|
straight from Starcraft2.com forums stickied by Blizzard
We've recently applied two hotfixes for StarCraft II:
Noticing some players were not being promoted as soon as they should have been, we’ve made an adjustment to the ladder that will promote them in a more timely fashion. Some players may have already noticed recent promotions due to this hotfix.
We’ve made additional tweaks to the Up & Coming feature which should now be displaying a more accurate list of rising custom map stars.
Note: These hotfixes are currently only live in the North America region, with other regions coming in the weeks ahead.
|
I got promoted from bronze to silver to today.
|
Can only be a good thing. Hopefully we see less 800 games played bronzers.
|
I wonder if that is the reasoning behind my placement match putting our 2v2 into bronze, and in about 4 games, we were promoted into Silver. Ive gotten into bronze many times, but I have never been promoted that quickly.
|
When I started Season two, I played one 4v4 game (I was Gold 4v4 in Season 1 and I hadn't played a 4v4 match in about 4 months). Anyways, it put me in Bronze -- I assume because of inactivity maybe? Kind of sucked. I don't like having the Bronze on my profile but I don't care enough to actually go through the misery of 4v4 matches with random Bronzes.
|
Experienced 2 promotions on promotion day. Both in teams 2v2 and 3v3 and both to Diamond. My AT had been winning in both these formats so we probably did deserve the promotion, but in both cases we were not #1 in the league. For my 2v2 team though we are now #1 Diamond with a meager lead. Yay Promotion day!
|
I am glad some of my fellow players got promoted. As a lower level diamond player I feel like a lot of the platinum guys are pretty decent. I mean I am not saying I am awful or anything but just that the league continuity is pretty good from my point of view and if you are at a lower level and didn't get promoted don't feel too bad, you might just be a little bit behind the cutoff.
|
sigh I was hoping this would have gotten me to Masters. no luck yet 
|
Yesssss got promoted into Masters after many weeks of wondering why I haven't.. been beating them consistently. Got into a division with 500 points <3
Yay for promotion day!
|
I always thought the thresholds were floating numbers that changed with MMR distribution. So, at any point in time, ~20% of the active population would be in each division (masters+diamond counting together) based on the moving MMR thresholds. I guess the questions from this would be: "Were my assumptions wrong and the thresholds aren't 'floating'?" "Did they change how strictly the divisions stick to that ~20% number (or change it from 20%)?" "Does this have anything to do with the changes to MMR over the past month?"
|
A blue said 9 hours ago in LA foruns that this was in effect in NA only (as of 9 hours ago, so I don't know if it is in effect somewhere else right now).
Edit: oh, the original blue post said it itself >.> nvm
|
|
|
On April 22 2011 17:46 aksfjh wrote:
I always thought the thresholds were floating numbers that changed with MMR distribution. So, at any point in time, ~20% of the active population would be in each division (masters+diamond counting together) based on the moving MMR thresholds. I guess the questions from this would be: "Were my assumptions wrong and the thresholds aren't 'floating'?" "Did they change how strictly the divisions stick to that ~20% number (or change it from 20%)?" "Does this have anything to do with the changes to MMR over the past month?"
Reread Excaliburz Ladder Guide and then read what Ex has said in this thread to get your answers.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195273
The MMR thresholds are not dynamic. However, Blizzard can change them manually with a hotfix if the % of active players in each league does not line up with their intended goal ( 2 / 18 / 20 / 20 / 20 / 20). This is what has happened as of Wednesday. For Season 2, the leagues have not been approaching the correct distribution. Blizzard has adjusted accordingly, hence the huge number of promotions.
|
On April 22 2011 22:14 goofy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2011 17:46 aksfjh wrote:
I always thought the thresholds were floating numbers that changed with MMR distribution. So, at any point in time, ~20% of the active population would be in each division (masters+diamond counting together) based on the moving MMR thresholds. I guess the questions from this would be: "Were my assumptions wrong and the thresholds aren't 'floating'?" "Did they change how strictly the divisions stick to that ~20% number (or change it from 20%)?" "Does this have anything to do with the changes to MMR over the past month?" Reread Excaliburz Ladder Guide and then read what Ex has said in this thread to get your answers. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195273The MMR thresholds are not dynamic. However, Blizzard can change them manually with a hotfix if the % of active players in each league does not line up with their intended goal ( 2 / 18 / 20 / 20 / 20 / 20). This is what has happened as of Wednesday. For Season 2, the leagues have not been approaching the correct distribution. Blizzard has adjusted accordingly, hence the huge number of promotions.
Hmmm, I see. So the system corrects itself when players become inactive/active by injecting points or "clearing" points from the system. I would assume then that this change is in line with the modifications they made to MMR a few weeks back to fix the bronze problem.
|
Had three teams promoted to Diamond last night out of the blue, was wondering what was going on.
|
On April 23 2011 03:04 aksfjh wrote:
Hmmm, I see. So the system corrects itself when players become inactive/active by injecting points or "clearing" points from the system. I would assume then that this change is in line with the modifications they made to MMR a few weeks back to fix the bronze problem.
Not exactly. When players become inactive, their MMR just doesn't change at all. When they become active again, if their MMR is out of whack with the skill they exhibit in their games (say, because a bunch of players have dropped out and the population is differently distributed among MMRs now) then they'll win or lose a bunch of games until their MMR is back in line with the population.
Basically, if you think of the MMR as being a possibly inaccurate measurement of the player's percentile in the active player community, that's pretty close. (The more accurate way to say it is that MMR is a possibly inaccurate measurement of a skill parameter that can be used to estimate likelihood of a game result between two players, but a side effect of this is that MMR can be mapped to percentile in a way that's probably not linear, and gets less accurate the more loose your definition of an "active" player is.)
So, if an idle player's old MMR becomes out of whack because the population gets a LOT better at the game while they're away, because the metagame changes, or because they are out of practice, the MMR will quickly drop when they start playing and they'll be back in line with where they should be.
|
On April 22 2011 14:28 ZUR1CH wrote:
When I started Season two, I played one 4v4 game (I was Gold 4v4 in Season 1 and I hadn't played a 4v4 match in about 4 months). Anyways, it put me in Bronze -- I assume because of inactivity maybe? Kind of sucked. I don't like having the Bronze on my profile but I don't care enough to actually go through the misery of 4v4 matches with random Bronzes.
I ended up in bronze after my 4v4 placement matches (random bronze teamkillers < random bronze, that was a fun game). Took about 8-10 games of terrible allies and bad opponents to start being matched with siver/gold level players. Took less time still to be matched with gold/plat then plat/dia. I've been promoted twice in the past day. You won't be stuck with bad allies/opponents for long if you just outplay them.
|
was this hotfix also for 1v1 games or just team games?
|
What's the chance Blizzard is pushing loads of people up to make them feel better 
|
Probably related to the account suspensions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
