|
|
On April 29 2014 03:17 Sn0_Man wrote:I suppose. Direct volvo quote as of a few months ago: 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.
Before asking I really had no context to the numbers, and seeing pros at 6k+ and most people talking about mmr hell around 3k, I thought all those numbers would be like 1000 higher.
I didn't really mean to start the "what mmr = good" discussion since it's very subjective and depends on defining "good" which is why I asked the sc2 league equivalent.
|
Basically if you know ur ranked MMR ur likely in the top 10% I think lol.
|
On April 29 2014 04:03 Sn0_Man wrote:
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.
If mid masters exists, then 4.1k is exactly mid masters. The bottom 33% and the top 33% of the 2% that is masters would be low and high masters.
|
I suppose. However, based on the progression of 3900 being 95% and 4100 being 99%, I'd guess 4300 is in the top 3rd of the "top 2%".
Anyway it was pretty awkward to figure out where the hell you were in masters without any MMR anyways wasn't it? Beyond "I play GM's often" vs "I play Diamonds often".
|
It's not linear, so technically you can't simply do that kind of math, but that's going a bit too far into useless discussion even for our own standards. The fact that the top blows out to over 6k just ruins things as well.
And yeah, I don't think SC2 was really clear about anything.
|
Of course it isn't linear, its bell-curved and the fringes are logarithmic which fits my "math" aka guesstimate fine.
Regardless, we don't actually know if there is, for example, any MMR inflation/deflation inbuilt into the system so using MMR values that old may or may not have any relevance.
|
this dota2 vs sc2 is a very poor analogy, comparing dota to sports is much more apt if we're looking at it holistically.
the mindsets of the majority playing the respective video games are completely different.
|
On April 29 2014 04:07 Sn0_Man wrote:
I suppose. However, based on the progression of 3900 being 95% and 4100 being 99%, I'd guess 4300 is in the top 3rd of the "top 2%".
Anyway it was pretty awkward to figure out where the hell you were in masters without any MMR anyways wasn't it? Beyond "I play GM's often" vs "I play Diamonds often".
iirc points in masters could be compared across divisions, but not for other leagues. There were MMR tools though so you could find your mmr that way.
|
I dont doubt valves numbers.
|
basing off of that old blog post is dumb anyways, its not accurate to the modern levels
|
On April 29 2014 03:52 FuzzyJAM wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 03:49 Plansix wrote: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%.
I agree, I just don't think the skills of SC2 directly translate into dota 2. I was high platinum in SC2 and I'm not nearly as good at dota 2. I care about as much about winning in both, but don't think just because you made it to high platinum or diamond in sc2 will get you to the top 10% of dota.
|
On April 29 2014 04:15 Shaella wrote:
basing off of that old blog post is dumb anyways, its not accurate to the modern levels
on redditstrawpolls is worse.
|
as a sidenote those official valve figures are taken from normal unranked mm, so the impact of skews caused by smurfs/super casuals that have ~10 games played is very high.
on the other hand, it illustrates the entire population in general and is a better snapshot than say, only comparing ranked mmr as that population is inherently biased.
|
On April 29 2014 04:40 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2014 04:15 Shaella wrote:
basing off of that old blog post is dumb anyways, its not accurate to the modern levels on redditstrawpolls is worse.
There is no possible way that a reddit straw poll could lead to a inflation of MMR values across the board. No possible way at all that would happen.
|
Well, to be fair one of the ones on reddit at least had a bot that truly checked ur mmr no lying involved.
Not that there aren't still biases but the most obvious one gets cut out that way.
|
It still doesn't remove the one where people with shitty MMR arnt going to post or be aware of the poll. It's like take a straw poll of people who shit themselves at work and expecting a super accurate number.
|
|
|
|
|
Linking to the result page is something a 3k scrub would do
|
On April 29 2014 05:16 EmilA wrote:Linking to the result page is something a 3k scrub would do
I think you ment to say "majestic champion of the trench"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
