EPT[G] Comprehensive SC2 League and Ladder Guide - Page 64
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
EtherealDeath
United States8366 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12237 Posts
On September 14 2012 10:45 EtherealDeath wrote: Well I mean the estimated stable rating for someone. I recall a few seasons ago it was posted that the cutoff was about 1400 with bonus, or 770 before bonus, in order to get GM. I seem to recall the next season after that being the same length, but it increasing to about 1500 with bonus, judging from who actually got in. Then we had a tremendous number of people above 2000, that just a result of a longer season? Cause it almost seems like GM would have been nearly 2100 last season, and that's nearly 2 extra months of bonus pool, and the season didn't seem that much longer. Basically, is an estimated stable rating of 770 before bonus still the expected GM cutoff (ofc it depends on the exact 200, but blizz posted at one point it was about 770 before bonus at the current time). The 770 was my number based on subtracting the bonus pool from an 8-week season, so that value will never change. The rest kind of depends on who the top 200 are, yeah. Note that the offsets probably changed with Season 9 so Season 10's "promotion values" may change. | ||
|
The_Unseen
France1923 Posts
| ||
|
Rosolino
Germany1 Post
| ||
|
Ducknswitch
Canada2 Posts
| ||
|
jean23
France6 Posts
| ||
|
baconftw
Denmark45 Posts
| ||
|
easygoes
United States1 Post
| ||
|
wushu
United States9 Posts
| ||
|
Aiden1337
Sweden61 Posts
| ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
This makes me wonder whether the range from top of silver to bottom of plat is fairly small. I have been playing somewhat more but since I'm pushing 5000 1v1 games by now I'm not willing to chalk it up to some huge leap forward. Edit: My win rate this season has been 52.6%, so not an extreme outlier. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12237 Posts
On September 24 2012 19:19 Lysenko wrote: Season 9 has been a head-scratcher for me. A couple seasons ago (season 6 I think) I'd been in platinum, then placed into gold at the next season reset. I'd then spent seasons 7 and 8 in gold, and placed into silver when the season reset in for 9. Since the start of the season, I've been promoted to gold and then platinum in about 173 games. This makes me wonder whether the range from top of silver to bottom of plat is fairly small. I have been playing somewhat more but since I'm pushing 5000 1v1 games by now I'm not willing to chalk it up to some huge leap forward. Edit: My win rate this season has been 52.6%, so not an extreme outlier. Reports of people being placed lower than they should be in Season 9 are common. When the offsets changed (and a season roll is a perfect time to do this, let alone one that's also removing all division tiers) the carried-over MMRs must have either qualified players for lower leagues or there was some global penalty applied in order to simulate a conservative estimate for placement (or combat rating inflation?). | ||
|
stard1n
50 Posts
| ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On September 26 2012 00:05 stard1n wrote: Didn't blizz remove league tiers this season? They removed division tiers, which made point scores between different divisions in a league map differently to MMR. What were you seeing that provoked you to ask about this? | ||
|
stard1n
50 Posts
| ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12237 Posts
| ||
|
stard1n
50 Posts
No I buried it under "Legacy Information" meaning it's no longer relevant. Thanks  | ||
|
oZe
Sweden492 Posts
On September 14 2012 10:38 Excalibur_Z wrote: I'm not sure what you're saying here. Last season was slightly longer than 8 weeks so yes, bonus pools for that season will be a little higher which means point inflation. I don't know what you mean by "now" because GM isn't unlocked yet. Points have no meaning other than their relative relationship to other in your league. I personally hate when people say X points Y league. It's like someone saying I used to be 140 cm tall. It means absolutely nothing until you hear said person saying he was X years old. Then add the bonus pool dilemma, that points accumulate during seasons and your hidden actual rating. Even high diamond, low plat and stuff have no meaning. Usually there are like 20-40 active accounts in a league. So low basically means you played your placement and not much more. High means you played many games. It relates to skill level in a very unrelated way. The only thing having any kind of relevance is your league. If you are high or low is mostly a factor of how many games you played. I can easily make #1 by just massing games BUT if it meant I was the best in my league. I would get promoted, right? I wish they made a server score board. Listing you among all players. This would make for great motivation for players trying to improve. Letting you see from day to day where you rank on eu,us,korea & whatever. Breaking top 100k 10k 1k would provide great mile stones. Back in the 90's they provided that on free internet chess servers. Now we pay for the worst league system ever created  Just steal glicko ratings the formula can be calculated by a 12 year old...I mean it's not poker. There is no financial incentive to hide from losers that they are losers. Lastly and unrelated you are in one league. So many people say "I am high diamond low master". By people I mean delusional high diamond players ^^ | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On October 08 2012 15:25 oZe wrote: The only thing having any kind of relevance is your league. If you are high or low is mostly a factor of how many games you played. I can easily make #1 by just massing games BUT if it meant I was the best in my league. I would get promoted, right? I'm with you on most of what you're saying, but it's simply not accurate that any player can reach number 1 by massing games. (Whether you personally can or not is a different question and one I obviously couldn't answer.) At a certain point, your point score comes into equilibrium with your MMR, you've used up all your bonus points, and unless you actually win more games than you lose (to get your MMR up) you won't be able to increase your point total beyond random variation. Say you divide players into those who are active enough to use all their bonus points and those who are not. You'll find that in a typical division there will be players who are that active as low as, say, #25 or lower, and of course a concentration of them nearer the top. If it were possible to amass a large number of games to get to number 1, you'd expect that number 1 would usually have played more games than anyone else in the division. However, that's not usually the case. Here's how many games the top 15 in my Platinum division have won (which for most players should be roughly half their games): 1) 50 2) 60 3) 93 4) 53 5) 39 6) 17 7) 22 8) 42 9) 37 10) 111 11) 23 12) 33 13) 46 14) 30 15) 75 Without performing any kind of statistical analysis on this, I can say pretty clearly just looking at it that playing a lot of games doesn't correlate that well to placement on that list. Why? Because active players get ordered roughly by their MMR. Yeah, some people who don't play much are lower than they might be because their bonus pools pile up. It's not an exact correspondence to MMR because these point totals may fluctuate more or less per game than the MMR does, because people will have slightly different bonus point totals (but most within a game or two of zero, for top 15) but regardless, getting to #1 does actually require playing better than the other players in the division, because there's no other way to raise one's point total once one gets to 0 bonus points. As for getting promoted, the people in the top couple spots do get promoted now and then and everyone else moves up the list, plus people who get promoted into this division will end up placed into the middle somewhere. Just to put this in perspective, I play a lot more than anyone else in my division and I'm currently at number 18 with 144 games played and 31 unspent bonus points. If I played enough games right now to use up my bonus points and not change my MMR, that would get me up to about number 11 or 12 on this list. In terms of actual MMR, I'm probably on the low end of platinum, but I could mass games all day and unless I actually improve my play there's no way I'm getting to number 1. As for the post to which you're responding: Active master league players are the people who are most able to use their point totals as a proxy for MMR. They're playing enough to use up their bonus pools and there are often a couple hundred point differences between the top players in a master league division. That's not extra play, it's extra MMR (which translates to better performance in the game.) Your complaining about them using the point score this way just doesn't make any sense -- you don't make points out of nothing at the top end of master league. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On October 08 2012 15:25 oZe wrote: Lastly and unrelated you are in one league. So many people say "I am high diamond low master". By people I mean delusional high diamond players ^^ This I agree with, although I do know what they're trying to say -- they're trying to say "I sometimes play master league players and beat them, though I haven't been promoted." That really just means they're in or near the range of MMR overlap with the next league up, which is interesting, but doesn't equate to "being" in that league. | ||
| ||
