|
|
On April 29 2014 02:41 Sn0_Man wrote:
I mean, yes those are the figures valve posted. Reddit survey had average at like 3.3K or something though which lines up closer to my numbers. I guess it has to do with demographics etc (accounts with <10 games or currently inactive, etc). Dunno.
Theres no way 3.5K is "low masters" aka 98th percentile. Maybe 4K flat I'd be willing to believe.
Surveys at Reddit/TL/Etc are always skewed towards higher numbers. I doubt 3.3k is the real average, it should definatelly be lower than that.
|
I suppose.
Direct volvo quote as of a few months ago:
5% 1100
10% 1500
25% 2000
50% 2250
75% 2731
90% 3200
95% 3900
99% 4100
Which put masters at around 4K.
I dont really know the distribution statistics for SC2, espeically since this volvo stat likely includes inactive etc accounts.
|
Reddit shows 2.5k at like bottom 3%, that's way, way too low. 3k At bottom 15%, when it should be at least 50% (Dota 2 blog puts 50% at 2250). It's really off.
There's also the issue that it's already biased just from looking only at Ranked. "Bronze" players dont play ranked nearly as much as "Masters" players.
|
Okay okay whatever.
All I have to say is that I'm like 4.3K and I suck ass. If I'm "high masters" then wtf lol.
|
I have friends who are really good Football players but they are all completelly awful compared to Messi. The standards on TL are not the average. 95% of the players here would do really well at Garena, Bnet, etc. The average Dota player is the autoattacking multiple boots moron everyone laughs about, he is not the bottom of the curve.
The SC2 playerbase is much smaller than the Dota playerbase, so top 1% also means more. In Dota you basically have to create a new ranking system just for the top 1%.
|
On April 29 2014 03:23 Sn0_Man wrote:
Okay okay whatever.
All I have to say is that I'm like 4.3K and I suck ass. If I'm "high masters" then wtf lol.
well, context is always important. High masters players suck ass too compared to their professional counter-parts, but to the general population, they're pretty good.
it's the same boring argument that happened in sc2, 'im masters im good', vs 'masters is shit' with everyone arguing from different perspectives and drawing from different comparisons.
|
I wonder if a more interesting axis of comparison wouldn't be "games vs MMR" instead of "Players vs MMR". Simply because IN GENERAL one would expect a higher ranked player to play more games per day (yes yes infinite counterexamples exist idgaf).
|
Masters is SC2 is a lot like being a very talent highschool athlete. Your good for the pool of players you are in, but your not going to set the world on fire. GM is about the same level as a division 1 college sports team.
And pros ande pros. Their MMR doesn't fucking matter. And the rest of us just play as a hobby.
|
No, you can safely make that assumption. A small number of counterexamples in a large pool is meaningless. It's just not as relevant as a statistic. You want to know how good you are compared to other people, not to muddy the statistic with other data.
You could do something like rank all players that play at least X games a week, so you could see how good you are compared to other very active players, but that's much harder to measure.
Creating stats just for the sake of creating stats is easy and meaningless. You have to think of a question on what's the best way to answer it with stats. "How many of Dota 2 games are at a high level?" is just not as interesting to players as "How good I am compared to other people?"
|
I imagine Dota has a much more "casual" audience than StarCraft. Someone who has the sort of mentality typical of a Gold/Platinum StarCraft 1v1 player is almost guaranteed to be near the top (say, top 10%) of the Dota playerbase purely because of attitude and effort.
|
Or the simple question of "am I better than most dota players?" And using MMR to determine if you are over the 50% mark.
|
On April 29 2014 03:45 Plansix wrote:
Or the simple question of "am I better than most dota players?" And using MMR to determine if you are over the 50% mark.
Also, if you even care enough to ask this question, chances are the answer is "Yes".
|
You know, they made a separate MMR system so we don't have make these cross-game labeled comparisons!!1
|
I played with a valve employee who's literally never played a ranked game in his life and is actually pretty decent. Well, at least not 2K kind of bad.
People who don't give a rats ass about their ranking don't necessarily suck.
|
On April 29 2014 03:46 FuzzyJAM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 03:45 Plansix wrote:
Or the simple question of "am I better than most dota players?" And using MMR to determine if you are over the 50% mark. Also, if you even care enough to ask this question, chances are the answer is "Yes".
Few people really care about average, since it's so easy to be above average in virtually anything if you put some effort into it. Most people that do, do it because they artificially raised the bar. "The average "anything" can't be that bad." Yes it is.
|
On April 29 2014 03:44 FuzzyJAM wrote:
I imagine Dota has a much more "casual" audience than StarCraft. Someone who has the sort of mentality typical of a Gold/Platinum StarCraft 1v1 player is almost guaranteed to be near the top (say, top 10%) of the Dota playerbase purely because of attitude and effort.
I don't think so. The skill sets for each game are very different. I was in that group and I'm not at the top 10% of dota. Mechanical skill will only get you so far in dota and not nearly as far as it will get you in SC2.
|
Mechanics are more important in dota than people think, take it from a mechanical disaster.
|
On April 29 2014 03:48 Sn0_Man wrote:
I played with a valve employee who's literally never played a ranked game in his life and is actually pretty decent. Well, at least not 2K kind of bad.
People who don't give a rats ass about their ranking don't necessarily suck.
I said if you care at all you probably don't suck, not that if you don't care at all you probably suck. Different.
On April 29 2014 03:49 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 03:44 FuzzyJAM wrote:
I imagine Dota has a much more "casual" audience than StarCraft. Someone who has the sort of mentality typical of a Gold/Platinum StarCraft 1v1 player is almost guaranteed to be near the top (say, top 10%) of the Dota playerbase purely because of attitude and effort. I don't think so. The skill sets for each game are very different. I was in that group and I'm not at the top 10% of dota. Mechanical skill will only get you so far in dota and not nearly as far as it will get you in SC2.
Well, exceptions exist. But I meant to edit out the "Gold" part. I think Platinum is a pretty reasonable cut off point for where you had to at least have some idea of the game.
The point is just that if you care about winning, almost everyone can be better than the bottom 50%.
|
On April 29 2014 03:23 Sn0_Man wrote:
Okay okay whatever.
All I have to say is that I'm like 4.3K and I suck ass. If I'm "high masters" then wtf lol.
no but ur masters and mid masters suck ass
|
Technically anything over 4.1K is high masters since 4.1K is by definition the midline in masters (the 1%). How high? not that high obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
