|
On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem.
Its not reasonable to claim that you are better just based off of 1 game..
Anyone can play a terrible game from time to time and get slaughtered in the process looking completely outmatched. It just means you were the better player that game, definitely not an overall indication of anything.
|
We don't have MMR because SC2, despite its developed competitive scene, is geared towards its largest demographic: casual players. Points increase over time, whereas MMR eventually comes to rest in a range that reflects your relative skill. Increase over time produces a more positive response than stagnation, and this positive response makes us think positively of SC2. You can guess why Blizzard wants that.
|
On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem.
Have to agree with the above poster, you played him 1 time, there is no way to tell if you are better than him, and it's pretty arrogant to believe so.
|
Although I would personally love to see an actual MMR, I agree with the above poster. "Better", is such an vague term. While it is possible that you are the truly superior player, there are too many factors that are included in deciding who the better player is from 1 game or even 100 games between two individual players. All that would prove is that you are better in that specific match up.
|
Personally, I dislike a general MMR for SC. I have like a 70%+ win rate in ZvP, but only a 40% win rate in ZvZ (though its improving now that I have played zerg a bit more), and sometimes I end up with a lot of ZvZ's which lowers my MMR even though my ZvT and ZvP are quite good.
|
On June 15 2011 11:18 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2011 10:55 ClysmiC wrote:
I never really liked iCCup's system, as 90% of players stayed in D or D+ so it was really hard to gauge how good they were. I think Blizzard's current system isn't too bad, but I guess every ladder system is going to have flaws. O_O what? If 90% of the players were stuck in D or D+ then that is their skill ranking. If you could get to B+ you were good, you could not get to B+ by just cheesing or all inning every game which was awesome. I don't even think you could really get past C+ with pure cheese but could be wrong ^^. I do wish thats how blizzard did it even though it wont' ever happen as it could be frustrating :D.
no alot player was frustrated playing vs noobs so never really did and so there was often players on D C who could be easy B B+ and you got crushed like SHITT and it was so -_- frustrating
blizzards system is 1million times better
ps: you could pass even B+ with cheesing ... there was a korean guy even 5pool in 70% of the games on A- and A and won alot of games ... (see in Kr replaypack from 2010 and some others if u not believe)
|
On July 24 2011 14:45 pyaar wrote:
We don't have MMR because SC2, despite its developed competitive scene, is geared towards its largest demographic: casual players. Points increase over time, whereas MMR eventually comes to rest in a range that reflects your relative skill. Increase over time produces a more positive response than stagnation, and this positive response makes us think positively of SC2. You can guess why Blizzard wants that.
I don't think Blizzard was that psychological when deciding to implement bonus pool. As I see it, its simply a way to help speed up the process of catching up to points reflecting your MMR as well as encourage continual participation. If you don't play, people pass you up by default. It also serves as a way to keep track of activity for GM.
As for MMR, it's never at rest. MMR constantly changes with each match and continues to attempt to place you against players your level, even if your level may be lower or higher a certain day. The fluctuations are actually quite wild. If you've spent your bonus pool, players at your level yield/take 12 points per win/loss. Any time you gain or lose points more or less than 12, that indicates your MMR has shifted, shows signs of uncertainty, or couldn't find you a match your level. When it gets into ±3 or more points away consistently, that means your MMR has essentially shifted faster than your points can keep up. If you've played 100s of ladder games, I can almost guarantee this situation has happened to you on a good or bad day.
|
On July 24 2011 16:18 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 14:45 pyaar wrote:
We don't have MMR because SC2, despite its developed competitive scene, is geared towards its largest demographic: casual players. Points increase over time, whereas MMR eventually comes to rest in a range that reflects your relative skill. Increase over time produces a more positive response than stagnation, and this positive response makes us think positively of SC2. You can guess why Blizzard wants that. I don't think Blizzard was that psychological when deciding to implement bonus pool. As I see it, its simply a way to help speed up the process of catching up to points reflecting your MMR as well as encourage continual participation. If you don't play, people pass you up by default. It also serves as a way to keep track of activity for GM. As for MMR, it's never at rest. MMR constantly changes with each match and continues to attempt to place you against players your level, even if your level may be lower or higher a certain day. The fluctuations are actually quite wild. If you've spent your bonus pool, players at your level yield/take 12 points per win/loss. Any time you gain or lose points more or less than 12, that indicates your MMR has shifted, shows signs of uncertainty, or couldn't find you a match your level. When it gets into ±3 or more points away consistently, that means your MMR has essentially shifted faster than your points can keep up. If you've played 100s of ladder games, I can almost guarantee this situation has happened to you on a good or bad day.
Of course then you have to add in "slightly favored" and stuff to it too.
Honestly I find the points system to be a little confusing, just having a single number for your skill ranking would be so much better and easier to understand.
Then we wouldn't have to have the MASSIVE post that is the "Understanding Blizzards ladder system"
Seriously, if you need an epic post to decipher (and it's not even fully understood even then) your rating system, there is something MONUMENTALLY wrong with it.
|
So any new about the Starcraft 2 greasemonkey,when is gonna be updated, is better then nothing
|
On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem.
Why arent you nr1 in your division then?
|
Blizzard treats its player base like they would treat a child. They are hard at work deceiving ladder players, though I know they have their reasons.
|
On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem.
No, you are completely incorrect. Being higher within a division (ie 100 players) just means you have got more points - which could come from using more of the bonus pool, or from more wins. However, his wins could have come vs far worse opponents that you. Therefore, it is entirely possible that the last player in a division could be better than the first.
(This is complicated slightly by division tiers, but not in a major way)
|
On July 28 2011 20:19 sadyque wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem. Why arent you nr1 in your division then?
Ladder rank has more to do with games played than skill level quite often.
|
On July 28 2011 20:43 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2011 20:19 sadyque wrote:On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem. Why arent you nr1 in your division then? Ladder rank has more to do with games played than skill level quite often.
I agree, to an extent. I think you've got to be either skilled, or have a large bonus pool, to get to high ranks on the ladder in your division. However, I hardly ever ladder unless I feel very happy with my game-plans for all three match-ups. This means I spend a lot of time practicing BOs against practice partners, and sometimes in YABOT.
This means that the ranking system doesn't accurately represent my 'skill' compared to those higher in my division, as I simply haven't given it a chance by not playing enough games.
|
On July 28 2011 20:43 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2011 20:19 sadyque wrote:On July 24 2011 14:09 CellTech wrote:
Ahhh.. as if the MMR God's answered me. I clicked 'Find Match' and who else does it put me against but the guy atop my division (I am rank 26th at this point, he is ranked 1st) I proceed to slaughter him.
My conclusion:
I am better than him, the ladder "says" he is a lot better than me.
This is the problem. Why arent you nr1 in your division then? Ladder rank has more to do with games played than skill level quite often.
There are major threads describing how the ladder works. If you get placed vs someone higher than you, it could very well mean that he lost 2 matches in a row and you had won 2 matches in a row prior to that. It doesn't mean you're better than him.
Blizzard has often described MMR as a "buffer", so you wont lose 1000 points for having a bad day. Instead you'll lose 100, and get placed against lower opponents so you have a chance of getting back.
|
One problem with numbers that change in "non obvious ways" is that a lot of people will misinterpret them. You get these "my friend says his iq is 110, how can someone have more than 100% iq? I'm happy with my 85%!" type misunderstandings. So instead of giving people that like to complain but don't understand how it works a reason to produce negative propaganda, you just try to make it look simpler than it actually is. A lot of people would just be confused by sitting in a huge MMR ranking where they jump hundreds of ranks for every win/loss and all this "ladder fear" nonsense would be even more prevalent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
