|
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. |
On December 07 2013 12:24 Heyoka wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 12:17 LeLoup wrote:On December 07 2013 12:15 Heyoka wrote: Now what we need is an actual team ladder where winners get invites to a TI4 qual. That... actually sounds pretty awful. How about a team ladder that is just more than average MMRs first? Can you explain what sounds awful about this? How does turning TI into something more than an invite-only event make it worse?
Because you'll get stomped once you face the pro teams and that's just not entertaining to watch.
|
On December 08 2013 00:58 zeo wrote:So you only get your MMR number? You don't get your exact spot on a list of all the dota players in the world? Shame Single Draft isn't in ranked  On that topic, it would be neat to have a top 500/200 list, grandmaster style.
|
On December 08 2013 01:00 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 12:24 Heyoka wrote:On December 07 2013 12:17 LeLoup wrote:On December 07 2013 12:15 Heyoka wrote: Now what we need is an actual team ladder where winners get invites to a TI4 qual. That... actually sounds pretty awful. How about a team ladder that is just more than average MMRs first? Can you explain what sounds awful about this? How does turning TI into something more than an invite-only event make it worse? Because you'll get stomped once you face the pro teams and that's just not entertaining to watch.
Doesn't make much sense. The "pro" teams should be the ones at the top of the ladder but that's only in theory. Practically must be pretty hard to create a global ladder properly.
|
pretty good, glad to see volvo once again serving the best interests of the community and hardcore scene.
|
That's a smart way of implementing this, nice job.
|
I wouldn't be surprised if Ranked matchmaking turns into a toxic pool of flame. But hey, anything to make my normal matchmaking more fun I'm all for
|
Best news in a while. So glad.
|
On December 07 2013 22:56 JoeTheHoe wrote: is it already live? I updated dota today, not sure if it was for the ranked MM?
?
|
I'm not even sure why people who aren't going to be playing ranked are posting? This has next to zero affect on your current Dota.
And those people who don't believe MMR is a good indicator of skill should probably never complain about getting unbalanced games even in unranked. They're all random then.
|
On December 08 2013 02:08 JoeTheHoe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 22:56 JoeTheHoe wrote: is it already live? I updated dota today, not sure if it was for the ranked MM? ?
The next major update will add a ranked matchmaking feature to the game.
I'm sure it not be added in a random unnannouced update. Maybe next week.
|
On December 07 2013 20:27 Bumblebee wrote: Arhhhhhhhh... I really love ranked matchmaking, it's like the number one thing I need in a game, but this is such a turn-off like.. I don't think there is any way you can use an algorithm to determine a players individual performance. What if the other team always buys the bait (and ultimate this guy die without kills and likely very little assists), but he did the exact job the team wanted him to do? It really doesn't make sense to rate people's individual performance in a win/loss scenario from an algorithm. That being said, this is going to be interesting.
On December 07 2013 20:32 Bumblebee wrote: Also, it incentivises killstealing, taking the farm when you're not supposed to and stuff... It's just not good. :-( The 11 system ladder for DotA 1 in China actually does this sort of thing, and while these are all true, for the most part it just favors certain heroes and ways of playing the game.
In particular, it favors heroes with high fight participation, which results in very fast-paced midgame fighting-oriented game, which in pubs is ultimately a good thing.
|
|
|
On December 08 2013 01:00 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 12:24 Heyoka wrote:On December 07 2013 12:17 LeLoup wrote:On December 07 2013 12:15 Heyoka wrote: Now what we need is an actual team ladder where winners get invites to a TI4 qual. That... actually sounds pretty awful. How about a team ladder that is just more than average MMRs first? Can you explain what sounds awful about this? How does turning TI into something more than an invite-only event make it worse? Because you'll get stomped once you face the pro teams and that's just not entertaining to watch. Why wouldn't pro teams play TMM ladder if it had that as a prize? Basically every team that isn't invited to the qualifier will play.
|
On December 07 2013 20:48 Bumblebee wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 20:45 Unleashing wrote:On December 07 2013 20:32 Bumblebee wrote: Also, it incentivises killstealing, taking the farm when you're not supposed to and stuff... It's just not good. :-( How does it do that? o_o Read the first post I made. It rates people's individual performance via an algorithm and that means you can go down in MMR even if you won a game. When it's ranked, people want to get higher MMR obviously. Since the determining factor is an algorithm to determine your performance, it definitely has something to do with KDA, XPM and GPM. :-) But I think that wins/losses will be by far the biggest determinant. So if you lose games because you were greedy, you'll overall probably go down. I'm not sure to what extent this is true, but that's the way I read it.
"Win/loss is the primary criteria used to update MMR, but individual performance also plays a role, especially when our uncertainty about your MMR is high."
So basically, if you're constantly winning games and going 20-0, you'll go up faster, because clearly the system isn't quite sure how good you are. If you perform "normally", wins/losses will mostly be representative of your MMR.
|
On December 08 2013 04:23 Pokebunny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 20:48 Bumblebee wrote:On December 07 2013 20:45 Unleashing wrote:On December 07 2013 20:32 Bumblebee wrote: Also, it incentivises killstealing, taking the farm when you're not supposed to and stuff... It's just not good. :-( How does it do that? o_o Read the first post I made. It rates people's individual performance via an algorithm and that means you can go down in MMR even if you won a game. When it's ranked, people want to get higher MMR obviously. Since the determining factor is an algorithm to determine your performance, it definitely has something to do with KDA, XPM and GPM. :-) But I think that wins/losses will be by far the biggest determinant. So if you lose games because you were greedy, you'll overall probably go down. I'm not sure to what extent this is true, but that's the way I read it. "Win/loss is the primary criteria used to update MMR, but individual performance also plays a role, especially when our uncertainty about your MMR is high." So basically, if you're constantly winning games and going 20-0, you'll go up faster, because clearly the system isn't quite sure how good you are. If you perform "normally", wins/losses will mostly be representative of your MMR. Key words are "specially when our uncertainty about your MMR is high". It's a very efficient way to bump smurfs quickly to a higher MMR. For a regular player it really shouldn't be that relevant.
|
On December 07 2013 20:49 Bumblebee wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 20:46 Teton wrote:On December 07 2013 19:14 BurningSera wrote:On December 07 2013 18:25 TheEmulator wrote:On December 07 2013 18:15 Laurens wrote:On December 07 2013 17:28 TheEmulator wrote: The most important thing (that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr) is that a good player can't go play ranked on a new account and own the low ranks. Once he gets to 150 games he will be at a really high normal mmr, and will place higher initially when he enters ranked, instead of at the lower end.
edit: unless you purposefully lose 150 games in order to enter ranked at a low mmr. But then you're an idiot if you do that. Are you sure ranked MMR will be based on normal MMR? The article doesn't hint that it will. I think it will just be the 10 placement games and everyone starts with a clean slate. I'm not sure at all, that's why I said "that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr". I think it will be that way, or at least in my mind it makes the most sense. But I have no idea  I am getting this impression that everyone will have a clean start with ranked game because technically all the games we played are not ranked. Matches played in normal matchmaking do not impact your ranked matchmaking MMR, and vice versa.
When you first start using ranked matchmaking, you will enter a calibration phase of 10 games. During this time, your ranked MMR will not be visible. And that makes sense too, because what's the point if we used current mmr (which is a mess) as a baseline for ranked game's mmr :S I am just so damn happy that we will get solo mmr, too many people just purposely stack with tryhards and brag about them mmr. And i hope they will include some sort of hero score too so people who can only play very few heroes will be noted too. Current MMR is fine, do you realise they will be using the same system for ranked? I, for once, think the base mmr in ranked (for your first game)should be your normal mmr I disagree with this because people will have a different approach to ranked games and normal games. Whatever you've done in an unranked setting should not reflect your ranked setting.
Agreed. Sometimes i try to win, sometimes i don't...i try to have fun all the time and play accordingly
Although i think you assume too much in terms of how they rate individual performance, we just don't know
|
On December 08 2013 04:32 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2013 20:49 Bumblebee wrote:On December 07 2013 20:46 Teton wrote:On December 07 2013 19:14 BurningSera wrote:On December 07 2013 18:25 TheEmulator wrote:On December 07 2013 18:15 Laurens wrote:On December 07 2013 17:28 TheEmulator wrote: The most important thing (that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr) is that a good player can't go play ranked on a new account and own the low ranks. Once he gets to 150 games he will be at a really high normal mmr, and will place higher initially when he enters ranked, instead of at the lower end.
edit: unless you purposefully lose 150 games in order to enter ranked at a low mmr. But then you're an idiot if you do that. Are you sure ranked MMR will be based on normal MMR? The article doesn't hint that it will. I think it will just be the 10 placement games and everyone starts with a clean slate. I'm not sure at all, that's why I said "that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr". I think it will be that way, or at least in my mind it makes the most sense. But I have no idea  I am getting this impression that everyone will have a clean start with ranked game because technically all the games we played are not ranked. Matches played in normal matchmaking do not impact your ranked matchmaking MMR, and vice versa.
When you first start using ranked matchmaking, you will enter a calibration phase of 10 games. During this time, your ranked MMR will not be visible. And that makes sense too, because what's the point if we used current mmr (which is a mess) as a baseline for ranked game's mmr :S I am just so damn happy that we will get solo mmr, too many people just purposely stack with tryhards and brag about them mmr. And i hope they will include some sort of hero score too so people who can only play very few heroes will be noted too. Current MMR is fine, do you realise they will be using the same system for ranked? I, for once, think the base mmr in ranked (for your first game)should be your normal mmr I disagree with this because people will have a different approach to ranked games and normal games. Whatever you've done in an unranked setting should not reflect your ranked setting. Agreed. Sometimes i try to win, sometimes i don't...i try to have fun all the time and play accordingly This has nothing to do with what he said though. The first game in ranked should 100% use your old MMR. It makes adjusting into your correct ranked MMR far easier. There's no reason make everyone start from scracth when you have something that is at least moderatelly acurate, even if both ranks will not end up being the same after a few games.
|
On December 08 2013 04:34 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2013 04:32 Prplppleatr wrote:On December 07 2013 20:49 Bumblebee wrote:On December 07 2013 20:46 Teton wrote:On December 07 2013 19:14 BurningSera wrote:On December 07 2013 18:25 TheEmulator wrote:On December 07 2013 18:15 Laurens wrote:On December 07 2013 17:28 TheEmulator wrote: The most important thing (that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr) is that a good player can't go play ranked on a new account and own the low ranks. Once he gets to 150 games he will be at a really high normal mmr, and will place higher initially when he enters ranked, instead of at the lower end.
edit: unless you purposefully lose 150 games in order to enter ranked at a low mmr. But then you're an idiot if you do that. Are you sure ranked MMR will be based on normal MMR? The article doesn't hint that it will. I think it will just be the 10 placement games and everyone starts with a clean slate. I'm not sure at all, that's why I said "that is if ranked mmr is based off your normal mmr". I think it will be that way, or at least in my mind it makes the most sense. But I have no idea  I am getting this impression that everyone will have a clean start with ranked game because technically all the games we played are not ranked. Matches played in normal matchmaking do not impact your ranked matchmaking MMR, and vice versa.
When you first start using ranked matchmaking, you will enter a calibration phase of 10 games. During this time, your ranked MMR will not be visible. And that makes sense too, because what's the point if we used current mmr (which is a mess) as a baseline for ranked game's mmr :S I am just so damn happy that we will get solo mmr, too many people just purposely stack with tryhards and brag about them mmr. And i hope they will include some sort of hero score too so people who can only play very few heroes will be noted too. Current MMR is fine, do you realise they will be using the same system for ranked? I, for once, think the base mmr in ranked (for your first game)should be your normal mmr I disagree with this because people will have a different approach to ranked games and normal games. Whatever you've done in an unranked setting should not reflect your ranked setting. Agreed. Sometimes i try to win, sometimes i don't...i try to have fun all the time and play accordingly This has nothing to do with what he said though. The first game in ranked should 100% use your old MMR. It makes adjusting into your correct ranked MMR far easier. There's no reason make everyone start from scracth when you have something that is at least moderatelly acurate, even if both ranks will not end up being the same after a few games. Yeah, starting with a general estimate of their ranking is a lot better than having absolutely no idea. Your uncertainty will be high, so you'll quickly adjust
|
Before you pass/reject the update, you should read the whole article from dota2 blog as the first post is only a part of the article. It seems like a good step (atleast) towards a balanced skill based mmr.
|
On December 08 2013 04:38 Taters_ wrote: Before you pass/reject the update, you should read the whole article from dota2 blog as the first post is only a part of the article. It seems like a good step (atleast) towards a balanced skill based mmr. I'm pretty sure it's not a step towards that, since he is talking about things that already exist. The only change is the addition of ranked.
|
|
|
|
|
|