|
The ladder is fair as far as matching up even opponents. The only real 'punishment' for infrequent players is that it is harder to get a high rating.
For example, I'm a 500-600 player. My MMR is much higher because I don't play frequently, so my even matches are against 1400-1700 players. While I'll be gaining more points due to bonus pool, I will never catch up to those players already 1,000 points ahead of me because I can't play enough to cut the gap. If I was playing against people who's skill level was around my displayed skill level, then I would win much more and my points would catch up to my MMR, but that's not how Bnet works.
I wouldn't care if MMR was shown, because that's a true skill rating, but points are misleading. Bad players who use up all of the bonus pool and then stop having higher points than they should. Good players who don't use all of their bonus pool have fewer points than they should. It's silly.
I think bonus pool is a good idea, but they should seriously decrease the amount of points it gives.
|
I almost think there should be a MMR tax for not playing. Anyone doesn't play for 2+ weeks is going to be rusty, but, in the current system, they are still treated as if they had the same skill as if they never stopped playing. Personally, it's annoying to me because I will go three weeks with no play, and it takes a good week of losing a lot more than usual before I get my abilities back.
|
I found through some research and analyzing that in a certain way, not playing very often kind of hurts for getting promoted. Because the way divisions works, a lot of ppl are stuck in a league, with enough points, win ratio and whatever more, but never got promoted, and a factor for this is because most of them took long breaks.
We know that divisions are always been created, we just dont know if blizzard has a specific set date for it, like every week, every 2 weeks or once in a month, or if they are generated as there are players eligible for promotion, so it just waits until 100 players are gathered.
People who play everyday get promoted more often because they get these time spans of when divisions are created, of course you could get placed in a spot of someone who got demoted, but by far this seems to be more the exception than the rule.
|
You dont decay in sc2 like you did in wc3 so you can save up bonus pool and then only play when you got bonuses. That way your gonna go up in rating even if you only win half of your games.
|
If you're winning half of your games in a world where you get 11 bonus points for a win and 12 bonus points a day, you have to play two games a day simply to keep up. That's absolutely ridiculous. It's saying you need to play a minimum of 700 games in a calendar year to keep your bonus pool clean.
|
On November 05 2010 06:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:
If you're winning half of your games in a world where you get 11 bonus points for a win and 12 bonus points a day, you have to play two games a day simply to keep up. That's absolutely ridiculous. It's saying you need to play a minimum of 700 games in a calendar year to keep your bonus pool clean.
Who says you have to keep your bonus pool clean? If you don't play enough to use it all it seems to me you wouldn't care very much about your rating in general.
Also there is going to be ladder seasons so the ratings will be reset one or more times a year.
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
In the last two month I haven't been on much. I'm ~500 diamond and match against ~1500 diamond players. My bonus pool is ~1000 pts (coincidence?).
Point inflation makes sense because skill degrades without practice. But I think the rate should be tweaked. In addition, the new Master League should base off MMR.
|
United States12273 Posts
On November 05 2010 06:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:
If you're winning half of your games in a world where you get 11 bonus points for a win and 12 bonus points a day, you have to play two games a day simply to keep up. That's absolutely ridiculous. It's saying you need to play a minimum of 700 games in a calendar year to keep your bonus pool clean.
It's not directly comparable to War3's XP decay, but it serves some similar functions, and depending on your skill level and determination to play it's either worse or better than War3. Right now you have to play about 14 games per week (but basically just get 7 wins). In War3 you had to play even more than that if you were over level 50: http://classic.battle.net/war3/ladder/war3-ladder-info-charts.aspx?Gateway=Northrend#chart1
|
On November 05 2010 06:51 Bull-Demon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2010 06:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:
If you're winning half of your games in a world where you get 11 bonus points for a win and 12 bonus points a day, you have to play two games a day simply to keep up. That's absolutely ridiculous. It's saying you need to play a minimum of 700 games in a calendar year to keep your bonus pool clean. Who says you have to keep your bonus pool clean? If you don't play enough to use it all it seems to me you wouldn't care very much about your rating in general. Also there is going to be ladder seasons so the ratings will be reset one or more times a year.
It falls right into the exact same problem that the post-1.14 AMM overhaul did: It encourages game massing. The "best players" on the ladder will be the ones that play the most games. The only reason it hasn't been exposed is that most of the semi-pro and pro-level players haven't developed any real in-house operations yet, and thus you still have the IdrAs and the Boxers of the world playing their thirty ladder games a day. Once they go, you're going to be left with the good-to-very-good players that will move past the very-very-good players simply by playing a lot.
On November 05 2010 07:07 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2010 06:45 MichaelJLowell wrote:
If you're winning half of your games in a world where you get 11 bonus points for a win and 12 bonus points a day, you have to play two games a day simply to keep up. That's absolutely ridiculous. It's saying you need to play a minimum of 700 games in a calendar year to keep your bonus pool clean. It's not directly comparable to War3's XP decay, but it serves some similar functions, and depending on your skill level and determination to play it's either worse or better than War3. Right now you have to play about 14 games per week (but basically just get 7 wins). In War3 you had to play even more than that if you were over level 50: http://classic.battle.net/war3/ladder/war3-ladder-info-charts.aspx?Gateway=Northrend#chart1
If I remember correctly, people thought the fifty-and-above Ladder Decay was ridiculous as well. Not everybody has the incentive or the drive to play fourteen games a week. But that shouldn't invalidate them from having solid standing on the Starcraft II ladder. Not compared to the person who plays and plays and plays and accumulates bonus points for the mere act of playing.
|
I still don't know if I should like this system. Probably all ranking systems are not that good.
Infrequent players should be punished, maybe because their few games are not convincing. The more they play, the more significant becomes their rating. Therefore the system should stimulate activity, like in most other burgeois systems. By inflating the activity, people will probably accumulate more skill in sc2 than in a non-inflated ladder. Maybe there are still better ways to do it.
I definitely do not like all the psycho-tricks like divisions and the phoney achievement bulls***.
However, it measures the skill in the active crowd of people quite well.
|
IMO it does not punish infrequent players. I only play 2-3 games a day, and I find that when I have improved my skill, my rating goes up, and when I am not, it stays the same. I guess if I was like 1800 and playing HuK 5 times in a row I would be a bit suspicious, but that isn't happening.
It is true that points is more about how many times you play than about how good you are. But it also means that you can't tell how good your opponent is by how many points he has. What you should be concerned about is making sure you are always improving so that your points is always increasing, and not be worried about the actual point total.
|
It falls right into the exact same problem that the post-1.14 AMM overhaul did: It encourages game massing. The "best players" on the ladder will be the ones that play the most games. The only reason it hasn't been exposed is that most of the semi-pro and pro-level players haven't developed any real in-house operations yet, and thus you still have the IdrAs and the Boxers of the world playing their thirty ladder games a day. Once they go, you're going to be left with the good-to-very-good players that will move past the very-very-good players simply by playing a lot.
This isn't true though, you only raise up in ranking WHILE you have bonus pool. If you mass games when you have no pool, which will happen since you're massing games, unless you're winning more than losing, you won't advance. Bonus pool at most is a "free" 12 points a day that everyone gets.
And remember, ladder doesn't go forever, points will be reset so most of this is moot anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
