| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Jago
Finland390 Posts
On February 22 2011 15:13 Excalibur_Z wrote:For example, let's say two players are matched together, Player A with 1500 MMR and 0 points and Player B with 1000 MMR and 0 points. Each player would see the other as Favored Err, what? Why? Why on earth would a 1500 MMR player see the lesser player as Favored? | ||
|
ChrysaliS_
United States261 Posts
On March 12 2011 10:41 Jago wrote: Err, what? Why? Why on earth would a 1500 MMR player see the lesser player as Favored? did you read the OP? favored means your opponent's MMR is greater than your points...... | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On March 12 2011 14:11 ChrysaliS_ wrote: did you read the OP? favored means your opponent's MMR is greater than your points...... Oh man this brings up another thing As MMR goes down and points go up your chances of being favored (i hope im doing this right) decrease over time? Therefore as time goes on and MMR's depreciate favored points will become less frequent. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 12 2011 14:17 Archerofaiur wrote: Oh man this brings up another thing As MMR goes down and points go up your chances of being favored (i hope im doing this right) decrease over time? Therefore as time goes on and MMR's depreciate favored points will become less frequent. Your adjusted points don't go up unless you're performing well. Your displayed points only go up because of bonus pool. You're way overthinking the MMR recalibration, it in no way is as drastic as that. What happens is that the larger the gap between your MMR and your points, the more likely you will face favored opponents. That's common for new players who have just been placed because they start out with 0 and typically their MMR is still pretty far from that initial placement point. If they keep winning, their Favored opponent streak continues. What typically happens is players will gradually arrive at their MMR, and their match history will go something like this: +48 +48 +48 +46 +46 +44 +44 -1 +42 -1 +40 -2 +36 -4 +30 -5 +28 -8 +24 -10 +20 -11 +22 -11 +24 -13. | ||
|
alp1ne
Canada4 Posts
 so its crusing me in terms of trying to move up or maintain a better than 50% w/l ratio. Not to mention most pvps play out the same way I find at my level anyways. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 13 2011 01:22 alp1ne wrote: Does anyone else seem to notice or is it just me that the ladder does not seem to be "random"? What I mean by that was that when I was playing Zerg, the majority of my games were ZvZ and now I switched to toss and the majority of my games are PvP. 5/7 of my games this morning were PvP. Which would be fine if it wasnt my worst MU so its crusing me in terms of trying to move up or maintain a better than 50% w/l ratio. Not to mention most pvps play out the same way I find at my level anyways.That's just a coincidence. It's random. | ||
|
RyuChus
Canada442 Posts
 | ||
|
neriofrio1
5 Posts
| ||
|
Tamerlane
Canada424 Posts
| ||
|
nvrs
Greece481 Posts
One thing that many ppl seem to ignore regarding the frequency that they face X race opponents is that one's veto list may play a huge role to it. From a personal experience, before the last patch and the new maps i had more TvPs as a Terran player than TvZs and that was for looong period of time (not just a couple of days). However i had no maps vetoed and the most TvPs i was playing were on Steppes of War and Blistering sands, which makes sense cause the Protosses seemed to like these maps  The moment i voted against them i started getting less TvPs and a lot more TvZs!edit: If you think about it, ti makes a lot of sense. If there are about equal number of players from each race searching for a game at a given moment and you have voted against 3 maps which you feel uncomfortable in / feel good (which may well be a race thing), then the chance of you facing another race that "likes" these maps is lesser that getting yourself a mirror! | ||
|
IamOBESE
United States134 Posts
On March 15 2011 00:26 nvrs wrote: One thing that many ppl seem to ignore regarding the frequency that they face X race opponents is that one's veto list may play a huge role to it. From a personal experience, before the last patch and the new maps i had more TvPs as a Terran player than TvZs and that was for looong period of time (not just a couple of days). However i had no maps vetoed and the most TvPs i was playing were on Steppes of War and Blistering sands, which makes sense cause the Protosses seemed to like these maps The moment i voted against them i started getting less TvPs and a lot more TvZs!edit: If you think about it, ti makes a lot of sense. If there are about equal number of players from each race searching for a game at a given moment and you have voted against 3 maps which you feel uncomfortable in / feel good (which may well be a race thing), then the chance of you facing another race that "likes" these maps is lesser that getting yourself a mirror! I believe the system picks your opponent first, then chooses a map that neither of you have vetoed | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 15 2011 00:26 nvrs wrote: One thing that many ppl seem to ignore regarding the frequency that they face X race opponents is that one's veto list may play a huge role to it. From a personal experience, before the last patch and the new maps i had more TvPs as a Terran player than TvZs and that was for looong period of time (not just a couple of days). However i had no maps vetoed and the most TvPs i was playing were on Steppes of War and Blistering sands, which makes sense cause the Protosses seemed to like these maps The moment i voted against them i started getting less TvPs and a lot more TvZs!edit: If you think about it, ti makes a lot of sense. If there are about equal number of players from each race searching for a game at a given moment and you have voted against 3 maps which you feel uncomfortable in / feel good (which may well be a race thing), then the chance of you facing another race that "likes" these maps is lesser that getting yourself a mirror! Yeah that's absolutely true. I think we may see some sharp differences once the new 1v1 map pool is out, too (the one rumored on the KR server). Zerg players will likely veto the non-macro maps, Terran players will likely veto the macro maps. | ||
|
Prinate
United States182 Posts
On March 15 2011 00:33 IamOBESE wrote: I believe the system picks your opponent first, then chooses a map that neither of you have vetoed I believe it's possible to play on a map that you have vetoed, so why would that happen if what you say is true? I am 90% certain I've played on a vetoed map before, and others have claimed the same. Unless this only happens in 2v2 or larger, at which point it'd be possible after the 4 players are selected, all map choices could potentially be vetoed between the 4+ players. I can't remember if my memory of playing on a veto map was 1v1 or a team game. I only remember thinking WTF? | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
Q. How do I enter the Grandmaster League? A. To enter the Grandmaster League: * There needs to be an open slot within the ladder. * You need to be in the top 200 players according to a rolling average of your skill rating. * You must be eligible. Q. What does eligible mean? A. To be eligible, your unused bonus pool must be less than 180. Q. Can I be removed from the top 200? A. Yes. If your unused bonus pool exceeds 270, you will be removed from the Grandmaster League. Q. Is there a way to see who is in the Grandmaster League? A. Yes. Click on the in-game ladder icon, and then click "Grandmaster" to see the current season rankings. Q. How active do I need to be to stay in the Grandmaster League? A. Your unused bonus pool must remain under 270. This means you can't get three weeks behind. This is equivalent to roughly 45 games. What do we take away from this? - The "inactivity threshold" is probably 270. This probably applies to all leagues. - Players really are "locked" into GM league based on their MMR's moving average for the entire season until they accumulate 270 bonus pool, at which point they're dropped and a slot opens up. If they stay below 270 they won't be removed even if better players emerge. - The "45 games" figure means that with a 50% win rate you will win 22.5 even matches which would allow you to spend 12 bonus pool per win or 270 over 45 games. | ||
|
The Touch
United Kingdom667 Posts
I'm a little hazy on exactly how the moving average stabilisation works. Do we have any idea how long your moving average needs to be stable (at a level worthy of promotion) in order for the system to be sufficiently convinced that your performances warrant that promotion? For example, does your moving average need to be sufficiently stable for 10 games; 25 games; 50 games; before you can be promoted? Also, do we have any info on how many games are used when calculating your moving average? Does it take into account every game you have played since you started, or only a certain number of your most recent games? | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 21 2011 22:53 The Touch wrote: So I've read the OP and scanned the thread (absolutely fantastic work, by the way. Truly outstanding), but I can't find an answer to the following question: I'm a little hazy on exactly how the moving average stabilisation works. Do we have any idea how long your moving average needs to be stable (at a level worthy of promotion) in order for the system to be sufficiently convinced that your performances warrant that promotion? For example, does your moving average need to be sufficiently stable for 10 games; 25 games; 50 games; before you can be promoted? Also, do we have any info on how many games are used when calculating your moving average? Does it take into account every game you have played since you started, or only a certain number of your most recent games? The moving average, by design, only encompasses the performance of your last X games. It could be last 5, 10, 15, we don't know. | ||
|
The Touch
United Kingdom667 Posts
On March 22 2011 02:26 Excalibur_Z wrote: The moving average, by design, only encompasses the performance of your last X games. It could be last 5, 10, 15, we don't know. Fair enough. Do we have any info at all or is this something that is just likely to remain a mystery, so to speak? | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 22 2011 08:11 The Touch wrote: Fair enough. Do we have any info at all or is this something that is just likely to remain a mystery, so to speak? We will very likely never know the interval of the moving average. | ||
|
Kambing
United States1176 Posts
Does your MMR change during the lockdown period, or are you "stuck in place" until lock down ends? In particular, if someone is in deep bronze during the lockdown period but then goes on a 100 game winning streak, will they be ready for promotion once the ladder is reset? Or did those 100 games not count for the purposes of their MMR/league placement. (Of course they certainly counted towards the person's final placement in their bronze league). I can see the system working either way from a theoretical perspective. MMR may not change during lockdown so that your opponent skill levels stay consistent thus not gimping your opportunities to gain points if you go on a hot streak. On the other hand, the favored system may be the "slack" that makes up this difference (i.e., if you go on a hot streak and then get punted back down, you will gain more points going up the ladder and then lose less going down), so it is fine from a competition perspective if your MMR does change. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On March 23 2011 01:58 Kambing wrote: Something just struck me that would be nice to figure out during this lockdown period: Does your MMR change during the lockdown period, or are you "stuck in place" until lock down ends? In particular, if someone is in deep bronze during the lockdown period but then goes on a 100 game winning streak, will they be ready for promotion once the ladder is reset? Or did those 100 games not count for the purposes of their MMR/league placement. (Of course they certainly counted towards the person's final placement in their bronze league). I can see the system working either way from a theoretical perspective. MMR may not change during lockdown so that your opponent skill levels stay consistent thus not gimping your opportunities to gain points if you go on a hot streak. On the other hand, the favored system may be the "slack" that makes up this difference (i.e., if you go on a hot streak and then get punted back down, you will gain more points going up the ladder and then lose less going down), so it is fine from a competition perspective if your MMR does change. MMR still changes. If your skill level changes dramatically enough as compared to the rest of the population, then you may not find yourself in the same league after your Season 2 placement match. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
PiGosaur Monday
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
