EPTMaybe i'm confused here, but wouldn't removing the bonus pool force a lot of players into a forever 0 position?
Poll: Bonus pool should be removed - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
ronpaul012
United States769 Posts
Maybe i'm confused here, but wouldn't removing the bonus pool force a lot of players into a forever 0 position? | ||
|
Oxb
199 Posts
Someone who has active uses all their bonus points, someone who is not does not. Where does the idea come from that someone with less games has exactly the same amount of points? It just means he did a better job win/loss ratio or played better against higher ranked players. The amount of bonus points used is exactly the same... The system is made that even with 0 bonus pool you steadily increase (i.e it tries to give you a 50:50 win:loss) in ladder points because wins are in general rewarded with slightly more points than losses (unless you lose to bronze while you're in gold, or to gold when you are in diamond/master etc.) In the end both players (whether one has 1000games played and the other only 100) used exactly the same amount of bonus points. Using the given arguments by OP I don't see any reason to remove bonus pool? I actually though bonus pool is just to make sure people who don't play to much (but win -> i.e they are not bad) don't have to play 1000+games/season to keep up with the more active players of same skill level. This would actually be very de-stimulation to a lot of people who have a "busy" job + wife/kids or "busy" student life or whatever. Imagine a decent player in Platinum league who plays very actively and therefor is top of the league. But all of a sudden he has exams/has to go on a business trip and can't play much/at all for 2 weeks. He would fall 'behind' in ladder points (compared to the other active players) and thus he either has to play like crazy to catch up and get in top 5 of his ladder. Or somebody who has not been able for whatever reason to play for 2 months and only now starts season 2, he would never make it into top50 even if he is one of the better players in his league. I don't see that one can actually abuse the bonus pool since everybody gets exactly the same amount of bonus pool points. | ||
|
Tr0utp0nD
United States4 Posts
| ||
|
Gnax
Sweden490 Posts
On June 29 2011 23:49 shinyA wrote: Wrong. The numbers I used were figurative and have nothing to do with the point made. There was no math involved in my argument. The bottom line was, I would play 1000 games and be ranked as the same as someone who plays 100 games. During my month of play my bonus pool would have run out long before the end of the month meaning that I wouldn't be gaining near as many points as the person who doesn't start playing until after that month, with a huge bonus pool. I would continue playing even while he's playing still and he will always be equal to my points as long as he keeps abusing the bonus pool and I keep on playing a lot. Why do you keep failing so much? if your bonus pool runs out you already "abused" bonus pool more than the guy who didn't play has. And when he starts playing he "abuses" it the way you already did until he catches up with you. | ||
|
Mendelfist
Sweden356 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:02 ronpaul012 wrote: While 45% win ratio isn't very good, its still possible to be top 25 in your league as long as your active. No, it isn't, unless you are in bronze. With a 45% win ratio you will get demoted to a lower league after a while. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:04 Gnax wrote: Why do you keep failing so much? if your bonus pool runs out you already "abused" bonus pool more than the guy who didn't play has. And when he starts playing he "abuses" it the way you already did until he catches up with you. Still wrong. Everybody have the same amount of bp. Even if they start 2months after everyone. Why do you keep failing so much ? | ||
|
shinyA
United States473 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:02 Oxb wrote: I'm confused by some posters. Someone who has active uses all their bonus points, someone who is not does not. Where does the idea come from that someone with less games has exactly the same amount of points? It just means he did a better job win/loss ratio or played better against higher ranked players. The amount of bonus points used is exactly the same... The system is made that even with 0 bonus pool you steadily increase (i.e it tries to give you a 50:50 win:loss) in ladder points because wins are in general rewarded with slightly more points than losses (unless you lose to bronze while you're in gold, or to gold when you are in diamond/master etc.) In the end both players (whether one has 1000games played and the other only 100) used exactly the same amount of bonus points. Using the given arguments by OP I don't see any reason to remove bonus pool? I actually though bonus pool is just to make sure people who don't play to much (but win -> i.e they are not bad) don't have to play 1000+games/season to keep up with the more active players of same skill level. This would actually be very de-stimulation to a lot of people who have a "busy" job + wife/kids or "busy" student life or whatever. Imagine a decent player in Platinum league who plays very actively and therefor is top of the league. But all of a sudden he has exams/has to go on a business trip and can't play much/at all for 2 weeks. He would fall 'behind' in ladder points (compared to the other active players) and thus he either has to play like crazy to catch up and get in top 5 of his ladder. Or somebody who has not been able for whatever reason to play for 2 months and only now starts season 2, he would never make it into top50 even if he is one of the better players in his league. I don't see that one can actually abuse the bonus pool since everybody gets exactly the same amount of bonus pool points. On June 30 2011 00:04 Gnax wrote: Why do you keep failing so much? if your bonus pool runs out you already "abused" bonus pool more than the guy who didn't play has. And when he starts playing he "abuses" it the way you already did until he catches up with you. If 2 people of equal skill, who have the same exact W/L ratio play ladder. They each start out with 300 bonus pool. One of the players plays 20 games a day, say he averages 10 points per win, which gives him 10 bonus points a win and he goes 50/50 every day. He'll be out of his bonus pool in a little over 3 and a half days. So let's say he's winning 10 points and losing 10 points, so with bonus pool that's +20 for a win and -10 for a loss. After those 3 and a half days he'll be at 600 points. But at this point his bonus pool runs out, if he maintains a 50/50 W/L ratio then he'll basically gain only a few points a day, whatever is the amount of bonus pool you get per day is what he'll gain. Another player who only plays when he has bonus pool will always win double points, so at the end of the month he'll have way less games played but the same amount of points because the first guy whos mass gaming hardly wins more points than losing when he plays without bonus pool. Obviously the numbers I used aren't perfect and there is a little more factors to take into consideration but the point is the same. | ||
|
Gnax
Sweden490 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:10 Erasme wrote: Still wrong. Everybody have the same amount of bp. Even if they start 2months after everyone. Why do you keep failing so much ? Sir. First of all, I was never wrong in this thread, so you can't say I am still wrong. Secondly I have been saying the same thing you just said, so you say I'm wrong and then you echo what I've said. That is probably the ultimate fail right there. | ||
|
shinyA
United States473 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:15 Gnax wrote: Sir. First of all, I was never wrong in this thread, so you can't say I am still wrong. Secondly I have been saying the same thing you just said, so you say I'm wrong and then you echo what I've said. That is probably the ultimate fail right there. No, you're a moron and have been wrong in every post. You keep saying that everyone has the same amount of BP therefore it will even out eventually. But you can't seem to comprehend that when a player plays when he doesn't have bonus pool he hardly gains anything more than he loses. So two players of equal WL% but one plays every day and the other only plays when he has bonus pool, the player who only plays with bonus pool will have the same amount as the guy player every day. SO one player can have 1000 games and be at the same points as someone who only plays out their bonus pool and has 100 games. EDIT - Here, just to further prove you wrong. I go to sc2ranks and find these 2 players. RevDime 1,869 437 393 52.65% SolidControL 1,870 151 140 51.89% The Dime kid has around 800 games played and a higher win % than someone who only has 290 games played and a lower win % but Dime has less points. GG? | ||
|
zarepath
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
In the ladder system, you don't get any points, if you do not improve relative to your competitors. That's simple, because the point you get have to come from someone. If you are ranked at the level that you belong to, you will NOT gain any points - besides bonus pool. Now why is the bonus pool there? To reward regular activity and force players to play (and risk losing points) in order to keep their rank. If there are two players and one is playing 100 games with a 50% win/loss ratio and the other one is playing no game at all, both players would stay at equal points if there was no bonus pool. Without any skill in change, your points will rise at the same rate as you accumulate bonus pool (I think it's 100 points per week) - as long as you are active enough to use up your bonus pool (around 15 games per week) and thus the active player pulls ahead of the inactive player, until the latter gets active again. Now comes the kicker: The rate at which you accumulate bonus pool is exactly the same no matter how many games you play! This means that everyone who has used up his bonus pool has his point according to his skill. The OP does not understand, that him falling out of the top 8 is a result of his losing streak. If the top1 guy of the OP's division is inactive, the OP only needs to maintain a 50% record and he will close in to the inactive guy, even though the inactive guy might be better. Having more points with less games is NOT a result of the bonus pool system (or an abuse thereof) but hint that this person might win more than they lose (and thus will continue to rise in the system). @shinyA: Without the bonus pool, exactly the same would happen. You would have your 200 points after 3000 games and a guy would have the same amount of points after 100 games, because he as good as or better than you. A ladder system ranks people for their skill and not for the amount of games. You still have to play enough to use up your bonus pool, but that's it. It also ensures that you can start later in the season and still place decent - provided you are actually good. Poll: Do you understand the bonus pool system? Yes, I knew it all along. (22) Yes, I know it now. (1) No, I still believe there is a way to get more points if you play more/less. (1) Other (1) 25 total votes Your vote: Do you understand the bonus pool system? (Vote): Yes, I knew it all along. | ||
|
KepowOb
Canada24 Posts
On June 29 2011 23:50 shinyA wrote: My problem with bonus pool is that it doesn't motivate players to play more, it only motivates them to play enough to keep their bonus pool low. It doesn't reward mass games, it actually rewards fewer games which shouldn't be the case. If I play 1000 games in the first month of a ladder reset with a decent win percentage say I have 1500 points. After that month someone else starts laddering, has an inflated bonus pool, will have the same amount of points as me after just 100 games. That doesn't reward or motivate players to play more it actually does the opposite. I think one thing you have to realize is Blizzard needs to cater to people outside the hardcore players. Why? Because the hardcore players will play, period. Those who don't play all the time might switch to another game when it comes along, they are the ones who need incentive to play, not those who ladder several hours a day. The hardcore players of a game are important as they are likely to recruit other people to play, but they also make up a small % of the actual sales Blizzard is going to make. Obviously if they are totally alienated the game will fail... This isn't an MMO with monthly fees, once you bought the game they've made their profit off you... they need casual players to enjoy the game and feel incentive to play, so that they will get their friends to get the game too etc... As we can all see through this forum, it is the devoted fans who are the most vocal as the game means more to them than the rest, but at the same time the number of players who ladder for hours a day is VERY minimal. As great as it would be to cater to these players, it wouldn't make sense. .... And as others have pointed out, does it really matter at the end of the day? | ||
|
cyrex
United States24 Posts
On June 29 2011 23:22 shinyA wrote: My problem with bonus pool is that it doesn't motivate players to play more, it only motivates them to play enough to keep their bonus pool low. It doesn't reward mass games, it actually rewards fewer games which shouldn't be the case. Why shouldn't it be the case? Would you not agree that fewer people play 100 games a week than those that play 15 games a week? Do you think it is better to have a ladder consisting of fewer people that play more often, or more people that don't play as often? Who wants to go up against the same people over and over? What motivation does blizzard have to reward people for playing a lot? Do they get more income that way? Wouldn't it be better to reward many people who can only play 5 hours a week, thus increasing popularity of the game and indirectly increasing those that play more often? | ||
|
Kwanny
Germany222 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:11 shinyA wrote: If 2 people of equal skill, who have the same exact W/L ratio play ladder. They each start out with 300 bonus pool. One of the players plays 20 games a day, say he averages 10 points per win, which gives him 10 bonus points a win and he goes 50/50 every day. He'll be out of his bonus pool in a little over 3 and a half days. So let's say he's winning 10 points and losing 10 points, so with bonus pool that's +20 for a win and -10 for a loss. After those 3 and a half days he'll be at 600 points. But at this point his bonus pool runs out, if he maintains a 50/50 W/L ratio then he'll basically gain only a few points a day, whatever is the amount of bonus pool you get per day is what he'll gain. Another player who only plays when he has bonus pool will always win double points, so at the end of the month he'll have way less games played but the same amount of points because the first guy whos mass gaming hardly wins more points than losing when he plays without bonus pool. Obviously the numbers I used aren't perfect and there is a little more factors to take into consideration but the point is the same. But in the end, they are in equal skill, so there is no reason, why the massgamer should have higher points, even though he played more. He shouldn't be rewarded for it, because, in the end, the intrinsic skill is the same. It actually would seem, that the massgamer hasn't even improved despite the amount of games he has played compared to the other, "casual", guy. It doesn't really matter either, if it encourages massgamers (who will keep on playing regardless of any system) or only casual gamers, because as long as it keeps the community active, blizzard has achieved its goal with the bp system. | ||
|
HallBregg
134 Posts
In the end tho, division rank doesn't correlate at all with skill until you are in masters/granmasters so its all just placevo for the masses. | ||
|
shinyA
United States473 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:21 Thrombozyt wrote: @shinyA: Without the bonus pool, exactly the same would happen. You would have your 200 points after 3000 games and a guy would have the same amount of points after 100 games, because he as good as or better than you. A ladder system ranks people for their skill and not for the amount of games. You still have to play enough to use up your bonus pool, but that's it. It also ensures that you can start later in the season and still place decent - provided you are actually good. If there were no bonus pool the same thing wouldn't happen because whoever plays more games would make up more ground. If there were no bonus pool and 2 players of the same exact skill and had the same exact win% played ladder, whoever who would play more games would have more points. | ||
|
Barbiero
Brazil5259 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:19 shinyA wrote: No, you're a moron and have been wrong in every post. You keep saying that everyone has the same amount of BP therefore it will even out eventually. But you can't seem to comprehend that when a player plays when he doesn't have bonus pool he hardly gains anything more than he loses. So two players of equal WL% but one plays every day and the other only plays when he has bonus pool, the player who only plays with bonus pool will have the same amount as the guy player every day. SO one player can have 1000 games and be at the same points as someone who only plays out their bonus pool and has 100 games. That, of course, is only true when the gives conditions occur: - All of the games are giving and removing the same amount of points for both players compared - Player A(the one with more games) NEVER gets better/ALWAYS ALWAYS will receive the same points(sry for repeating the first point) - Player B(the one that waits for the bonus pool) NEVER players with 0 bonus The thing is, the system won't work that way. As you get better, ladder starts varying the points. There is a point where you are either receiving +20 pure points a win or you get promoted. In this case, the active player - as he gets better - receives much more points. However, it is indeed true that a player with 100 wins can have the same points as a player with 1000. It is also true that it is more efficient to ladder when you wait for bonus. However, you are also stagnated in the league and won't go up into plat/diamond/masters or whatever, and the active player will improve due to the sheer fact that he is getting more experience, and eventually will get promoted. So, if you want points, play 2 games a day. If you want a promotion, 20 games a day. | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:26 shinyA wrote: If there were no bonus pool the same thing wouldn't happen because whoever plays more games would make up more ground. If there were no bonus pool and 2 players of the same exact skill and had the same exact win% played ladder, whoever who would play more games would have more points. There you are wrong. If you are matched with player of your skill you win as much as you lose - your win% approaches 50%. Thus without bonus pool you would not gain any points in the long run because you win as many as you lose. So not playing is actually as good as 52383 games per week, because you don't gain any points as long as you don't improve (Edit: without bonus pool). | ||
|
shinyA
United States473 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:24 Kwanny wrote: But in the end, they are in equal skill, so there is no reason, why the massgamer should have higher points, even though he played more. He shouldn't be rewarded for it, because, in the end, the intrinsic skill is the same. It actually would seem, that the massgamer hasn't even improved despite the amount of games he has played compared to the other, "casual", guy. It doesn't really matter either, if it encourages massgamers (who will keep on playing regardless of any system) or only casual gamers, because as long as it keeps the community active, blizzard has achieved its goal with the bp system. It's a ladder though, it's a competition. They don't just give top players top rank spots, they have to play games to get it. Whoever plays more should have that reflected on their rank in the ladder. That's the point of a ladder. There should be a winner of a ladder, so where does the actual work and competition come in if someone of the same skill can do way less work than you and be at the same rank. That's like having a tournament with MC going straight to the finals but NesTea has to go through 50 rounds to get to him and then MC only has to play 1 round to win. That defeats the purpose of the tournament in the same way that bonus pool defeats the purpose of a ladder. | ||
|
shinyA
United States473 Posts
On June 30 2011 00:29 Thrombozyt wrote: There you are wrong. If you are matched with player of your skill you win as much as you lose - your win% approaches 50%. Thus without bonus pool you would not gain any points in the long run because you win as many as you lose. So not playing is actually as good as 52383 games per week, because you don't gain any points as long as you don't improve (Edit: without bonus pool). That's assuming that you have an exact rate of 50%, if you have anything higher than 50% then whoever plays more is rewarded more. I know what you're saying but that only applies to people who can't break 50% when in reality tons of people will have a higher win% than 50. Don't get me wrong, I hate the MMR system too. I think that I should play people of my own points, not some hidden MMR that is supposed to match me with people of my own skill because that obviously doesn't work since there's tons of people with incredibly high win percentages. | ||
| ||
