|
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player.
This is not true. This is, incidentally, why many people are terrible at practicing. People don't focus on trying to get better at the game; they focus on trying to win. It sounds silly to differentiate the two, but it's true. There is no point striving to win more games because you will always win ~50% regardless! Instead, you should focus on trying to improve your skill - even if that means doing something that will lose you games!
I could go and spend 10 games on ladder and focus as hard as I can on injects. I'll not intentionally fail the game, but because injects are what I'm focusing on for those games my overall play, scouting/micro etc, may suffer. Chances are I'll have a greater likelihood of losing those games - but I'll become a better player in the process.
I could get cannon rushed on ladder and die horribly... and that will mean I am now a better player than I was. That experience will help me become a better player, because even the WORST failures serve to give you a clearer insight of what to do (or not do) next time. As a tool for learning and improvement losses are more useful than wins, because it's harder to see a clear path of improvement on a win. Every game is a learning experience - especially the losses, hence Whitera's famous quote of "more gg more skill".
Overall winrates are useless. They're useless for long term analysis (it's 50%), and they're useless for short-term analysis (small sample size means any value is likely to be inaccurate, and, as I said above, winning more recently doesn't even mean you've improved as a player). They give you no useful information whatsoever. Concentrate on playing better (even at the expense of wins!), find some better metrics to judge your play by, and screw the winrate (it's 50%!).
|
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:Show nested quote +They are progress statistics that tell how many games you have played and distribution of the end results of those games. What use would such a statistic be? I am assuming you are talking about the remaining games after you take (wins - losses). If the number is positive, the player has improved faster than the average player, and if negative the opposite. The bigger the number, the bigger the change since last season. However, since it does not show your MMR, you still don't know where the person was last season. They may have improved faster than their "peers" in a league below them, but it doesn't mean that their positive win ratio is of any interest to you.
I find this an odd question. Of course I want to know how many games I have played and what were the results. Number of games played, number of games won & number of games lost are basic progress statistics. Basic statistics don't have to have special uses. But often they have uses especially if other data/statistics is available.
And if you are talking about the win-lose difference (wins minus loses) - Based on it you can _roughly_ deduce your MMR change if you mostly face similar MMR level opponents during that period (each win will increase your MMR, each loss will decrease your MMR). The change itself does not necessary mean you have improved. It means that your MMR has changed. And there are ways to estimate your relative starting level too. But it is often easier just to use the MMR tool for this, as it's fairly accurate.
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:Show nested quote + [...] but can also e.g. be used to _roughly_ estimate what kind of changes there have been to your MMR in those games. and then Show nested quote +Win-loss stats are not for deducing player skill level due to how the ladder system works Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player. The whole reason we have leagues is because we consider them divided by player skill. League placement is based on MMR and MMR is based on how many games you win and against whom you win.
For example if you get a win streak of 10 against similar MMR level opponents, you know that the system will start pairing you roughly half a league (size of a typical league, master & bronze are larger) higher opponents than before the streak. If your typical level is less than that you might want to take a break and continue laddering when you are fresh. And by doing so maximize your chances against more difficult opponents. And when you are playing against 'better' opponents, there is more potential for improvement.
And your league only tells that your MMR was inside that league when you were placed. It does not tell what has happened to your MMR since.
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
The reason I don't like win rates as a statistic is that it only shows how much you win, but is blind to whom you win against. There is no context in which each win can be valued.
You yourself know whom you play against. You can always check their profiles and who they usually play against. And if you are not at the top of the ladder, the matchmaking system actually does a good job pairing you against similar level opponents (there is rarely a big difference regarding MMR. Of course during some hours of day there are less people playing and matchmaker may have to widen the search). And as the MMR difference is usually quite consistent it is possible to generalize and get surprisingly accurate results. This is of course a _rough_ method. But you can test the method out yourself e.g. by checking your relative starting MMR with the MMR tool, and then playing tens of games and estimating by the W-L difference where your MMR is after the games. And then checking how the estimate relates the result given by the tool. The method works surprisingly well even if it's rough.
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:Show nested quote +Also by looking at other's win-lose differences it quickly tells if the player has risen or dropped (large difference) based on MMR (highlights especially MMR abusers quite nicely). Looking at players best league placement also highlights MMR abusers. Someone dropping 10 or even 15 games over a season is not necessarily significant if they played 1500 games. Especially not if 10 of those drops occured because they were playing on tilt last night. 15 negative w/l over an entire season is a lot more significant than recent fluctuations, as those will normalise. Not to mention the overall win/loss ratio for several seasons.
Many MMR abusers do not just drop 10 or 15 games. They drop much more so their MMR drops several leagues. Thus they often have considerably negative win-lose difference. Also players having extremely high winratio, but mediocre ladder points in some league often tells that that person has risen a lot lately regarding MMR (likely promoted a league or leagues. Has possibly crashed his MMR before the season break or is playing a new account). And services such as sc2ranks offer historic data regarding players' leagues and points.
On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then again, I never did care about win/loss ratios since I will need to become amuch better player in order to play against someone that I would value keeping statistics of. Either way, my point is that I think a graph and the actual MMR would be a much better tool for evaluating performance than simply adding losses, which is most likely not going to be all that surprising anyway.
It would be great if Blizzard would reveal the actual MMR numbers, but it seems they are not going to do so. Thus we have to use other data to estimate our relative positions (ladder points, ranks and even the adjusted points often give inaccurate info). Thankfully at the moment MMR tool provides quite accurate relative numbers, but how long? Its creator Skeldark (who has done a great favor for the community!) plans to retire from the project when HotS is published. It is unknown if somebody else will continue the MMR tool project after that.
On November 24 2012 12:12 Hairy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player. This is not true. This is, incidentally, why many people are terrible at practicing. People don't focus on trying to get better at the game; they focus on trying to win. It sounds silly to differentiate the two, but it's true. There is no point striving to win more games because you will always win ~50% regardless! Instead, you should focus on trying to improve your skill - even if that means doing something that will lose you games!
No. If your skill level / performance changes (actual improvement, degrading due to inactivity, starting a new account) you will either win or lose more until you reach your typical MMR range. If you maintain that level your winratio will approach 50 % for games played after that point.
For example in an _imaginative_ scenario if I start laddering with an account that has stabilized at the bottom border of silver and if my typical level is at bottom of gold (in reality it is not), I will fairly fast reach my typical level but to reach it, I will roughly need to win 18 games more than I lose. After I have reached my typical level I roughly win 50% of the games. In this scenario my overall winratio was not 50% as while my MMR rose I simply won more than I lost.
On November 24 2012 12:12 Hairy wrote:
I could go and spend 10 games on ladder and focus as hard as I can on injects. I'll not intentionally fail the game, but because injects are what I'm focusing on for those games my overall play, scouting/micro etc, may suffer. Chances are I'll have a greater likelihood of losing those games - but I'll become a better player in the process.
I could get cannon rushed on ladder and die horribly... and that will mean I am now a better player than I was. That experience will help me become a better player, because even the WORST failures serve to give you a clearer insight of what to do (or not do) next time. As a tool for learning and improvement losses are more useful than wins, because it's harder to see a clear path of improvement on a win. Every game is a learning experience - especially the losses, hence Whitera's famous quote of "more gg more skill".
Overall winrates are useless. They're useless for long term analysis (it's 50%), and they're useless for short-term analysis (small sample size means any value is likely to be inaccurate, and, as I said above, winning more recently doesn't even mean you've improved as a player). They give you no useful information whatsoever. Concentrate on playing better (even at the expense of wins!), find some better metrics to judge your play by, and screw the winrate (it's 50%!).
You are still focusing on "it is not a metric of skill" and not thinking from different viewpoints. Yes I agree - You cannot deduce the skill level by looking at bare win-loss statistics (not ratio!), but W-L stats still have other valid uses. And as the winratio is a percentage, it is not too interesting as it tells less about the progress the more you play. The win-loss difference is much more interesting statistic. And the winratio is rarely exactly 50%, even if it in most cases approaches it after your 'typical MMR level' has been reached. Even you told yours was 51%, that is not exactly 50%.
|
On November 23 2012 19:39 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 18:19 emc wrote:
OP, you are literally the only person on TL who detests seeing W/L, you are a minority in this forum. there were tonnes of people who said the win/loss caused ladder anxiety. And that for sure happens to me when I go on a losing steak that just seems never ending.
That is what unranked is for though then  best of both worlds honestly.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
|
On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote:Overall win/loss values are absolutely useless; due to matchmaking, your overall win/loss is always going to trend towards 50/50 unless you are at the very extremes of the top or bottom of the ladder. If you want to see how many wins you have right now, just take your total matches played and halve it and you'll be pretty much spot on. Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant. It's 50%! To elaborate on this, it doesn't even matter what league you're in. Silver players will have a 50% win ratio. Gold players will have a 50% win ratio. Diamond players will have a 50% win ratio. Unless you're at the very top or bottom of ladder (or have played very few games), your win ratio is ~50%. If you're looking for a metric by which to measure your skill or progress, you would be hard-pushed to find something worse. EDIT: just glanced at my sc2gears history since my harddrive exploded; Guess what my win ratio is out of 229 games? + Show Spoiler +
Unless you are constantly changing in skill...then your winrate will either be higher or lower than 50%. My winrate has been as high as 60% and as low as 45%. If you are improving at the average rate, your winrate will be 50%. If you're improving much faster you'll win much more and if you are improving slower/getting worse, you will win less.
|
On November 24 2012 12:12 Hairy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player. This is not true. This is, incidentally, why many people are terrible at practicing. People don't focus on trying to get better at the game; they focus on trying to win. It sounds silly to differentiate the two, but it's true. There is no point striving to win more games because you will always win ~50% regardless! Instead, you should focus on trying to improve your skill - even if that means doing something that will lose you games! I could go and spend 10 games on ladder and focus as hard as I can on injects. I'll not intentionally fail the game, but because injects are what I'm focusing on for those games my overall play, scouting/micro etc, may suffer. Chances are I'll have a greater likelihood of losing those games - but I'll become a better player in the process. I could get cannon rushed on ladder and die horribly... and that will mean I am now a better player than I was. That experience will help me become a better player, because even the WORST failures serve to give you a clearer insight of what to do (or not do) next time. As a tool for learning and improvement losses are more useful than wins, because it's harder to see a clear path of improvement on a win. Every game is a learning experience - especially the losses, hence Whitera's famous quote of "more gg more skill". Overall winrates are useless. They're useless for long term analysis (it's 50%), and they're useless for short-term analysis (small sample size means any value is likely to be inaccurate, and, as I said above, winning more recently doesn't even mean you've improved as a player). They give you no useful information whatsoever. Concentrate on playing better (even at the expense of wins!), find some better metrics to judge your play by, and screw the winrate (it's 50%!).
Classical Blizzard fallacy that win rates were meaningless so they should be removed (when the true reason for the removal was ladder anxiety).
You're wrong. While overall win rates will be 50%, win rates by matchup and maps will not necessarily be 50%. Win rates broken down in this way are useful for revealing how good you are in each matchup or map.
|
On November 24 2012 16:43 Alryk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 19:39 ETisME wrote:On November 23 2012 18:19 emc wrote:
OP, you are literally the only person on TL who detests seeing W/L, you are a minority in this forum. there were tonnes of people who said the win/loss caused ladder anxiety. And that for sure happens to me when I go on a losing steak that just seems never ending. That is what unranked is for though then best of both worlds honestly.
To be fair, I think I would very much prefer a matchup, map win/loss rate than an overall win rate.
It gives more data and less stressful for me :p
|
If anyone would have truly bothered with this, there would have been a program where you could write down data, to gain statistics. Overall it was just crying for the sake of being conservative. I had just a small table to get some stats nothing more, took about 5 seconds of my time after each game.
It is still great they are adding more stats though, as long as the performance won't suffer to much. There are people that just love playing with numbers.
|
On November 24 2012 22:23 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 12:12 Hairy wrote:On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player. This is not true. This is, incidentally, why many people are terrible at practicing. People don't focus on trying to get better at the game; they focus on trying to win. It sounds silly to differentiate the two, but it's true. There is no point striving to win more games because you will always win ~50% regardless! Instead, you should focus on trying to improve your skill - even if that means doing something that will lose you games! I could go and spend 10 games on ladder and focus as hard as I can on injects. I'll not intentionally fail the game, but because injects are what I'm focusing on for those games my overall play, scouting/micro etc, may suffer. Chances are I'll have a greater likelihood of losing those games - but I'll become a better player in the process. I could get cannon rushed on ladder and die horribly... and that will mean I am now a better player than I was. That experience will help me become a better player, because even the WORST failures serve to give you a clearer insight of what to do (or not do) next time. As a tool for learning and improvement losses are more useful than wins, because it's harder to see a clear path of improvement on a win. Every game is a learning experience - especially the losses, hence Whitera's famous quote of "more gg more skill". Overall winrates are useless. They're useless for long term analysis (it's 50%), and they're useless for short-term analysis (small sample size means any value is likely to be inaccurate, and, as I said above, winning more recently doesn't even mean you've improved as a player). They give you no useful information whatsoever. Concentrate on playing better (even at the expense of wins!), find some better metrics to judge your play by, and screw the winrate (it's 50%!). Classical Blizzard fallacy that win rates were meaningless so they should be removed (when the true reason for the removal was ladder anxiety). You're wrong. While overall win rates will be 50%, win rates by matchup and maps will not necessarily be 50%. Win rates broken down in this way are useful for revealing how good you are in each matchup or map.
"You're wrong"? "Classic Blizzard fallacy"? You're just attacking a strawman.
Firstly I'd like to point out that, as one of the very first things in this thread, I wrote:
On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote: (snipped)
...Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant.
Secondly, I have NEVER argued that winrate statistics should be removed. If the original removal of the winrate was an attempt to reduce ladder anxiety, I would far prefer that they instead had given the option of having those statistics private. The more statistics we have access to the better. My point has simply been that overall winrate is a very poor and uninteresting statistic compared to many others.
|
I prefer to have W/L ratios related to my matchups like ZvT and ZvP so I know what matchup I should be working on next, how dare people call it a useless feature. I know for a fact that my ZvZ is much lower than my ZvT for example, tending towards 50% is absolutely not true for that.
|
On November 24 2012 23:07 FeyFey wrote:
If anyone would have truly bothered with this, there would have been a program where you could write down data, to gain statistics. Overall it was just crying for the sake of being conservative. I had just a small table to get some stats nothing more, took about 5 seconds of my time after each game.
It is still great they are adding more stats though, as long as the performance won't suffer to much. There are people that just love playing with numbers.
I'm surprised there are people posting on TL that are unaware of SC2Gears:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=124689
Auto-saving of replays, auto-renaming of replays, categorization or replays, analysis of games, analysis of mass games, winrates in each matchup, winrates on each map, winrates in custom-made scenarios (eg what is my winrate when my opponent makes DTs in the first 10 minutes?), APM development over time, spawn larvae development over time....
|
Plus, you can get a plugin for SC2Gears called 'MMR Stats':
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334561
It provides an estimate your current MMR based upon various factors. Here is a screenshot of my progress over the last 60 games:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LxssE.jpg)
The green line is the platinum promotion line, the light blue line is the diamond promotion line, and the dark blue line is the masters promotion line.
|
On November 24 2012 23:40 Hairy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 22:23 paralleluniverse wrote:On November 24 2012 12:12 Hairy wrote:On November 24 2012 09:56 Fenris420 wrote:
Then what value is there in knowing you had a sudden win streak or an improving MMR from the last 10 games? If you are winning more, you are doing better. If you are doing better, you are a better player. This is not true. This is, incidentally, why many people are terrible at practicing. People don't focus on trying to get better at the game; they focus on trying to win. It sounds silly to differentiate the two, but it's true. There is no point striving to win more games because you will always win ~50% regardless! Instead, you should focus on trying to improve your skill - even if that means doing something that will lose you games! I could go and spend 10 games on ladder and focus as hard as I can on injects. I'll not intentionally fail the game, but because injects are what I'm focusing on for those games my overall play, scouting/micro etc, may suffer. Chances are I'll have a greater likelihood of losing those games - but I'll become a better player in the process. I could get cannon rushed on ladder and die horribly... and that will mean I am now a better player than I was. That experience will help me become a better player, because even the WORST failures serve to give you a clearer insight of what to do (or not do) next time. As a tool for learning and improvement losses are more useful than wins, because it's harder to see a clear path of improvement on a win. Every game is a learning experience - especially the losses, hence Whitera's famous quote of "more gg more skill". Overall winrates are useless. They're useless for long term analysis (it's 50%), and they're useless for short-term analysis (small sample size means any value is likely to be inaccurate, and, as I said above, winning more recently doesn't even mean you've improved as a player). They give you no useful information whatsoever. Concentrate on playing better (even at the expense of wins!), find some better metrics to judge your play by, and screw the winrate (it's 50%!). Classical Blizzard fallacy that win rates were meaningless so they should be removed (when the true reason for the removal was ladder anxiety). You're wrong. While overall win rates will be 50%, win rates by matchup and maps will not necessarily be 50%. Win rates broken down in this way are useful for revealing how good you are in each matchup or map. "You're wrong"? "Classic Blizzard fallacy"? You're just attacking a strawman. Firstly I'd like to point out that, as one of the very first things in this thread, I wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote: (snipped)
...Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant. Secondly, I have NEVER argued that winrate statistics should be removed. If the original removal of the winrate was an attempt to reduce ladder anxiety, I would far prefer that they instead had given the option of having those statistics private. The more statistics we have access to the better. My point has simply been that overall winrate is a very poor and uninteresting statistic compared to many others.
@Hairy: Many of your claims were indeed plainly wrong and you even ignored common sense. You continued to argue that all win-lose statistics are absolutely useless (meaning that nobody could deduce anything in any viewpoint based on them and thus there would be no use of counting/showing them), claimed that ratios are always ~50% or exact 50% which they often are not for several reasons, fixated on the winratio (percentage) and ignored the individual win count, loss count, tie count & games played count and what these numbers could mean by themselves or in combination with other data. The winratio itself is indeed often uninteresting and does not tell much. The more you play the more the ratio stagnates and as the system tries to pair you with equal level opponents it approaches 50% for most.
And yes, Blizzard used an excuse for removing win-loss statistics. Masses who don't understand how the ladder system functions kept using the numbers for wrong purposes - e.g. tried to deduce skill based on the ratio, fixated only on the percentage ratio and tried to compare different accounts based on it. Blizzard did not try to solve the issue by providing more advanced & meaningful statistics or by educating people regarding the ladder system. They simply hid the numbers from the majority of SC2 population so they would not need to make the effort. They even called it as 'quick fix' in some articles they wrote. Now they finally add them back along with more advanced statistics.
Blizzard often uses so called 'PR or marketing language' where they twist/simplify reality & ignore things for their cause and make it sound better in ears of the masses. Claims made in "marketing speech" are usually true only in idealistic world, but not necessary actualize in practice. For example this was Blizzard's statement regarding removal of win-loss counts: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2267580240?page=3#57
In it they concentrate on claims 'not reflection of skill' (this is true), 'matchmaking system plays role' (yes it does try to match people to equal level opponents and thus the ratio approaches 50% for most after they have reached their typical MMR level & maintain it and are not at the very top or bottom of the ladder), 'misleading' (yes, masses used the numbers for wrong purposes such as deducing the skill). These 3 claims are true, but they purposely ignored that there are other uses for these stats especially if you understand how the ladder & matchmaking system functions.
As an example one of the worst recent usages of "marketing speech" was when Blizzard announced that skill tiers would be removed from leagues starting from the beginning of season 9: http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/5729733/Season_8_Now_Locked_and_Big_Changes_Coming_Next_Season-07_09_2012
Here are couple of sentences from it: "The removal of tiers from all leagues will allow players to better gauge exactly where they're at on the ladder and how far away they are from the next league.", "After this change, climbing to (for example) Rank 2 Diamond will mean that you are in the top 2% of all Diamond players, and you are very close to moving into the Master League. Similarly, Rank 50 Platinum is in the top 50% in the Platinum league, and so forth."
I am sure lots of people scratched their heads in the beginning of Season 10 after they had finished S9 e.g. in top-8 of some division in some league and were demoted when S10 started. Their MMR was inside the boundaries of the lower league and they were not in top 8% of the upper league like they could have thought based on the Blizzard's article.
|
On November 23 2012 18:19 emc wrote:
OP, you are literally the only person on TL who detests seeing W/L, you are a minority in this forum.
lol yeah, pretty much my thoughts. idk about literally the only person though. lol
i mean look at this place, its a forum for playing competitive video games. of course were hardcore 
|
On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote:Overall win/loss values are absolutely useless; due to matchmaking, your overall win/loss is always going to trend towards 50/50 unless you are at the very extremes of the top or bottom of the ladder. If you want to see how many wins you have right now, just take your total matches played and halve it and you'll be pretty much spot on. Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant. It's 50%! To elaborate on this, it doesn't even matter what league you're in. Silver players will have a 50% win ratio. Gold players will have a 50% win ratio. Diamond players will have a 50% win ratio. Unless you're at the very top or bottom of ladder (or have played very few games), your win ratio is ~50%. If you're looking for a metric by which to measure your skill or progress, you would be hard-pushed to find something worse. EDIT: just glanced at my sc2gears history since my harddrive exploded; Guess what my win ratio is out of 229 games? + Show Spoiler +
Pretty much sums it up. I think it is time for people to get over their ladder anxiety and just play the game. Even the idea of people playing unranked in the beta makes me giggle.
|
On November 26 2012 23:43 GDI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote:Overall win/loss values are absolutely useless; due to matchmaking, your overall win/loss is always going to trend towards 50/50 unless you are at the very extremes of the top or bottom of the ladder. If you want to see how many wins you have right now, just take your total matches played and halve it and you'll be pretty much spot on. Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant. It's 50%! To elaborate on this, it doesn't even matter what league you're in. Silver players will have a 50% win ratio. Gold players will have a 50% win ratio. Diamond players will have a 50% win ratio. Unless you're at the very top or bottom of ladder (or have played very few games), your win ratio is ~50%. If you're looking for a metric by which to measure your skill or progress, you would be hard-pushed to find something worse. EDIT: just glanced at my sc2gears history since my harddrive exploded; Guess what my win ratio is out of 229 games? + Show Spoiler + Pretty much sums it up. I think it is time for people to get over their ladder anxiety and just play the game. Even the idea of people playing unranked in the beta makes me giggle.
Except many of Hairy's claims are false. There are better descriptions earlier in this thread:
- Win-loss statistics _are not_ absolutely useless.
- Due to matchmaking winratio will approach 50% only after you have reached your typical MMR range and maintain it. Exception: At the very bottom & top of the ladder population is too scarce --> matchmaker often has to pair people with large MMR differences
- If you want to see how many wins you have _you cannot_ divide your games played by 2 and always get correct results. If your win count is not shown you either have to separately keep a record of your wins or count it with tools such as sc2gears from all of your saved replays (not always exact as in special cases such as base races & ties win detection is not straight forward - results are not saved in the replay files)
- Winratios _are not_ always 50%. There are logical reasons behind this.
- Winratio (persentage ratio) itself is usually uninteresting, but other win-loss statistics are more interesting especially in combination with other data.
- As winratio usually aproaches 50% after typical MMR level is reached, large win-loss difference (wins minus loses) often indicates that player's MMR has changed considerably during that period.
|
I personally hated not being able to see my w/r ratio when I was in Diamond in WoL, I'm glad they added it back since I would have difficultly seeing how well I did for the day. Usually I would have to look at my history to check which games I would lose.
|
For people who want to keep track, it's great; No more calculating it manually or using 3rd part programs. But it should be an option to have it displayed to everyone on your profile.
|
On November 23 2012 18:13 Hairy wrote:Overall win/loss values are absolutely useless; due to matchmaking, your overall win/loss is always going to trend towards 50/50 unless you are at the very extremes of the top or bottom of the ladder. If you want to see how many wins you have right now, just take your total matches played and halve it and you'll be pretty much spot on. Individual race matchup statistics or map winrate statistics hold value, but overall winrate is irrelevant. It's 50%! To elaborate on this, it doesn't even matter what league you're in. Silver players will have a 50% win ratio. Gold players will have a 50% win ratio. Diamond players will have a 50% win ratio. Unless you're at the very top or bottom of ladder (or have played very few games), your win ratio is ~50%. If you're looking for a metric by which to measure your skill or progress, you would be hard-pushed to find something worse. EDIT: just glanced at my sc2gears history since my harddrive exploded; Guess what my win ratio is out of 229 games? + Show Spoiler +
except is not always going to trend towards 50%. For extremelye awfull players and extremely great players it will be below/above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
