The Elo System Should be Changed in DDO

I will now present my own rebuttals and show that "The DDO Elo system should be changed somehow" can't be defended. The DDO Elo systemIn his last round, my opponent claimed that the formula for the DDO Elo system is " D=100* (w+9L)/10W" and presents a source of someone answering a thread in the main forum. If you follow the link in the second post from the Pro's source (1), one can see another discussion. Here, the user Ore_Ele talks about how he was the one that created that formula, but he was not sure if it was coded like that. So there is uncertainty on how the system actually works in DDO. But even if that was the formula and we knew every detail of how it works, the problems mentioned by Pro are not caused by the rating system. Rebuttals1. Stopping noob snipersPro claims that reducing the constant "K" to 24 would solve both of the problems "a little bit". There are some issues with that:- The "100" in the formula is not the constant "K" from the Elo original formula. The formula presented by Pro follows the same principles of Elo, but it's not original Elo. There is no reason to think that the "100" was intended to be the constant from original Elo. - The source I presented doesn't talk about the DDO system. Just a quick comparison that will make any argument of Pro invalid, and a comparison that we all can see and know is that in the original Elo system, players start with 1400 points and in DDO, we start with 2000 points. Everything has bigger numbers in the DDO Elo system. So not only Pro has zero reasons to ask a reduction of the constant (which is probably not 100 anyway), but the formula may require a bigger number because those are the numbers used from the start. - The reason the source's claims are related to the difference of level between Chess grandmasters and non grandmasters. This has nothing to do with DDO so it can't be used as a reason to change the rating system. Other thing that Pro claims is that reducing this "K" will make noob sniper less efficient because they will receive less point. The problem with this is that everyone would be receiving less points. That means that the numbers will get smaller but the problems will still exist.2. Accurately displaying debating skillsHere pro claims that I did not explain why this is not a problem. I never said it was not a problem. I said that this was not caused by the Elo rating system because any other system would have the same problem. The reason of this is that the system needs fairness, that doesn't exist because any debater can choose his opponents to an extent and the system is more accurate the more debates there are, and having 10 debates or 20 debates per debater would make everything less accurate, but the system would be the same.3. Con's solutionI offered a solution, just to show some examples of things that can fix the problems Pro presented. I'm not advocating those solutions. Pro treated the different parts of my solution as little different solutions. The truth is that the parts of the solution are intended to work together. a. Matchmaking systemMy opponent claims that there is a matchmaking system because a debater has the option to limit and filter the challengers to get the opponents they want. But this is actually the problem. Different debaters debate with different groups of people. Of course the ratings will seem different, like they are not matching. I was talking about something like, if I had X Elo points I would be able to play only against debaters from x - 200 to x + 200 Elo points. This is just an example of the idea. b. Non rated debatesThis is not changing the Elo system. It's like saying that not using a back account is changing the banking system. There will be no change in the code of the site that controls the Elo rating system for DDO. It will just add the option of a debate at doesn't use that system. It is as simple as that. c. Don't let noobs debateAgain, this is part of the whole solution. Of course not all the "noobs" are going to improve after some debates against other noobs, but this is giving experience to some of the new debaters and works as a filter for the rated debates. How? Simple. A lot of new users have only one debate where they forfeit all the rounds and never come back. This will not be part of rated debates anymore, and it will not affect the accuracy of the points. d. Don't count the ffWhat I meant here is that full forfeitures should not be counted. If 2 users are debating and one of them forfeits one round, of course it should be penalized with points of conduct for the debate, but if there is a all-rounds-forfeiture, then there is no reason to give points to the winner because it would affect accuracy also. New argument Changes in the code requires paid workBecause Pro is not able to show what should be changed and how it would affect the site, we should have to make a research and understand how to solve those problems and force the solutions in the rating system. Then developers should write code that makes the system work in the site. Those developers should be payed for their work. This is not a good method. Unless Pro is able to show exactly where the problem is and that we should necessarily change that thing, then we should not try to do it. ConclusionPro was not able to present a compelling case for a change in the DDO Elo system. All the problems he presented are caused by other parts of the site or behavior in the community. No other rating system would exist without of those problems. Unless Pro is able to show a rating system that solve those problems and why, then the resolution is negated. Thanks. Vote Con. Source1. . http://www.debate.org...