|
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 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right.
U should not ask a question which u allready know the answer too. No, doesnt seem likely now does it? If u have a little higher mmr u will never carry a team to 70% without u playing an OP hero and owning with it. 2nd u quote me but ignore my main point.
You can also have a higher winrate because u only counterpick heros in AP. Does this imply that the player in question is more skilled? No, i dont think so, it implies he knows something about the heros. Skill, knowledge, execution is hard to measure in the dota2 and still providing a fun gamingexperiences at that. But if he played 100 games in the same setting, he should win more then his friends. As i see it, winrates are the only possibility to ensure a ratingsystem so that everybody gets alot of enjoyment no matter if they only play 1 hero, allways random, random draft, cm or cd.
|
On December 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right.
No what he's saying is that if you actually were better than your number, then you would go up (even slowly you would still go up) because you would factually win more games than you lose. Most people however are not better than their number and as such don't win as much to move up. They just can't believe it because clearly they are the gods of Dota and it is everyone else's fault that they are where they are.
|
On December 21 2013 22:37 LeLoup wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right. No what he's saying is that if you actually were better than your number, then you would go up (even slowly you would still go up) because you would factually win more games than you lose. Most people however are not better than their number and as such don't win as much to move up. They just can't believe it because clearly they are the gods of Dota and it is everyone else's fault that they are where they are.
Yes and no. I m saying that skill and mmr are partly correlated but mmr is not a measure of pure skill because its i.e. hard to rate a randompicker against an allpicker or a opheropicker. He still thinks mmr-differences are the same as differences in skill, which as i define skill, doesnt have to be true. The only thing im sure of is that a big part of mmr is defined by winrate and number of games. These two parameters give u a nice set to bring players together to create the most enjoyable experience for them, nothing more nothing less. So, yes, indirectly it does give u a rating, but mostly so that u can enjoy dota2 as much as possible any way and/or mode u want.
|
On December 21 2013 22:46 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 22:37 LeLoup wrote:On December 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right. No what he's saying is that if you actually were better than your number, then you would go up (even slowly you would still go up) because you would factually win more games than you lose. Most people however are not better than their number and as such don't win as much to move up. They just can't believe it because clearly they are the gods of Dota and it is everyone else's fault that they are where they are. Yes and no. I m saying that skill and mmr are partly correlated but mmr is not a measure of pure skill because its i.e. hard to rate a randompicker against an allpicker or a opheropicker. He still thinks mmr-differences are the same as differences in skill, which as i define skill, doesnt have to be true. The only thing im sure of is that a big part of mmr is defined by winrate and number of games. These two parameters give u a nice set to bring players together to create the most enjoyable experience for them, nothing more nothing less. So, yes, indirectly it does give u a rating, but mostly so that u can enjoy dota2 as much as possible any way and/or mode u want.
If you're not picking a hero to have the best chance of winning the game, don't be surprised when you don't win as many games.
MMR will never be able to evaluate how hard someone tries at the game.
If you think you're high skilled but you're losing because you're not "picking OP heroes", what makes you think picking those same heroes at a higher MMR would lead you to win any more?
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On December 21 2013 22:37 LeLoup wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right. No what he's saying is that if you actually were better than your number, then you would go up (even slowly you would still go up) because you would factually win more games than you lose. Most people however are not better than their number and as such don't win as much to move up. They just can't believe it because clearly they are the gods of Dota and it is everyone else's fault that they are where they are.
1.If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games.
2.maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true.
3.yes it is
he definitely said you would win 70%
im not disputing that you wont gradually increase in mmr with skill, im just wondering why you would dispute the fact that being marginally better won't give you a 70% wr
|
well i got 75% winrate in solo ranked with 6k mmr, and im almost always the highest rated player in the game except if im against jerax or topson dirty earth spirit pickers.... so yeah, dont dispute get better.
i also have 75% winrate over my 2.3k games played. oh well ig uess im just me.
|
I said genuinely better, as in objectively better.
If it's that obvious you are ahead of the other 9 people you will end up winning 70% of the games. However you need to look at it objectively. People seem to remember when they went 10-2-7 and lost and not when they went 3-7-2 and lost. Look through your match history and see if all your losses are with good stats (spoiler, no they arent). Then you would end up winning 70% of the games I'd say. The number obviously pulled out of my butt since I don't have any source for it but whatever, steady rating progress.
500 Rating is also a lot I think. If you played HoN the difference between 1500 and 1600 was pretty big. And 1600 and 1700, and 1700 and 1800 etc. And you gained/lost around 12-15 rating there.
I'm stuck on my rating because I am not better than everyone else I get matched with. Just like every other person who is stuck on their. Stop judging your teammates based on one game. We all have shitty games. If you are stuck on a rating then you are stuck there for a reason.
|
On December 21 2013 23:12 Targe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2013 22:37 LeLoup wrote:On December 21 2013 22:16 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 21:24 govie wrote:On December 21 2013 21:14 Targe wrote:On December 21 2013 20:42 DrPandaPhD wrote:On December 21 2013 12:13 SS.Shark wrote:
This is the worst rating system Volvo could come up with. You lose points no matter what when you lose a game. No matter how much you carry a team. Doesnt matter if you end up 21-0 or 0-21. Doesnt matter if you're support and you finish 5-1 and your carry is 0-5. Same crap. And how is this motivating/rewarding players for their efforts ? You still end up in the same queue with the feeders you had in the previous game because you lost the same amount of points and your MMR is the same. Rdiculous If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. Otherwise you are stuck on that rating for a reason.. maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. not that i agree with first guy yes it is. it says that u will win more then u loose if paired to the same 2 teams again. Winn/loss is easy to calculate, skill however is not. I think u should generally not assume mmr means skillrating. Ofcourse for most there will some sort of correlation between the two, but a higher mmr then your friend doesnt say you are more skilled at all, it says your wins-loss ratio is better then that of your friend within the heropool you and he played. I myself would rate someone that plays random in ranked of higher skill then someone that doesnt if they would have around the same mmr. Thats why mmr is fine if its based on win-loss mostly. Because if the samplesize is big enough, u will see a pretty descent and accurate rating to give everyone a nice game of there skilllevel within the size of there heropool they like to play with. Even if they play random, or only 1 hero. MMR isnt there to give u a rating on how good u are compared to others, it exists to give u the most pleasant dotaexperience Valve can offer you, thats something totally different. youre saying someone whos slightly better can carry his team to a 70% wr every game? right. No what he's saying is that if you actually were better than your number, then you would go up (even slowly you would still go up) because you would factually win more games than you lose. Most people however are not better than their number and as such don't win as much to move up. They just can't believe it because clearly they are the gods of Dota and it is everyone else's fault that they are where they are. 1. Show nested quote +If you are genuinely better than the people you get matched with you will win like 70%ish of the games. 2. Show nested quote +maybe if youre a lot better, but if youre just better by say 500 mmr's skill worth then this isnt true. 3. he definitely said you would win 70% im not disputing that you wont gradually increase in mmr with skill, im just wondering why you would dispute the fact that being marginally better won't give you a 70% wr
If you're actually 500 points better but 'stuck' at a rating 500 points below, yes, you should win that much. If you're really getting put with people that are 500 points below you than you should be able to take over the game and win regardless of hero. There are very very few heroes in the game that can't have any impact at all on the game, and that fact is why better players win more. Like it or not, your rating is usually right and all the crybaby stuff that comes with visual numbers means nothing because if you were better, you would be higher.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
my rating is right :D im not disputing the fact im in the trench, im just saying even if youre better than your teammates and enemies youre not guaranteed to get 70%
|
also eu ratings are higher on average im pretty sure. i wud say a 5.4k on USE is like a 5.7k on EU but thats just me.
|
On December 22 2013 00:34 ChunderBoy wrote:
also eu ratings are higher on average im pretty sure. i wud say a 5.4k on USE is like a 5.7k on EU but thats just me.
How can you say this.....?
|
On December 22 2013 00:40 harodihg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 00:34 ChunderBoy wrote:
also eu ratings are higher on average im pretty sure. i wud say a 5.4k on USE is like a 5.7k on EU but thats just me. How can you say this.....?
personal observation. im pretty experienced with the everyone in the toppest of the toppest of brackets aka constant firstpagers. in both servers that is. and i also play in both.
also i think the highest rating on USE is a guy with 5.8k
and the highest in EU is a guy with 6.2k
|
On December 22 2013 00:41 ChunderBoy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 00:40 harodihg wrote:On December 22 2013 00:34 ChunderBoy wrote:
also eu ratings are higher on average im pretty sure. i wud say a 5.4k on USE is like a 5.7k on EU but thats just me. How can you say this.....? personal observation. im pretty experienced with the everyone in the toppest of the toppest of brackets aka constant firstpagers. in both servers that is. and i also play in both. also i think the highest rating on USE is a guy with 5.8k and the highest in EU is a guy with 6.2k
I can't handle this.
Requesting ban on myself.
|
On December 22 2013 00:44 harodihg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 00:41 ChunderBoy wrote:On December 22 2013 00:40 harodihg wrote:On December 22 2013 00:34 ChunderBoy wrote:
also eu ratings are higher on average im pretty sure. i wud say a 5.4k on USE is like a 5.7k on EU but thats just me. How can you say this.....? personal observation. im pretty experienced with the everyone in the toppest of the toppest of brackets aka constant firstpagers. in both servers that is. and i also play in both. also i think the highest rating on USE is a guy with 5.8k and the highest in EU is a guy with 6.2k I can't handle this. Requesting ban on myself.
oh well
|
|
|
how in the world do u get 6.2k rating. Its a bird its a plane ... so who is it? is it even a proplayer?
|
On December 22 2013 01:08 govie wrote:
how in the world do u get 6.2k rating. Its a bird its a plane ... so who is it? is it even a proplayer?
topson earth spirit picker, i won against him tho. its this guy http://dotabuff.com/players/94054712
|
|
|
On December 22 2013 01:13 ChunderBoy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 01:08 govie wrote:
how in the world do u get 6.2k rating. Its a bird its a plane ... so who is it? is it even a proplayer? topson earth spirit picker, i won against him tho. its this guy http://dotabuff.com/players/94054712
Highest GPM = 1123 on Earth Spirit.
JEEEEESUS.
|
On December 22 2013 01:25 BlitzerSC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 01:13 ChunderBoy wrote:On December 22 2013 01:08 govie wrote:
how in the world do u get 6.2k rating. Its a bird its a plane ... so who is it? is it even a proplayer? topson earth spirit picker, i won against him tho. its this guy http://dotabuff.com/players/94054712 Highest GPM = 1123 on Earth Spirit. JEEEEESUS.
Ive read about him somewhere, isnt he the one that could walk on water? jeez its insane
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.theprospect.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/we-are-not-worthy.jpg)
