|
On May 08 2010 10:10 Tinithor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 02:52 FortuneSyn wrote:On May 08 2010 02:38 craaaaack wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does. On May 08 2010 02:38 Talic_Zealot wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. It is in fact the same. Since you are not playing people that are only in your division. On May 08 2010 02:40 Kashll wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does... On May 08 2010 02:41 grubal wrote:On May 08 2010 02:40 Kashll wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does... This is correct. I approve. On May 08 2010 02:43 Alou wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. 1400 = 1400. You're not playing people in only your division so it is roughly the same. I mean some guy could hypothetically randomly get all the extremely good people, but it's honestly roughly the same. On May 08 2010 02:46 eugen1225 wrote:On May 08 2010 02:38 craaaaack wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does. What the man said. No it does not. Next time you play someone thats "even" with you, go check and see if his rating equals your own. Most of the time / 50% of the time it does not. the rating is basically there to show you how "good" you are relative to others in your division, not between divisions. If you are 200 pts below somebody in your division, that person is 200 pts better than you. That does not apply if you are in separate divisions. edit: proof (found by shinosai) http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23766800567&sid=5000&pageNo=2 The reason that when it says "Even" and you don't have the same amount of ladder points alot of the time is because that it doesn't match you up with other people based on ladder points. It has a sort of internal skill rating system thing it matches you by that no one sees.
yep, so your skill is equal to ur hidden rating not your pts
|
I droped out of some of my 5 placement matches, so i got into silver. When I moved up from bottom silver to top silver to top gold, I honestly could tell little to no difference in skill. I hope that upon release your league will actually reflect your skill level more. In my opinion the highest rank you can get into off of your placements should be silver or gold. To get any further you would have to show you good enough to compete there. I know i should just play more games and try to move up to platinum, but it is still annoying to play platinum players who are clearly worse than numerous players in gold/silver.
|
I agree. I feel that the highest league is something you should have to be promoted to, but don't they have something like that set up for release?
|
From what i understand the highest league (pro league) will be extreamly exclusive and not something that normal players will be able to get to. While im not sure about this it seems like what blizzard was implying.
|
I hope that is the case. I doubt I have much of a chance of ever getting in to such a league (I'm silver-quality right now, and perhaps gold with some more practice), but it should make finding good replays a lot easier.
|
Another problem i have with matchmaking is that the division one isn't necessarily better than division 100. Although division one has been around for way longer and therefore probably has some pretty good players, but when a new player finishes their placement matches or ranks up from a previous rank, they might get placed right at division one.
Keep in mind i am talking mostly about levels below platinum, as platinum players will most likely not leave their division. When release hits and there are thousands and thousands of divisions you will really have no idea what your overall rank is because you are in the exact same slot as thousands of people who could be better, or worse than you.
I would like to see some kind of overall ranking system besides just points.
I know this isn't a great example because of the huge difference in player size, but in ICCUP you can know your exact place in the ladder, something that I really liked.
|
On May 08 2010 10:56 xOchievax wrote:
Another problem i have with matchmaking is that the division one isn't necessarily better than division 100. Although division one has been around for way longer and therefore probably has some pretty good players, but when a new player finishes their placement matches or ranks up from a previous rank, they might get placed right at division one.
Keep in mind i am talking mostly about levels below platinum, as platinum players will most likely not leave their division. When release hits and there are thousands and thousands of divisions you will really have no idea what your overall rank is because you are in the exact same slot as thousands of people who could be better, or worse than you.
I would like to see some kind of overall ranking system besides just points.
I know this isn't a great example because of the huge difference in player size, but in ICCUP you can know your exact place in the ladder, something that I really liked.
As I've said in a few other posts, this rank is actually not very indicative of your overall place with so many people. The division-based rank is very close to what percentile you are of all of the players in your league, and so is a much better indicator of your relative rank in your league than a number like 3560/46031.
|
Has anyone discovered it division actually affects Rating? I used to hear things like divisions with more people would gain ELO at a different rate then divisions with less people or something like that.
|
On May 08 2010 11:03 Disastorm wrote:
Has anyone discovered it division actually affects Rating? I used to hear things like divisions with more people would gain ELO at a different rate then divisions with less people or something like that.
That would remove all meaning behind the ranks and, thus, the reason for using divisions, so I highly doubt that is the case.
|
|
|
On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1.
why would it be any different??
|
United States47024 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:29 FortuneSyn wrote:
yep, so your skill is equal to ur hidden rating not your pts
Over a long period of time, they level out. Your hidden rating fluctuates more than your point value in order to allow you to quickly find players at your own skill level even when you're slumping or streaking. When you level out to playing against players of your own skill level, the two match up.
So rating 1400 in division 1 might not the same as rating 1400 in division 54, but unless one of them has played significantly less games, or is playing inconsistently, they're probably pretty close, because their hidden rating has likely stabilized to correspond to their rating.
|
He just wants everyone to know hes rank 1 plat, thats why he made the thread LULZ
|
On May 08 2010 10:29 FortuneSyn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 10:10 Tinithor wrote:On May 08 2010 02:52 FortuneSyn wrote:On May 08 2010 02:38 craaaaack wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does. On May 08 2010 02:38 Talic_Zealot wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. It is in fact the same. Since you are not playing people that are only in your division. On May 08 2010 02:40 Kashll wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does... On May 08 2010 02:41 grubal wrote:On May 08 2010 02:40 Kashll wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does... This is correct. I approve. On May 08 2010 02:43 Alou wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. 1400 = 1400. You're not playing people in only your division so it is roughly the same. I mean some guy could hypothetically randomly get all the extremely good people, but it's honestly roughly the same. On May 08 2010 02:46 eugen1225 wrote:On May 08 2010 02:38 craaaaack wrote:On May 08 2010 02:36 FortuneSyn wrote:
It's a much better indication, but 1400 plat div54 still does not equal 1400 plat div1. Yes it does. What the man said. No it does not. Next time you play someone thats "even" with you, go check and see if his rating equals your own. Most of the time / 50% of the time it does not. the rating is basically there to show you how "good" you are relative to others in your division, not between divisions. If you are 200 pts below somebody in your division, that person is 200 pts better than you. That does not apply if you are in separate divisions. edit: proof (found by shinosai) http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23766800567&sid=5000&pageNo=2 The reason that when it says "Even" and you don't have the same amount of ladder points alot of the time is because that it doesn't match you up with other people based on ladder points. It has a sort of internal skill rating system thing it matches you by that no one sees. yep, so your skill is equal to ur hidden rating not your pts
that's what i think too. part of match making is based off hidden things....maybe even average APM might be a factor
|
I find this funny , i'm almost 1400 , and still copper , are there Golds with 1400 points?
the ladder is quite stupid... once you reach certain ELO you should be promoted or degraded to the next level.
|
On May 10 2010 05:22 terrordrone wrote:
that's what i think too. part of match making is based off hidden things....maybe even average APM might be a factor
I doubt it's anything so complicated - neither APM nor game score really reflect how well you play. From what I've noticed, the system just seems to factor in your current win streak and the level of people you've beaten / lost to in the last few games.
|
On May 10 2010 05:28 Meatloaf wrote:
I find this funny , i'm almost 1400 , and still copper , are there Golds with 1400 points?
the ladder is quite stupid... once you reach certain ELO you should be promoted or degraded to the next level.
The leagues seems to suggest this is true.
After looking at each league on Starcraftrankings.com, it seems that there's noone that has more than 1600 or more points. The top player in each league is:
gold: 1520
silver: 1468
bronze: 1530
copper: 1578
That's only a 110 point spread betwen the top player of each league. This at least suggests that once you reach the 1500-1600 range, you're probably about ready to be promoted
|
Rating shows you how good you really are, rank and divisions just give you a more remote and 'ral' goal to aspire to. It's easier to gun for no1 spot in your division, and strive to achieve that, it's also a bit more 'personal', than it would be to strive for let's say 1700 rating, or trying to be top 10 when you are in spot 2000.
i agree with this, its deffinitely a personal goal for someone to strive for the top of their division, as opposed to the rating system, which indicates skill level across all divisions in the league.
|
Regardless of how the system does work, I think we would all agree that it SHOULD work in a way where you can compare players across divisions. This could be done by a rating system that works like a lot of people seem to think it does (where 1400 in div 5 is same as 1400 in div 98), or some sort of ELO system.
By release Blizzard either needs to fix this shit (since there seems to be so many weird parts to the system) or fully explain every aspect of how it works.
Also, I think we can agree that even if rating isn't an exact match between divisions because somehow being in that division changes it (like the b.net post indicated), ratings are still a better indicator for skill than rank. This is obviously true because you can have a bad division and easily get ranks whereas the general pool will never be "bad" (tho u can hit some bad players) and will give you a much more realistic view of where you stand.
|
On May 10 2010 05:52 On_Slaught wrote:
Regardless of how the system does work, I think we would all agree that it SHOULD work in a way where you can compare players across divisions.
This will be the case. At the moment we're looking at very small timespans and a small amount of people playing the game, but when the game ships and we have very long seasons of several months (6+ usually) where every good platinum player will play a shitton of games, the rating in your platinum ladder should be a very good indicator of your hidden ELO rating. This will just be a case of a mathematical equilibrium that will balance itself out over time (albeit of course not perfectly).
At the moment (like Dustin Browder said) the average player plays about 20 games a week. Since the last reset that is what? 40-60 games on average per account? It does about equal the amount of games I see on accounts when I play (I'm ~1550 Platinum with about 80 games). That isn't even close to what a mathematically relevant sample size would be. When we have seasons where most active players have 300+ games on their accounts, that will be representable for the skill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
