|
I can't believe there is still so much confusion in this thread.
The amount of points based on win or loss factor in all 4 things. Your points/mmr, opponents points/mmr.
The only reason it seemed like you could take heavy point losses early on this season is because the MMR hadn't inflated either. Back when huk was near the top in global rank and the top was at 700, his MMR was prolly a bit above 700. Now the ladder has inflated to where 2500-2600 is the top, and his MMR has inflated with it as well because that is the new top of the ladder and he is still playing at a top level.
Next season if MMR is saved like it is in WoW, you will see top players with extremely high MMR climbing the ladder much faster. Because when your MMR is at 2500-3k you aren't going to be taking heavy point losses until your actual rating gets closer to that MMR.
On October 21 2010 23:19 skipdog172 wrote:
It sounds like this only applies to a very select few of the top teams in the world.
That seems like the only situation where there literally aren't enough players of equivalent MMR for you to play against. The only reason you have this issue in your 3v3, is because your team is apparently the best in the world(in terms of MMR), by leaps and bounds, and thus are never play others with MMR as high as yours(as they apparently don't exist).
The problem is simply that once you get high MMR in 2v2 or 3v3 or 4v4, there are literally so few teams playing at that high MMR that most of the games you get are vs people with much lower MMR.
My 2v2 team had really high MMR, constantly favored vs some of the highest rated 2v2 teams in the US. Then we went inactive...
Now when we try to queue we get long wait times cause so few good players take 2v2 seriously and there are so few teams with high MMR in 2v2.
The other day we literally got 4 games in a row, where we literally got 0 points a game because we were so favored. Yet if we had lost we probably woulda lost 20+ points.
It sucks sitting in a queue for 5-10mins and then going in at risk to something like double zerg which can gimmick our team pretty badly, and then getting 0 points for the wins.
|
On October 21 2010 23:36 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 23:19 skipdog172 wrote:
It sounds like this only applies to a very select few of the top teams in the world.
That seems like the only situation where there literally aren't enough players of equivalent MMR for you to play against. The only reason you have this issue in your 3v3, is because your team is apparently the best in the world(in terms of MMR), by leaps and bounds, and thus are never play others with MMR as high as yours(as they apparently don't exist). The problem is simply that once you get high MMR in 2v2 or 3v3 or 4v4, there are literally so few teams playing at that high MMR that most of the games you get are vs people with much lower MMR. My 2v2 team had really high MMR, constantly favored vs some of the highest rated 2v2 teams in the US. Then we went inactive... Now when we try to queue we get long wait times cause so few good players take 2v2 seriously and there are so few teams with high MMR in 2v2. The other day we literally got 4 games in a row, where we literally got 0 points a game because we were so favored. Yet if we had lost we probably woulda lost 20+ points. It sucks sitting in a queue for 5-10mins and then going in at risk to something like double zerg which can gimmick our team pretty badly, and then getting 0 points for the wins.
Yes.. just like I said. This is only a problem for teams whose MMR is so high that there aren't other teams with equivalent MMRs to be matched against. I'm not exactly sure how this can be resolved....just be happy that you are the best? You really don't deserve many points at all against such a bad team...but then again, the system shouldn't normally pair you against those teams and the only reason it does is because you are so damn good! I'm sure it does suck to not have any good teams to play against...but I guess that is just a drawback of team games: there just aren't many good players playing them.
Just seems like something we have to accept... if you have such a high and ludicrous winning percentage like 90% and you are the "best in the world and there are no equally skilled teams to play against", it will be hard to catch up in terms of "points". I don't think Blizzard anticipated players/teams being so good as to have such a high winning percentage and there not being any other players/teams online to play against on any sort of consistent basis.
This just seems like a quirk of an issue that only affects very very very few people. I would say generally and especially for 1v1, once you've spent your bonus pool....points probably do reflect your skill level pretty accurately. This is because in 1v1s, you just aren't going to have a 90% winning percentage and have a problem with there not being equally skilled players online when you are looking for a match.
Really this thread should be title "The MMR is broken if you have a 90% winning percentage and there are no equally skilled players to play against". That just isn't something that is going to be experienced very often.
|
On October 21 2010 23:52 skipdog172 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 23:36 robertdinh wrote:On October 21 2010 23:19 skipdog172 wrote:
It sounds like this only applies to a very select few of the top teams in the world.
That seems like the only situation where there literally aren't enough players of equivalent MMR for you to play against. The only reason you have this issue in your 3v3, is because your team is apparently the best in the world(in terms of MMR), by leaps and bounds, and thus are never play others with MMR as high as yours(as they apparently don't exist). The problem is simply that once you get high MMR in 2v2 or 3v3 or 4v4, there are literally so few teams playing at that high MMR that most of the games you get are vs people with much lower MMR. My 2v2 team had really high MMR, constantly favored vs some of the highest rated 2v2 teams in the US. Then we went inactive... Now when we try to queue we get long wait times cause so few good players take 2v2 seriously and there are so few teams with high MMR in 2v2. The other day we literally got 4 games in a row, where we literally got 0 points a game because we were so favored. Yet if we had lost we probably woulda lost 20+ points. It sucks sitting in a queue for 5-10mins and then going in at risk to something like double zerg which can gimmick our team pretty badly, and then getting 0 points for the wins. Yes.. just like I said. This is only a problem for teams whose MMR is so high that there aren't other teams with equivalent MMRs to be matched against. I'm not exactly sure how this can be resolved....just be happy that you are the best? You really don't deserve many points at all against such a bad team...but then again, the system shouldn't normally pair you against those teams and the only reason it does is because you are so damn good! I'm sure it does suck to not have any good teams to play against...but I guess that is just a drawback of team games: there just aren't many good players playing them. Just seems like something we have to accept... if you have such a high and ludicrous winning percentage like 90% and you are the "best in the world and there are no equally skilled teams to play against", it will be hard to catch up in terms of "points". I don't think Blizzard anticipated players/teams being so good as to have such a high winning percentage and there not being any other players/teams online to play against on any sort of consistent basis. This just seems like a quirk of an issue that only affects very very very few people. I would say generally and especially for 1v1, once you've spent your bonus pool....points probably do reflect your skill level pretty accurately. This is because in 1v1s, you just aren't going to have a 90% winning percentage and have a problem with there not being equally skilled players online when you are looking for a match. Really this thread should be title "The MMR is broken if you have a 90% winning percentage and there are no equally skilled players to play against". That just isn't something that is going to be experienced very often.
I'm not arguing with you or anything, I am just elaborating on it all with my own experiences.
The main problem is just that not enough teams are participating actively and competitively in 2v2 ladder.
Without a healthy player base blizzard's personal ladder system for wow/sc2 just doesn't work very well.
I don't blame anyone though, this game isn't even close to balanced for 2v2.
Also I want to clarify, that I think it is really stupid for the ladder system to ever give you 0 points for a ladder match, that's the equivalent of being a waste of time.
|
United States12230 Posts
On October 21 2010 22:56 MrLonely wrote:Show nested quote +On October 21 2010 20:01 Grummler wrote:On October 21 2010 12:21 fant0m wrote:On October 21 2010 09:42 Grummler wrote:You are wrong Silidons. Because: On October 20 2010 02:21 Hider wrote:
After each win the point you get are based on your ladder point compared to his MMR. So your logic is wrong. This is wrong. After each win the point you get are based on your MMR compared to his MMR. This is how it currently works, and leads to broken rating gains. Did you never wondered, why the loading screen sometimes shows both players favored? Like Player A vs Player B. Loading screen player A: Player B is favored Loading Screen player B: player A is favored Its because the point gain is based on your points compared to his MMR. If both players have a higher MMR then the other one has points, they both face a favored player. There was a thread about it, actually saying that the MMS is broken because it compares own points to opponents MMR. Now people say its broken because it compares MMR to MMR. I don't believe this until I see proof. It's not that often you see both players loading screens so I have never experienced it. Anyway, the system is broken either way cause MMR sucks whatever you do with it. It's just bad.
If you want proof, then just look at any game ever. Look at your match history and pick out a game. Now go to your opponent's profile and find the same game and you'll see what he gained or lost. The points gained and lost aren't always zero sum (and I'm not factoring in bonus pool here). If you won +40 points and your opponent lost 3, then you both saw each other as favored.
|
United States12230 Posts
On October 21 2010 23:58 robertdinh wrote:
Also I want to clarify, that I think it is really stupid for the ladder system to ever give you 0 points for a ladder match, that's the equivalent of being a waste of time.
Yeah, agreed. There were some games in WoW where both teams lost points (say one loses 15 and the other loses 1). That doesn't make any sense to us but Blizzard said it's not a bug, it's a result of rating approaching MMR. We don't know whether that's happening in SC2's system but gaining 0 points is almost as bad.
|
did not read past the second or third paragraph. basically, your mmr is hidden, you will never know it. the points system is completely unrelated, and is just there to help your e-penis grow. why do you think people like me got promoted from plat to dia with just 300 or so ladder points, while people are in plat now with 1500 and no promotion?
points will always grow. your mmr won't.
When you hit 50% win-lose ratio, thats pretty much your MMR cap, but yet if you keep playing, and retain your 50% ratio, you will still gain ladder points.
Im so sorry your thread was so long, you have wasted your time by misunderstanding how the MMR and Ladders work.
|
On October 22 2010 04:40 arthur wrote:
did not read past the second or third paragraph. basically, your mmr is hidden, you will never know it. the points system is completely unrelated, and is just there to help your e-penis grow. why do you think people like me got promoted from plat to dia with just 300 or so ladder points, while people are in plat now with 1500 and no promotion?
points will always grow. your mmr won't.
When you hit 50% win-lose ratio, thats pretty much your MMR cap, but yet if you keep playing, and retain your 50% ratio, you will still gain ladder points.
Im so sorry your thread was so long, you have wasted your time by misunderstanding how the MMR and Ladders work.
Wow you really should learn to read. This is not what the post was about. He is talking about having a very high MMR, but not a high rating. He is playing a team that has a really high rating, yet lower MMR. Meaning when he wins he will only get 1-2 points (because of his ridiculus MMR), and when losing against the same team (the team that has a much higher rating) he will lose 10-12 points. This is turn results the other team having a higher rating (So their e-penis is bigger and they are more pr0 than him) yet he has a really hard time catching up in rating (because of getting a lot fewer points). This he feels is unfair, which I totally agree. So the MMR is punishing him for being better and is working against him to reach where he belongs in the ladder, while the not so good team will be displayed as better because of the higher rating. You should really read threads before making a post 
|
The only problem I see with the ranking and matchmaking system is that it's unnecessarily complex and secretive. I don't believe this secret ranking thing makes casuals want to play more. Actually I would think being in bronze while your best friend is in plat would hurt more than it would if you were ranked properly on an overall ladder.
|
I think I get this and after reading this I feel like this applies to me. I was a 700 diamond 1v1 player with like a 60% win-loss a month and a half ago when 700 points was like... decent. When the top people were only liek 1200. I didn;t play 1v1s for a long time and so now, since ladder has inflated tons, my 700 points looks pretty crappy. So I started playing 1v1s and I keep getting placed against 1400-1800 point players only to see that I'm "evenly matched". So I get like 10 points plus another 10 from bonus pool when playing these so called evenly matched players despite the fact my actual point rating is like 1000 points lower and I feel liek my hidden ranking and points ranking will take like 200 games to equilibriate. Which is annoying.
|
got pitted vs a 12-3 plat today and lost as a 1550 diamond to someone who shouted out tlo half the game and thor rushed me with strike cannon on my immortal -_-
come to think of it been seeing tons of mech vs terran lately..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
