|
On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League.
No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion.
By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining.
|
United States12235 Posts
On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League."
Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR.
And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool.
|
On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining.
Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss.
|
On January 19 2011 09:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League." Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR. And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool.
No I mean't like Master league is top 2% or 200 or whatever they were claiming, but with the amount of games I played it's clearly obvious I CANNOT be "Top" of anything. I found it odd that I jumped from Platinum to diamond, then 1 game it took to get into Masters, just wanted to share the story.
Definitely debunks the point system, resetting and all must be irrelevant since I jumped in a single game. I just find it odd that in 30 games the system judged my MMR so high. Sure it's a good winning % but not that difficult with such low games played.
|
EDIT: Double-post. Hit "Back" on my browser and accidentally posted the same thing twice. Sorry about that.
|
On January 19 2011 09:39 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League." Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR. And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool. No I mean't like Master league is top 2% or 200 or whatever they were claiming, but with the amount of games I played it's clearly obvious I CANNOT be "Top" of anything. I found it odd that I jumped from Platinum to diamond, then 1 game it took to get into Masters, just wanted to share the story. Point resetting and all must be irrelevant since I jumped in a single game.
but you AREN'T the "top" of anything, you are not in the top 200. master league is just another league above diamond, and I don't see why you think you shouldn't be in it if you beat multiple masters in a row and went 24-6 probably playing pretty high up players for half of the games because of how fast your mmr goes up (as it should) when you start out with a really good record like that.
would you prefer that your mmr goes up slowly despite winning every game and having to win 100 games to get to your proper level? or do you want it to keep you in plat because you don't have many games played while matching you against master players? what is the alternative you're suggesting?
|
On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss.
I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit.
|
On January 19 2011 09:39 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League." Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR. And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool. No I mean't like Master league is top 2% or 200 or whatever they were claiming, but with the amount of games I played it's clearly obvious I CANNOT be "Top" of anything. I found it odd that I jumped from Platinum to diamond, then 1 game it took to get into Masters, just wanted to share the story. Definitely debunks the point system, resetting and all must be irrelevant since I jumped in a single game. I just find it odd that in 30 games the system judged my MMR so high. Sure it's a good winning % but not that difficult with such low games played.
That's because the system have a hard time figuring, or fixing the level (or MMR) of new account/player. It "needs" something to lower the raising capacities of new accounts or it will continue to be freestyle like it is since the beginning.
|
United States12235 Posts
On January 19 2011 09:39 Slardar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League." Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR. And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool. No I mean't like Master league is top 2% or 200 or whatever they were claiming, but with the amount of games I played it's clearly obvious I CANNOT be "Top" of anything. I found it odd that I jumped from Platinum to diamond, then 1 game it took to get into Masters, just wanted to share the story. Definitely debunks the point system, resetting and all must be irrelevant since I jumped in a single game. I just find it odd that in 30 games the system judged my MMR so high. Sure it's a good winning % but not that difficult with such low games played.
The whole intent and design of the system is to get you where you need to be very rapidly. Your promotion status is determined by the quality of opponents that you have faced. If you keep winning against good players, then it puts you against very good players, then top players, all in a very short period of time. It's very common especially if you have only a small number of games played to be rocketed up or down the leagues. There are a bunch of examples of people who have 20, 30, 40 games played who have been promoted into Master league. If your skill proves you deserving of Master league, that's where it will send you, and it won't take hundreds of games for that to happen.
|
On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit.
again, why the fuck shouldn't they? how many games should you need to play beating master level players before it promotes you? why should there be some lower bound of games played if you're clearly of that skill level
and no, when you already have over 500 games played a 15-4 streak should not make your mmr jump that much, because chances are you didn't get twice as good at starcraft 2 overnight, you just had a good little streak. it's not broken whatsoever (in this situation at least). if someone goes 23-0, playing people with an mmr much higher than 2.7k (which they would be, because your mmr goes up fucking fast starting out!) then of course he should have a higher mmr than a 2.7k diamond player. think before you post.
going 24-6 is much better than going 15-4 regardless, even without considering the fact that the 26-4 player was playing much higher level opponents
|
On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit.
Of course it should not, but it is.
MMR can jump quickly when you have a new account, not when you have made like 500 game, because statisticly, going for a 9-0 when you have 12-6 is going from 66,7% win to 77,8% win (huuuuuuuge), while going for a 9-0 when you have 270-230 is going from 54% to 54,8%.
|
On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit.
You have no idea what you're talking about. When you went 15-4 your games were most likely played against people of all similar MMR. The person that just started, it's constantly searching to find their MMR. Consequently, it might pair him against a 2400 player, he wins, then a 2700 player, he wins, then a 3,000 player, he wins again, etc. Are you suggesting after you win one game at 2700 it should start matching you vs 3,000 players? No, because it already figured where about you should be.
|
On January 19 2011 09:46 god deezy yo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit. again, why the fuck shouldn't they? how many games should you need to play beating master level players before it promotes you? why should there be some lower bound of games played if you're clearly of that skill level and no, when you already have over 500 games played a 15-4 streak should not make your mmr jump that much, because chances are you didn't get twice as good at starcraft 2 overnight, you just had a good little streak. it's not broken whatsoever (in this situation at least). if someone goes 23-0, playing people with an mmr much higher than 2.7k (which they would be, because your mmr goes up fucking fast starting out!) then of course he should have a higher mmr than a 2.7k diamond player. think before you post. going 24-6 is much better than going 15-4 regardless, even without considering the fact that the 26-4 player was playing much higher level opponents
I did, and apparently I disagree with how the system works. There's not nearly as much...i donno "exclusivity" in a Master league when someone can achieve it in a couple hours. I know this isn't Chess, but humor me for a second: if I come out of nowhere and beat 3 chess GMs in a row, that does not (and should not) make me a GM. I'd have to work my way through thousands of games and many tournaments to have a chance. In chess, achieving GM means something. In SC, it means very little. You could get lucky with a few cannon rushes and become a "Master" which just tarnishes the title in my opinion.
|
Is it possible to pull historical data to see how many wins/losses they had before they got into masters?
That might shed some light on this.
I'm looking at some info now... not sure if I will find anything...
|
United States12235 Posts
Let's say Player A and Player B have identical win-loss records of 20-10 and that they started with the same MMR.
If Player A went 4-2, 4-2, 4-2, 4-2, 4-2 while Player B went 15-0, 5-10 they would probably have pretty dramatically different MMR.
|
On January 19 2011 09:43 god deezy yo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:39 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:35 Excalibur_Z wrote:On January 19 2011 09:27 Slardar wrote:On January 19 2011 09:24 forelmashi wrote:
except they reset points with promotion No they don't read my post. Reposting this cause I just debunked the whole thing incidentally. Excal what do you think about it? "I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League." Are you suggesting Master league is the top 200 players? It isn't. Master is the top 2% of active players. Your promotion eligibility is determined by the moving average and stability of your MMR. And yes your points are reset with promotion to 73 + spent bonus pool. No I mean't like Master league is top 2% or 200 or whatever they were claiming, but with the amount of games I played it's clearly obvious I CANNOT be "Top" of anything. I found it odd that I jumped from Platinum to diamond, then 1 game it took to get into Masters, just wanted to share the story. Point resetting and all must be irrelevant since I jumped in a single game. but you AREN'T the "top" of anything, you are not in the top 200. master league is just another league above diamond, and I don't see why you think you shouldn't be in it if you beat multiple masters in a row and went 24-6 probably playing pretty high up players for half of the games because of how fast your mmr goes up (as it should) when you start out with a really good record like that. would you prefer that your mmr goes up slowly despite winning every game and having to win 100 games to get to your proper level? or do you want it to keep you in plat because you don't have many games played while matching you against master players? what is the alternative you're suggesting?
I said I'm not the top of anything, yet I'm in the league which Blizzard claims is the top of something. I'm just saying 30 games isn't much of anything, there's people with several hundred who can't get there, it felt like I cheated the system and now I have a hollow Master League tag and it's pissing me off a touch. What I thought was going to happen was I'd need another 20ish games after Diamond(with a good record) to jump to Master.
|
On January 19 2011 09:52 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:46 god deezy yo wrote:On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit. again, why the fuck shouldn't they? how many games should you need to play beating master level players before it promotes you? why should there be some lower bound of games played if you're clearly of that skill level and no, when you already have over 500 games played a 15-4 streak should not make your mmr jump that much, because chances are you didn't get twice as good at starcraft 2 overnight, you just had a good little streak. it's not broken whatsoever (in this situation at least). if someone goes 23-0, playing people with an mmr much higher than 2.7k (which they would be, because your mmr goes up fucking fast starting out!) then of course he should have a higher mmr than a 2.7k diamond player. think before you post. going 24-6 is much better than going 15-4 regardless, even without considering the fact that the 26-4 player was playing much higher level opponents I did, and apparently I disagree with how the system works. There's not nearly as much...i donno "exclusivity" in a Master league when someone can achieve it in a couple hours. I know this isn't Chess, but humor me for a second: if I come out of nowhere and beat 3 chess GMs in a row, that does not (and should not) make me a GM. I'd have to work my way through thousands of games and many tournaments to have a chance. In chess, achieving GM means something. In SC, it means very little. You could get lucky with a few cannon rushes and become a "Master" which just tarnishes the title in my opinion.
Master isn't the same as Grandmaster. It's a lot easier to become a Master in chess than a Grandmaster. There will be a Grandmaster league coming soon.
|
if u came out of nowhere and beat 3-4 chess grand masters in a row, i will consider you of at least master level strength.
|
On January 19 2011 09:52 absolutionsc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 09:46 god deezy yo wrote:On January 19 2011 09:43 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 09:38 WhiteDog wrote:On January 19 2011 09:34 absolutionsc wrote:On January 19 2011 08:45 Slardar wrote:
I got into Masters League with approximately 30 games. 24-6. I can't be top 200 of anything with that amount of games played.
I did beat 3 Master League players in a row though(I believe) It's obviously basing it off your hidden MMR, not actual points. I was in Platinum League, I won a single game --> Diamond. Played another right after, won it, straight into Master League. No offense to you, but to me this screams "broken matchmaking system". Two games to go from plat to master is a joke. On the other hand, I had over 500 games played and was around 2.7k diamond, won 15 of 19 games, and still wasn't promoted. It actually doesn't surprise me that the top 200 is totally freaking screwed up. Something is wrong with the entire system right now in my opinion. By the way, I'm saying this AFTER I finally got to Master league, so it's not just me complaining. Well, this MMR system need you to play a lot so that your MMR become stable. Someone like you, with 500 games and a good diamond rating is "fixed" statisticly and your MMR doesn't change a lot from a game to another, the match making system can match you with player that are close to you, and so a loss or a win is not much. On the other side, someone with 24-6 has a MMR that goes russian mountains after each loss. I understand MMR, but it simply shouldn't be possible for someone with under 30 games to get to Master's league. Also, you're implying that someone with 23 wins had a higher MMR than a 2.7k diamond player, which shouldn't be possible in my opinion. If MMR could jump that quickly, my 15-4 streak should have put me in Master league easily. Broken shit. again, why the fuck shouldn't they? how many games should you need to play beating master level players before it promotes you? why should there be some lower bound of games played if you're clearly of that skill level and no, when you already have over 500 games played a 15-4 streak should not make your mmr jump that much, because chances are you didn't get twice as good at starcraft 2 overnight, you just had a good little streak. it's not broken whatsoever (in this situation at least). if someone goes 23-0, playing people with an mmr much higher than 2.7k (which they would be, because your mmr goes up fucking fast starting out!) then of course he should have a higher mmr than a 2.7k diamond player. think before you post. going 24-6 is much better than going 15-4 regardless, even without considering the fact that the 26-4 player was playing much higher level opponents I did, and apparently I disagree with how the system works. There's not nearly as much...i donno "exclusivity" in a Master league when someone can achieve it in a couple hours. I know this isn't Chess, but humor me for a second: if I come out of nowhere and beat 3 chess GMs in a row, that does not (and should not) make me a GM. I'd have to work my way through thousands of games and many tournaments to have a chance. In chess, achieving GM means something. In SC, it means very little. You could get lucky with a few cannon rushes and become a "Master" which just tarnishes the title in my opinion.
You don't seem to be able to understand the difference between Master league and Grandmaster. There is no Grandmaster league right now, but the Blizzard top 200 list is the closest thing there is to it. You won't be getting in Grandmaster league with 30 games played when it's released.
Master league has thousands of players.
|
On January 19 2011 09:57 Zalfor wrote:
if u came out of nowhere and beat 3-4 chess grand masters in a row, i will consider you of at least master level strength.
Yeah... It wouldn't take "thousands" of games to be master level in chess if you are strong enough to beat GMs in standard time controls. You'd probably be master after 50 games at most if you played that well.
Besides, everyone knows that division names are there to please casuals. Nobody good is going to think someone is good just because they are in masters league.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
