|
On November 02 2010 00:00 emythrel wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 22:52 PimpMobeel wrote:[B]On November 01 2010 08:36 darmousseh wrote:
. 1: The only people that play are those that are serious. 2: The skill gap between a grandmaster and an amateur is pretty small.
Hmmm. the OP was actually quite accurate with those statements. The difference between an amateur and a GM in chess is more often than not simply experience. You can master the knowledge of the game quite quickly and there comes a point where simply being more experienced than your opponent will net you alot of wins. The difference between and GM and everyone else is the GM's can work out all the variations in their head, not that the GMs are actually majorly more skilled at the game. It doesn't take skill to work out variations, it takes experience or just having the right kind of mind for it (like the child prodigies that pop up every few years). Josh waitzkin (think i spelt it right) was 2200 rated by the time he was 15 but often lost to older, more experienced, lower ranked opponents. Chess is however not the best analogy for SC as there is only one match-up to master. And a limited amount of ways to move your pieces. SC2 has 6 different possible match-ups, an infinite numbers of ways to move your units and literally unlimited ways to group those units into armies. You have multiple ways to cripple your opponent, and many different ways to win... in chess you have only 2... mate the king or force your opponent into such a bad position they tap out. On topic, great website OP..... even tho its unlikely you have managed to hit the magic formula (i know for a fact you haven't because they showed it at blizzcon and it was waaaaaaay more complicated than your formula) you have managed to devise a way for us players to see roughly how we stack up, whether we are near promotion etc... and that should be applauded. Its a great first step towards having a place where we can go and find our true rating. edit: according to your OP i am very near promotion to Plat and have been for a while... guess i need to play a little more regularly. On a related note.... sc2ranks.com puts me just outside the top 200 gold players in europe (atleast on points) and almost top 600 in the world.... I know points mean fuck all, but its still nice to know of people in my league.... i am up among the best lol
This is the formula you're talking about:
![[image loading]](http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b212/aksfjh/lawl/winrateformula.png)
This formula is actually used to determine win-rate against a certain player-race combo.See the p(gj|y)? That's the probability of event gj given event y. In the context of the discussion, this seems to be the formula for the distribution of win rates for various races against other races. It's not the MMR which the topic is about.
|
There is another way to confirm my results. If you are a 1500 or 1600 player in any division and got promoted recently, how many points did you lose when you switched divisions (it won't be exactly 500 or 600 to account for the recent winning streak, but it should be close). If we continuously see a trend of these players losing 500-600 points, then that is another confirmation.
|
On November 02 2010 02:59 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 00:00 emythrel wrote:On November 01 2010 22:52 PimpMobeel wrote:[B]On November 01 2010 08:36 darmousseh wrote:
. 1: The only people that play are those that are serious. 2: The skill gap between a grandmaster and an amateur is pretty small.
Hmmm. the OP was actually quite accurate with those statements. The difference between an amateur and a GM in chess is more often than not simply experience. You can master the knowledge of the game quite quickly and there comes a point where simply being more experienced than your opponent will net you alot of wins. The difference between and GM and everyone else is the GM's can work out all the variations in their head, not that the GMs are actually majorly more skilled at the game. It doesn't take skill to work out variations, it takes experience or just having the right kind of mind for it (like the child prodigies that pop up every few years). Josh waitzkin (think i spelt it right) was 2200 rated by the time he was 15 but often lost to older, more experienced, lower ranked opponents. Chess is however not the best analogy for SC as there is only one match-up to master. And a limited amount of ways to move your pieces. SC2 has 6 different possible match-ups, an infinite numbers of ways to move your units and literally unlimited ways to group those units into armies. You have multiple ways to cripple your opponent, and many different ways to win... in chess you have only 2... mate the king or force your opponent into such a bad position they tap out. On topic, great website OP..... even tho its unlikely you have managed to hit the magic formula (i know for a fact you haven't because they showed it at blizzcon and it was waaaaaaay more complicated than your formula) you have managed to devise a way for us players to see roughly how we stack up, whether we are near promotion etc... and that should be applauded. Its a great first step towards having a place where we can go and find our true rating. edit: according to your OP i am very near promotion to Plat and have been for a while... guess i need to play a little more regularly. On a related note.... sc2ranks.com puts me just outside the top 200 gold players in europe (atleast on points) and almost top 600 in the world.... I know points mean fuck all, but its still nice to know of people in my league.... i am up among the best lol This is the formula you're talking about: This formula is actually used to determine win-rate against a certain player-race combo.See the p(gj|y)? That's the probability of event gj given event y. In the context of the discussion, this seems to be the formula for the distribution of win rates for various races against other races. It's not the MMR which the topic is about.
Blizzard said at blizzcon that they currently do not separate your MMR by matchup.
|
Oh, almost forgot. The website (sc2stars.com) is only used so you can get an understanding of where you rate in comparison to others. Since i do not have the information about players bonus pool remaining i had to estimate it and there are easy ways to abuse the system (like if you played 200 games in the first week and haven't played since).
Unless there is a real interest I don't really plan on developing the site further until i get more clarification from either blizzard, or by others confirming my results. For the best information i would recommend sc2ranks.com.
|
interesting..i'm closer to the bottom than i am to the top =[
|
I know, my post was simply referring to the reference he made about the "complicated formula."
To help you out though, I recently got promoted to diamond with ~1400 points and only lost ~50 points (maybe ~80 points). When I look at my other rank up history, when I went from gold to platinum, I lost ~250-300 points.
Here's a direct link to my data:
http://www.sc2ranks.com/team/4246801
|
United States12267 Posts
On November 02 2010 02:54 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 02:09 Excalibur_Z wrote:On November 02 2010 00:46 Mendelfist wrote:On November 02 2010 00:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:
He also said that when he "does the Top 200 every week, that's all by points, but with all the division stuff taken out" which makes it pretty clear that there's some kind of weighting or adjustment involved. So what could be the reason for adding any sort of division weighting to your points in the first place? I can't think of any. I'd speculate that if there are indeed "tiers" of divisions such that everyone in your division is roughly your skill level, then it makes a little more sense. So let's say that a new Gold division is created and its target MMR range is the top 20% of Gold (this is still speculation). That means that all 100 players within that division will, at the time of their promotion/demotion/placement, be in the top 20% of Gold. From there, you can get a fairly accurate ranking of who is better than who based on points in that division. That may not translate to the points generated by a 20-40% Gold division or a 40-60% Gold division, even though the points may be similar. Specifically, the designer said that at Team Liquid, we are the top of the top Diamond who focuses only on the top of the top Diamond, but that for 99% of the player base, the division system works properly. He said that the Master League is designed to address the issues that we're noticing now. The problems that we're seeing are centered around (1) Diamond being the highest league and (2) the skill gap between high Diamond and low Diamond being too great, which is sort of where the division system breaks down. Diamond comprises the top ~8% now of players, that's over 40,000 players on the NA server. Because of the way the skill curve works, the top 5,000 or so players may be vastly more skilled than the next-highest 5,000 in Diamond, and that the top 500 players may be vastly more skilled than the next 500. However, it's possible that some of those players could be in the same division, and that causes enormous rifts between the top and bottom of each Diamond division even though the skill ranges are supposed to be tight. I'm almost 100% certain that someone asked this during the beta and they confirmed that once you get into a division you are stuck there. Weighing divisions would be useless. If i'm correct then master league will start at 500 points higher than diamond assuming they don't do any scaling in the future (read my most recent reply).
That's not contradictory though. When you are placed in a division, you are indeed stuck there until you get moved out of your league. You never get moved laterally (until the Bronze Zero hotfix is deployed but it's only for those players and is a separate matter).
|
On November 02 2010 03:12 aksfjh wrote:I know, my post was simply referring to the reference he made about the "complicated formula." To help you out though, I recently got promoted to diamond with ~1400 points and only lost ~50 points (maybe ~80 points). When I look at my other rank up history, when I went from gold to platinum, I lost ~250-300 points. Here's a direct link to my data: http://www.sc2ranks.com/team/4246801
Have you played a lot of Favored matches recently?
|
On November 02 2010 03:17 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 02:54 darmousseh wrote:On November 02 2010 02:09 Excalibur_Z wrote:On November 02 2010 00:46 Mendelfist wrote:On November 02 2010 00:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:
He also said that when he "does the Top 200 every week, that's all by points, but with all the division stuff taken out" which makes it pretty clear that there's some kind of weighting or adjustment involved. So what could be the reason for adding any sort of division weighting to your points in the first place? I can't think of any. I'd speculate that if there are indeed "tiers" of divisions such that everyone in your division is roughly your skill level, then it makes a little more sense. So let's say that a new Gold division is created and its target MMR range is the top 20% of Gold (this is still speculation). That means that all 100 players within that division will, at the time of their promotion/demotion/placement, be in the top 20% of Gold. From there, you can get a fairly accurate ranking of who is better than who based on points in that division. That may not translate to the points generated by a 20-40% Gold division or a 40-60% Gold division, even though the points may be similar. Specifically, the designer said that at Team Liquid, we are the top of the top Diamond who focuses only on the top of the top Diamond, but that for 99% of the player base, the division system works properly. He said that the Master League is designed to address the issues that we're noticing now. The problems that we're seeing are centered around (1) Diamond being the highest league and (2) the skill gap between high Diamond and low Diamond being too great, which is sort of where the division system breaks down. Diamond comprises the top ~8% now of players, that's over 40,000 players on the NA server. Because of the way the skill curve works, the top 5,000 or so players may be vastly more skilled than the next-highest 5,000 in Diamond, and that the top 500 players may be vastly more skilled than the next 500. However, it's possible that some of those players could be in the same division, and that causes enormous rifts between the top and bottom of each Diamond division even though the skill ranges are supposed to be tight. I'm almost 100% certain that someone asked this during the beta and they confirmed that once you get into a division you are stuck there. Weighing divisions would be useless. If i'm correct then master league will start at 500 points higher than diamond assuming they don't do any scaling in the future (read my most recent reply). That's not contradictory though. When you are placed in a division, you are indeed stuck there until you get moved out of your league. You never get moved laterally (until the Bronze Zero hotfix is deployed but it's only for those players and is a separate matter).
If they do weigh divisions then when you play a game it must consider the division you are in and adjust your points accordingly since we already know that it compares your points to your opponents MMR that way it scales people in the division.
If blizzard is that smart then that is truly amazing.
|
As I already said, your formula doesn't seem to work at all if I look at my own match history.
Some examples:
Match 1:
Mendelfist, Silver, 753 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 753 + 317 + 1500 - 862 = 1708
Wilu, Silver, 982 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 982 + 153 + 1500 - 862 = 1773
Match 2:
Mendelfist, Silver, 779 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 779 + 304 + 1500 - 862 = 1721
Nemesis, Gold, 743 points. MMR = (2 - 1) * 500 + 743 + 160 + 1500 - 862 = 2041
Match 3:
Mendelfist, Silver, 769 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 769 + 305 + 1500 - 863 = 1711
Zbooj, Silver, 665 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 665 + 376 + 1500 - 863 = 1678
Match 4:
Mendelfist, Silver, 821 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 821 + 318 + 1500 - 902 = 1737
BBang, Gold 855 points. MMR = (2 - 1) * 500 + 855 + 109 + 1500 - 902 = 2062
Within a league the calculated MMRs are close, but across the leagues they are way too different. The matches were called even by the matchmaking system, they felt even so the MMRs should be close. Your formula does not work. Either the 500 point offset is wrong or there are other pieces of the puzzle missing.
|
Ok, so uh how useful is this at all? What are the applications of knowing the mmr? I mean i guess you cracked the code, but what can we do with it, it seems kind of useless.
The journey greater than the destination ?
PS- why doesnt sc2stars show the ranking along with the mmr rating?
|
On November 02 2010 03:29 Mendelfist wrote:
As I already said, your formula doesn't seem to work at all if I look at my own match history.
Some examples:
Match 1:
Mendelfist, Silver, 753 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 753 + 317 + 1500 - 862 = 1708
Wilu, Silver, 982 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 982 + 153 + 1500 - 862 = 1773
Match 2:
Mendelfist, Silver, 779 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 779 + 304 + 1500 - 862 = 1721
Nemesis, Gold, 743 points. MMR = (2 - 1) * 500 + 743 + 160 + 1500 - 862 = 2041
Match 3:
Mendelfist, Silver, 769 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 769 + 305 + 1500 - 863 = 1711
Zbooj, Silver, 665 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 665 + 376 + 1500 - 863 = 1678
Match 4:
Mendelfist, Silver, 821 points. MMR = (1 - 1) * 500 + 821 + 318 + 1500 - 902 = 1737
BBang, Gold 855 points. MMR = (2 - 1) * 500 + 855 + 109 + 1500 - 902 = 2062
Within a league the calculated MMRs are close, but across the leagues they are way too different. The matches were called even by the matchmaking system, they felt even so the MMRs should be close. Your formula does not work. Either the 500 point offset is wrong or there are other pieces of the puzzle missing.
Like i said, the formula doesn't work too well for streaky players. MMR can change by a lot more than points can during a time. The formula is more for solidified players than players who are currently improving. How quickly were you promoted after these matches? And did you play a lot of favored games once you were promoted?
|
On November 02 2010 03:36 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Ok, so uh how useful is this at all? What are the applications of knowing the mmr? I mean i guess you cracked the code, but what can we do with it, it seems kind of useless.
The journey greater than the destination ?
Not too much actually lol. The only thing you can get out of it is knowing your relative strength and figure out how close you are to getting promoted.
|
why doesnt sc2stars show the ranking along with the mmr rating?
I'd like to see my ranking for separate divisions as well as globally based on the mmr
btw, im 1779 with 21 bonus and my mmr is 3457 I wish this was out like 2 weeks ago before I used up all my bonus pool because I dropped like 30 ranks from being idle and I would have liked to seen if my mmr changed much since I used like 300 bonus or something + another 500 pts.
ps- the site is really lagging
|
Catyoul
France2377 Posts
On November 02 2010 00:11 vanick wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 22:29 Catyoul wrote:
What you have found though is how the different leagues compare, and how we can convert from one to another. That in itself is interesting enough.
He actually did no such thing. He observed that players who have used their bonus pool generally have points between 1000-1500, except in Diamond where there are higher point values (because anyone good enough to rise above a certain number of points in lower leagues would get promoted). I'm not sure if his 1000-1500 observation is exactly correct (it looks a lot more like 1000-1600 in my brief look) but even worse, his 500 point offset comes from basically nowhere and is not actually justified as a solid assumption. As you said before, the formula put forth is just readjusting a player's earned points by a league offset. And given what we know about the volatility of MMR when a player is streaking, and that divisions have other adjustments made to the points there is no way this is even close to accurate. That is, using this formula would be more misleading than illuminating. This combined with his solicitation to Shadowed for ad revenue, and the topic title piggybacking on the work ExcaliburZ put into his thread, makes the whole thing stink.
In my answer I was shooting for "not too mean" 
|
On November 02 2010 03:41 CharlieMurphy wrote:
why doesnt sc2stars show the ranking along with the mmr rating?
I'd like to see my ranking for separate divisions as well as globally based on the mmr
btw, im 1779 with 21 bonus and my mmr is 3457 I wish this was out like 2 weeks ago before I used up all my bonus pool because I dropped like 30 ranks from being idle and I would have liked to seen if my mmr changed much since I used like 300 bonus or something + another 500 pts.
ps- the site is really lagging
Yeah, i just made it in like 15 minutes so that people can check their rating, I don't really have plans to develop it further and I don't have any money to pay for better hosting.
|
On November 02 2010 03:49 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 03:41 CharlieMurphy wrote:
why doesnt sc2stars show the ranking along with the mmr rating?
I'd like to see my ranking for separate divisions as well as globally based on the mmr
btw, im 1779 with 21 bonus and my mmr is 3457 I wish this was out like 2 weeks ago before I used up all my bonus pool because I dropped like 30 ranks from being idle and I would have liked to seen if my mmr changed much since I used like 300 bonus or something + another 500 pts.
ps- the site is really lagging Yeah, i just made it in like 15 minutes so that people can check their rating, I don't really have plans to develop it further and I don't have any money to pay for better hosting.
ic, well it would be nice if someone took this and added it to the sc2ranking site http://www.sc2ranks.com/
|
wait i just noticed that debo and I share the same MMR 3457. He has something like 1300 games played and I only have like 400. We also have the exact same ladder rating as well 1779
|
On November 02 2010 04:02 CharlieMurphy wrote:
wait i just noticed that debo and I share the same MMR 3457. He has something like 1300 games played and I only have like 400. We also have the exact same ladder rating as well 1779
Yup, this isn't iccup, ratings do not inflate indefinitely.
|
On November 02 2010 04:03 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 04:02 CharlieMurphy wrote:
wait i just noticed that debo and I share the same MMR 3457. He has something like 1300 games played and I only have like 400. We also have the exact same ladder rating as well 1779 Yup, this isn't iccup, ratings do not inflate indefinitely.
well but my point is, that MMR is the same exact thing as your rating just a larger number?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
