EPTSolo rating is an interesting thing. What it actually represents is your rating when everyone else in the game is a complete unknown to you. It is somewhat odd that it doesn't exclusively represent solo players playing with and against other solo players, but I have had games that turned out that way. Party rating is obviously something over which you have some influence, but that rating's definition is reliant upon relatively consistent teammates, isn't it? In that regard, it's a little strange. That is to say, queuing regularly with players 1000 rating below you would probably have a negative long term impact on your rating as opposed to queuing regularly with players 1000 rating above you, right? What about if you queue one day with the +1000 rating people and the next day queue with the -1000 rating people? What does your resulting party rating mean then? At least that sort of ambiguity is mitigated in your solo rating which should, over time, revolve around you as an individual as opposed to gravitating toward your present company.
Ranked matchmaking coming to Dota 2 - Page 112
| Forum Index > Closed |
Please keep the QQ to a minimum if you do not like this update. We are happy to hear your reasoning for not liking a ranked system, but no "OMG VOLVO WHY" posts. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12279 Posts
Solo rating is an interesting thing. What it actually represents is your rating when everyone else in the game is a complete unknown to you. It is somewhat odd that it doesn't exclusively represent solo players playing with and against other solo players, but I have had games that turned out that way. Party rating is obviously something over which you have some influence, but that rating's definition is reliant upon relatively consistent teammates, isn't it? In that regard, it's a little strange. That is to say, queuing regularly with players 1000 rating below you would probably have a negative long term impact on your rating as opposed to queuing regularly with players 1000 rating above you, right? What about if you queue one day with the +1000 rating people and the next day queue with the -1000 rating people? What does your resulting party rating mean then? At least that sort of ambiguity is mitigated in your solo rating which should, over time, revolve around you as an individual as opposed to gravitating toward your present company. | ||
|
BurningSera
Ireland19621 Posts
Oh don't get me wrong the system looks good if one joined dota2 after the rmm system, is just that when you suddenly applied the system on the 'old' players everything would be messy there (or messier, as if it wasn't messy enough to begin with). | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
This means that if you consistently queue with players 1000 rating below you, you will still STAY 1000 rating above them. Your MMR isn't going to slide closer to theirs. just that your stack as a whole will move down such that the average MMR of your stack matches appropriately to the MMR of your stack. The MMR spread of your entire stack should remain the same. | ||
|
SeakayKu
United States128 Posts
a short summary of what i read so far... when q for ranked games 1. party ranked, valve assume higher mmr for the party? highly likely, this is vaguely described by dev 2. is the color of players based on mmr? likely, but no proof 3. mmr difference 200+/- can be ignored since anyone can be on 8 game winning streak also, mmr difference more than 500+/- happens at higher mmr, like 5k+, because player pool is smaller 4. elo hell exists? for a 5k player, it takes less than 1 month to get from 3k to 4.5k+, so no for players who are not good enough to out-class his/her current skill plateau, unfortunately yes 5. valve improved q search time by allowing higher mmr variance in a single ranked match effect on 3k~4k games is minimal since player pool is huge 6. planix said his current mmr is around 2.5k all of a sudden he is THAT MUCH MORE FRIENDLY i would love to play with planix sometimes (public proposal? lmfao) 7. my thoughts? who the fuck cares? edit# 8. what is best method to grind mmr? general idea is to play solo mid position with high dps bursts and/or be a communication [cheer]leader | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22213 Posts
On January 21 2014 05:53 TheYango wrote: Remember that the system pretty much always gives +24-26/-24-26 rating per game. Regardless of your initial position relative to the rest of the stack, you still get the same rating gains/losses. I've played as part of stacks with 1k rating difference, and both the top and bottom members of the stack still gain/lose the same MMR for winning/losing. This means that if you consistently queue with players 1000 rating below you, you will still STAY 1000 rating above them. Your MMR isn't going to slide closer to theirs. just that your stack as a whole will move down such that the average MMR of your stack matches appropriately to the MMR of your stack. The MMR spread of your entire stack should remain the same. I don't really understand why they do this though. Shouldn't they have scaling "K-factors" with MMR? | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:17 SeakayKu wrote: 4. elo hell exists? for a 5k player, it takes less than 1 month to get from 3k to 4.5k+, so no for players who are not good enough to out-class his/her current skill plateau, unfortunately yes If you really read all of the thread and came away with this as a conclusion, you might want to go re-read or look more thoroughly. Even at 5k there are highly incompetent players and The 5 and even 6k players that get an alt ID that has been secured as "2k-4k" have a hell of a time getting it up to where they know they should be. Hence, the cry of "rating doesn't work well" since even pros can't seem to change the ELOs of accounts the system thinks should stay in the middle. | ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:17 SeakayKu wrote: [...] 4. elo hell exists? [...] for players who are not good enough to out-class his/her current skill plateau, unfortunately yes What does this even mean? If you are not good enough to out-class players with mmr similar to yours, your rating is clearly not too low. How does that lead to the conclusion that elo hell exists? | ||
|
cecek
Czech Republic18921 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:32 sCCrooked wrote: If you really read all of the thread and came away with this as a conclusion, you might want to go re-read or look more thoroughly. Even at 5k there are highly incompetent players and The 5 and even 6k players that get an alt ID that has been secured as "2k-4k" have a hell of a time getting it up to where they know they should be. Hence, the cry of "rating doesn't work well" since even pros can't seem to change the ELOs of accounts the system thinks should stay in the middle. Can you show me a 5k-6k player who has an account stuck at "2k-4k"? Or a "highly incompetent" 5k player? I am genuinely curious, because I think you're pulling this stuff right out of your ass. Sources, people. | ||
|
SeakayKu
United States128 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:32 sCCrooked wrote: If you really read all of the thread and came away with this as a conclusion, you might want to go re-read or look more thoroughly. Even at 5k there are highly incompetent players and The 5 and even 6k players that get an alt ID that has been secured as "2k-4k" have a hell of a time getting it up to where they know they should be. Hence, the cry of "rating doesn't work well" since even pros can't seem to change the ELOs of accounts the system thinks should stay in the middle. eh? who has that problem? i know at least 1 player who proved that he does not have that problem, which was mention somewhere between pages 85~95 where did you get that player who is 5k+ but could not get alt account up to 4.5k+? of all 112 pages i read, i could not find that | ||
|
SeakayKu
United States128 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:37 Sr18 wrote: What does this even mean? If you are not good enough to out-class players with mmr similar to yours, your rating is clearly not too low. How does that lead to the conclusion that elo hell exists? someone mention religion my conclusion is that if any player believe it exists, it would be because 1. the player is complaining he/she gets stuck AND 2. the player cannot out-class other players with similar mmr other than that, elo hell does not exist i believe elo hell does not exist | ||
|
cecek
Czech Republic18921 Posts
Or... something like that. The "logic" behind elo hell is very confusing. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:32 sCCrooked wrote: If you really read all of the thread and came away with this as a conclusion, you might want to go re-read or look more thoroughly. Even at 5k there are highly incompetent players and The 5 and even 6k players that get an alt ID that has been secured as "2k-4k" have a hell of a time getting it up to where they know they should be. Hence, the cry of "rating doesn't work well" since even pros can't seem to change the ELOs of accounts the system thinks should stay in the middle. I have a really really easy time carrying people at 4.5-5k rating so you should probably back up your claims. Unless really smart people dont have to do it and we have to believe you because you're a superior mind. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On January 21 2014 08:01 Erasme wrote: I have a really really easy time carrying people at 4.5-5k rating so you should probably back up your claims. Unless really smart people dont have to do it and we have to believe you because you're a superior mind. Actually you don't seem to realize that what you are suggesting you do and what I spoke of are completely different things. What you have stated is that people you play with are consistently of high quality and pick well/support well/move around/last hit well/etc (assumably). What I stated was someone of 5k-6k taking an account that has been determined by the MMR system to be at the lower spectrum of perhaps 2k-3k and then seeing if the system correctly identifies them as not belonging there. So far, the results have been absolutely mixed at best, with unsubstantiated claims existing as the majority of evidence for both sides despite the fact they were poorly arrived at. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10989 Posts
In general the system seems to work really good, if you keep in mind that many people don't even have 20 ranked 1on1 games yet.... | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On January 21 2014 08:27 Erasme wrote: Actually i do understand what you're saying and if i can carry 4.5k, I will easily win 99% of my games lower 1v9. Also you have a poor understanding of the matchmaking system. Unless you believe that, overnight, a 2k player can become a 5k player. Since you have roughly 200games to place yourself, if you're really good, you will not end up at 2k. That's not at all what I was saying. It appears you don't understand that I wasn't in any way suggesting that an overnight MMR change of 3k would happen nor would most people interpret it as such. I was not aware the MMR balanced out over 200 games, as I have only played perhaps a quarter of that in total ranked games so far. I guess that design was so that wild swings do not occur often, but all I have been doing since I got placed is steadily rise up. After 50 games, its only +200-300 or so, but I could see how after 150 more, I might have over 1,000 or 2,000 difference made. Perhaps it just FEELS so ridiculously long because 200 games is a lot of time spent playing for the casuals. A 5k player who only plays 15 games a week probably will have to wait a long time to see where they actually are if they got placed at 3.5k for example. | ||
|
Darpa
Canada4413 Posts
On January 20 2014 15:06 Excalibur_Z wrote: How did you find out the ratings of the other players? They're supposed to be private unless they're your friends. If you're strictly asking then of course the numbers you get are probably not going to be very reliable. Also, the main reason you might see large deviations in MMR is because those players are usually part of a stack. I'm 4k and sometimes I play with people who are 4.5k and sometimes I play with people who are 2.5k. "wtf who let this 2.5k noob in the game" well, he's with me, that's why. I would ask them directly, and the ones that would allow it I would friend them and take a look. Most people will accept a friend request from someone they just played with on the same team. The one guy that was 5k was in a group with a guy who was the same as me, around 3100. For the most part people were fairly accurate on the ones i checked, they would overestimate by 50 -100 points but rarely by much | ||
|
zezamer
Finland5701 Posts
| ||
|
SeakayKu
United States128 Posts
when people cannot accept that discrepancy, they either 1. try further to sell towards estimated value (try harder at games) 2. improve product or commodity (get a coach) 3. file petition and ask government to resolve unfair business conduct (complain to valve or on forum) 4. develop in different industry (play another game) others... accepts discrepancy and enjoys doing the business those others: some make big money, some don't but it's living, in the life of dota | ||
|
TrainSamurai
339 Posts
On January 21 2014 06:46 SeakayKu wrote: eh? who has that problem? i know at least 1 player who proved that he does not have that problem, which was mention somewhere between pages 85~95 where did you get that player who is 5k+ but could not get alt account up to 4.5k+? of all 112 pages i read, i could not find that He's talking about http://www.playdota.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1398477. AFAIK he's still stuck in shit creek. You can move from 2k to 4k without system dectecting easily just by inhousing a lot for example. anyone can move from 2k easily... say they moved from 2k to 3k using this method. Are we supposed to just not care because that is still in the trenches? Juice hasn't even managed a 1k rise yet (he hasn't even lost a single game) | ||
| ||
