Thanks! Sorry I started a new thread on the same thing.
I wasn't thinking along the lines of a ladder env. I don't think Strategy games lend themselves very well to that. What made me wonder if this could be done was a lot of my family plays Duplicate (aka Contract) Bridge with a couple of Life Masters in my family. This system earns points based on the size of the event as well as how well you do. (A better description is here:
http://www.acbl.org/details.asp?id=1831&PID=9069
(no bridge knowledge needed to understand this page).
The Elo system in Chess is a good example as well also being very strategic in play. I think 4X games like SE4 are more like bridge than like Chess though due to the incredible number of variables that get setup before a game even starts whereas Chess always begins the exact same way. This would be more analagous to Bridge where the card deal would be like Map placement, how racial points are used, starting systems values, etc.
I'm thinking everyone would generate points for playing but people who play a lot of games a long time would advance more quickly than casual players. This is very much like Bridge where people who travel to tournaments regularly (usually retirees) advance much more quickly than people who only play when regionals/sectionals are near them and time permits.
A formula would need to be built that takes into account starting resources, starting planets, starting racial points, starting research level (L, M, H) and research cost (L, M, H). I know a game that starts with Low tech, medium or High research cost, 2000 racial points and 1 planet will have much lower scores than one with (for ex.) Medium Tech, Low research costs, 5000 racial points, and 5 planets. There would need to be a ratio multiplier applied to the score to make the balance even.
I'm thinking along those lines anyway, but there might be an easier way: What are the experience points that accumalate during a game used for? Would this be an indicator of play level during any given game?
Anyway, I am rambling a little so I'll shut up now that I have thrown this out there for some more discussion.
Binford