| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Animostas
United States568 Posts
On August 22 2010 00:05 Alexstrasas wrote: Btw how come there are different divisions? I mean why not make a single diamond league? If's sort of a silly thing to help the noobies. When you're judged by with smaller group of people, it isn't as demoralizing. Think of it like this, is it feels worse to be judged as #30 out of 50 people? Or #300 out of 500? | ||
|
Yurie
11836 Posts
On August 22 2010 02:37 RivalryRedux wrote: If you're saying that it applies across all divisions exactly the same (ex. two people at 500 in different divisions would get the exact same amount from me if my MMR held constant), then what you're saying needs more explaining if you look at the numbers I posted. Loss (-6) vs 648d(+0) (110-87 66th in Medic Mu) (+14) +7 without bonus Loss (-12) vs 737d(+2) (112-90, 8th in Duke Xi) (+24) +12 without bonus You would basically be saying that my MMR jumped hundreds and hundreds of points after losing games. As I understand it the -12 loss has lower MMR but higher score than the -6 loss. What is strange? | ||
|
Fumble
156 Posts
The MMR is the only thing that matters but that score is not revealed to us. One example is this friend I have that is way below me in actual skill. When I crush him in 1v1 like always, he says he does not even face opponents of my skill level. However if you look at ladder, we have similar rating. | ||
|
Barthus
21 Posts
On August 22 2010 02:37 RivalryRedux wrote: If you're saying that it applies across all divisions exactly the same (ex. two people at 500 in different divisions would get the exact same amount from me if my MMR held constant), then what you're saying needs more explaining if you look at the numbers I posted. Loss (-6) vs 648d(+0) (110-87 66th in Medic Mu) (+14) +7 without bonus Loss (-12) vs 737d(+2) (112-90, 8th in Duke Xi) (+24) +12 without bonus You would basically be saying that my MMR jumped hundreds and hundreds of points after losing games. Isn't it more likely that the player in Medic Mu did not receive bonus points? | ||
|
RivalryRedux
United States173 Posts
Isn't it more likely that the player in Medic Mu did not receive bonus points? I really doubt because of the -6 and from looking through some other games of his plus other Medic Mu players and even if he didn't get bonus it would still be inconsistent with the lower point player in the next game only receiving +14. As I understand it the -12 loss has lower MMR but higher score than the -6 loss. What is strange? If the game is trying to converge your rating with divisions being irrelevant what happened is totally backwards. Giving more points to the guy that has higher points relative to his MMR is COMPLETE THE OPPOSITE of what should be happening in that scenario. | ||
|
Necrosjef
United Kingdom530 Posts
Would it be fair to say that there is no logical way to compare players across divisions without the hidden ranking data? or is that going too far? If that is the case would it be fair to say that the current points system we have on a website like SC2rankings for example would be relatively accurate or totally innaccurate? Would it be fair to say that a player in a 'better' division e.g. Medic Mu with less points would likely be more skilled than a player in a division where the average points per player was much lower? Interested to hear what your response is to this. | ||
|
RivalryRedux
United States173 Posts
Would it be fair to say that there is no logical way to compare players across divisions without the hidden ranking data? or is that going too far? Using points to compare players across divisions is a much rougher estimate than I think the community has given it credit for. With that being said, It's certainly more likely though that good players will get higher points, it's just not nearly as precise as saying I'm xxxx ELO rating or I'm x ICCUP rank. You could probably could compare players more accurately without the hidden MMR by data mining a lot of games and further looking in to how it affects point gains in different divisions and then factoring that in. Would it be fair to say that [i]a player in a 'better' division e.g. Medic Mu with less points would likely be more skilled than a player in a division where the average points per player was much lower? Yea I would say point for point a player from a better division probably has a better ladder results | ||
|
StaR_Robo
Australia229 Posts
| ||
|
SpaceYeti
United States723 Posts
| ||
|
RivalryRedux
United States173 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/600592 Gauging division strength is a bit tricky though since it's MMR based and we don't know the exact details of their MMR system other than it's some sort of true skill system. Just looking at division win rate Dayvie is in the absolute lowest of all diamond divisions (Scout Kilo) among NA at 53.65% and he drops from 1st in points to 41st in Blizzards Ranking. This is very consistent with the #2 in Scout Kilo (Minigun (1240 pts)) who drops from 15th in points to 172 on Blizzards Ranking. That's lower in Blizzards Ranking than the 31'st player in Medic Mu who has 912 points but is at 167th on Blizzards ladder. If you look at the 2 divisions with the highest win % (Turaxis Yankee and Tassadar Charlie) both of their #1 players are WAY higher on the list than their points would indicate. Filthy from Turaxis Yankee has under 1k points and yet sits at 105 on Blizzards ladder. From my division (Tassardar Charlie) there is Gale at 1062 who ends up right behind Ruff at 55th on the list. | ||
|
theSAiNT
United States726 Posts
I was under the impression that match making did not depend on what division you were in. In which case, your points acquisition should also be independent. I'm not challenging the OPs conclusions. I'm just curious about possible mechanisms. | ||
|
nttea
Sweden4353 Posts
| ||
|
RivalryRedux
United States173 Posts
On August 24 2010 05:27 nttea wrote: YOUR PUBLIC RATING VS OPPONENT HIDDEN RATING = YOUR POINT GAIN/LOSE. What division u're in don't matter at all you can certainly compare between divisions at least just as well/bad you can compare within a division. At least this explanation is what makes the most sense to me currently. I've already posted why that doesn't work out. Just saying it again without showing where I messed up doesn't add anything. their top 200 list is simply based on the hidden rating, possibly removing some inactive players and players with very few games. I never disagreed with this. What I'm saying is that a player in Medic Mu with 900 points after 200 games will almost certainly have a higher MMR than a player Scout Kilo with the same points/games (assuming they had equal bonus points). The reasoning for this is that it's harder to gain points in Medic Mu and thus it would require better results to get to 900 points than it would in Scout Kilo. Think of it like the difference you've experienced in gaining points in platinum versus diamond only on a smaller scale. | ||
|
rauk
United States2228 Posts
| ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
On August 21 2010 13:05 Jermstuddog wrote: TLDR version: OP got more points beating a platinum player than he did from beating high diamond players. This alone refutes our understanding of ranking and shows that the entire system is full of bullshit numbers. I really don't see why they make it this hard to find your world-wide ranking. The bonus point/division rank system is plenty to stave off noobs. They really don't want to know how bad they are. But people at the top really do want to know how they compare. Going off ratings should be enough, but I guess they wanted it to be harder than that. It's just like WC3 Blizzard has a hidden system that we will never ever see and it makes little to no sense. They then explain the system to us in terms that aren't entirely accurate. | ||
|
nickwtf
United States27 Posts
| ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
On August 22 2010 02:37 RivalryRedux wrote: If you're saying that it applies across all divisions exactly the same (ex. two people at 500 in different divisions would get the exact same amount from me if my MMR held constant), then what you're saying needs more explaining if you look at the numbers I posted. Loss (-6) vs 648d(+0) (110-87 66th in Medic Mu) (+14) +7 without bonus Loss (-12) vs 737d(+2) (112-90, 8th in Duke Xi) (+24) +12 without bonus You would basically be saying that my MMR jumped hundreds and hundreds of points after losing games. The first guy didn't actually have bonus points and it was +14 for him and +12 for the other then? | ||
|
RivalryRedux
United States173 Posts
On August 24 2010 06:07 rauk wrote: i don't understand why it's harder to gain points in medic mu. could you explain? It seems like the game not only looks at your opponents MMR compared to your points but also factors in how strong your opponent is relative to your entire division (MMR wise) before giving/taking away points. So the stronger your division, the harder you would to work for your points and vise versa. It applies to all divisions and not just Medic Mu, I just bring that one up a lot because it's fairly certain that it's a much stronger than average division. Blizzards Rankings have backed this up by being much more favorable towards players in that division compared to how their point totals stack up on a site like SC2ranks. It's also an alternative way of thinking about why many players here get a ton of points while they're in platinum. It's because they're diamond bound and they're playing people who CRUSH the MMR of the other players in whatever platinum division they're in. The first guy didn't actually have bonus points and it was +14 for him and +12 for the other then? Like I said in another post even if he didn't get bonus points (which seems really unlikely) it would still be inconsistent with other results. | ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
| ||
|
FearMe.UK
United Kingdom6 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs TBD
WardiTV European League
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
HeRoMaRinE vs MaxPax
Wardi Open
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
RSL Revival
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
