EPTSC2 Ladder Analysis: Division Tiers - Page 32
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Vehemus
United States586 Posts
| ||
|
Comma20
Australia138 Posts
On January 04 2011 15:42 SDream wrote: It's probably MMR based. Your MMR or MMR moving average isn't there yet. The problem is we are only looking at the top 200 points (after offsets) cause that's all we can see right now. But what if Blizzard looked first at top 200 MMR and just then organized them by points? That could be the case, so you need higher MMR and you'll only get that beating players with higher MMR than yours. Have you ever fought against someone at top 200? If so, how many points did you won or lost? if you won more than 12 points that means your mmr was(is?) lower than his indeed, if you lost less than 12 that also means your mmr is lower than his and that would explain why some players, expecialy on LA and SEA servers seems to be failing the top 200 with Exc_Z math. Win/Loss - Points - Opponent Status Win + 36 (Favored) Win +36 (Favored) Win +16 (Slightly Unfavored) Win +40 (Favored) Loss -9 (Favored) Win +32 (Favored) Win +42 (Favored) Win +26 (Slightly Favored) Loss -16 (Slightly Unfavored) Loss -14 (Slightly Unfavored) Loss -10 (Even) Win +34 (Favored) Win +20 (Even) Loss -1 (Favored) Win +34 (Favored) Win +34 (Favored) Win +38 (Favored) Win +20 (Even) Loss -7 (Slightly Favored) Win +10 (Even) Loss -7 (Slightly Favored) Win +12 (Even) Win +28 (Slightly Favored) Win +38 (Favored) Loss -14 (Slightly Unfavored) I think this indicates my MMR Moving Average is reasonably unsettled as of late. I'm at 59.4% W/L, the next win will give me a square 60%. | ||
|
gcFamous
New Zealand35 Posts
idk, Im just doubting its accuracy, Myself and Salvation outranked jump on the "masters league section" at the time of t200 release yet he is on the official t200 and we are not. Perhaps our division was calculated wrong and we are -500+? | ||
|
radiatoren
Denmark1907 Posts
S-rank (+0) : Agria Alpha Akilae Lima Aldaris Foxtrot Feld Delta Forge Eta Hellion Echo Korhal Juliet Mar Sara Sigma Phoenix Mars Prelate Theta Ramsey X-Ray Rimes Echo Roach Lambda Roach Romeo Scimitar Psi Shuttle November Siege Tank Gamma Stukov Foxtrot Tal’darim Theta Uraj Eta Zealot Alamo A-rank (+63) : Khala Tau Muadun Tau Mutalisk Zed Norad Phi Zamara Zed B-rank (+126): Chau Sara Quest Gorn Mars Nexus Epsilon Reaper Gravity Routhe Victor C-rank (+189): Boros Tango Brood Lord Mars Executor Alamo Hauler Foxtrot Khas Sierra Raven Gravity Scourge Charlie Shiloh Oscar Vermillion Nu D-rank (+252): Alzadar Sigma Augustgrad Kilo Char xi Gantrithor Bravo Jorgensen Zeta Judicator Hawk Lockwell Theta Urun Charlie E-rank (+315): Araq Delta Archon Beta Broodling Mu Corsaire Pepper Drone Echo Duke Sigma Kagg Upsilon Kalathi Pepper Kalathi Zeta Liberty X-Ray Marine psi Meinhoff Pi Overlord Hawk Overmind November Sakai Lima Scourge Peppe Tabrenus Whiskey F-rank (+378): Queen Iota If i can get Excalibur_z or someone else at sc2ranks.com to update it would be very nice! | ||
|
lastreason
Romania250 Posts
| ||
|
TheCabDriver
Canada159 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
radiatoren
Denmark1907 Posts
On January 05 2011 03:36 lastreason wrote: this is creepy really , and why all this info needed about us ? We want to hijack your profile and steal your dreams. RATATATAT Or we want to have as much info about the pointsystem to be better prepared for ranking players in the new system Blizzard has announced after the ladderreset! I would go for the first one but i dont say the glass is half empty nor the glass is half full. I don't even say that it is overproportioned. I say that the glass is underproportioned for extreme storms. Ah well see what you made me do? | ||
|
Wfat
Australia108 Posts
185 papaxiong 612 539 185 Studyharder 203 146 As I have been pretty active over the last few days I've had to subtract 22 games from my matchlist to arrive at the score taken for the top 200 (currently I have a rating of 2657 with a W/L record of 216 - 155). Doing this takes me to a rating of 2433, which is the exact same rating as papaxiong who hasn't been active over the past few days (this is his current rating). This makes sense, however, I wasn't the highest rated player in my division at the time the top 200 was calculated. No one else in my division is listed on the most recent top 200 (see link above). The division leader at the time of the top 200 calculation, Ehzx, with a current rating of 2631 would have had a very similar rating when the list was taken, which definitely would have been above my rating. So why has this occurred? I have looked into the possibility that it could be related to bonus pool but my bonus pool adjusted by adding points used between the time when the top 200 was taken and now is 300, whereas papaxiong's is 322 (unchanged). On the other hand Ehzx has a very small bonus pool (~40). This still doesn't give reason for why papaxiong and myself are equal on the top 200. Also for other peoples benefit, papaxiong's division is 'Baneling Chi', which would make my divison, 'Praetor Kappa' (which isn't on the list at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=169830¤tpage=27) also E-rank (+315). | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On January 05 2011 09:39 Wfat wrote: I'm a little confused by my ranking in the SEA top 200 this week, as it differs slightly from the analysis set out in this thread. I am currently ranked 185 with papaxiong under the alias Studyharder (see excerpt below). 185 papaxiong 612 539 185 Studyharder 203 146 As I have been pretty active over the last few days I've had to subtract 22 games from my matchlist to arrive at the score taken for the top 200 (currently I have a rating of 2657 with a W/L record of 216 - 155). Doing this takes me to a rating of 2433, which is the exact same rating as papaxiong who hasn't been active over the past few days (this is his current rating). This makes sense, however, I wasn't the highest rated player in my division at the time the top 200 was calculated. No one else in my division is listed on the most recent top 200 (see link above). The division leader at the time of the top 200 calculation, Ehzx, with a current rating of 2631 would have had a very similar rating when the list was taken, which definitely would have been above my rating. So why has this occurred? I have looked into the possibility that it could be related to bonus pool but my bonus pool adjusted by adding points used between the time when the top 200 was taken and now is 300, whereas papaxiong's is 322 (unchanged). On the other hand Ehzx has a very small bonus pool (~40). This still doesn't give reason for why papaxiong and myself are equal on the top 200. Also for other peoples benefit, papaxiong's division is 'Baneling Chi', which would make my divison, 'Praetor Kappa' (which isn't on the list at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=169830¤tpage=27) also E-rank (+315). We've certainly seen these kinds of anomalies in the past, and MARS also in your division would presumably be in the Top 200 this week, but wasn't (his rating at the time of the snapshot would have been probably 2557 or so). We currently believe -- but cannot confirm -- that Top 200 eligibility is based upon your MMR's moving average, which is part of the same criteria that allows promotion into another league. Therefore, it's possible that the moving averages of MARS and Ehzx may have been lower than yours at the time of the snapshot, even though their points were higher. It's worth noting that these anomalies appear to be more common on the TW, SEA, and LA servers, suggesting that the smaller player pool may have something to do with it. | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
On January 05 2011 10:04 Excalibur_Z wrote: We've certainly seen these kinds of anomalies in the past, and MARS also in your division would presumably be in the Top 200 this week, but wasn't (his rating at the time of the snapshot would have been probably 2557 or so). We currently believe -- but cannot confirm -- that Top 200 eligibility is based upon your MMR's moving average, which is part of the same criteria that allows promotion into another league. Therefore, it's possible that the moving averages of MARS and Ehzx may have been lower than yours at the time of the snapshot, even though their points were higher. It's worth noting that these anomalies appear to be more common on the TW, SEA, and LA servers, suggesting that the smaller player pool may have something to do with it. There are 2 "problems" IMO: Well, 100% of LA diamond divisions are known, while in US we have like 20%? There's probably a lot of F-ranked divisions on US but we can't confirm any. That alone makes spotting errors like these harder, too many people to look, too many people we can't look. I am sure if you could we'd find many anomalies, but checking 200 players is already too troublesome. Also, LA server is so less competitive that you can be top 200 with 700 bonus pool if you are really good, that's huge. Top 200 on LA means top 10% diamond. That's more than master league is suppose to be, which means there's more mediocre players there, which means there's too many people with close to same skill. | ||
|
Wfat
Australia108 Posts
Also, as FamousSEA pointed out (see quoted text), TASalvatioN is not on the SEA top 200 list but would have had a rating of ~2700 at the time of the list calculation. I actually played several games with TASalvatioN on the ladder yesterday (after top 200 calculation) and am roughly evenly MMR-matched with him (I think our games went 3-3 - all 12 or 13 point games). This means that TASalvatioN's division 'Prelate November' must have a ridiculously high division modifier, which would be something like +567 (I-class... lol) if the top 200 list is somewhat related to MMR aswell. On January 04 2011 19:49 FamousSEA wrote: Im doubting the accuracy of http://www.sc2ranks.com/ at the time of SEAs top 200 coming out I am 154, TASalvation in my division aswell is 86 (on sc2ranks), but when SEAs top 200 came out, neither of us were on it, however, ranked 199 on http://www.sc2ranks.com/ is jump, and he is at 161 on SEA top 200. idk, Im just doubting its accuracy, Myself and Salvation outranked jump on the "masters league section" at the time of t200 release yet he is on the official t200 and we are not. Perhaps our division was calculated wrong and we are -500+? | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
Shadowed
United States679 Posts
On January 05 2011 10:37 Vei wrote: What evidence do you have that divisions are tiered by Blizzard's doing, as opposed to divisions naturally appearing tiered because better players get placed into Diamond 1v1 faster, so the earliest-made divisions have the highest concentration of good players/higher pts, and the divisions being filled/created at this very moment are lower-tiered by the very nature that the most competitive SC 1v1 players will have already long been placed into an (older) division? If they weren't actually tiered, you wouldn't see a perfect 63 point modifier across every single division that's appeared in the top 200 across all 5 regions. I don't feel like getting exact numbers right now, but most of the divisions on the US masters page in top 100 are not at-release divisions and came a while later. Time based would make no sense anyway, that would penalize anyone who didn't play at the very start. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
now i'm struggling to understand why 2000 pts in an S division is equal to 1880~points in my (B) division. why is that? | ||
|
Shadowed
United States679 Posts
| ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
"We know that the Top 200 is generated by points without factoring in "the skill of your division." seems to conflict with " You can still appear in the Top 200, your points just have to be that much higher than other players. For example, if you have 2000 points but your modifier is +315, then your adjusted score is actually 1685. That means in order to rank evenly with 2000-point players in a division with a modifier of 0, you would have to have 2315 points." Why do these modifiers exist? Are points not equal across divisions then? What's the point of this? | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
On January 05 2011 11:15 Vei wrote: Why do these modifiers exist? Are points not equal across divisions then? What's the point of this? The points could be for: 1) Making it harder to reverse engeneering the system. 2) They wanted to make it so we could also get promoted/demoted from/to divisions, but they scrapped that, but they did let the tiers there... 3) They wanted everyone that play this game using all their bonus pool to always have a not ridiculous disprepancy from on another. That way, you see a S-rank player with 2000 points (instead of 2400), and you yourself is a bronze player with 2000 points (instead of 1200), so it seems to you that you are "almost there" or something like that. Trying some psycological effects so the worst and best player base, everyone feels somewhat equal, not equal, but not that far appart? Who knows! | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/187811/1/KenTouchMe/ladder/3579#current-rank Very new division. http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/127966/1/JeffVader/ladder/3424#current-rank New division, but not so newer than the other. Why do you think the system would create a new division with only 10 players inside when there is already a division with only 34 people inside? That could prove there're tiers on platinum and others. | ||
|
Vei
United States2845 Posts
| ||
| ||
