I was confused, because when checking out scenario stats on the table, none of the scanarios seemed to be better-rated than 3.5 or 4.
Then I checked a game that I had just reported. Turns out I'm on the only one to have reported it (it's from Minsk). While I rated the scenario 8 (which was indicated as such), the table showed it rated as 4! AHA!
It seems that the table listing for game ratings is averaging, so that if two players are reported to <i>have played</i> a game, but only one <i>rates</i> the game, then the score is halved.
Am I reading this right? If so, is there any way to fix this so that a review of the lists would more accurately show Blitzers' ratings of scenarios?
Which scenario?
Anyway scns are rated from 1 to 5 (quality), entertaiment from 1 to 10 and balance from 4 up and down, 4 being ideally balanced.
There are problems in the way averages of the quality rating are calculated. Still not fixed and I have no idea when that will be done and by who.
But scns with an average of 3,5 to 4 have good ratings. But the average doesn't show correctly for all scns. For example on the CS ladder there are scns that have only ratings of 4 and 5 but the average shows 1 instead of 4,something :bang:
The best I can tell having watched the ratings, although it is a guess, is that the quality rating sticks in a -1 if no rating is given. Then this gets used in calculating the average quality rating, resulting in them being lower than the actual average. I may be wrong though, but it would make sense because I have seen a number of them at -2/-1 without an actual quality vote.
Rick
No that is not it. There is even less logic in it. :hissy: Some scns have a correct average rating and for some it can't be explained (well it can because Umbro who made the rating system corrected a few, but he seems to have disappeared).
See this one:
https://www.theblitz.club/scenarios/show...0&ladder=2
:conf:
Quote: Huibe wrote:
See this one:
https://www.theblitz.club/scenarios/show_f...p;ladder=2
Huib,
Seems this example is fine to me.
Balance = 28/6 = 4.67
Entertainment = 49/6 = 8.17
This math works for me.
Quote:Liebchen wrote:
Then I checked a game that I had just reported. Turns out I'm on the only one to have reported it (it's from Minsk). While I rated the scenario 8 (which was indicated as such), the table showed it rated as 4! AHA!
Liebchen,
This is the link to your posted game in the scenario DB.
https://www.theblitz.club/scenarios/show...8&ladder=3
There is only one vote I can see here and it is yours. The average = your only vote. No problem.
Dog Soldier
Dog Soldier Wrote:Huib,
Seems this example is fine to me.
Balance = 28/6 = 4.67
Entertainment = 49/6 = 8.17
This math works for me.
Dog Soldier
Look at the stars in the top of the screen: that is the average quality rating. 1 star while it never received less than 4. :conf:
This avg quality rating is what you see when you browse scns without zooming on them.
Liebchen,
Mystery solved......almost.
The rating on the scenario list is related to the (third question when posting a game result) in the tell us about your experience section. This a separate rating of 0-5 stars. If you notice the stars in the upper left hand corner of the scenario detail screen, this matches the rating column on the far right of the scenario listings.
Click on the stars in the scenario detail screen to see the separate ratings given that make up this score. For 0624_22a: Breakthrough at Parichi - [HTH], only one player has rated the scenario, (you might know him). He gave this scenario a three star rating.
I checked this on other scenarios that have more than one game report and the results work just fine. Now we get to Huib's question which is related to yours.
Huib,
To address your question I looked at several scenarios for different games. Again the detail scenario screen holds the key. On your scenario, "A Dutch Verdun", There are four players using the star ratings. (two 5's and two 4's). Normally this should rate a 4.5 (18/4). I noticed there were six players who have posted game results and only four of them used the star ratings system.
So the question becomes, how does the DB code handle a 0 or null rating from the other two players?
The first two players to post a game result are the ones not listed as using the star rating system. The system may not have existed at the time these posts were recorded. I checked other scenarios where the number of ratings was equal in both rating systems, yet the number of the rating did not add up to the average. So I think we can rule out 0 or null ratings as a factor input by players.
I checked a number of other games where the ratings did not seem to add up to the rating stated. There must be a glitch or corruption of the data somewhere, yet I was unable to find the pattern at this time.
Dog Soldier
BTW, someone asked if only the player who records the game can rate the scenario. Actually anyone can rate a scenario.
Got to the Scenarios link at the top of the main blitz page. In the boxes on the right there is the following categories:
G-4 - Supply
Scenarios
* Scenario Listings
* Search Scenarios
* Add Scenario Info to DB
* Calculate scenario SM
* Scenario Voting
Click on scenario voting and navigate to your scenario to rate..
Two things are needed.
1. You must be a blitz member to rate a scenario.
2. A word to the wise...You better not try to "stuff" the ballot box. We club officers can see everything....
Dog Soldier