EPT[G] Comprehensive SC2 League and Ladder Guide - Page 40
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
sechkie
United States334 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On August 16 2011 07:10 sechkie wrote: I noticed that the division tiers that were around in s1 and beta got removed, perhaps because we don't have enough data anymore but are these tiers still relevant? and would these tiers still exist for only up to diamond league or does masters league also have these tiers? For example, there are a lot of master league divisions that have a severe difference in points for rankings. 500 points in 1 division might be top 25, but only top 50 in another division, etc. Division tiers have always been around. The only difference was that in early beta, divisions were numbered rather than randomly named. The numbers didn't have any inherent meaning just like the names (I remember Diamond divisions 2 and 4 having better players than the rest) but the tiers were still there. In mid-beta, that's when they introduced the random naming. The tiers are still relevant because they effectively cloud your overall standing in a league, so being aware of them and researching which tier you might be in by comparing yourself against the adjusted points of your opponents is important. Tiers don't exist for the Master and Grandmaster leagues. Newer Master divisions of course will have fewer average points because Master players are more likely to spread very far out in skill since that's the highest league next to Grandmaster which has a constantly-changing entry threshold. There are no point offset changes between Master divisions. | ||
|
sechkie
United States334 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On August 16 2011 08:03 sechkie wrote: ahhh okay, and I had thought that the divisions were filled in 1 division at a time, such like fill up one division with 100 then open the next division. Is this actually correct? I was just curious because I joined a division with a lot of ppl that have been in there for a while, but I guess it makes sense if someone were to have dropped out of the division. If there are fewer than 100 players in a division tier and you get promoted to that tier, you'll join that division. If all the divisions in a tier are full, then it will make a new division and move you there. So filling in 1 division at a time is true for Master league where there is only one tier, but for Diamond league for example it's populating 7 divisions at a time because there are 7 tiers. | ||
|
Fiero
United States13 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On August 18 2011 11:41 Fiero wrote: I played my S3 placement match today, delayed because of real life, and got place into Diamond (same as S2) but with zero points. I ctrl+f'd the guide for my question but only found the bits about Bronze players with zero points and very low MMRs. My question is, if my understanding of the favored system is correct, I will continually face favored opponents until I get to a specific range of points, yes? Your placement match only puts you into a league. You don't get any points from it. You always start at 0. It's common to face favored opponents immediately following placement, though, yes. Depending on where your MMR actually is (that is, if it's far enough away from 0 points in whatever league/division tier you were placed) and how often you're winning following placement, you may encounter many favored opponents or only a few. | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
Pre-game and Post-game Favoritism Discrepancy The pre-game loading screen does not always agree with the post-game score screen, and may not always be accurate. The accurate information can always be found on the score screen. Blizzard is aware of this bug, but it cannot be consistently reproduced. After months of this bug not being fixed (maybe it is fixed already??), I finally made a theory for it. I think the matchmaking rating isn't a number like X, but a number range for X to Y (a minimum and a maximum). Also, the math to our MMR does take into account the present/future games of our old opponents and that's why the MMR seems to move fast if you stop playing for awhile (1 day or maybe some hours). If you play many games in a row, the math just won't occur and your MMR will basicly not update That said, someone that play their 5 placement matches in a row (and win) might get promoted to platinum only, but someone that play 3-4 placement matches and wait a day then play the last one, he will be promoted to diamond instead. In a similar way, a bottom bronze that is actually master level and play its games till masters might require 150+ games to hit master, but if he actually waited some time between these games he will probably need way less games, because his MMR will update with not only his games but the present/future games of his opponents that are also taken into account to calculate your current MMR. This need to be tested, but it seems that smurfing is a bannable ofense, so it can't be tested. I also feel that the MMR is a range and not a single number because it seems that my opponents would lose few points as the system didn't know my MMR, but then when I finally lose, my opponents doesn't get that many points as it would be logical, so it seems the MMR is not a single number, but a range. Finally, that would explain how the discrepancy of the "favored" thing specially in team games could be possible. If MMR were a number that never changes unless after a game is over, then the math to calculate the favorable thing would be too simple to show us a bug like this. The thing is, the MMR of everyone keeps baing calculated and changing, but they also have this range from X to Y (at least for new players) that make the math that more complex. That said, it also seems that we will always start at some "gold" level MMR in our teams, but the MMR will move that fast if we win/lose games, so it seems to move into master range even before the 3th game if you have a past MMR record that help the system make this decision. So, our MMR doesn't move just because the MMR of our opponent was X, it takes into consideration a lot more things, but that also doesn't mean the MMR doesn't start at the same "0" value for everyone. If I am right that means that someone that wants to be promoted should never "give a break" after a loss, because if he does that your MMR will decay in the future, you should give a break only after you've got some winning over your losses, so when the math is done in the future, the account will be positive for you and never negative. Of course that could lead to 15 losses in a row that you just can't recuperate from, but then you just doesn't deserve to be at that level of MMR anyway and maybe you were only there because you made a break after a winning streak and when the math was done your MMR ended up being too high. Testing things like this is difficult, but the "discrepancy bug" basicly confirms that something is more confusing than I'd thought and I finally think that I now understand what was it that I wasn't taking into considerating. Please, critique my thoughts so we might move foward this one more step =D | ||
|
vanick
United States53 Posts
First, MMR is a number, but you're not totally wrong in your intuition that there is a "range" of sorts in a player's skill representation. A player's skill is represented with MMR and an uncertainty or confidence factor (depending on how you want to look at it) that we've called sigma. Related to this, the perception that your MMR may move faster after a period of inactivity may just be bias, or it may be a time factor that the ladder system also incorporates (the Xbox TrueSkill system uses a factor like this). Second, the math only takes into account the statistics for the players at the time of the game, then performs the update from there. The Bayesian model they use does not require more, not to mention the algorithmic pain in the ass it would be to implement. | ||
|
SDream
Brazil896 Posts
Why do you think that the system puts newbies against newbies in the placement matches? What information can the system get from a newbie in his first placement match that win or lose against another guy in the same situation? That was what I was wondering about when I concluded the system should keep track of our past opponents further, otherwise it would be just a waste of a placement match. My last 3 placement matches (NA acc, LA->AM acc and now EU acc) were the same, I got into diamond the 3 times winning 5 times, but with a break either in the 2nd or 3th or 4th game, but some people win the 5 placements as well and only get into platinum. Then I made this hipothesys. You can check my anotations here (: https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AoPq9zdgd7owdFFUZFIyNmtlVXJxWEtmQ1ZlSEZWeEE&hl=en_US&authkey=CODQx50L And last, why do a bug like the discrepancy bug would exist if the math was that straight-foward? I think it is hard to believe that this bug is that hard to fix =/ (does anyone know if this bug is still out there?) | ||
|
theonlyshaft
United States581 Posts
| ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On August 18 2011 13:25 SDream wrote: Thanks for replying Vanick <3 Why do you think that the system puts newbies against newbies in the placement matches? What information can the system get from a newbie in his first placement match that win or lose against another guy in the same situation? That was what I was wondering about when I concluded the system should keep track of our past opponents further, otherwise it would be just a waste of a placement match. My last 3 placement matches (NA acc, LA->AM acc and now EU acc) were the same, I got into diamond the 3 times winning 5 times, but with a break either in the 2nd or 3th or 4th game, but some people win the 5 placements as well and only get into platinum. Then I made this hipothesys. You can check my anotations here (: https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AoPq9zdgd7owdFFUZFIyNmtlVXJxWEtmQ1ZlSEZWeEE&hl=en_US&authkey=CODQx50L And last, why do a bug like the discrepancy bug would exist if the math was that straight-foward? I think it is hard to believe that this bug is that hard to fix =/ (does anyone know if this bug is still out there?) Could also have to do with who your opponents are in the placement matches. If you're unlucky enough to get 4 bronze players in a row and the 5th is silver, you're probably going to get placed in silver/gold. Not sure how they determine who plays against people in placement matches though. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
Actually I just thought of something. Maybe they try to factor in game familiarity to some degree exclusively for placement matches. Maybe they don't want you playing against someone who's been playing for a bunch of games when you're only playing your first game, maybe they instead want to choose an opponent who is also playing his first game. Then after a couple of those games, you start facing people who are already placed in a league to gauge the accuracy of the matchmaking? | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
The problem with pitting placement players against established players from the start is: what do you do when there are no established players? Even then, your assumption about game familiarity and matching makes a lot of sense. It probably models part of the reason why the system works the way it does. | ||
|
Legend7777
United States28 Posts
My friend and I play 2v2 a lot. We got into diamond and are hovering around rank 1-2 in our division this season. Recently we started playing masters teams or random masters teams, but consistantly playing them. My question is this though: is there any correlation to the amount of points that you lose when you lose a game and your MMR? We are playing better opponents, but at the same time, we are starting to lose more points per game that we lose. Two Weeks ago: Losses would range from 4-9 points. (Playing diamond teams on the average) Last week: ~6-11 (some diamond, some masters) This week: 8-12 and slowly rising kinda thing. (mostly masters) Does that signify anything as far as MMR goes? | ||
|
IMScientist
Italy125 Posts
the starcraft 2 greasemonkey is not working well and i like it, it's a good way to see if you are going to be promoted at least in my opinion. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
It looks something like this: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tBuGI.png) | ||
|
Legend7777
United States28 Posts
Would that help to signify a possible league promotion coming up *if* the new level we are approaching is above the masters threshold? | ||
|
Mendelfist
Sweden356 Posts
On August 20 2011 01:55 Lucyan wrote: Guys can anyone here update or say how to adjust this http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/103651 the starcraft 2 greasemonkey is not working well and i like it, it's a good way to see if you are going to be promoted at least in my opinion. Change this row: {region:'eu', date:new Date(2011,2,29,22,48,7)}, to this: {region:'eu', date:new Date(2011,6,27,4,26,0)}, and this row: {region:'us', date:new Date(2011,2,29,7,52,7)}, to this: {region:'us', date:new Date(2011,6,26,13,30,0)}, Those are the starting dates for season 3: 2011-07-27 04:26:00 and 2011-07-26 13:30:00 (januari is month number 0). I don't have the starting dates for the other regions. You can find out yourself by fiddling with the values. An 1 vs 1 player with 0 points and 0 games won should have 0 adjusted points. There is also a bug in the original that needs patching: This code: if (bonus_matches == null) { return; } var bonus = bonus_matches[1].trim(); BP.bonusLeft = parseInt(bonus); must be replaced with this code: if (bonus_matches == null) { BP.bonusLeft = 0; } else { var bonus = bonus_matches[1].trim(); BP.bonusLeft = parseInt(bonus); } If you added any patch during the ladder lock to make it work that patch must be removed. If they ever fix the bonus pool bug on the battle.net web pages (I can't understand why they don't) the script will break again. I don't know if the other script features work (friends stats) because I don't use them. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On August 20 2011 04:22 Legend7777 wrote: oh thanks askfjh :D Would that help to signify a possible league promotion coming up *if* the new level we are approaching is above the masters threshold? Your points approaching your MMR has nothing to do with promotion, if that's what you're thinking. If you're talking about your opponents as indicators, that's a little trickier. There seems to be a great deal of overlap between bottom masters and high diamond (from my experience). While you can use it as a measure of getting close to a promotion, you also have to be conservative in your expectations of how close you really are. This probably has to do with how small of a population windows masters really is. | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
 | ||
| ||
