EPT[G] Comprehensive SC2 League and Ladder Guide - Page 33
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
| ||
|
abacus707
United States6 Posts
On July 18 2011 15:59 arbitrageur wrote: How was this fixed? I threw 200 games last season because I had ladder phobia (more I hated losing because i wanted to maintain 60+% win rate, so I wanted to completely remove the emotional distress associated w/ losing), and just now played this season's placement game. Placed in 99th bronze and i get +0 points for the win. Just like last season, every win I'd get +0 points. After about 20 (consecutive) wins I gave up on NA ladder. No way I'm grinding hundreds or thousands of bronze games. Does anybody know of a recourse to this problem? I e-mailed blizzard 4 months ago, but as I expected they ignored it. I think this was the original announcement on 4/28/2011 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2416160162 "This is a warning that the practice of purposefully losing games and/or automating gameplay can be met with suspension from the game, revoking of achievements and portraits earned, or permanent closure of the account. If you're found to be automating your gameplay and/or purposefully losing games or win trading, your account will come under scrutiny, and any of the aforementioned actions may be taken." If you did it before that, maybe it's okay. I thought I read somewhere that Blizzard may have put some of the cheaters and wintraders on the bottom of the Bronze league and locking them there instead of banning them from the game. But that was in relation to one anecdote of the drop hackers who was later found on the bottom of a Bronze league. I didn't see any follow up saying that was really the case. It would be interesting to see if you would be matched up against stronger players as you keep winning. If so, this account might become a really precious resource for trolling higher level players. If you are still paired against terrible players after winning 200 games in a row, I would agree that it does suck. | ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
| ||
|
Sek-Kuar
Czech Republic593 Posts
On July 18 2011 19:52 Probe1 wrote: Well said. If you have ladder phobia, alternate between SEA and NA games so you can slow your rank increase. Throwing games on purpose isn't smiled upon here or by Bliz. Where exactly is the difference between: a) throwing games away on purpose with intention to play easier games against worse players b) playing (smurfing) on 2 accounts with intention to play easier games against worse players ??? Seriously... Intention is same, effect is similar. Just hypocrisy. | ||
|
arbitrageur
Australia1202 Posts
On July 20 2011 23:13 Sek-Kuar wrote: a) throwing games away on purpose with intention to play easier games against worse players b) playing (smurfing) on 2 accounts with intention to play easier games against worse players ??? Seriously... Intention is same, effect is similar. Just hypocrisy. No real difference at all. Luckily I do not belong to either category. If you were implying so, you either cannot comprehend English very well or you didn't read my posts. | ||
|
Sek-Kuar
Czech Republic593 Posts
On July 20 2011 23:53 arbitrageur wrote: No real difference at all. Luckily I do not belong to either category. If you were implying so, you either cannot comprehend English very well or you didn't read my posts. Well I wasnt talking about you, but since you are here then hear my opinion: On July 18 2011 15:59 arbitrageur wrote: I threw 200 games last season because I had ladder phobia (more I hated losing because i wanted to maintain 60+% win rate, so I wanted to completely remove the emotional distress associated w/ losing), [...] You threw 200 games so you could have 60+% w/lr - playing against worse players - and remove ladder stress - playing against worse players. After acomplishing that you stopped playing. You, however, clearly belong to group a), dont know why are you confused. | ||
|
arbitrageur
Australia1202 Posts
On July 21 2011 02:05 Sek-Kuar wrote: Well I wasnt talking about you, but since you are here then hear my opinion: You threw 200 games so you could have 60+% w/lr - playing against worse players - and remove ladder stress - playing against worse players. After acomplishing that you stopped playing. You, however, clearly belong to group a), dont know why are you confused. I kindly request that you re-read my posts. You either didn't comprehend what I typed, or you didn't read all my posts. | ||
|
SLTR.Maverick
Canada142 Posts
Appreciate the effort :D | ||
|
Traditional Fire
United States60 Posts
| ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On July 25 2011 13:38 Traditional Fire wrote: I read this twice and I'm still baffled by this bonus pool concept. Lets say that you don't play for an extended period of time does the game treat you as if you are "worse" and will demote you? Nope, unless you're in grandmasters league. When you don't play, your MMR stays the same (the thing that decides if you're promoted/demoted). | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On July 25 2011 14:11 aksfjh wrote: Nope, unless you're in grandmasters league. When you don't play, your MMR stays the same (the thing that decides if you're promoted/demoted). And rightly so, because the system doesn't know whether you're any better or worse than you used to be or whether you're any better or worse than the current population versus the population when you last stopped playing unless you play games. | ||
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
If everyone starts at 0 points, and in general you gain as much for a win as you do for a loss, so if you're in top half you'll start drifting up but never too far bc losses invariably will result in a 0 point ladder (50/50 wins). Bonus pool is a way to incentivize playing. You can only spend bonus pool or lose it at end of season. Without bonus pool people would have a tough time getting to 1k pts and beyond. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On July 26 2011 02:15 thurst0n wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong but here is how I see bonus pool. If everyone starts at 0 points, and in general you gain as much for a win as you do for a loss, so if you're in top half you'll start drifting up but never too far bc losses invariably will result in a 0 point ladder (50/50 wins). Bonus pool is a way to incentivize playing. You can only spend bonus pool or lose it at end of season. Without bonus pool people would have a tough time getting to 1k pts and beyond. You can view it both ways and they're both correct. Yes, bonus pool incentivizes play because if you play and you win, you get free points. If you don't play, you miss out on those points that other players are earning and you indirectly fall in the rankings, which makes it function similar to decay. You're also correct that people would have a tough time getting to like 1k points, because it's pretty rare that a player will have even as high as ~500 adjusted points (points with spent bonus pool factored out) before he gets promoted to the next league, depending on what the league is. Bonus pool also creates another layer of granularity in the division rankings because the range from #1 to #100 increases from like 0-500 points without bonus pool to 0-1700 or something like that. | ||
|
Capook
United States122 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On July 26 2011 05:02 Capook wrote: The guide states that (e.g.) masters is 2% of active players, yet it also states that inactivity does not cause demotion. So if half of masters stops playing, then masters will swell to 150% the size it used to be as top diamonds are promoted to fill up the 2% of active players requirement? That can happen, yes. Skill naturally and gradually fills up gaps in the skill spectrum as some players are better than others but worse than others, where they eventually settle. I want to emphasize though that those percentages are not quotas -- meaning there is no hard requirement of "2% of the population must be Master league". It just turns out that way because of where the fixed Master league MMR boundary is. If Blizzard calculated that out of the possible MMR range, that only 2% will make it to X MMR, then X is where the boundary is. Think about it in terms of Elo rating, for example. Take three players with ratings of 1000, 1100, and 1200. The 1100 player is at 1100 because he beats the 1000 player but loses to the 1200 player. If the 1200 player stops playing, the 1100 player's rating would rise because the 1200 player is no longer actively pushing him downward. The 1200 player is still 1200 even though he's not playing. | ||
|
Traditional Fire
United States60 Posts
| ||
|
JeanBob
Canada295 Posts
On July 26 2011 09:22 Traditional Fire wrote: How do you spend bonus pool points? I have 1.2k The only way is to win games, but I tomorrow, with season 3 beginning, your bonus pool will be back to zero, so do not stress out with this for the moment. | ||
|
Xation
Canada147 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On July 26 2011 09:55 Xation wrote: Great thread, I am still confused about the the whole "Interception point thing" where you are like matched up with an opponent based on where your MMR intercepts or something? The intercept zone represents the odds of either player winning the match, and yes, it's based on MMR as well as the uncertainty factor (which determines how wide your curve is). The smaller the overlapping area, the greater the chance one player will win and the other will lose. We believe -- but obviously can't prove -- that when two curves never intersect that those players just never find a game against each other. Of course, this is different from "favored vs unfavored" in-game which is determined a different way, using points versus opponent MMR which is not considered at all during the matchmaking process. | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
| ||
