EPTNorth America Season 4 GM Ladder Errors - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Moosy
Canada396 Posts
| ||
|
Paperplane
Netherlands1823 Posts
Hope they revamp the entire system. Their MMR system in WoW was retarded as shit. Everyone was abusing it. I don't know the details of how it works in SC2 but I guess it's very similar to WoW. In WoW you would lose very little MMR until your current rating closed in on your MMR. So if you start a new arena team at 0 rating but have 2500 MMR you would hardly lose anything until you got to 1000 ish rating. Then you would start losing some MMR if you lost games. So what did people do? Disband their team at 1000 rating ( where you start losing MMR) start a new one and repeat that a million times. Because you didn't lose anything but gained something every win your MMR inflates enormously. Eventually you'd have teams with over 4k MMR. Before this exploit only a handful of teams had ever reached 3k, and those were all teams who went to tournaments. Now I know some of you might be thinking wait why is this douchebag talking about WoW? This is a SC2 forum damnit. Hear me out son. The entire system is flawed if it's similar to WoW's. If you got a high MMR in one season you can ride on that for several seasons without actually winning a lot. If you're a 3k MMR GM you won't lose a lot of MMR until you have like 2400-2600 rating. Before that you'll only lose a handful of points per game. If you only play to clear your bonus pool, even if you lose most of your games your MMR won't drop a whole lot. Even if you do badly, the less you play the less you lose. You'll maybe drop to 2800 MMR if you're careful, which means you'll just have to win your one game at the start of next season to get your next GM rank. However if you'd play a lot more and you'd get close to that 3k, you're at risk of actually losing MMR. So, 3k MMR 200 rating loses to 2.8k MMR rated player. "lost 10 MMR" and X rating 3k MMR 2600 rating loses to 2.8k MMR rated player. "lost 60 MMR" and X rating numbers are not accurate but I'm trying to give you the best picture of the elo system that I can. With the shorter seasons the current system rewards inactivity. Active players are at greater risk of losing their MMR. Since GM placement is based on MMR, if you're afraid you can't keep up with the competition the best thing you can do to stay in GM is to play as little as possible. | ||
|
coL.hendralisk
Zimbabwe1756 Posts
On November 03 2011 03:50 The.Doctor wrote: Hey just saw the rankings SAw ur not in GM but a diamond level player is sup? Yup there are lots of diamond players atm, I count many 1.4k to 1.5k pts last season players and numerous ppl I easily beat on ladder and felt they were like midmaster | ||
|
MaV_gGSC
Canada1345 Posts
| ||
|
The.Doctor
Canada333 Posts
E.g. on NA it would be idra, ostojiy, dde etc. | ||
|
Warlock40
601 Posts
With the shorter seasons the current system rewards inactivity. Active players are at greater risk of losing their MMR. Since GM placement is based on MMR, if you're afraid you can't keep up with the competition the best thing you can do to stay in GM is to play as little as possible. You make excellent points, but what I wonder is how many games should these people play to be considered "active players"? The people who deserve to be in GM are the kind of people who are constantly practicing for, traveling to, and playing in tournaments, so I wouldn't think they would be able to ladder that much. And if GM league doesn't display who the pros are, then I don't really see a point in having one. | ||
|
sLiMpoweR
United States430 Posts
On November 03 2011 04:09 Warlock40 wrote: You make excellent points, but what I wonder is how many games should these people play to be considered "active players"? The people who deserve to be in GM are the kind of people who are constantly practicing for, traveling to, and playing in tournaments, so I wouldn't think they would be able to ladder that much. And if GM league doesn't display who the pros are, then I don't really see a point in having one. you mistake gm for a what it is, it should be the top Ladder players, not the top players in general. Its a reward for the ppl that perform the best in ladder. Not tournaments and other things. | ||
|
Paperplane
Netherlands1823 Posts
On November 03 2011 04:09 Warlock40 wrote: You make excellent points, but what I wonder is how many games should these people play to be considered "active players"? The people who deserve to be in GM are the kind of people who are constantly practicing for, traveling to, and playing in tournaments, so I wouldn't think they would be able to ladder that much. And if GM league doesn't display who the pros are, then I don't really see a point in having one. My issue is more with the inactive players who only play the bare minimum they have to to keep their bonus pool under 180. The players who deserve to be there may not play as consistently because of tournaments, but they'll play a ton of games over the course of a whole season. It would be cool if the GM league wasn't locked. Sure you got your Idra, Sheth, Select, Major, dde, Huk on the top. They're not going anywhere, they're several tiers ahead of many GM players. I'd like to see GM be the 200 highest rated players of this very moment. The harder it is to keep your GM ranking the more prestigious it gets and that is only good for the ladder. If the guys in high Master League can earn GM, even if only for a couple days until they lose it again. High Masters/ low GM will become a battlefield, with a ton of players competing for those coveted GM spots. It would be a ton of fun because everyone at that level will frantically try to improve. | ||
|
Darkthorn
Romania912 Posts
| ||
|
sLiMpoweR
United States430 Posts
On November 03 2011 06:14 Darkthorn wrote: I wonder when will Blizzard give an official response to this issue. knowing blizzard? i expect an official response shortly before next season starts =) | ||
|
ThE_OsToJiY
Canada1167 Posts
 | ||
|
sLiMpoweR
United States430 Posts
On November 03 2011 06:47 ThE_OsToJiY wrote: gahhh they had a full day to fix it and my games still don't affect ladder rating yea mine are also not working | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On November 03 2011 03:59 Paperplane wrote: Long post incoming Hope they revamp the entire system. Their MMR system in WoW was retarded as shit. Everyone was abusing it. I don't know the details of how it works in SC2 but I guess it's very similar to WoW. In WoW you would lose very little MMR until your current rating closed in on your MMR. So if you start a new arena team at 0 rating but have 2500 MMR you would hardly lose anything until you got to 1000 ish rating. Then you would start losing some MMR if you lost games. So what did people do? Disband their team at 1000 rating ( where you start losing MMR) start a new one and repeat that a million times. Because you didn't lose anything but gained something every win your MMR inflates enormously. Eventually you'd have teams with over 4k MMR. Before this exploit only a handful of teams had ever reached 3k, and those were all teams who went to tournaments. Now I know some of you might be thinking wait why is this douchebag talking about WoW? This is a SC2 forum damnit. Hear me out son. The entire system is flawed if it's similar to WoW's. If you got a high MMR in one season you can ride on that for several seasons without actually winning a lot. If you're a 3k MMR GM you won't lose a lot of MMR until you have like 2400-2600 rating. Before that you'll only lose a handful of points per game. If you only play to clear your bonus pool, even if you lose most of your games your MMR won't drop a whole lot. Even if you do badly, the less you play the less you lose. You'll maybe drop to 2800 MMR if you're careful, which means you'll just have to win your one game at the start of next season to get your next GM rank. However if you'd play a lot more and you'd get close to that 3k, you're at risk of actually losing MMR. So, 3k MMR 200 rating loses to 2.8k MMR rated player. "lost 10 MMR" and X rating 3k MMR 2600 rating loses to 2.8k MMR rated player. "lost 60 MMR" and X rating numbers are not accurate but I'm trying to give you the best picture of the elo system that I can. With the shorter seasons the current system rewards inactivity. Active players are at greater risk of losing their MMR. Since GM placement is based on MMR, if you're afraid you can't keep up with the competition the best thing you can do to stay in GM is to play as little as possible. I don't think I understand. Even in WoW you should be gaining or losing MMR based on the difference between your MMR and the opposing team's and the outcome of the game. I think you're confusing rating with MMR, because you would only lose a significant amount of rating when your rating was close to your MMR. | ||
|
Skullsc2
Estonia18 Posts
| ||
|
desRow
Canada2654 Posts
On November 03 2011 06:47 ThE_OsToJiY wrote: gahhh they had a full day to fix it and my games still don't affect ladder rating wait does that mean u cant burn bonus pool if u win ? | ||
|
doner0
United States233 Posts
| ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
On November 03 2011 07:18 desRow wrote: wait does that mean u cant burn bonus pool if u win ? not sure if osto can confirm this too but for me, after wins it does nothing but after you lose it does everything at once. For example win 3 games +10 pts each but it looks like it does nothing, then lose one -5 pts, after the loss if you check record and rating you'll have +25 pts and stats will look fine. at least that's how it's working for me. I know osto doesn't lose much so he might not have noticed this yet  or maybe its just different for others I dunno...I have a feeling this is happening only for players that are "supposed" to be GM but aren't. | ||
|
Paperplane
Netherlands1823 Posts
On November 03 2011 07:01 Excalibur_Z wrote: I don't think I understand. Even in WoW you should be gaining or losing MMR based on the difference between your MMR and the opposing team's and the outcome of the game. I think you're confusing rating with MMR, because you would only lose a significant amount of rating when your rating was close to your MMR. That's would make sense but isn't what happened. Dunno if you played Cataclysm but MMR exploiting was rampant. Here's a thread on reddit explaining a bit more. http://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/kcfdd/new_mmr_exploit_helps_eu_team_reach_3106_rating/ ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sXc9Q.png) It used to be like you said, but somewhere among the line they changed it into this pants-on-head retarded system I'm no Blizzard employee, I do no know if it's the same as in wow. I do wake up in cold sweat screaming every night thinking about wow's MMR system though : ( | ||
|
Hikari
1914 Posts
So one would look at something like: Hikari (Z) Avg MMR: 1139.4 vT: 1039.4 vZ: 1139.4 vP: 1239.4 Top 3% (Ranked 12388) (% and rank not eligible if not enough games have been played recently) 52 Games Played (30 wins, 22 losses) (optional hide/show records) | ||
|
Rosvall
Sweden122 Posts
On November 03 2011 07:55 Hikari wrote: What is the purpose of the various leagues and rating? Why can't we just have 1 solid ladder based on MMR? So one would look at something like: Hikari (Z) Avg MMR: 1139.4 vT: 1039.4 vZ: 1139.4 vP: 1239.4 Top 3% (Ranked 12388) (% and rank not eligible if not enough games have been played recently) 52 Games Played (30 wins, 22 losses) (optional hide/show records) Basically, they want to 'reward' people for playing and getting better. Being promoted is for several people a nice goal and a moment of happiness. Going from f.ex gold to platinum will make those players a lot more happy than going from rank 14812 to 14503. | ||
| ||
