    1. JeffHCross's Avatar
      JeffHCross -
      Quote Originally Posted by xMrHitStickx904 View Post
      Right. I played against the CPU yesterday & won like 45-3. It presents zero challenge to me.
      Either A: Sliders
      or
      B: Teach me everything you know.

    1. CLW's Avatar
      CLW -
      Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
      Either A: Sliders
      or
      B: Teach me everything you know.

      Yeah with sliders you really can get a pretty fun game and not have to worry about the craziness that is random onliners. Just went .500 through 6 games this weekend against the CPU. But maybe I just suck?