EPTStop saying "I'm rank 5 platinum". - Page 9
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 08:55 kzn wrote: Oh. Well in that case ratings are rather more comparable, but there's still the possible issue of different divisions being full of much higher quality players than another. Basically divisions by their very nature cast doubt on rating comparisons. The pop cap removes most of the issue though. Well, since the matchmaking system doesn't take your division into account I can't imagine how being in a division with less skilled players would matter at all. By their very nature you'll have a division with someone who's bad relative to the total population of the league and someone who is very good relative to the total population of the league. There may be some overlap, which I think is what you were getting at, but it will be very minor in the grand scheme of things - in the cases in which the top two players are both, perhaps, top 1% of the league, their rating will be more reliable forms of comparison between the two players than their rank. Again, though, a top 1% player will more than likely have rank 1 anyway. | ||
|
Gallimatias
France95 Posts
Being ranked against people that are not playing is heart breaking and has made me feel like somewhat of a fool. "I guess I shouldn't be playing, nobody else this bad is". I do think that low numbered divisions are better btw. Not by purpose but simply because they were created earlier and people that reached platinum the first few weeks are generally better than people only reaching it right now. | ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 08:59 Sentient wrote: This post makes me wonder: Why doesn't Blizzard list your percentile for both your league only and all leagues combined. A player could see he or she is rank #3 platinum, 95%ile overall, but only 50%ile for platinum league. It would make this whole mess a lot better overnight. By listing percentiles, you avoid the despair of seeing #13525/1345829 total players, and the system still has the intended psychological effect of competing out of 100 people. I'm not sure you're using percentiles in the correct way here. Someone who is rank 3 platinum over a long period of time will be in, I suppose, the 97th percentile or the top 3% of all platinum players. They will actually very likely be in a percentile of less than 1 relative to the total population of players, and saying "you're in the top .003% out of everyone!" is a lot less helpful than "you're in the top 3% of those against whom you actually compete ." On May 08 2010 09:06 Gallimatias wrote: Being a low level player myself I have to say the division system has been very discouraging to me. The reason is that the leagues I am placed in are essentially dead, with only 5-10 players racking up more then 20 games (in a silver league, it's probably even more inactive in bronze and copper). Being ranked against people that are not playing is heart breaking and has made me feel like somewhat of a fool. "I guess I shouldn't be playing, nobody else this bad is". I think you're misinterpreting what the division system means. If you're, say, rank 8 in your division, that doesn't mean much for this beta. Over a long period of time with no resets, rank 8 would be a very good indicator of your skill. For now, though, your rating should likely be considered a better indicator of skill than rank simply because of what you described - many people (though probably not most) are inactive, so the data is a bit unreliable. I think blizzard may implement some way to weed out inactive accounts from the calculations for rank in the future. As more games are played, your rank will become a much more significant indicator of your overall skill level in comparison to your league. You also seem to assume that you only get matched against people in your division. This is not true. In fact, if you do well, you begin to be match against people who aren't even in your league. Due to the fact that this is a short period of time relative to how long you might be playing at release, this amount of time matched against higher leagues is insignificant. It does, however, invalidate your ranking until you are promoted (or, alternatively, you begin to lose again and the matchmaking system begins to match you with players at your new rating and current league) and have the chance to play many more games in that league. Overall, I feel the division system is (or perhaps has the potential to be) a MUCH better way of indicating player skill level. On May 08 2010 09:06 Gallimatias wrote: I do think that low numbered divisions are better btw. Not by purpose but simply because they were created earlier and people that reached platinum the first few weeks are generally better than people only reaching it right now. Also keep in mind that the beta has fewer players playing fewer games than the game will at release, and thus is susceptible to flaws such as the one you have described for new divisions.. Over a period of perhaps a few weeks, though, the division system will not mean anything other than a convenient way to see how well you play in comparison to people in your league. It may end up being even shorter than that, perhaps a few days, given the large number of people who will be playing. | ||
|
Sentient
United States437 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:07 Issorlol wrote: I'm not sure you're using percentiles in the correct way here. Someone who is rank 3 platinum over a long period of time will be in, I suppose, the 97th percentile or the top 3% of all platinum players. They will actually very likely be in a percentile of less than 1 relative to the total population of players, and saying "you're in the top .003% out of everyone!" is a lot less helpful than "you're in the top 3% of those against whom you actually compete ." I just made up some numbers to demonstrate. With the way the bonus points work, older divisions are generally always going to have more points than younger divisions, simply because they have had more time to accumulate bonus points. The younger divisions can feed off this to some extent by earning more points for winning, but I don't think it fully compensates. I would also expect the older divisions to contain more people who placed directly into a league, while the younger divisions contain people who were promoted. The older divisions should have more points in this situation (because they are generally better players, which is basis of the OP), but the ranking does not reflect this. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the top 10 players of the first few divisions are better than the top players of the last divisions, simply because the last divisions were probably created from promotions, while the early divisions were placed directly. But I suppose you are right about the total population of players. On the flipside, copper players probably don't want to see they are worse than 95% of all players. I still think showing your percentile for your league would be excellent, and it would allow a direct comparision between divisions (and finally give us an empirical clue as to how the point distribution really works between them). | ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:14 Sentient wrote: I just made up some numbers to demonstrate. With the way the bonus points work, older divisions are generally always going to have more points than younger divisions, simply because they have had more time to accumulate bonus points. The younger divisions can feed off this to some extent by earning more points for winning, but I don't think it fully compensates. I would also expect the older divisions to contain more people who placed directly into a league, while the younger divisions contain people who were promoted. The older divisions should have more points in this situation (because they are generally better players, which is basis of the OP), but the ranking does not reflect this. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the top 10 players of the first few divisions are better than the top players of the last divisions, simply because the last divisions were probably created from promotions, while the early divisions were placed directly. But I suppose you are right about the total population of players. On the flipside, copper players probably don't want to see they are worse than 95% of all players. I still think showing your percentile for your league would be excellent, and it would allow a direct comparision between divisions (and finally give us an empirical clue as to how the point distribution really works between them). The thing is, though, that your rank IS your percentile for your league. If you're rank 3, you're in the top 3% of the players in your league. That is why the division system is so good an indicator of skill - it just requires some time to get to that point. Regarding the bonus pool - isn't the bonus pool only very large for newly-qualified people (and maybe promoted? my rating reward is massively bugged right now so rather than being promoted for doing well I'm losing many many many times more points than I should per loss vs people two leagues higher than me - 62 points vs a gold team when it should have been only two, so I haven't been able to be promoted) and people who are inactive for an amount of time? Someone could, then, purposely wait or go inactive in order to have a high bonus pool, but it must be kept in mind that the bonus pool IS limited, and so when they start to be matched against players of higher skill, they will be brought down to their appropriate rating/ranking once again. They may be promoted if they're in the right position, but, again, they will be quickly demoted when the system decides that they can't perform in the league to which they are promoted. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
Not necessarily, although the numbers are small enough at this point that you may be right. You can easily disprove this by looking up your rating on the comprehensive ladder website that that one guy put up, then comparing your actual percentile based on rating compared to what you think your rank is. I don't see why this is a hard concept to understand -- rank is relative to your division, rating is relative to your league. You do not only play players in your div, you play people in your league, so your rating and ELO are balanced around THAT. | ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
| ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:23 Vei wrote: "The thing is, though, that your rank IS your percentile for your league. If you're rank 3, you're in the top 3% of the players in your league. That is why the division system is so good an indicator of skill - it just requires some time to get to that point." Not necessarily, although the numbers are small enough at this point that you may be right. You can easily disprove this by looking up your rating on the comprehensive ladder website that that one guy put up, then comparing your actual percentile based on rating compared to what you think your rank is. I don't see why this is a hard concept to understand -- rank is relative to your division, rating is relative to your league. You do not only play players in your div, you play people in your league, so your rating and ELO are balanced around THAT. I see what you're saying, but I also think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. Right now, due to relatively small populations and inactivity, ranking is not really the most reliable way of rating yourself. However, in the release, there will be more players, and so the chance of a top 1% player being in any given league is a lot higher (given, perhaps, higher population caps for leagues, but this would make interpreting rank much harder to do for a player). This means that a player capable of top 1% play will quickly overtake a player who is incapable of such play. There is a chance, though, that NO player in any given league is capable of such high level play, and THEN you can use ELO/rating to decide who the better player is. For the most part, though, ranking will become a very good indicator of overall performance relative to the league in which a player is playing. While rank is certainly relative to your division, the way the rating/ranking system works essentially means that most (though not ALL) rank 1 players should be in the top 1% of players in any given league. Also keep in mind that people shuffle in/out of leagues due to promotion/demotion, and so there is always the opportunity for a better player to enter a division and overtake the rank 1 player, increasing the validity of the rank as a way to compare a player to their league. edit: On May 08 2010 09:25 SichuanPanda wrote: Who cares what your rank is its a Beta, its 100% meaningless being rank 1 div 1 2000+ or rank 1 div 20 1600+ - while granted there is a distinct skill difference, its pretty much irrelevant if you are high ranked in Beta because stats are gonna be wiped again and again. This post really isn't saying much. This thread has turned into a "is the division system a good way or ranking players overall?" discussion, and so your post is pretty meaningless overall. | ||
|
Sentient
United States437 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:29 Issorlol wrote: While rank is certainly relative to your division, the way the rating/ranking system works essentially means that most (though not ALL) rank 1 players should be in the top 1% of players in any given league. This is where we disagree I think. My view is that old divisions will contain players who placed directly into a league. For platinum, my hunch is that these players are better than players who get promoted from a lower league. Is there a reason you disagree with my hypothesis? | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
 | ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:42 Sentient wrote: This is where we disagree I think. My view is that old divisions will contain players who placed directly into a league. For platinum, my hunch is that these players are better than players who get promoted from a lower league. Is there a reason you disagree with my hypothesis? Although obviously I can't offer real data for why I disagree, I think simply thinking about it a little bit will show why your hypothesis is flawed. We know that matchmaking is entirely independent of which division you've placed. This means that you get matched one one of two (or perhaps more) criteria: 1.) your rating. This is used most often for most people. 2.) how well the matchmaking system thinks you're doing and what it thinks your true rank SHOULD be. This system is not perfect, but it allows people who are perhaps wrongly low-ranked or low-rated (perhaps a person newly promoted in to a league). In the first case, you play against people who are only slightly better than you (and when it gets to the point that they start beating you - slightly worse). In this way, you have a fairly consistent rank that is a good indicator of your place in your league. In case number two, the system has to make a few guesses. This system is necessary, though, to allow rankings to be a more significant indicator of rank. This system is made more effective by way of the favored/slightly favored system and bonus pool. A player who qualifies into a league has an easier time of increasing their rank than someone who plays consistently and often. This may seem somewhat of a bad idea at first consideration, but upon further thought, you should find that it is a very good way of running the system. A player who jumps too high in ranking will quickly begin losing games and will be brought down to their appropriate ranking fairly soon. In a similar regard, a player who SHOULD be much higher will have an easier time of ranking up, and thus bonus pool encourages players who were perhaps wrongly placed to actually continue playing. It allows the amount of games necessary to play to be much lower than it would be without bonus pool, and so the game grind is, in fact, less of a grind. Now, what this means is that a player who is promoted into a league is allowed to more quickly begin playing against people who placed into a league. What this means is that any player who may be promoted into a league is just as good as a player who placed into a league given that their ranking is the same. This is why the number attached to a division is irrelevant in the consideration of what a player's ranking really means. Because these promoted players are playing people who placed into these leagues, their rank is just as indicative of their skill as the player who placed into the league in the first place (again, given a fairly significant volume of games played at the rating at which they belong). I hope you understand what I'm trying to say here. edit: I need to proofread. | ||
|
Wi)nD
Canada719 Posts
you have games were u are having a quailty match far to few inbetween the crap were you either get rolled by someone better, or smash someone who has no clue wat they are doing (yes there still there in plat) | ||
|
Rice
United States1332 Posts
On May 08 2010 02:34 bodysnatcher21 wrote: If you want to give an indication of your skill, use your rating. E.G I am 1400 platinum, or I am 1200 gold. Now I am rank 1 platinum, but I'm only 1500 rating, so it's actually not that great. In one of the older divisions, 1500 rating would only get me to rank 20 or something. So for me to go around telling people I am "rank 1 platinum" would be extremely misleading. Ratings allow you to compare people in different divisions. Rank's do not. So yeh, if you want to give an indication of your skill level, please use your rating instead of rank! Edit: Alot of people are saying that we should focus on the validity of someones argument, rather then their rank/rating. I actually agree with that. What I am saying in this post is that IF you want to give an indication of your skill level, it is better to use rating instead of rank. Whether it is a good idea to use someones rating/rank (authority) to support claims is an entirely different debate. im rank 1 platinum division 357 and im going to have to respectfully disagree. | ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:03 Oodama wrote: the system itself is flawed in the match making system imo. you have games were u are having a quailty match far to few inbetween the crap were you either get rolled by someone better, or smash someone who has no clue wat they are doing (yes there still there in plat) Yes, this is true to an extent. I feel that with more players, this will happen less and less often. I'm sure they'll also make the system more reliable - keep in mind that we are here to test the matchmaking system's quality just as much as the balance of the game. | ||
|
Tinithor
United States1552 Posts
On May 08 2010 02:52 FortuneSyn wrote: 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. | ||
|
Sentient
United States437 Posts
On May 08 2010 09:53 Issorlol wrote: Big long post. My head hurts now  . I'll have to think about this some more. | ||
|
Issor
United States870 Posts
On May 08 2010 10:19 Sentient wrote: My head hurts now . I'll have to think about this some more.I'll hope you end up realizing how great the division system is in comparison to other systems. Have fun! <3, Issorlol | ||
|
TheNomad
United States134 Posts
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. You are quite wrong sir, everyone plays eachother regardless of division, which means absolute jackshit. A 1900 rated player will play another 1900 rated player. | ||
|
OPSavioR
Sweden1465 Posts
On May 08 2010 02:44 sLiniss wrote: I compltely agree. Ratings are much more important. High rated gold will bhe playing a lot of plats anyways im rank 4 in gold with 1300 rating and i get alot of toss players from plat who just voidray rush and such , like one guy just spamming Zealots and going 2stargate voidray directly after.. makes me kinda sad :/ | ||
| ||
