EPTlosira never loses more than 5 points for a loss. Sometimes he loses 2. Who is he playing, Flash?
SC2 Master League Information - Page 19
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
losira never loses more than 5 points for a loss. Sometimes he loses 2. Who is he playing, Flash? | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12224 Posts
On January 15 2011 01:12 stiknork wrote: From your OP: I assume this is referring to the bug that has everyone favored against everyone? Because that's what I'm talking about. Not sure if it's still the case, but many players have at least gained an easy +700-900 points from it. That was fixed within hours, and the bug was that Master league players were unable to spend their bonus pool after promotion. It's not a bug that everyone in Master shows the other person as Favored. That will keep happening until those players have points that approach their MMR, and the time at which it will end will differ for everyone. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On January 14 2011 22:25 Mikau wrote: You just supported my point. Mass gaming doesn't help your MMR one bit if you don't actually improve. Yes you'll get more points, but your MMR will stay roughly the same. As I said, the system itself isn't bad, it's just that we get conflicting and incomplete information. We can only judge our own point values and they're meaningless. We can't really know what our MMR and uncertainty factor are like (we can make educated guesses though) and that's what all the top200/ladder promotions are based on. In short, if you only care about your point total then yes mass laddering is the way to go. Yóú might care about your points though, to the 'pro' scene it's irrelevant and MMR is what matters, something you can't just increase by massing games. yeah sorry maybe my post were misleading, but I never thought you were wrong in anything except when you said that this system is good. It's bad because you are constantly kept in the dark about your true level/position and what you need to achieve to go into a better division. For exemple, when you were like lvl 40 with 1 game left to go level 41 in warcraft3, the game were very tense (well they could be), cauz a loss would also mean that you would need 2 or even 3 win to level up to 41. Now it's like "ok i'm gonna ladder, ho i lost X points, let's make another game". There is no goal, and without a goal damn the game is way less fun in my opinion. For exemple, i was ranked 12 in my division (???) with 2300 points! I am now ranked 8... Well you know what? It doesn't feel like i m a top 8 AT ALL! Going to master league would have been a fine goal, except you don't know shit about how far you are from it. | ||
|
stiknork
United States128 Posts
On January 15 2011 01:08 Excalibur_Z wrote: It's not a bug that everyone in Master shows the other person as Favored. That will keep happening until those players have points that approach their MMR, and the time at which it will end will differ for everyone. I see, so the MMR/Points ratio and MMR didn't change with the jump to Masters league, so for people who had 3.5k points before the system is still feeling like they "should" have 3.5k points MMR wise and is favoring everyone consequently? I guess I don't understand this stuff that much! Thanks for the clarification. | ||
|
Eeryck
United States184 Posts
It seems to me that if they would have just deducted points based on existing division modifier + masters offset the same "normalization" would have occurred. Just a bit more slowly. While MMR convergence is happening quickly now (for active players) because of most displayed ratings being lower than MMR, after things stabilize people who are promoted later (or less active) into masters league will take much longer to converge to their MMR with this method. I wonder why Blizzard decided that this is their preferred method? It also makes me thing about the top 200 calculation speculations that they are first chosen by MMR then sorted by points. There are obviously high MMR low activity players and if the top 200 speculation is correct then they are getting sorted out by not having played enough games even though they could be top 200 if you looked at their MMR in a vacuum (of course if they played a lot more games they would most likely have a lower MMR). I wonder if this decision is to give them some method to demote non-active master league players? I can't speculate any other reason for the change in promotion mechanic. | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
On January 15 2011 01:39 Eeryck wrote: 1) I wonder why Blizzard decided that this is their preferred method? 2) It also makes me thing about the top 200 calculation speculations that they are first chosen by MMR then sorted by points. There are obviously high MMR low activity players and if the top 200 speculation is correct then they are getting sorted out by not having played enough games even though they could be top 200 if you looked at their MMR in a vacuum (of course if they played a lot more games they would most likely have a lower MMR). I can't speculate any other reason for the change in promotion mechanic. 1) Maybe they were testing the reset. That is what will happen to everyone after reset, though the bonus pool will be way lower, everyone will start equal, but with different (the same as now) MMR. Everyone will be favored against everyone till they stabilizes into their points/MMR correlaction, whatever it is... 2) Top 200 have some unknown prerequisites as well, so maybe the system won't give a place in top 200 for people with less than 100 games. It could actually have lots of prerequisites, something like this: 1) Non-banned and other obvious things -> 2) Top 2000 Points. -> 3) Top 200 MMR. -> 4) Sort by points. -> Done. OR 1) Non-banneds 2) Top 500 MMR 3) Sort by points (top 200) Done. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12224 Posts
On January 15 2011 02:25 MockHamill wrote: Are we really sure that all Master Divisions are equal? It could be that most that got in so far had similar MMR so that it looks that way. In a few weeks maybe people with slightly lower MMR will fill up some new Master Division and have a different division modifier? I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that they wouldn't all be equal. There are so many players in Master league now I think we can confirm this to be the case. | ||
|
Eeryck
United States184 Posts
On January 15 2011 01:53 SDream wrote: 1) Maybe they were testing the reset. That is what will happen to everyone after reset, though the bonus pool will be way lower, everyone will start equal, but with different (the same as now) MMR. Everyone will be favored against everyone till they stabilizes into their points/MMR correlaction, whatever it is... This seems reasonable, but I still wonder why pick a method that appears to give a rate of gaining points disadvantage to those that come to the league later? On January 15 2011 01:53 SDream wrote: 2) Top 200 have some unknown prerequisites as well, so maybe the system won't give a place in top 200 for people with less than 100 games. It could actually have lots of prerequisites, something like this: 1) Non-banned and other obvious things -> 2) Top 2000 Points. -> 3) Top 200 MMR. -> 4) Sort by points. -> Done. OR 1) Non-banneds 2) Top 500 MMR 3) Sort by points (top 200) Done. Sure, I gave a quick and simple repost because I was thinking about activity and Masters league and the discussion on the Top 200 and the hidden requirements. It just seems like the change should give some insight. Groups of people rarely change things on a whim. Of course simple answers have a tendency to be correct so ladder reset could very well be the only reason. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12224 Posts
On January 15 2011 01:39 Eeryck wrote: Does it seem odd to anyone else that Blizzard chose to "normalize" be starting all master league players with a default points of "spent bonus pool +73" It seems to me that if they would have just deducted points based on existing division modifier + masters offset the same "normalization" would have occurred. Just a bit more slowly. While MMR convergence is happening quickly now (for active players) because of most displayed ratings being lower than MMR, after things stabilize people who are promoted later (or less active) into masters league will take much longer to converge to their MMR with this method. I wonder why Blizzard decided that this is their preferred method? It also makes me thing about the top 200 calculation speculations that they are first chosen by MMR then sorted by points. There are obviously high MMR low activity players and if the top 200 speculation is correct then they are getting sorted out by not having played enough games even though they could be top 200 if you looked at their MMR in a vacuum (of course if they played a lot more games they would most likely have a lower MMR). I wonder if this decision is to give them some method to demote non-active master league players? I can't speculate any other reason for the change in promotion mechanic. Hm, I think the intent of the point normalization was to satisfy the top-end players who feel they don't need to be coddled with regard to their actual standing. That's something that people on TL (who, make no mistake about it, are far better than the average Bnetter) have been clamoring for since launch. As time passes, we'll invariably see the best players rise to the top of the ladder and be able to compare them on SC2Ranks without having to worry about division offsets or other such obfuscation. Points become far more meaningful in Master league for this reason. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On January 15 2011 02:38 Excalibur_Z wrote: Hm, I think the intent of the point normalization was to satisfy the top-end players who feel they don't need to be coddled with regard to their actual standing. That's something that people on TL (who, make no mistake about it, are far better than the average Bnetter) have been clamoring for since launch. As time passes, we'll invariably see the best players rise to the top of the ladder and be able to compare them on SC2Ranks without having to worry about division offsets or other such obfuscation. Points become far more meaningful in Master league for this reason. Of course, they're completely useless until everyone's played the 100+ games it takes to return your points to your MMR. The reset to 2300 was kind of silly. If a player's MMR was 3500, he can rock paper scissors his way back to 3500. Moreover, he can only win 20 points per game (fewer as his points get closer to his MMR), so it will take 60+ wins until his points are relevant again. Even if he wins at a high %, that's a lot of games to play. You can't really blame players with 1000+ points of surplus MMR for using rock paper scissors as a short-cut. | ||
|
Eeryck
United States184 Posts
On January 15 2011 02:38 Excalibur_Z wrote: Hm, I think the intent of the point normalization was to satisfy the top-end players who feel they don't need to be coddled with regard to their actual standing. That's something that people on TL (who, make no mistake about it, are far better than the average Bnetter) have been clamoring for since launch. As time passes, we'll invariably see the best players rise to the top of the ladder and be able to compare them on SC2Ranks without having to worry about division offsets or other such obfuscation. Points become far more meaningful in Master league for this reason. It seems like the point normalization would have occurred much more quickly naturally if they just used their standard promotion method. S-rank loses say 73 and all the rest lose 73 plus diamond division modifier. I understand how the removal of the obfuscation works and agree that it is the right thing to do, but the reset and re-earn seems pretty drastic for basically doing what the system will do anyway. I guess once people get a demotion out of masters or combined masters and diamond players make the top 200 in LA it may show some more interesting things. Just found their method thought provoking. | ||
|
Meldrath
United States620 Posts
 | ||
|
Sigmur
Poland497 Posts
On January 16 2011 05:09 Meldrath wrote: 2550 points with no bonus pool and a good win/loss ratio nearing 56% I suppose i havent received a promotion yet becuase My mmr puts me against 2500 diamond players...and not against a "master" yet? When the league came out I was so hyped I went on a 6 game win streak thinking promotion any minute now! lol Dude relax, just play more games, and hopefully you'll advance  I'm 2750 on EU and still in diamond, but it is just more motivating to play since i'm not in masters league yet ^^ | ||
|
Nevy
Canada169 Posts
| ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
On January 16 2011 09:34 Nevy wrote: So if only the top 2% of diamond gets into masters, does that mean eventually the master's league will get full? No one else could enter unless people get demoted? It's probably just a rough percentage, also assuming more people indeed get into master's league (which would mean raising their MMR), additional players will move into diamond since they will no longer be fighting those players that have moved up via MMR increase. So the ratios will stay similar I believe. | ||
|
Dice17
United States520 Posts
| ||
|
Strivers
United States358 Posts
Thinking back it seems the hidden rating is pretty accurate as I remember playing many Rank 1 players during Diamond. This was after taking long breaks of not playing and I was wondering why I was not getting much points for beating them. So my MMR barely went up (+8 points for beating a Rank 1?) but my hidden rating must have. I know some players who messed up their practice games and stayed in Silver league with 120-5 records jumped to 3100 in Diamond but lost a lot of MMR when promoted to Masters and now are back down to 2300 so this is definitely a closer step to accurate player skills based on their games. GJ Blizz. | ||
|
Teejing
Germany1360 Posts
Like making very very sure you are too good to ever drop to diamond again ^^ I even had a 9 game win streak and did not get promoted, took me a loss and 3 more winsto get there..... my loss ( cannon rushed my hatch ) was from a rank 12 master league guy so i guess with a 10 game win streak i would have made it too... | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12224 Posts
On January 16 2011 14:33 Strivers wrote: I was promoted to Masters after going 1-3, with the win as my last game. I was 1947 Diamond and dropped to 1810 Masters with the same ~600 bonus pool. Thinking back it seems the hidden rating is pretty accurate as I remember playing many Rank 1 players during Diamond. This was after taking long breaks of not playing and I was wondering why I was not getting much points for beating them. So my MMR barely went up (+8 points for beating a Rank 1?) but my hidden rating must have. I know some players who messed up their practice games and stayed in Silver league with 120-5 records jumped to 3100 in Diamond but lost a lot of MMR when promoted to Masters and now are back down to 2300 so this is definitely a closer step to accurate player skills based on their games. GJ Blizz. I think you're confusing terms here. MMR is the hidden skill rating. We refer to the displayed rating as "rating" or "points". You never lose MMR due to promotion. | ||
| ||
