| Forum Index > Dota 2 General |
IRC chatter should remain in IRC - http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=tl.dota2 Posts that relate to topics with their own thread, such as in News, Tournaments or Strategy should go in those threads. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:24 Comeh wrote: so guys uh how you feel about linkens on weaver? (SHIT NO THIS IS JUST AS BAD FUCK FUCK) Depends, how unkillable to do you need him to be? Because if you don't need damage right away, its pretty great. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On July 20 2013 01:33 TheYango wrote: The other thing about Fletcher's statement about Elo not showing progression is that it assumes a static player pool--that if you are at a given skill level, your Elo remains static. However, if League's old system is to be used as an example, that assumption is not true. Constant influx of players at the bottom end of the skill range (which is what happens, as players joining the game/ranked system predominantly represent the bottom end of player skill) causes the average skill level to go down, which in turn inflates the Elo of players above them. You therefore get an artificial sense of progression that acts the same way as SC2's bonus pool did simply because new players are essentially feeding rating into the system by losing to players better than them. This of course stops working once the player pool becomes static. There're influxes of people joining in the game, but there're also people quitting games. If the player pool is 1000 and you're rank 100 (aka ), and the player pool raise to 10000 and your rank is 110, or 999, it doesn't mean that you get worse. The bigger the player pool is. the more competitive the game gets. A mid master in SC2 3 years ago is worse than a mid master today. You are talking about higher skill players feeding off lower skill players, and push the level down. But that's the system's fault. Every MM system is designed to match people who have similar skills together, to minimize the said situation. If that situation happens too often, then it's the system's fault, not the player's pool. Ranking is not only for comparing penises. - What it does is to put people to have the same mentality together. In normal games, you have 10 people with different mentalities meshing together, some play for improvement, some drunk guys, some dudes play to troll, some are bored, some have 10 minutes free time before going out,.....v.. As the result, it's hard to see if you're improving or just feeding off drunk people and stuffs. With ranking and ladders, people are unconsciously put in "tryhard" mode, where they most of the time have to play their best to win. You rarely see people who join ranked games with the intent of trolling often (most of the time they're pro smurfs though). I can tell you for sure that if you compare one person who play 10 ranked games, and one person who play 10 normal game, you'll see the guy that play rank games improve more than the other one. - It's unreasonable to whine that you can't troll or play roles that you feel like in Ladders. MM ladder is designed to match people together as close in term of skill as possible based on their game history. So if you are a main carry and that's your best role, the system will try to match it. It's not the system fault that you're the one that feel like trolling and bored that game. For example, the system tries to match you as main carry, and your team will have 50% win where each player contribute rough 10% in the win. If you suddenly want to play support, you essentially handicap your team, and lower your rough % of win chance (10% to 5% eg). If you lose that game, it's most likely your fault, whether it's directly your fault or your troll decision forces the whole team to play what they're uncomfortable with. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:35 canikizu wrote: There're influxes of people joining in the game, but there're also people quitting games. If the player pool is 1000 and you're rank 100 (aka ), and the player pool raise to 10000 and your rank is 110, or 999, it doesn't mean that you get worse. The bigger the player pool is. the more competitive the game gets. A mid master in SC2 3 years ago is worse than a mid master today. You are talking about higher skill players feeding off lower skill players, and push the level down. But that's the system's fault. Every MM system is designed to match people who have similar skills together, to minimize the said situation. If that situation happens too often, then it's the system's fault, not the player's pool. Ranking is not only for comparing penises. - What it does is to put people to have the same mentality together. In normal games, you have 10 people with different mentalities meshing together, some play for improvement, some drunk guys, some dudes play to troll, some are bored, some have 10 minutes free time before going out,.....v.. As the result, it's hard to see if you're improving or just feeding off drunk people and stuffs. With ranking and ladders, people are unconsciously put in "tryhard" mode, where they most of the time have to play their best to win. You rarely see people who join ranked games with the intent of trolling often (most of the time they're pro smurfs though). I can tell you for sure that if you compare one person who play 10 ranked games, and one person who play 10 normal game, you'll see the guy that play rank games improve more than the other one. - It's unreasonable to whine that you can't troll or play roles that you feel like in Ladders. MM ladder is designed to match people together as close in term of skill as possible based on their game history. So if you are a main carry and that's your best role, the system will try to match it. It's not the system fault that you're the one that feel like trolling and bored that game. For example, the system tries to match you as main carry, and your team will have 50% win where each player contribute rough 10% in the win. If you suddenly want to play support, you essentially handicap your team, and lower your rough % of win chance (10% to 5% eg). If you lose that game, it's most likely your fault, whether it's directly your fault or your troll decision forces the whole team to play what they're uncomfortable with. We have had this debate before and not one really likes its. At the end of the day Valve is going to do what they want, but for the sake of the thread, lets drop the topic. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:35 canikizu wrote: There're influxes of people joining in the game, but there're also people quitting games. Yes, but people quitting the game is more likely to be spread out across the entire skill range, while the pool of players entering the game is always going to be far more bottom-heavy. On the whole, player-base growth/shrinkage probably results in a net decrease in skill level. On July 20 2013 02:35 canikizu wrote: A mid master in SC2 3 years ago is worse than a mid master today. That doesn't counter my point at all because SC2's playerbase growth slowed down to the point where the bottom-end rating infusion stopped having a significant effect a long time ago. Only a game seeing significant playerbase growth like LoL (and hopefully DotA 2 now that the game is out) should actually see this inflation effect. In fact, if you want to make a far out conjecture, you could say that LoL's playerbase growth slowing down contributed to their revamp of their ranked system because the rate of rating inflation due to new players entering the system was no longer high enough to provide that false sense of improvement anymore. On July 20 2013 02:35 canikizu wrote: You are talking about higher skill players feeding off lower skill players, and push the level down. But that's the system's fault. Every MM system is designed to match people who have similar skills together, to minimize the said situation. If that situation happens too often, then it's the system's fault, not the player's pool. There's not fundamentally anything the system can do about it, though. The starting rating will always be the average rating of the current player pool (ou could in theory have the system bottom out somewhere, but that creates worse issues of matchmaking players that aren't actually the same skill level but all have the "bottom" rating). If a new player enters the player pool, he will have that starting rating, but since he will be below average skill, he will simply have to lose games to get down to his appropriate skill level. Valve already has a partial solution to this based on the option to select your skill level upon starting DotA 2 for the first time, but this can only be so good. On July 20 2013 02:35 canikizu wrote: Ranking is not only for comparing penises. - What it does is to put people to have the same mentality together. In normal games, you have 10 people with different mentalities meshing together, some play for improvement, some drunk guys, some dudes play to troll, some are bored, some have 10 minutes free time before going out,.....v.. As the result, it's hard to see if you're improving or just feeding off drunk people and stuffs. With ranking and ladders, people are unconsciously put in "tryhard" mode, where they most of the time have to play their best to win. You rarely see people who join ranked games with the intent of trolling often (most of the time they're pro smurfs though). I can tell you for sure that if you compare one person who play 10 ranked games, and one person who play 10 normal game, you'll see the guy that play rank games improve more than the other one. I have no clue why you turned this into an argument about having a separate ranked ladder, because I wasn't discussing that at all. I was merely commenting on Fletcher's statement that an Elo system does not provide players with a sense of progression, which isn't true so long as there is constant player influx at the bottom end. | ||
|
Xxazn4lyfe51xX
United States976 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:17 superstartran wrote: In other words. Make two ques. Ranked/Try Hard/Non Try hard. Problem solved. I'm sure you don't enjoy it when you get a pubstar that stomps you, nor do you enjoy it when a pubstar is on your team and is trying to tell you how you should play and what to do. This kind of thing is pointless. What happens when a guy in the "non try hard" queue buys wards? Ban him for being too try hard? A team gets KOTL PL, ban them for being too try hard? Some guy goes on a killing spree, ban him for being too try hard? Conversely, if a guy in the "try hard" queue ends up not buying wards at the start of the game, do you ban him for not trying hard enough? There's just no way to do this. | ||
|
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:48 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: This kind of thing is pointless. What happens when a guy in the "non try hard" queue buys wards? Ban him for being too try hard? A team gets KOTL PL, ban them for being too try hard? Some guy goes on a killing spree, ban him for being too try hard? Conversely, if a guy in the "try hard" queue ends up not buying wards at the start of the game, do you ban him for not trying hard enough? There's just no way to do this. If you're in 'non-try hard' que who cares what you do. If you're playing try hard que, why would you not buy wards if you're a support? That's pretty much all there is to it. You're not gonna que try hard mode unless you're expecting a tryhard game. | ||
|
RoyGBiv_13
United States1275 Posts
I'd rather not drop the subject, since it is rather interesting to see what people want out of a ranking, and I am curious what Valve will eventually do to address this. I would prefer if people don't drop to flaming/ego bashing in order to make their points on rankings though. It's a valid point that in LoL and HoN, the rankings brought a lot of bad attitudes out of the community. Perhaps this needs to be addressed as a cultural problem before Valve agrees to add in rankings. As far as the try-hard queue vs non-try-hard queue, it is my biggest gripe against LoL's MM system. I'd love to play the game with my high ELO brother, and I like to try-hard at all games, but queuing with him causes everyone to flame me since I'm 200 ELO below them. This makes me not want to win, or try at all, which ruins the game for everyone. Dota has similar problems, though they are much less severe. | ||
|
ch33psh33p
7650 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:48 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: This kind of thing is pointless. What happens when a guy in the "non try hard" queue buys wards? Ban him for being too try hard? A team gets KOTL PL, ban them for being too try hard? Some guy goes on a killing spree, ban him for being too try hard? Conversely, if a guy in the "try hard" queue ends up not buying wards at the start of the game, do you ban him for not trying hard enough? There's just no way to do this. What kind of counterarugment is this? Stop taking the word tryhard so literally. All he meant is one queue where people play seriously, and one where people do whatever the fuck they want. He didn't literally mean a non-effort allowed queue, just one where people don't compete for points or whatever. Fuck that word and your overreaction to it. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:56 ch33psh33p wrote: Stop taking the word tryhard so literally. All he meant is one queue where people play seriously, and one where people do whatever the fuck they want. The problem is that in a lot of cases, the line between someone who isn't playing seriously and one who is playing seriously but just isn't that good is pretty blurry. | ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:48 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: This kind of thing is pointless. What happens when a guy in the "non try hard" queue buys wards? Ban him for being too try hard? A team gets KOTL PL, ban them for being too try hard? Some guy goes on a killing spree, ban him for being too try hard? Conversely, if a guy in the "try hard" queue ends up not buying wards at the start of the game, do you ban him for not trying hard enough? There's just no way to do this. I think the distinction would be Tryhard queue would be visibly ranked while Non-Tryhard would be just like it is now. So people who want to take it more seriously would play the ranked whereas non-tryhard would be just like it is now. | ||
|
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:57 TheYango wrote: "Try-hard" is pretty subjective. Honestly I don't see why you're distinguishing between a "non-tryhard" player who chooses not to buy wards and a "tryhard" player who is trying but is just bad so forgets to buy them/doesn't know where to play them. The only distinction I can see is that the "tryhard" player might be at an MMR reflected by how well he does when he tries hard, but then ruins games where he fucks around at the same MMR--but really if people want to find ways to make their MMR not representative of their actual skill, they will regardless. The problem is that in a lot of cases, the line between someone who isn't playing seriously and one who is playing seriously but just isn't that good is pretty blurry. There's always going to be issues with any matchmaking system, but there's more issues with putting everyone into one que. Valve keeps saying they want to keep new players from being abused, and yet they refuse to separate the more competitive/serious part of the community away from the new players. If you're playing in the more serious que, you're gonna just have to expect tempers to flare. That's how it has always been in IHLs, and anyone that has played DotA 1 has known that everything from RGC, Dotalicious, GArena, IHCS, DXD, etc. has always had tons of flaming for bad play. It's not an issue with the system itself, it's an issue with the community. However, now you have all of the same tryhard/serious players/pubstars all in the same que with players that are new/trying to improve, and all of a sudden you have tons of flaming, far more than before. | ||
|
maru~
2345 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:17 superstartran wrote: There's always going to be issues with any matchmaking system, but there's more issues with putting everyone into one que. Valve keeps saying they want to keep new players from being abused, and yet they refuse to separate the more competitive/serious part of the community away from the new players. If you're playing in the more serious que, you're gonna just have to expect tempers to flare. That's how it has always been in IHLs, and anyone that has played DotA 1 has known that everything from RGC, Dotalicious, GArena, IHCS, DXD, etc. has always had tons of flaming for bad play. It's not an issue with the system itself, it's an issue with the community. However, now you have all of the same tryhard/serious players/pubstars all in the same que with players that are new/trying to improve, and all of a sudden you have tons of flaming, far more than before. Except that new players don't get matched with experienced/strong players. "Tryhard" is just a bullshit excuse. The only issue that arises from only having 1 player pool is that if you are a strong player but just want to goof around instead of playing seriously you can't really do that, but then you could play some casual inhouses or something. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On July 20 2013 02:46 TheYango wrote: There's not fundamentally anything the system can do about it, though. The starting rating will always be the average rating of the current player pool (ou could in theory have the system bottom out somewhere, but that creates worse issues of matchmaking players that aren't actually the same skill level but all have the "bottom" rating). If a new player enters the player pool, he will have that starting rating, but since he will be below average skill, he will simply have to lose games to get down to his appropriate skill level. Valve already has a partial solution to this based on the option to select your skill level upon starting DotA 2 for the first time, but this can only be so good. I have no clue why you turned this into an argument about having a separate ranked ladder, because I wasn't discussing that at all. I was merely commenting on Fletcher's statement that an Elo system does not provide players with a sense of progression, which isn't true so long as there is constant player influx at the bottom end. The second topic I didn't mean to talk about your quote, that's why I spaced it far from the first one. I agree with what you said that there're nothing to separate the noob and the newbie. But I also think that is why number of games and level will come into places. There's no reason to match people who have established MMR (aka people who has been playing a lot of games) and people who have spiked MMR (just starting out, either smurfs or newbies). A newbie shouldn't be losing a lot of games and pushed down the rating too far if he simply got matched with other newbies. In LoL you have a long (too fuking long) period of playing normal games, and as the result, you have established MMR for the ranked ladder already. In Dota, we don't actually have that. Another problem currently is that people don't trust Dota2's MM system. For example, with normal ranked queue, if you are Diamond and you got matched with the guy who only have 20 games win, you'll go "holy shit that guys must be a smurf and really good." But right now, because noone knows where they are in the rating, and there're nothing to separate the 20win lucky newbies, and 20win smurfs, people will assume the 20wins guy is a newbie and they whine about it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:25 maru~ wrote: Except that new players don't get matched with experienced/strong players. "Tryhard" is just a bullshit excuse. The only issue that arises from only having 1 player pool is that if you are a strong player but just want to goof around instead of playing seriously you can't really do that, but then you could play some casual inhouses or something. The classic reasoning why a good player is matched with a new player is that it was done to "balance" the teams. That the strong player was SO good that the client couldn't find people to match them with, so it put them with some pubstar players and put one other strong player on the other team. I have always been very suspect of this claim and think it might be the Dunning and Kruger effect in full force, but that is just me. Edit: The change log thing aside, which was an error in the MM system. | ||
|
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:25 maru~ wrote: Except that new players don't get matched with experienced/strong players. "Tryhard" is just a bullshit excuse. The only issue that arises from only having 1 player pool is that if you are a strong player but just want to goof around instead of playing seriously you can't really do that, but then you could play some casual inhouses or something. See Valve MM changelog. It still happens if you que with a player that is vastly below you in skill level too. On July 20 2013 03:32 Plansix wrote: The classic reasoning why a good player is matched with a new player is that it was done to "balance" the teams. That the strong player was SO good that the client couldn't find people to match them with, so it put them with some pubstar players and put one other strong player on the other team. I have always been very suspect of this claim and think it might be the Dunning and Kruger effect in full force, but that is just me. Smurf detection is pretty sensitive in DotA 2, so it's pretty easy that a newer player could just be naturally good at DotA 2 and spike their ELO up absurdly high. Maybe he read a few guides, watched tutorials, practiced vs bots, etc. and has a natural up on newer players. Not to mention that parties with big gaps in ELO/MMR will tend to have wacky teammates of wildly different MMRS. | ||
|
Targe
United Kingdom14103 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:37 superstartran wrote: See Valve MM changelog. It still happens if you que with a player that is vastly below you in skill level too. Smurf detection is pretty sensitive in DotA 2, so it's pretty easy that a newer player could just be naturally good at DotA 2 and spike their ELO up absurdly high. Maybe he read a few guides, watched tutorials, practiced vs bots, etc. and has a natural up on newer players. Not to mention that parties with big gaps in ELO/MMR will tend to have wacky teammates of wildly different MMRS. But having a ranked ladder will not fix that problem. The system will still be prone to errors in ELO/MMR caused by people getting a bunch of wins on a new account and then going "I'm ready for ranked" and getting stomped/fucking up the game. The simple fact of the matter is that you are connecting to 5 random people from god knowns where. There is no system valve can build that is going to make sure that those players are all going to be as serious about playing dota as you want them to be. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:37 superstartran wrote: See Valve MM changelog. It still happens if you que with a player that is vastly below you in skill level too. Smurf detection is pretty sensitive in DotA 2, so it's pretty easy that a newer player could just be naturally good at DotA 2 and spike their ELO up absurdly high. Maybe he read a few guides, watched tutorials, practiced vs bots, etc. and has a natural up on newer players. Not to mention that parties with big gaps in ELO/MMR will tend to have wacky teammates of wildly different MMRS. I don't think Smurf detection is a good thing. A game shouldn't be designed to accommodate for smurfing because it's gonna just encourage smurfing. After all smurfing in a sense mean you're cheating the system. A truly new player, even a pro, won't be able to get used to the graphics, the hero visual, the effects off all spells and stuff in 10, 20 games. Once you tryhard to detect smurfs, you're gonna overdetect lucky newbies. That being said, I don't think we have any actual smurf detection going on here. I think that people who has lower game count are actually in "hidden" placement matches. The problem is nobody knows whether that guy is in there because the MM system is doing its job or just simply messup. So when the guy screws up in the actual game, people will just assume the system is mess up. | ||
|
Comeh
United States18919 Posts
On July 20 2013 03:52 TheYango wrote: TBH from reading Fletcher's posts, most of the "fucked up" games that come in are for people that are stacking with wide MMR differences making the game suck for people it tries to fill into the middle. For every stack that has an enormous MMR gap between the players, you have to find a game for them--and you just end up having people get shafted by this when they're the middle player that gets filled into a pair of stacks. Even though the teams are balanced, games are just fundamentally shitty when you have games like that--but how do you solve that issue without prohibiting those players from playing with their friends? One thing that's worth noting is that sometimes its hard to tell how different your MMR is between friends. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Shine vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs EffOrt
OSC
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
