|
On April 14 2011 02:16 Me1234 wrote:did artosis just give up? Region: #113 for sjArtosis nearly all GM spots are taken and he's 113 in Masters league.. not good 
The sense of entitlement from Artosis was mind boggling last night on SoTG. I don't have anything against the guy but, him bitching that he was ranked 80th and should "clearly" be in Grandmaster's was hilarious. Loved the shit they gave him for it as well.
|
United States431 Posts
On April 14 2011 02:28 Hrrrrm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 02:16 Me1234 wrote:did artosis just give up? Region: #113 for sjArtosis nearly all GM spots are taken and he's 113 in Masters league.. not good The sense of entitlement from Artosis was mind boggling last night on SoTG. I don't have anything against the guy but, him bitching that he was ranked 80th and should "clearly" be in Grandmaster's was hilarious. Loved the shit they gave him for it as well.
i'd like mmr to be visible if they're going to have an entire league centered around a hidden stat. maybe they could at least make it visible for grandmaster entry and hide it again after the GMs are decided. i would be confused if i were him too as his high ranking implies high mmr, but we all know that's not necessarily the case when it comes to having the top 200 mmr.
|
On April 14 2011 01:25 DiaBoLuS wrote:
all i hear is mimimi from ppl who wanna be in and didnt get into.
the only thing i dont get is darkforce, he was top 10 in europe for the last few weeks with 70%+ wins, has like 20 to 10 w/l since gml is up and simply does not get promoted, while others like me with much less points / ratio / MMR did.
yes we got it, you made it into GM, enjoy your 2 months because when your race is patched you will go back to your bronze league.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On April 14 2011 02:28 Hrrrrm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 02:16 Me1234 wrote:did artosis just give up? Region: #113 for sjArtosis nearly all GM spots are taken and he's 113 in Masters league.. not good The sense of entitlement from Artosis was mind boggling last night on SoTG. I don't have anything against the guy but, him bitching that he was ranked 80th and should "clearly" be in Grandmaster's was hilarious. Loved the shit they gave him for it as well.
Huh, his reasons were quite clear. He is playing against guys in GM so surely he should be in GM. I don't see any "sense of entitlement" in that. It's logical. If you want to hate on a guy at least hate on him for some legit reasons.
|
On April 14 2011 02:43 Toxi78 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 01:25 DiaBoLuS wrote:
all i hear is mimimi from ppl who wanna be in and didnt get into.
the only thing i dont get is darkforce, he was top 10 in europe for the last few weeks with 70%+ wins, has like 20 to 10 w/l since gml is up and simply does not get promoted, while others like me with much less points / ratio / MMR did. yes we got it, you made it into GM, enjoy your 2 months because when your race is patched you will go back to your bronze league.
Lol, less pms please... let me guess, you're one of the people that deserve to be in GM but didnt make it? It's not like he was bragging abot it, so I don't see a reason for you to be a dick about it.
|
On April 14 2011 02:45 Numy wrote:
Huh, his reasons were quite clear. He is playing against guys in GM so surely he should be in GM. I don't see any "sense of entitlement" in that. It's logical. If you want to hate on a guy at least hate on him for some legit reasons.
From what I've seen looking at matches on people's streams, it appears that matchmaking is pretty loose in high Master league and above so that people don't have to wait forever to get a game. There are probably 1000+ people who regularly play GM players.
|
On April 14 2011 01:34 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 01:28 Sfydjklm wrote:
because if you want to take it seriously you gotta measure time in man-hours. Pretty sure that the moving average is over "games," not "time," so I think that's what they're already doing. My comment should have read "lot of games" not "long time."
i meant your gsl comparasion.
entire season of GSl equates to like 2-3 days of laddering for a pro.
|
The biggest problem with the ladder is there are 2 kinds of meaningless ranking going on, by points and by hidden mmr. Points does not indicate skill, hidden mmr is well, hidden.
|
On April 14 2011 03:03 Like a Boss wrote:
The biggest problem with the ladder is there are 2 kinds of meaningless ranking going on, by points and by hidden mmr. Points does not indicate skill, hidden mmr is well, hidden.
apprently hidden MMR doesnt indicate skill either, judging by Darkforce's example.
Why do you think they hide this stuff in the first place.
Theyre afraid of criticism of the system that has been failing for over a year now.
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On April 13 2011 22:15 ch33psh33p wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2011 21:20 T.O.P. wrote:On April 13 2011 19:33 ch33psh33p wrote:On April 13 2011 19:09 Beyonder wrote:On April 13 2011 19:08 Cajun2k1 wrote:
Daboo, dutch pro-gamer is in there with 2 accounts, LLLDaboo and PraeDaboo. Really weird to not be able to recognize 90% of those names. TLO still isn't in it, no naniwa as far as I can see, maybe they haven't laddered that much? They just have not played yet, but TLO is in the American one. People need to stop complaining really. If you are not in, you either have not played enough to reach the desired MMR level, or you are not good enough to reach it. Reality check! :D Each slot has an mmr value assigned to it. the lower values were snatched up quickly, so even players that may be better than the lower end of the GM league have higher MMR's now, they are still lower than the availiable remaning slots which are probably assigned to extremely high MMR values for pros that have yet to play their placement. Therefore, it isn't a question of if oyu're good enough for most people from 100-200, its just simply they were too late It's their fault for not having a top 200 mmr in the first place. If you have a top 200 mmr, you eun one game and you're in. If you play your first game late, then someone surpassed you and you're not top 200 in mmr anyways. I don't get why you guys are complaining. Mmr is the best way to measure pure skill. It doesn't reward players for mass gaming. The MMR from 100-400 is extremely packed, it was definetly more of a first come first serve basis, versus a, just having the high enouhg MMR. I even checked out your account, if you played today, you would not be getting in. Don't act all high and mighty when you simply played early and stole one of hte lowerrated MMR slots. Its a flawed system, but no need to pretend its all perfect just becaus you landed a spot.
It's only got harder today because there were alot of people who massed gamed yesterday. Those people thought they were GM material already, once they found out they weren't, they tried really hard to raise their MMR. My friend went 11-1 after the release of GM to get in.
Those who waited until today to play and didn't get in didn't get in for a reason. Their MMR wasn't top 200 anymore. They got surpassed by hundreds of players who worked hard to raise their MMR yesterday.
|
On April 14 2011 03:04 Sfydjklm wrote:
Why do you think they hide this stuff in the first place.
Theyre afraid of criticism of the system that has been failing for over a year now.
They hide MMR for multiple reasons, most of which were stated in their SC2 Multiplayer forums at Blizzcon 2009 and 2010:
* Because most players' MMR doesn't change that much on average, over the long run, and they don't want that to be demoralizing to people.
* Because MMR swings around as you win and lose games and isn't great feedback about how you're doing for the short term.
* Because displaying MMR would allow people to reverse-engineer the system, which both helps their competitors trying to build a similar system and would probably result in a huge increase in effectiveness of win-trading strategies.
* Because they want rewards for activity factored into their ladder ranking system, which is what bonus points provide.
The idea that they hide the MMR to dodge criticism makes no sense, because only a tiny handful of people would understand what the number meant and the remainder will complain whether they can see the number or not.
The sole purpose of MMR is to give people relatively even matches, and for that it's excellent. Players who are not deliberately throwing games get matched with people who aren't that far off in terms of play quality, most of the time.
|
"Mmr is the best way to measure pure skill. It doesn't reward players for mass gaming."
Explain guys like Yaa getting in then. Go ahead ill wait.
|
On April 14 2011 03:14 SpiDaH wrote:
"Mmr is the best way to measure pure skill. It doesn't reward players for mass gaming."
Explain guys like Yaa getting in then. Go ahead ill wait.
Yaa was the guy who stopped playing middle of last season (before Master league was implemented) and played a modest number of games this season, then got promoted to grandmaster league?
One weakness of the MMR system, as implemented, appears to be that it measures where you fall in the population, not some absolute level of skill, while at the same time remaining unchanged if you do not play.
This means that people who take a very long break can fall behind the rest of the community both from being out of practice and from the general skill level rising, yet have an MMR that reflects where they were several months before.
If a player had had a very high MMR last fall, and quit the game until this season, then played a small number of games that were mostly losses but didn't tank their MMR completely, it's possible they might make it into the GM league due to a stale, inflated MMR.
Players in this position will probably very quickly fall out for inactivity, but if they keep playing they will still have trouble spending their bonus points because they'll start out with an extended losing streak.
|
On April 14 2011 03:12 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 03:04 Sfydjklm wrote:
Why do you think they hide this stuff in the first place.
Theyre afraid of criticism of the system that has been failing for over a year now. They hide MMR for multiple reasons, most of which were stated in their SC2 Multiplayer forums at Blizzcon 2009 and 2010: * Because most players' MMR doesn't change that much on average, over the long run, and they don't want that to be demoralizing to people. * Because MMR swings around as you win and lose games and isn't great feedback about how you're doing for the short term. * Because displaying MMR would allow people to reverse-engineer the system, which both helps their competitors trying to build a similar system and would probably result in a huge increase in effectiveness of win-trading strategies. * Because they want rewards for activity factored into their ladder ranking system, which is what bonus points provide. The idea that they hide the MMR to dodge criticism makes no sense, because only a tiny handful of people would understand what the number meant and the remainder will complain whether they can see the number or not. The sole purpose of MMR is to give people relatively even matches, and for that it's excellent. Players who are not deliberately throwing games get matched with people who aren't that far off in terms of play quality, most of the time.
cause that handful of people with Excal at teh lead did not go out of their way to do their best and explain it to us even knowing how it actually works? And i doubt reverse engineering as you say it would be of any hustle to any company that possesses adequate man power to analyze the data that is already displayed. And a company that doesnt have that manpower has access to free and superior ELO. Obviously all your other reasons are valid but i dont doubt that avoiding criticism is one of the contributing reasons as well.
|
if someone is playing like mad, hoping to get in: dont give up. delphi and i just managed to get in with around 900 points. delphi should be like top50 EU MMR-wise so no idea why he wasnt in from the start.
anyway. it appears to me, that around 900 points might still be enough to get in "no" matter the the MMR.
gl
|
I'm guessing artosis didn't get in because of his standing BEFORE the new ladder season (since he played on korea and not NA)
|
The system should have no hidden skill rating system, it should be based only on ladder points and the only games you should get are of those in a set range of your ladder points.
Basically a system like PGT / ICC. It's stupid to have hidden rankings, it just leads to the idiocy that we have now. If the system were one based solely on points, then not only would the system be incredibly easy to understand but it would be an accurate measure of skill. The higher your points, the higher your skill. You wouldn't need all the idiotic divisions, you would simply have a ladder rating such as the ABCD system of PGT and ICC. Being #1 in Bronze isn't going to give someone encouragement, they're still in bronze. But if you're D and you know what it takes to get to D+ it makes you work harder. There's no "I wonder if I'll get promoted soon", it's just "I need to get to X amount of points to be promoted" and that's how it should be.
If it were like that, points and ladder score would mean something, just as in PGT. If you were a high rank there everyone knew you were good, that's because you only played people who are also that high in points. But with the hidden MMR you have people with high points / low MMR which makes the system a joke. Not to mention that there's no set points to strive for, it's always going. If you were pro, you could play 200 games and get A and then you're set - you accomplished something and it was rewarding. "I got to X rank in X amount of time", that's something to be proud of, but here it's like you can play 200 games and get to 1000 points as one of the first in the world, if you don't play for a week theres 500 people who are already at 1500 making your 1000 points look stupid and pointless
/end rant
|
On April 14 2011 02:28 Hrrrrm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 02:16 Me1234 wrote:did artosis just give up? Region: #113 for sjArtosis nearly all GM spots are taken and he's 113 in Masters league.. not good The sense of entitlement from Artosis was mind boggling last night on SoTG. I don't have anything against the guy but, him bitching that he was ranked 80th and should "clearly" be in Grandmaster's was hilarious. Loved the shit they gave him for it as well.
Had nothing to do with a sense of entitlement.. It was his logical understanding that if he was in top 200 on the server (he was 80) and won a game, he'd be placed in GML...
You can stuff your comments in a sack mister
|
On April 14 2011 03:24 Sfydjklm wrote:
cause that handful of people with Excal at teh lead did not go out of their way to do their best and explain it to us even knowing how it actually works?
He's worked extremely hard to explain how it works, but as much as he does so, the majority of people don't seem to understand (or perhaps read) his explanations.
And i doubt reverse engineering as you say it would be of any hustle to any company that possesses adequate man power to analyze the data that is already displayed.
Reverse engineering how a scoring system works becomes a lot more difficult when you can't see the numerical score. All you can see right now on the profiles are a history of wins and losses -- and you would probably have to have all that data, for all players, to be able to extract what the matchmaking system is doing.
And a company that doesnt have that manpower has access to free and superior ELO.
Blizzard's system is a lot more similar to Microsoft's TrueSkill system than to ELO, for a number of specific reasons. While Blizzard's system is held secret, Microsoft's conveniently published a paper on TrueSkill that, among other things, explains why it's designed differently than ELO, and many of those same design choices probably apply to Blizzard's system (particularly because the architects of Blizzard's matchmaking came from Microsoft.)
Here's a link to Microsoft's paper on the TrueSkill matching system:
TrueSkill: A Bayesian Skill Rating System
Obviously all your other reasons are valid but i dont doubt that avoiding criticism is one of the contributing reasons as well.
I think if six years of WoW have had one impact on Blizzard, it's that it's helped them realize that people will complain no matter what choices they make.
|
On April 14 2011 03:37 shinyA wrote:
But with the hidden MMR you have people with high points / low MMR which makes the system a joke.
You really don't ever have people with "high points / low MMR" for very long. Points (not counting bonus points, and adjusted differently per division) converge on MMR.
If the total number of bonus points awarded so far in a given season is 3000 (for example), then for a point value to be "high" it needs to be well above 3000.
Division rankings are a pretty good proxy for rankings by MMR within that division, other than that inactive players drop to the bottom of the list over time. And, in Master league, you can compare point values across division, because all the division modifiers are the same.
Edit: Incidentally, division rankings may be better than MMR for ranking players, because a player who takes an extended break will have a stale MMR that overstates their skill, but they'll fall to the bottom of the division ranking because they aren't spending bonus points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
