|
MOD EDIT: This change has been reverted. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/4427703901
Seems like they are trying something out for season 7. They want to higher the range of possible opponents on ladder so you can play against very much higher or very much lower MMR players, too.
Edit: it actually says "slightly higher/lower"
http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/4025749/Upcoming_Changes_to_Match-Making_-06_04_2012#c-3659986159
We’ve been closely monitoring the quality of match-making since StarCraft II was released to make sure that the ladder offers the most exciting and finely tuned competitive experience possible. It’s been a great success, and because of the small skill gap between competing players, most games are tightly contested. While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way.
As a one-season experiment, we will be relaxing the match-making settings slightly in Season 7 to introduce more variety into the ladder. In practical terms, this means you won't always be evenly matched with your opponent. You'll regularly compete with players at slightly higher or lower skill levels, to make the experience more well-rounded. These adjustments to the match-making system will also offer a chance to potentially get promoted more quickly, so stringing together wins versus more skilled opponents could potentially result in faster league promotions.
As always, we will be monitoring the effects of these changes and tweaking the match-making settings to improve upon the match-making system going forward. We’re excited to hear about your experiences and we’re looking forward to your feedback about these changes once Season 7 begins.
See you on the ladder!
|
Just saw this as well on FB... very interesting. I'm actually really excited about this change, to be honest. I think it will make my games a lot more interesting, even if it does mean occasionally getting facestomped by a far-better opponent.
|
It might be cool for some "bad" players to play from time to time against pro gamers.
|
oh god its worse IMO, its like i am standing in GM ranks and get to thrash some low masters or diamonds....
|
Hell yes! This might breathe life back into sc2 laddering!
|
They didn't say "much higher" or "much lower", they said slightly higher or lower. I don't think GM players will be matched against top diamond, it would make no sense...
|
It's one-season experiment.
|
Looks like a higher winrate next season then
|
I bet this is also because there is fewer players in Bnet. With less players they need to broad their matchmaking sample so players get matched with others faster. Well see how that turns out.
|
This feels like a cop out from Blizzard. If they really wanted to make this game more appealing and exciting, they should just fix the custom game system. This just makes playing the ladder much more unpredictable, and potentially frustrating.
|
Well promising Change, hope i will get to play some GM
|
That's a stupid idea. Intentionally creating games where one side to be roflstomped? What's the purpose? Just so some people will feel better by occasionally beating someone up real bad?
|
Well to be honest, I am quite against it, as for me being master it will be fun to play vs GM's, but at the same time couple bad games vs diamonds and you will be demoted back to diamond, they said it can make you get faster promote, but they forgot about demote ;x
|
I think it's so that it can accurately classify your skill faster than with the 50/50 balance it aims to do at the moment.
If you're a player who was way out of his league in his placement games and somehow got platinum but is actually bronze, the large variety in MMR players they play will allow for them to find their skill out faster. If they lost a game vs a gold player MMR then the system could then match the MMR of that gold player and do the variance again, to see if they struggle against the lower bound of that gold player MMR, if they do, it drops significantly again until a solid stable MMR could be found, then demotion occurs.
This is what I think would be happening with this... I could be drastically wrong.
But overall, this is a nice change than having to play perfect relative to your skill level in order to match your opponents at that time. The biggest gripe I had with the 50/50 system was the fact that I could go into beast mode and go like 10-2 on ladder, and when I come back to the ladder the next day or something, I would get destroyed because I wasn't just at that level again.
|
I like this, one of the reasons i prefer to play custom is because of greater skill variety. I don't think i'd ever get matched up against masters players from my platinum division on ladder.
|
On April 07 2012 01:22 denzelz wrote:
This feels like a cop out from Blizzard. If they really wanted to make this game more appealing and exciting, they should just fix the custom game system. This just makes playing the ladder much more unpredictable, and potentially frustrating.
I don't know, it will also expose players to high levels of play than their current level, which should promote more improvement. People will have their bad habits punished more often by higher level players. Although I have no proof, I feel there were players who used abusive, easily countered play styles that were effective in their league, but then hit a hard wall on the ladder. This may remove some of that, which must be very fustrating for those players if they did not know what they were doing was really bad.
|
It sounds good in theory. We will see if it's good in practice. 
|
This sucks, I don't want to play someone who will destroy me without trying... I like to get better, but getting beat on by a pro doesn't help me...
|
I dont see any why there is any reason to do this. The MMR system is the only good thing on bnet2.0. Its near perfect for anyone in masters and below. While Gm still needs some kinks fixed i dont welcome this change.
|
i was excited there for a second because i thought they might just add a different MMR(or even league) for every matchup ... too bad :/ that experiment sounds like it won't be a big deal, iam already facing a wide variety of skills in my ladder matches, i guess it just means i get a free win every now and then ^.^
|
Actually it's not that bad. Don't know how it's gonna change our perception of the matchmaking, but i think it's a great idea to speed up some promotion ! I mean, i have a lose streak of maybe 30 games (20% of win ratio), and i'm still in platinium xD. So i think the actual system is a bit too much slow
|
This is so great. I just beat a masters player, and I've never played against one before. :D
|
Sounds good to me. It will be both refreshing to win some games without having to kill yourself to do it and challenging to get matched against someone much better and learn a thing or two. I can't help but wonder however if this is at all related to overall player numbers.
|
I think you guys are exaggerating this change. You know how big the leap is from the bottom of a league to the top of it? I would imagine that all it'll mean is you'll be playing people in the same general league but lets say you are ranked 10 in Diamond, you might be matched up with the guy you would play as if you were ranked 2 or 3 in that same league. I highly don't anyone will get consistently smashed to pieces over and over. This would also mean that the change in opponent between wins and losses will be a little more volatile for your next game. So, no big deal.
Besides...it'll be for 1 season.
|
On April 07 2012 01:23 ACrow wrote:
That's a stupid idea. Intentionally creating games where one side to be roflstomped? What's the purpose? Just so some people will feel better by occasionally beating someone up real bad?
I don't think they will widen it so much that you will be roflstomped. I would think you would just play vs people who are slightly better than you so while you may lose you still have a chance.
|
On April 07 2012 01:27 GreEny K wrote:
This sucks, I don't want to play someone who will destroy me without trying... I like to get better, but getting beat on by a pro doesn't help me...
Well most of the pros say playing people that are way better than you gives you a better idea of what you need to improve on. As long as the ladder points reflect that they should have a handicap, I don't see much of an issue. It may be as simple as a high level gold player up against a mid level diamond player. I don't think Idra is going to be playing Silver players any time soon.
|
There is nothing in that excerpt to suggest that platinum, diamond, or even mid masters players will be matched against pros. "Slightly higher or lower". I don't see any reason to assume anyone will be getting "free wins" either.
|
On April 07 2012 01:22 EdSlyB wrote:
I bet this is also because there is fewer players in Bnet. With less players they need to broad their matchmaking sample so players get matched with others faster. Well see how that turns out.
I gotta agree with this. My average wait time is a lot higher than what it was, 3, 2 or even 1 season ago. Around 1 minute minimum, 5 max.
|
On April 07 2012 01:38 theplagueman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 01:22 EdSlyB wrote:
I bet this is also because there is fewer players in Bnet. With less players they need to broad their matchmaking sample so players get matched with others faster. Well see how that turns out. I gotta agree with this. My average wait time is a lot higher than what it was, 3, 2 or even 1 season ago. Around 1 minute minimum, 5 max.
In what league?
In Plat EU I still get near instant queues.
I'm for this, I don't think it will make a big difference in practice you probably won't even notice which players have higher or lower MMRs than you. It will just help people get into games faster and it will help people be promoted and demoted quicker.
|
this is a good idea because as they say, having a bit more variety is more fun. also better for learning for everyone.
|
On April 07 2012 01:40 Dujek wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 01:38 theplagueman wrote:On April 07 2012 01:22 EdSlyB wrote:
I bet this is also because there is fewer players in Bnet. With less players they need to broad their matchmaking sample so players get matched with others faster. Well see how that turns out. I gotta agree with this. My average wait time is a lot higher than what it was, 3, 2 or even 1 season ago. Around 1 minute minimum, 5 max. In what league? In Plat EU I still get near instant queues. I'm for this, I don't think it will make a big difference in practice you probably won't even notice which players have higher or lower MMRs than you. It will just help people get into games faster and it will help people be promoted and demoted quicker.
Same Gold EU here and the queues are just as quick as they where in S1 ;p
|
this is unbelievably bad for everyone. Being matched up with someone significantly worse or better than you is neither fun nor useful. isn't the whole point of matchmaking to match you up with someone of close to equal skill level? so stupid.
|
I can't wait to stream snipe Idra from my diamond league. Thank you blizzard. You have made trolling alot easier.
|
On April 07 2012 01:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 01:22 denzelz wrote:
This feels like a cop out from Blizzard. If they really wanted to make this game more appealing and exciting, they should just fix the custom game system. This just makes playing the ladder much more unpredictable, and potentially frustrating. I don't know, it will also expose players to high levels of play than their current level, which should promote more improvement. People will have their bad habits punished more often by higher level players. Although I have no proof, I feel there were players who used abusive, easily countered play styles that were effective in their league, but then hit a hard wall on the ladder. This may remove some of that, which must be very fustrating for those players if they did not know what they were doing was really bad.
I get that, but I don't see how that would make the game more FUN. In fact, I would be more fustrated if I didn't know how good my opponents were and that I have the potential to get stomped instead of having an even game. I think this will just make people want to quit playing even more.
|
This change makes little sense. If people have "anxiety" about laddering, how is the fact that they will randomly get smashed by a player much better than them going to help?
How will they ever get better by playing someone much lower than them?
We already don't show losses on players 'diamond and below' to help relieve some of the stress of having a bad record, this is just ruining it for everyone else who isn't afraid to press find game.
|
I just want to see statistics. That is all I ask from BNET2.0...
|
I'm actually really excited about this. I'm looking forward to playing a more variety of players. Also glad to hear blizzard experimenting.
|
I like it! Open up the flood gates I say! As long as the ladder points in contention are adjusted accordingly, I don't have any problem with this at all.
|
Yay I can play the pros, thats cool.
|
Guess I should avoid masters ladder this season and just get my terran smurf to diamond.
|
On April 07 2012 01:15 Cosmos wrote:
It might be cool for some "bad" players to play from time to time against pro gamers.
Yep, the matchmaking will let silverleaguers play GMs...
|
I think this is really cool/interesting, though it sucks for GM players if they don't get a separate algorithm.
|
Don't see why people are complaining about "being crushed" by higher level players. You actually learn a lot from playing much better players than yourself. I'm quite happy everytime I get matched with a pro/semi-pro because it's a great occasion to test my builds, execution etc...
|
Why can't they just match 2 random people that search games at the same time, but instead of worrying about the players' levels, they only need to adjust the points. For example, it takes 1 second to match 2 players, but if one is bronze and one is GM, the point for winning and losing the match should be +1/-1 or something
|
Kids, you won't get matched against player that are more than one leaguer above you. especially if you're dimaond+
|
Soo many people have failed to read what the OP actually says. Stop saying you are gonna be stomped by someone way better than you, when thats not the case at all. Blizzard said slightly higher or lower, not a whole league or 2 higher or lower. I swear most people dont even read the post, but instead just skim through it and then post their own 2cents which turns out to be completely wrong.
|
This is SOOOOOOO good.
The MMR is too strict. Every opponent I get is JUST like me. We both have same issues, spending, and it ends up being a life or death struggle for 45 minutes. Each game is too hard. Incomes, armies and Tech all seem to balance so much that it becomes a deadlock.
Making a wider range does 3 things:
1) Shorten wait times. No need to find someone closer to perfect MMR.
2) Shorter games that are harder, as a Diamond player I will get to experience more asswhoopins from Masters players, and learn the gameplay.
3) Shorter games from winning against Platinum players, who get to see what Diamond strats look like and I also get to see how I've progressed and try new things.
Day9 has said it's important to get to play against a wide variety of people. Playing harder opponents allows you to test your best strats and see how long you can last and how solid your play is. Playing easier opponents allows you to test NEW strategies and have a little bid more wiggle room while experimenting.
This has been needed for a few seasons now. Even at the end of beta I was noticing "all these games are just too hard", each player rages for 45 minutes because neither of us can seem to get a leg up.
|
Hope they fix the MM where I have to play the same match up over and over again.
|
On April 07 2012 02:11 eXigent. wrote:
Soo many people have failed to read what the OP actually says. Stop saying you are gonna be stomped by someone way better than you, when thats not the case at all. Blizzard said slightly higher or lower, not a whole league or 2 higher or lower. I swear most people dont even read the post, but instead just skim through it and then post their own 2cents which turns out to be completely wrong.
Have you picked the brain of David Kim? How can you tell that by slightly lower or lightly higher that he doesn't mean a whole league below you? Never make conclusions about blizzard because half the shit they do makes no sense.
|
Pretty sure they are doing this because there are always less and less players on the ladder and they need to match people up quicker.
With a larger MMR range you will find matches much quicker in the dead of night.
However they may be one sided stomps for either side more frequently.
|
this just seesm silly
i was under the impression that ppl wanted a more competitive ladder, not a high/low type of system
|
On April 07 2012 01:23 ACrow wrote:
That's a stupid idea. Intentionally creating games where one side to be roflstomped? What's the purpose? Just so some people will feel better by occasionally beating someone up real bad?
Players will be match against other players that are SLIGHTLY better. You should spend some time trying to understand what is said before declaring the idea to be stupid.
|
Will be interesting to see what this does. Getting beat by decisively better players only means more experience for me!
|
On April 07 2012 02:11 CursOr wrote:
This has been needed for a few seasons now. Even at the end of beta I was noticing "all these games are just too hard", each player rages for 45 minutes because neither of us can seem to get a leg up.
i rofl at this because i know wat your talking about high master player here and in those long games it usually one wrong click here or there and one player isnt a happy bunny  (easter and all that)
|
I was feeling it was already the case since the mid season. I'm platinum and I've been facing low diamond and top golds and some of them were really bad so I was thinking matching was changed without them telling us. But maybe it's just that they cheesed their way to platinum and then wanted to play more standard and don't manage to.
|
On April 07 2012 02:17 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 02:11 eXigent. wrote:
Soo many people have failed to read what the OP actually says. Stop saying you are gonna be stomped by someone way better than you, when thats not the case at all. Blizzard said slightly higher or lower, not a whole league or 2 higher or lower. I swear most people dont even read the post, but instead just skim through it and then post their own 2cents which turns out to be completely wrong. Have you picked the brain of David Kim? How can you tell that by slightly lower or lightly higher that he doesn't mean a whole league below you? Never make conclusions about blizzard because half the shit they do makes no sense.
sigh...you have been matched against players that are slightly favored before (that is what usually happens when you are facing promotion). You don't get matched against pros, just against someone that has a better mmr than you do...It seems that everything blizzard is saying is that you will get more of those slightly favored opponents. They already have a more or less precise notion of "slightly favored", and it certainly does not mean a whole league above you...
|
guys it says "slightly" higher or lower. I don't think it will be matching diamond or low-mid masters players against GM's or anything like that. Just a little more variety.
Also, I bet they will make it so that a loss against someone higher than you doesn't kill your MMR as much as a loss against people lower than you (actually I think this is already true)
|
I don't like this at all, demotion to me feels dumb. i dont think demotion should be in sc2 anyways.
|
i already getting matched agains pro's constantly and im mid master, dunno what this will change? mby just getting owned more often?
|
On April 07 2012 01:45 cmizzles wrote:
this is unbelievably bad for everyone. Being matched up with someone significantly worse or better than you is neither fun nor useful. isn't the whole point of matchmaking to match you up with someone of close to equal skill level? so stupid.
It's funny that when someone say "slightly better or worst" you understand "significantly better or worst"...I wonder who is the stupid one...
|
Well, the best thing is that it's a one season experiment. If in practice it's a bad idea, they'll see it and remove it.
|
wider selection is always better.
You get to see things you wouldn't of thought of from harder players and get more breathing room with weaker players to try different stuff out.
The point is that you can always change the points won or lost ... that is what makes it competative.
I also suspect that its due to a smaller player pool. Wait times have gone up.
|
Very cool experiment. I'm glad they are still thinking of ways to make the ladder experience better.
|
I wonder if this is because there are less players? Or they're actually trying to experiment but Idk, its always tough to trust the official story.
|
Very good decision!!!
I support it!
Egomancer
|
i don't mind being steamrolled as shows skill and steamrolling myself is slightly boring though.
|
On April 07 2012 02:42 captainwaffles wrote:
I wonder if this is because there are less players? Or they're actually trying to experiment but Idk, its always tough to trust the official story.
Probably a little of both. But for me my match making times are still almost always well under a minute hell even when I log on at 3am it is still normally under a minute. But maybe on other servers and other leagues it is different. But regardless or waiting times I like this idea.
|
On April 07 2012 02:42 captainwaffles wrote:
I wonder if this is because there are less players? Or they're actually trying to experiment but Idk, its always tough to trust the official story.
That was my first thought. Especially if I play in the morning or mid-day, queue times seem to be getting worse. This will certainly help.
Either way, I'm excited to see how it works. It's easy to think you have your mechanics down, and this will shatter that perception for a lot of players. It will also be fun to occasionally roflstomp someone. Hopefully it doesn't make laddering too frustrating. As if it isn't already.
|
I like it. Though I have never been really 50/50 in a normal sense. A lot of my play is very streaky, mostly because when I am on the ball I play way better than when I am not.
|
In terms of the MMR algorithms, at a systemic level this change actually also improves the metric of confidence of ones MMR since it incorporates a wider range of variability-- if the change stays, your MMR will be more accurate.
On the surface this doesn't matter to us at all, since we can't actually SEE our MMR, but it will probably help some outliers be matched more appropriately.
|
I'm interested in seeing how this pans out. I agree with their assessment about the feeling that one has to be on top of one's game to win. Not that that's a problem. But for someone with a job, dissertation to write, and a fiancee, I have trouble maintaining my skill. I'd like to feel that after winning five games, then not playing for a week, I can come back and not necessarily be shit on the first game as I warm up.
That said, I'm not sure it will work this way. Perhaps I come back five days later and face 5 straight high masters and get my diamond-ass handed to me. We'll see.
|
Why? One of the things Bnet 0.2 does better then Bnet 1.0 is the matchmaking for ladder. X_x
|
the pro players will probably quit the ladder entirely. the top GMs are already 70-80% winrate before this change.
|
United Kingdom1381 Posts
I wonder if people will adapt their build depending on who is favoured in the loading screen.
EDIT: Is this change caused by a declining player pool?
|
Interesting idea, won't affect most people, but would be funny for promotion runs. But yes would give a more tournamentish feeling, if the showing favored system would work a bit better. So you know for sure your next opponent will be a tough one.
|
This is absolutely terrible.
|
Would be ok if they had an option to not allow this. Getting +2/-20 per game is already bad enough, +0/-24 is even worse not to mention people laddering don't want to waste their time on people that much worse than them.
|
NA ladder is easy enough as it is! Kinda silly imo, I dont see much trouble with having close matches..
|
Seems pretty cool to me!!
|
good imo, I'd like playing some better people.
|
Seems like a good change, well played
|
Seems ok for the average player.. i guess? But what about for the GM players who are already playing random no name top 9 masters?
|
On April 07 2012 02:17 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 02:11 eXigent. wrote:
Soo many people have failed to read what the OP actually says. Stop saying you are gonna be stomped by someone way better than you, when thats not the case at all. Blizzard said slightly higher or lower, not a whole league or 2 higher or lower. I swear most people dont even read the post, but instead just skim through it and then post their own 2cents which turns out to be completely wrong. Have you picked the brain of David Kim? How can you tell that by slightly lower or lightly higher that he doesn't mean a whole league below you? Never make conclusions about blizzard because half the shit they do makes no sense.
First off, David Kim has nothing to do with the ladder algorithms, and who you get matched up against. This statement just shows your ignorance about the subject at hand. Secondly, why would blizzard want to break their own ladder? Odds are you will be getting more games where the opponent is "slightly favored" or vice versa. When a player comes close to promotion they usually start playing players slightly better than them, I forsee this as similar to that, without the possible promotion.
|
On April 07 2012 03:37 SupLilSon wrote:
Seems ok for the average player.. i guess? But what about for the GM players who are already playing random no name top 9 masters?
I would argue that most GM players have practice partners they can train with, which is vastly superior to ladder anyway. I think its better to tailor to the 95+% of the population when it comes to matchmaking on the ladder.
|
I don't see how it would ever be possible for GM to play Diamond or lower league players with this method. Way too much MMR difference. Most people will probably end up liking this style though.
|
Seasons are so short, worse-case scenario in two months things go back to normal.
|
Won't this fix the whole queuing for like 5 minutes for some pros issue?
|
On April 07 2012 03:57 khanofmongols wrote:
Won't this fix the whole queuing for like 5 minutes for some pros issue?
Probably. I think it's a fantastic thing to try. I mean they pretty much have to try it this way, they can't try it on a test realm because nobody actually uses the test realm to test.
For the people that said this is because of the lower bnet population, I doubt it. Aside from at the very top search times are still pretty much instant. At least in Diamond on KR and Masters on NA.
|
Hmm this move is kind of intresting, and i am looking forward toseeing how big of a change you will see adn also i dont hope it affect master / grandmaster to much since they are at such a competetive level that i don't think it would fit it very well to suddenly meet a platnium player..
I am looking forwards to see it though since im just a low leauger
|
I don't think the difference in MMR will be great enough to create a truly one sides game, but I can also see it frustrating people who may run into handfuls of better players over and over, creating losing streaks. Which is hopefully balanced out by weaker players that you play. Interested to see how this will play out
|
Honestly I really like it, when you play peep modes and go against a player who just smashes you it's not really very frustrating and you feel like you've learned. On ladder right now you know your opponent is about your skill level, so when you lose it's extremely frustrating sometimes.
|
United States12235 Posts
So what this means is that for Season 7, all players' sigmas will increase (and perhaps have a larger minimum value).
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom).
|
I dont want this... I already aget face-stomped regularly, especially after a 3 game win streak. And that seems to happen about once or twice a week :/
I dont really have any issues with wait time either, so ultimately I think this will hurt people like me more than help 
|
Bad change. Pros already get matched-up with semi-good players because of MMR Cap which results in complete roflstomps. This will be even worse now.
|
On April 07 2012 04:10 Excalibur_Z wrote:
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom).
Except that doing this would increase everyone's win rates except for the unfortunates at the bottom of the ladder.
|
On April 07 2012 04:10 Excalibur_Z wrote:
So what this means is that for Season 7, all players' sigmas will increase (and perhaps have a larger minimum value).
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom).
is sigma the width of the probability range where ones MMR lies within? or does it measure the confidence that ones MMR lies at a specific value?
|
I've wanted this for a while but I never imagined it would happen. Cool!
|
On April 07 2012 01:18 Aelendis wrote:
They didn't say "much higher" or "much lower", they said slightly higher or lower. I don't think GM players will be matched against top diamond, it would make no sense...
They also thought Ghosts were 'slighty too good' before they nerfed both EMP and snipe by 45%.
I don't think blizzard understands what the word 'slightly' means, so I won't be suprised if indeed, GMs wil face diamond players.
Edit: I really don't understand this change. First they design a system that pitch you against players of equal skill. A system that works extremely well compaired to that of a lot of other games and is fair for everybody. And then they.. change it? Why?!
What is the point in having a 80% chance of a fair game and a 20% chance of an unfair game when you could have a >95% chance of a fair game?
|
On April 07 2012 04:10 Excalibur_Z wrote:
So what this means is that for Season 7, all players' sigmas will increase (and perhaps have a larger minimum value).
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom).
Sorry, but that makes no sense.
What is downward for one player, is upward for the other. It is impossible to expand only in one direction.
|
United States12235 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:28 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 04:10 Excalibur_Z wrote:
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom). Except that doing this would increase everyone's win rates except for the unfortunates at the bottom of the ladder.
That is true, but the marketing message behind the change is a little confusing then. If the goal is to alleviate "ladder anxiety", allowing easier opponents does that. However, allowing more difficult opponents makes things more intimidating for the average player who is just looking to win and "take it easy".
|
United States12235 Posts
On April 07 2012 04:33 trGKakarot wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 04:10 Excalibur_Z wrote:
So what this means is that for Season 7, all players' sigmas will increase (and perhaps have a larger minimum value).
It's kind of strange to me how the player search range will expand in both directions, though, given that they say "While it’s awesome that most games are very close, this also means that both players need to constantly be at the top of their games, because the slightest mistake usually means defeat. While we think this is a fun way to play, we’re not sure if it’s fun for every match to be this way." It seems like you would expect the search range to expand only downward rather than upward and downward, which would have the effect of your average game being slightly easier than it's been in the past (except for players at the very bottom). Sorry, but that makes no sense. What is downward for one player, is upward for the other. It is impossible to expand only in one direction.
Well, sort of. There are adjustments that they could make to accommodate this. If the search results were always 100% random in that range though, you're right, it wouldn't be possible because the larger lower bound for one player means a larger upper bound for another.
|
This sounds like it will make ladder much more interesting. Although I hope I don't get matched vs bad players very often.
|
This honestly seams like it won't make any difference unless you're in High Masters. I doubt I'll notice it in Platinum.
|
Hopefully this is only for the lower leagues... I feel bad for all the pros who get paired up against me on ladder, now they'll play even worse players :p.
On April 07 2012 03:57 khanofmongols wrote:
Won't this fix the whole queuing for like 5 minutes for some pros issue?
This never happens unless you play at like 5am, and even then after a long time it'll pair you up against a drastically higher/lower skilled player any ways (saw a GM beat a Diamond for 1 point after searching for 10 mins at 4am).
|
On April 07 2012 01:27 GreEny K wrote:
This sucks, I don't want to play someone who will destroy me without trying... I like to get better, but getting beat on by a pro doesn't help me...
First. Getting destroyed by better players is a better learning experience than beating somebody your own level and if you knew how to read you would know it said sightly. I know you live in a world where you ladder with the avg bronze, but now you will be facing them scary high bronze
|
|
|
wow this actually sounds really awesome! can't wait :D
i haven't thought about this but I like the idea of it!
|
On April 07 2012 05:05 ZAiNs wrote:Hopefully this is only for the lower leagues... I feel bad for all the pros who get paired up against me on ladder, now they'll play even worse players :p. Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 03:57 khanofmongols wrote:
Won't this fix the whole queuing for like 5 minutes for some pros issue? This never happens unless you play at like 5am, and even then after a long time it'll pair you up against a drastically higher/lower skilled player any ways (saw a GM beat a Diamond for 1 point after searching for 10 mins at 4am).
That cannot happen a GM can only be faced aginst high masters like top 8 (I am pulling that number out of my ass, but it is literally only the top 8 if not less) and what will happen now is GMs will face the top 10 master boo fucking who. Ohh and that story of yours it was probably a GM smurf locked by the season lock on his new account.
|
No one will be able to tell because all their games will be different.
Interesting, but only they will be able to really tell a difference between the previous change and now.
|
I wasn't thrilled about this at first but the more I started thinking about the more I'm willing to give this a chance.
This gives every game a certain increase in risk vs reward that makes every ladder game more meaningful. Think about it.
You're playing every game as though you could be against someone much better or much worse than you, either way you're going to be more encouraged to play your best.
It also provides some much needed help for the people stuck in bronze league to get out.
|
Seems like Pro players will take a big hit to their practice on ladder since they are at the top anyway.
|
On April 07 2012 03:37 SupLilSon wrote:
Seems ok for the average player.. i guess? But what about for the GM players who are already playing random no name top 9 masters?
Them playing random top 10 and 11 no name high masters wont change much.
|
[b]On April 07 2012 05:48 Vindicare605 wrote:
I wasn't thrilled about this at first but the more I started thinking about the more I'm willing to give this a chance.
This gives every game a certain increase in risk vs reward that makes every ladder game more meaningful. Think about it.
You're playing every game as though you could be against someone much better or much worse than you, either way you're going to be more encouraged to play your best.
It also provides some much needed help for the people stuck in bronze league to get out. Learn to read it said slightly.
|
i don't see anything wrong with this. you may get stomped by better players but likewise you may stomp lesser players (or get stomped too lol)
|
Interesting experiment! I've always enjoyed stomping noobs on the ladder but I already hate when I have to play vs GM players, but I get I'd feel more okay about it if I was facing MillStephano :p
I do feel abit bad for the very top of GM players. Their winrates are already completely ridiculous and that's not gonna get better if they have to face even worse players every once in a while.
|
I really feel like people are overreacting to this change. It will just offer people the chance to play in a broader skill range, not play people "Miles better than them" And to be honest, even if it doesn't work, I love seeing Blizzard trying new things, just to see how they work.
|
I don't mind them trying for a season, but I am not sure if I actually agree with this.
|
intrigue
Washington, D.C9933 Posts
thank goodness. thank GOODNESS omg. i'm sick of playing super tryhard only-use-optimal-strats teams when i just wanna try stuff out =(
|
This will be interesting, not really sure how the current MMR is cuz sometimes im playing top 16 GM players and sometimes im playing mid-master players.
|
On April 07 2012 05:54 thezanursic wrote:[b] Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 05:48 Vindicare605 wrote:
I wasn't thrilled about this at first but the more I started thinking about the more I'm willing to give this a chance.
This gives every game a certain increase in risk vs reward that makes every ladder game more meaningful. Think about it.
You're playing every game as though you could be against someone much better or much worse than you, either way you're going to be more encouraged to play your best.
It also provides some much needed help for the people stuck in bronze league to get out. Learn to read it said slightly.
Slightly is ambigious enough for me to assume that what I said is still very relevant.
Especially considering the match making can already pair you with people that are much higher than you already at times, altering that even slightly expands that window even further.
Plus if you read Blizzard's intentions, they said they are trying to offer someone an opportunity to get promoted faster if they win against higher rated players which obviously means they are tweaking it enough to allow that to happen.
So yea, I definitely can read.
|
I think it's a fun change, but it depends mostly on just how much variance is introduced. High Masters vs Diamonds? Platinum vs Silver? Probably not too sensible. But maybe they just mean that more slightly favoured/favoured games will be played, which I think would be fine, as it would give players a chance to learn by playing better players. But those times when you're the better player and lose ...
|
Russian Federation269 Posts
hate this, I like haviung it be a close game. expect to see no pros on ladder
|
The ladder already matches you against slightly better/worse opponents. Taking it further is just going to mean 1 sided games, which is boring and shitty for both players. Wtf.
|
I don't like it, I'm already regularly facing favored opponents and usually its a pretty onesided game for the favored player although its only a difference of like 200 points in master (from 1200 to 1000 or 1000 to 800).
They don't have to add more randomness to the ladder, they approach the whole ladder issue from a bullshit point of view. They have to add specific matchup and map options, if you want to play only 1 map in 1 matchup they should allow you to choose it. Maybe not give you ladder rating for it or something, I don't know, just use the Matchmaking System to get similar skill opponents. They should throw their stupid illusion out of the window that the highest ladder player is the best player of the region. Ladder rating means almost nothing. It has no competition value, it should be a practical tool to get better for every level of play and not a tool to measure competition or skill.
|
United States1201 Posts
I wonder if it means that those of us who get dramatically better through seasons can get placed against better people. I could still beat people in high silver as compared to high bronze.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On April 07 2012 05:33 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 01:27 GreEny K wrote:
This sucks, I don't want to play someone who will destroy me without trying... I like to get better, but getting beat on by a pro doesn't help me... First. Getting destroyed by better players is a better learning experience than beating somebody your own level and if you knew how to read you would know it said sightly. I know you live in a world where you ladder with the avg bronze, but now you will be facing them scary high bronze On April 07 2012 05:54 thezanursic wrote:[b] Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 05:48 Vindicare605 wrote:
I wasn't thrilled about this at first but the more I started thinking about the more I'm willing to give this a chance.
This gives every game a certain increase in risk vs reward that makes every ladder game more meaningful. Think about it.
You're playing every game as though you could be against someone much better or much worse than you, either way you're going to be more encouraged to play your best.
It also provides some much needed help for the people stuck in bronze league to get out. Learn to read it said slightly. Dude chill out. Let these people have their own opinion, and if it is based on misinformation, or what you believe to be misinformation, why not just... correct them? Not say they don't know how to read, wtf.
As for this whole change, I hope this will benefit me. I noticed that there is a certain skill level that is higher than mine where I am actually better at playing against; I think there are less cheesers and dumbasses etc, so I can play more of a normal game, which I am okay at. Although, on the other side, that means I could be getting matched up against even lower level players which may entail even more cheese. Ah well, can't judge till it happens, and even then I am a lowly Gold, what do I matter?
|
I would literally jizz my pants if they let you pick matchup and map on ladder. Nerdgasm all over the damn place.
The change they are actually doing just makes me want to vomit and cry.
|
On April 07 2012 01:16 justiceknight wrote:
oh god its worse IMO, its like i am standing in GM ranks and get to thrash some low masters or diamonds....
but it's good for people like Huk who search for 30 minutes just to find the same opponent every game. key word here is experiment. Looks like this will basically allow you to find people easier who search at the same time as you rather than wait for the appropriate skill level.
|
I really do not see how this is going to make the ladder experience less tense for players. You will still have to be at your best every game because this is what is going to happen, every time you play against a lower ranked player you will get cheesed or all inned because people will be able to tell when they are matched against someone of higher rank. And the thing about cheese and all-ins is precisely that you have to focus 100% because if you slip up you might lose the game outright to a far worse opponent.
|
On April 07 2012 08:22 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 01:16 justiceknight wrote:
oh god its worse IMO, its like i am standing in GM ranks and get to thrash some low masters or diamonds.... but it's good for people like Huk who search for 30 minutes just to find the same opponent every game. key word here is experiment. Looks like this will basically allow you to find people easier who search at the same time as you rather than wait for the appropriate skill level.
They fixed that by widening the search range a while back. I haven't seen pros search for more than a few minutes max.
The current search time is fine (under a minute typically) and being placed against evenly matched opponents is what matchmaking should be about. All this is going to cause is volatility and make things even worse for gm/bronze where there are no higher or lower players to be matched against respectively.
Imagine playing 5 opponents who are worse than you and losing 1 game to cheese.
Match History:
-20 points
+4
+4
+4
+4
=/
|
I'm fairly optomistic that this has a good chance of being a fun change. It's smart how they're stating its only for season 7 currently, being used as a test. The only problem I have with it, is that I think it incentive's the lower ranked player to cheese or all-in way more. If you lose, who cares? If you win, nice boost to your mmr. The higher level player has very little to gain, and quiet a bit to lose.
But, it all comes down to how they implement it. If too many games are one-sided, then ladder could get messed up. But if its just for a bit of a change every once in a while, then it could be a great change.
|
On April 07 2012 04:41 Excalibur_Z wrote:
That is true, but the marketing message behind the change is a little confusing then. If the goal is to alleviate "ladder anxiety", allowing easier opponents does that. However, allowing more difficult opponents makes things more intimidating for the average player who is just looking to win and "take it easy".
I think the thinking is that while some games may be a lot harder, many will also be easier, so rather than being consistently challenging, there will be lulls from time to time that will be a little less stressful.
|
On April 07 2012 08:20 mynameisgreat11 wrote:
I would literally jizz my pants if they let you pick matchup and map on ladder. Nerdgasm all over the damn place.
The change they are actually doing just makes me want to vomit and cry.
That would actually be terrible. Finding opponent would take so fucking long and most people would just play their favorite matchup. What if no one wants to play against Toss? Well i guess its only PvP for them. And ladder would be so boring if you could choose everything. Your wish should be integrated in the form of custom games, but thats a different topic.
|
lol has anyone else noticed that more often than not your opponent is "favored" or "slightly favored" when your match comes up. So if you lose blizzard wants you to think you were the underdog and that the other guy was just better. And if you win they want you to think you overcame some incredible opponent lol. Maybe its just met but i would say about 80-90% of my games it says the other guy is favored. Nice thinking blizzard. Everybody is the underdog!
|
On April 07 2012 08:52 RedMosquito wrote:
lol has anyone else noticed that more often than not your opponent is "favored" or "slightly favored" when your match comes up. So if you lose blizzard wants you to think you were the underdog and that the other guy was just better. And if you win they want you to think you overcame some incredible opponent lol. Maybe its just met but i would say about 80-90% of my games it says the other guy is favored. Nice thinking blizzard. Everybody is the underdog!
It means you don't play enough. The favored/slightly favored algorithm compares your ladder points to his MMR, so if you don't have many points, everyone is favored over you. Play more and it wears off.
|
On April 07 2012 08:54 imareaver3 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 08:52 RedMosquito wrote:
lol has anyone else noticed that more often than not your opponent is "favored" or "slightly favored" when your match comes up. So if you lose blizzard wants you to think you were the underdog and that the other guy was just better. And if you win they want you to think you overcame some incredible opponent lol. Maybe its just met but i would say about 80-90% of my games it says the other guy is favored. Nice thinking blizzard. Everybody is the underdog! It means you don't play enough. The favored/slightly favored algorithm compares your ladder points to his MMR, so if you don't have many points, everyone is favored over you. Play more and it wears off.
Oh ok. yeah i dont play much maybe 30 games a season or so. That would explain it. I thought ladder points had nothing to do with mmr and your overall skill level. guess im mistaken
|
This is awesome! My favorite thing about blizzard is that they are ALWAYS trying to make their product better! =D
|
This decreases the use of ladder practice for GM players, so they'll complain about this. For all others it's interesting, i guess.
|
I feel like this is going to be really weird and hard to really determine what its going to be like to be honest
|
On April 07 2012 01:16 justiceknight wrote:
oh god its worse IMO, its like i am standing in GM ranks and get to thrash some low masters or diamonds....
Yes because if you're winning in GM they will randomly lower your MMR and give you a shit opponent. If anything it's better.
For example, If you win like 4 games in a row, you'll have a chance to play a much higher opponent. Same thing for losing though. If you lose like 4 in a row or lose a lot more than you're winning, you'll have a chance to be playing like mid master players. I really doubt they would make a GM player play a diamond or even low masters unless they diamond/low masters has been winning like almost every game. Even then, that means that players has been playing high masters probably before you.
Don't turn off your brain just because the original text is still quite vague.
|
To counteract this they should increase the maximum mmr.
|
I don't see why people are so worried that the pros won't be able to ladder anymore. If pros are trying to seriously practice, then they'll be playing with practice partners where they can try out the specific strategy they're trying to work on. The only time serious pros ladder is when they're streaming or messing around...
|
Such a huge improvement. Search time is too long currently.
|
Could be interesting. Now all they need to do is show mmr
|
I'm excited for the change can't wait I just hope I don't get roflstomped by any one. Hopefully now I'll finely get promoted I can hope
|
Good post. Thanks for the info.
|
i guess they should put back the win/lose stats for diamonds now since they wont 50/50
|
vs the lower players and then you lose tons of points to them cheesing you.. thats my only concern
|
We have to see these stuff in action... sounds nice as first impression.
|
man I can't wait to get online to start practicing just to hit 5 diamond retards in a row.
Such a joke blizzard. How could you possibly make your matchmaking worse?
|
I personally find playing against severely lower ranked players a huge anxiety issue. If someone isn't playing standard, then I start to get a little hesitant and make dumb mistakes. Honestly, all my game winnings rely on playing someone in my league, who performs similar strategies/styles per race as everyone else. This creates the origins of my anxiety.
For example, if I see a Terran player rush for Banshees, without the 111 style Siege Tanks as a follow up, I immediately expand after their failed attack (btw I'm Protoss). But I've sadly lost to Silver league players who rush Banshee, fail horribly, then somehow win with some massively late bio push with Stim and Ghost, even though they spent shit tons on Banshees and Cloak. This nonsensical way of playing Starcraft 2 is a huge nuisance to play against because I can never tell if the other player is performing some elite strategy I've never encountered, or is simply the big noob that I suspect them to be.
With that being said, I still find this change to be quite exciting. Because this also means I'll be playing against players of higher caliber to learn new things. In my PvT match up, Terran players honestly suck at dropping my base, even though they are in Platinum league along with me. But I've played Diamond Terran who are simply amazing at their decisions to drop, and playing against them has taught me a lot.
|
I think this is a great idea for one season, it lets people who always complain "Oh i am really master level material i just have a little more to go etc.." really get to play vs higher ranked people and for the lower bronze -->Platinums get a chance to see (if they don't follow SC2 seriously) what the skill gap between Gold -->Diamond. If i was in master league it would be fun as well to get the small chance to play vs some pros. I think the EU ladder will be the best for this as most foreigner pros are on this ladder.
For the casual gamer in SK good luck and god speed...you will need it.
|
I'm interested. It'll give me more of a chance to pull off some sick upsets. Alternatively, I can stomp some people a bit lower.
|
Not sure how much I like this... getting paired with "bad" terrans is always going to be a nightmare because they can derp their way to victory against much more skilled players pretty frequently, but then getting matched against zergs who are way better than me will be kinda good because I, too, can get lucky and derp my way to victory. I play protoss. And of course pvp is really volatile and big skill gaps can be worked around with cannon rush/proxy gates.
|
On April 07 2012 11:13 TheToaster wrote:
I personally find playing against severely lower ranked players a huge anxiety issue. If someone isn't playing standard, then I start to get a little hesitant and make dumb mistakes. Honestly, all my game winnings rely on playing someone in my league, who performs similar strategies/styles per race as everyone else. This creates the origins of my anxiety.
For example, if I see a Terran player rush for Banshees, without the 111 style Siege Tanks as a follow up, I immediately expand after their failed attack (btw I'm Protoss). But I've sadly lost to Silver league players who rush Banshee, fail horribly, then somehow win with some massively late bio push with Stim and Ghost, even though they spent shit tons on Banshees and Cloak. This nonsensical way of playing Starcraft 2 is a huge nuisance to play against because I can never tell if the other player is performing some elite strategy I've never encountered, or is simply the big noob that I suspect them to be.
With that being said, I still find this change to be quite exciting. Because this also means I'll be playing against players of higher caliber to learn new things. In my PvT match up, Terran players honestly suck at dropping my base, even though they are in Platinum league along with me. But I've played Diamond Terran who are simply amazing at their decisions to drop, and playing against them has taught me a lot.
Don't complain about people playing "non-standard" strategies, especially if they beat you with them. If you make blind assumptions and greedy decisions then you're just as deserving of a loss as someone who cheeses and never expands.
And it's possible that your mindset is blinding you to other potential improvements that you could be making. Like in that example you gave, expanding after his banshee rush might have actually been viable but if you didn't make a good number of observers/gateways/units afterwards then that might have been a bigger problem. Or maybe you didn't have the watchtower, or poke his ramp, or spread your sentries. I can't really say much more without seeing the replay, but in general it's not very productive to blame scrubs for playing cheesy/cheap/dumb
|
On April 07 2012 11:45 Erik.TheRed wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 11:13 TheToaster wrote:
I personally find playing against severely lower ranked players a huge anxiety issue. If someone isn't playing standard, then I start to get a little hesitant and make dumb mistakes. Honestly, all my game winnings rely on playing someone in my league, who performs similar strategies/styles per race as everyone else. This creates the origins of my anxiety.
For example, if I see a Terran player rush for Banshees, without the 111 style Siege Tanks as a follow up, I immediately expand after their failed attack (btw I'm Protoss). But I've sadly lost to Silver league players who rush Banshee, fail horribly, then somehow win with some massively late bio push with Stim and Ghost, even though they spent shit tons on Banshees and Cloak. This nonsensical way of playing Starcraft 2 is a huge nuisance to play against because I can never tell if the other player is performing some elite strategy I've never encountered, or is simply the big noob that I suspect them to be.
With that being said, I still find this change to be quite exciting. Because this also means I'll be playing against players of higher caliber to learn new things. In my PvT match up, Terran players honestly suck at dropping my base, even though they are in Platinum league along with me. But I've played Diamond Terran who are simply amazing at their decisions to drop, and playing against them has taught me a lot. Don't complain about people playing "non-standard" strategies, especially if they beat you with them. If you make blind assumptions and greedy decisions then you're just as deserving of a loss as someone who cheeses and never expands. And it's possible that your mindset is blinding you to other potential improvements that you could be making. Like in that example you gave, expanding after his banshee rush might have actually been viable but if you didn't make a good number of observers/gateways/units afterwards then that might have been a bigger problem. Or maybe you didn't have the watchtower, or poke his ramp, or spread your sentries. I can't really say much more without seeing the replay, but in general it's not very productive to blame scrubs for playing cheesy/cheap/dumb
I completely agree, when ever i am teaching someone starcraft and they complain about being in Bronze -->gold because of the cheese i tell them its great to learn cheese at the lower levels because you get better at recognizing when something is off. At the higher levels people cheese but they are really fucking good at it so its good to get some practice.
|
so? time to pwn some newbs?
|
Am i the only person that has already had this experience already, i play against plat and gold players all the timem i am in silver league btw. Does no one else share my experiences on ladder, it seems that this change will result in me playing people even higher like diamond, right?
|
|
|
make it a player's choice
*boom* the problem solved
|
I don't get why people are saying "omg i'm master now i'm going to have to play against plats qq".
They said slightly better or worse. For us master players I'm assuming this will mean a few gm's and a few high diamonds, much the same it is right now depending on where you are in master league.
Chill, I don't think this will make that much difference....
|
The more I think about this, The more I just don't really know what to think.
I feel like the ladder already does this..
|
Are these changes coming with the new season?
|
I really like this change. This means that I will play against more GM's, maybe I'll play against some famous professionals!
|
As a mid-high master I'm glad I'll be playing more pros because of this change.
|
Perhaps this is a way to address the MMR issues 2v2 players have been having.
|
My problem with this is that the only way that us lower-level players have to improve is the ladder. This makes it so that some of your games will hardly allow you to improve at all, playing against people who are above or below your skill level on purpose. Seems to me it makes it hard for lower-level players to improve, and high level players will hate it anyways since it makes ladder less viable if you're just stomping noobs all the time.
|
Not a fan of this idea, frankly. I love that I can reliably have a struggle with my opponents on ladder without feeling utterly outmatched. Maybe they should introduce this for bronze-plat or something so the lower level, generally more casual players can enjoy it while the try-hards and good players can have reliably good games.
|
It's already quite wide, sometimes you play people who are just abysmal and sometimes you play people who are really good relative to your skill level. I can't see the need for this, but if they are doing it, hopefully I'm not getting matched against a progamer one game and someone with 20 APM the next.
|
I think that people are putting much more weight into this than they should be. We don't know the effect yet - and certainly you won't have GM players playing Diamond, or any such nonsense. Furthermore, I don't know how many people have had experience playing someone much better than you, but often there are typically a few stark differences. Maybe a timing you didn't know existed, or a weird build-order that catches you by surprise. I doubt the differences will be large enough that you are getting outclassed in each and every department.
|
Cool maybe i can finally play against the pros!
|
hehe now i wont feel bad when it matches me against reallly really bad players like diamonds when Im mid masteres xD
|
Fuck yah, this is going to motivate me to ladder more.
Matched up against diamonds = pull out the mothership/BC rush strats for the lols.
Matched up against GMs/top masters = pull out the most abusive strategies that I can execute perfectly up until the 5 minute mark that denies scouting and pray for the best.
Going to queue some ladder matches at lunch instead of playing customs^^
|
This just means that fewer people are laddering and is the system's way to adjust.
They can't standardize players as well now because there are fewer people at your exact skill level. Which means the system will now have to pull from a wider skill gap to compare you to the same number of people.
|
The moment I match against a mid-master NA player is the exact moment I switch to solely playing on Korea.
|
Lets just give it a shot (like you have a choice). 
|
Wasn't this the issue that they had in GM? I hope that they are going to change it for the tippy top level of play, when watching streams at least, the pros will stop some guy and then play vs someone that is a little bit closer to their skill level.
|
lol I'm waiting to get queued up against a bronze level player. "Slightly lower" I guess we will see!
|
On April 08 2012 12:27 chadissilent wrote:
The moment I match against a mid-master NA player is the exact moment I switch to solely playing on Korea.
If you play at the same skill level on both servers, then the variance should be the same, so you should play the same quality of players (Unless you are at the point where you are already are favoured against a large majority of your opponents on NA)
|
Looking forward to this. It has a lot of potential. It could also help with ladder anxiety knowing that you may not get matched up with someone much more skilled than you.
|
|
|
Blizzard need to stop wasting time on these kind of gimmicky things and try to make more important improvements such as being able to rejoin a disconnected game or instantlysave the game before the game disconnects
|
Personally, I think they are doing this to see if it smooths out the streaks. What I mean is, that the ladder has a tendancy to put you against a series of "better" players if you have been doing good, which can result in a loss streak. Since you have been losing, it places you against a series of "worse" players. The resulting win streak tells the ladder that you are doing well, so you play against a series of "better" players, rinse and repeat.
The current system leaves you trapped in an infinite loop unless you get lucky, are playing a lot, or are already really good at the game. For low-mid leaguers, the match-making system can be rather frustrating.
Loosening the boundaries just enough that the "better" and "worse" players are actually more like "equal to" would break the streaks system and allow players to have an actual win/loss spread/
Alternatively, if what they are relaxing is the "force the wins to 50%" boundaries, then they might be trying to get a feel for the "real" (non adjusted) win rates.
Either way, one season of this is likely to produce significant data for the design and balance teams to chew on so it should be worth it.
|
If it can help me to get into diamond easier I won't complain :D
|
I really like the current matchmaking system; it's really a marvelous peace of art.. I suggest a "Find Quick Match" button that matches you with a bit wider range of MMR; however these matches won't be ladder; this should satisfy any urges for casual matches.
|
Wow, really? You all can read right?.
You wont be "roflstomped" or any of that.
It clearly says "slighty higher or lower" skill level.
It also says; 1 Season experiment.
|
hmm. this will be a good experience for me.
|
Well I can say for a fact that this thing won't help the people who find ladder already scary and are suffering from the so called "ladder fear".
|
I don't really see what's good about this. Quantity over quality: Faster search time for less accurate match making. I guess they had to do this because so many people have stopped laddering.
So now you'll get less fair matches more often.
|
I've always had good queue times in silver and gold 1v1, so this change is puzzling. Atleast I mightbget to see how bronze and plat plays these days!
|
I think this seems great!
|
it will probably make the system not be 50-50 winrate anymore for GM-, if it does, it will be aweesome, definitely worth testing
|
Was this done to counter the lower amount of people wich play?
If so it is probably there to stay.
I like it personally, playing against better players is a challenge and a change you dont get often.
Would even be better if we could see the mmr so that we know exactly.
|
If my shiny platinum a** would get whooped in favor of me learning better tactics and smart play then I'm all for it. If I do however get matched up with a masters player 5 times in a row then I'll probably seriously get owned straight up.
|
Pretty bad idea.No sense,why some Platinum playes as ME,need to beat Silver or Bronce?Its just,because there are less and less players in ladder every season and due to HotS not coming SOON,they need to do something to keep SC2 alive...
|
On April 08 2012 12:06 KRee wrote:
My problem with this is that the only way that us lower-level players have to improve is the ladder. This makes it so that some of your games will hardly allow you to improve at all, playing against people who are above or below your skill level on purpose. Seems to me it makes it hard for lower-level players to improve, and high level players will hate it anyways since it makes ladder less viable if you're just stomping noobs all the time.
The best way to improve is to play vs people who are better than you, since it will force you to confront weaknesses in your play. Play 100 games vs easy AI and you will hardly improve one you reach a certain level.
Everyone needs to chill out. Note the change said slightly. There won't be GMs playing platinum players lol.
I think it is a good change. Once in a while you play vs someone slightly better, which can act as a good learning experience in will drill home weaknesses in your play, and once in a while you have a slightly easier game to take the pressure off + for you to experiment with different styles.
Please again remember our word of the day, slightly
|
On April 07 2012 01:23 stinkycop wrote:
Well to be honest, I am quite against it, as for me being master it will be fun to play vs GM's, but at the same time couple bad games vs diamonds and you will be demoted back to diamond, they said it can make you get faster promote, but they forgot about demote ;x
If you're a solid masters player you shouldn't ever lose to diamond players. You can't complain about being demoted to diamond if you are losing to diamond players lol. I'd never lose to a diamond player that is why I'm high masters. I feel like if it was possible for me to lose to someone of that level then I deserve to be demoted not cry about it.
|
nice, free wins for me as im already mid grandmaster i maybe can get some diamond/low master snacks
thats how u finally kill the casual sc2 scene, gj justin
i like the idea of being in bronze ladder and getting raped 24/7 by gold/platinum players because of this stupid change
if u want to do something against low pop. ladders, finally release HOTS and stop with this gay panda addon for WoW
|
Loving this change. The best way to improve is to play against players who are much better than you. I have to keep roaming custom games and hunt down good players for that, so hopefully this change will allow me to play them on the actual ladder. That and facing people who are worse than you can always provide some relaxing fun times.
|
The matchmaking isn't the real problem. The reason less players are playing is because the game speed is to fast and many people can't keep up with others that are a lot faster then them. I'm a tactical thinker but at the current game speed there is always going to be a big chance that you miss something because well things are moving to fast. The reason blizzard did this change to ladder was to help with the fewer players that are playing. Metal Gear Online had the same system in place where it would constantly expand its searching until it hit enough players to finally have the game start. Blizzard is trying the same concept I think with having the matchmaking system search for players close to your level at the begining but the longer the queue goes on you are more then likely going to face a tougher or weaker opponents instead of having an even match game.
|
So Season starts on Tuesday then?
|
lol this seems dumb. i'm already being matched up with mid masters at rank 50~ gm level
|
I like it. It just seems more interesting facing a wider range of skill levels.
|
8748 Posts
This is the opposite of what the top of the ladder needs. They should make high MMR behave differently.
|
On April 09 2012 10:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:
This is the opposite of what the top of the ladder needs. They should make high MMR behave differently.
Agreed. Top grandmaster league players should spill over and play bronze league players at the bottom of their divisions.
|
On April 09 2012 10:36 Deadlift wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 10:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:
This is the opposite of what the top of the ladder needs. They should make high MMR behave differently. Agreed. Top grandmaster league players should spill over and play bronze league players at the bottom of their divisions.
Then they get six pooled and die :X
|
Well, I think this change will be fun at least at my level. It will be exciting to take the challenge of playing favored players, and at the same time it will be confidence boosting to player lower players.
At top mmr levels I don't think this is very good though, it seems like GM players already are forced to play enough players below their caliber
|
Is it just me or does it feel like these changes have already been implemented since ladder locked?
For example my match history:
+8
-8
+8
-9
I win vs a lower player, then lose to a higher player, then lose to a lower player, then lose to a higher player. Usually it's much more stable like +12 -12 +12 -13
|
Im sure I just havent looked hard enough, apologies. But I was wondering if anyone knew if ladder resets tonight (sunday/monday) or if it resets in a few days?
|
On April 09 2012 13:33 Psilo wrote:
Im sure I just havent looked hard enough, apologies. But I was wondering if anyone knew if ladder resets tonight (sunday/monday) or if it resets in a few days?
Im guessing on Tuesday morning since that is when Bnet is down for maintenance
|
28088 Posts
I don't think top GM's will play anyone lower than they already do. To play someone really low you have to have a loss streak, and top GM players have like 75% winrates. Unless Idra loses 10 in a row he won't be playing any mid masters.
wait a sec. I just reread the op and realized that you will face lower opponents regardless of your winratio. Disregard my stupid post.
|
I think it's to reduce to win and loss streaks so you get matched up againts good and mid/low players and your MMR raises accordingly at the level you played.
You won't face GM's if your diamond but you will maybe face high masters.
Same goes with the rest of the leagues.
|
Great. The Blizzard solution to any deep problem in the game now seems to be throw some gimmicky stuff over it and call it a day. What do they pay the balance/ladder guys for anyways? Doesn't look like a real solution, thats for sure.
|
On April 09 2012 10:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:
This is the opposite of what the top of the ladder needs. They should make high MMR behave differently.
yeah but 98% are not on the top of the ladder.
when this change helps the 10win streak 10loss streak then i dont give a shit about the top tier
when not then i agree
why screw over the top tier with no significant improvements to the casuals
|
Its just for one season, if it turns out to suck then it will go away :/
|
Seems kinda dumb to me... if someone is available who is close to your skill level why wouldn't the ladder ideally put you vs that opponent? They are over-looking / over-thinking this whole ladder thing. There is no fix, people are scared to lose / scared to compete. There's no fix for that.
|
I don't think it is too fair to criticize something we haven't tried yet. I can see the pros and cons to this, and I admit I do have a bit more anxiety to ladder knowing I could be paired up with someone that could be quite better than me. I don't see the rationale, however, in Blizzard's reasoning. If you can't make any mistakes versus someone who is on your skill level, why even try playing someone who is better? You would have to bag on the fact that they make enough blunders that you take advantage of it to get ahead and win. The other con I see to this is that how are you practicing if you face people beneath your skill level and just decimate them? I know this won't always be the case, but it just seems to me those are the general concerns. I'm VERY excited for the new map pool for season 7, and just watching IPL4 has confirmed my hopes. I just hope this new system is not going to be a disappointment.
|
On April 09 2012 10:36 Deadlift wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 10:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:
This is the opposite of what the top of the ladder needs. They should make high MMR behave differently. Agreed. Top grandmaster league players should spill over and play bronze league players at the bottom of their divisions.
And to try and make it fair, whenever this happens the GM player should find themselves forced into monobattling solo.
|
I fell really bad about this, as a toss player its really easy to loss against a huge range of stupid chesses, and considering i am pretty high ranked, generally, the number of online opponenets that i can be sunfavored against is quite high thus the change will proly result in me getting matches vs a lot of lower mmr player, getting cheesed a lot and getting angry.
I have no problem with all iner generally since i can hold any all in most of the times, but when you get 5 points for winning and loss 20 points its much more annoying... even if only mindest wise, i can see myself not playing at all this season :/
|
i was top diamond when i faced a gm... i dont think this change is necessary.
|
It doesn't really matter but I rather they remove the slightly favored/favored thing out in my opinion. It serves nothing but getting people nervous. I'll imagine next season a lot of people will ladder less because they're afraid to be matched constantly with people lower than them.
|
On April 09 2012 16:01 K3Nyy wrote:
It doesn't really matter but I rather they remove the slightly favored/favored thing out in my opinion. It serves nothing but getting people nervous. I'll imagine next season a lot of people will ladder less because they're afraid to be matched constantly with people lower than them.
yes they should remove it or have option to disable it.
|
Why fix what isn`t broken...in my opinion at least. I thought the match making is the only good thing about bnet.
|
Why so upset? If you were meant to win, then you'd win against these players 2 leagues lower than you.
If you lose against someone 2 leagues above...then it's nothing to be ashamed of because you are not gonna lose hardly any points. I like the change.
|
I don't feel this is a good change for the following reasons.
Extremes on the ladder:
-High GM will have even higher win rates.
-Bronze players will get defeated one-sidedly more often.
Ladder goals:
-Players that want to gain X points will have to deal with straight up losing a % of their games during a ladder session.
=This could be [theoretically] avoided by giving even more disproportionate amounts of points for wins/losses (+24/-3)
-Streaks can be convincingly cut short
Entertainment:
-Players often are able to easily beat significantly lower skilled opponents. Having very easy games occasionally isn't appealing or entertaining in the long run.
-Losses can be so crushing that they become demoralizing
-Potentially lower quality games*.
-Potentially more high aggression strategies from the lower ranked player, due to the pre-match Favored status information.
*I personally find (I am rank ~1 to 4 masters) that when I play a rank 8-10 master player, the game is incredibly easy. If I want, and as I often do in ladder games, I could cut it very short. Games with very different skill levels will be counter productive, insofar as the games will be of lower quality. That first "pressure" push, might make you straight up win. ZvZs might not get out of the ling/bane phase. PvPs can end incredibly quickly. Differences in macro-ability can make extended games unfeasible. These skill level differentials don't just exist between separate leagues, but also subsets of diamond and masters divisions. If the skill gap of searchable players is widened from (guessing) 400 point difference with +/- 200 pts to 800 pt difference occasionally, the resulting games will have this problem. To me, it's not good.
|
I think this is a very, very good change.
You learn more from playing somebody better than you, than playing somebody who is the same skill as you. For example I am mid-diamond and recently played a couple of marine-tank vs marine-tank battles (it was late, so I got matched with the same guy 3 times :D). They was close, but only because each game we consistently made mistakes and threw away our marine forces.
If he had been significantly higher skill than me (i.e., a bigger skill gap than the current matchmaking system affords) I would have learned and improved much more than I did through those games, even if I got crushed.
This seems like a win-win. One player gets an almost-guaranteed win, the other gets a good learning experience.
|
On April 09 2012 16:28 ricecake wrote:
I think this is a very, very good change.
You learn more from playing somebody better than you, than playing somebody who is the same skill as you. For example I am mid-diamond and recently played a couple of marine-tank vs marine-tank battles (it was late, so I got matched with the same guy 3 times :D). They was close, but only because each game we consistently made mistakes and threw away our marine forces.
If he had been significantly higher skill than me (i.e., a bigger skill gap than the current matchmaking system affords) I would have learned and improved much more than I did through those games, even if I got crushed.
This seems like a win-win. One player gets an almost-guaranteed win, the other gets a good learning experience.
I dislike this as a person who plays 4's and 3's mainly... the top players tend to cheese a ton so I'd rather have the amount of cheese i face in high diamond/low masters
|
this is blizzard's way of saying that there are less players and they are trying to keep the waiting time down
|
On April 09 2012 16:46 akalarry wrote:
this is blizzard's way of saying that there are less players and they are trying to keep the waiting time down
I never once waited more than 1 min to find a match. The matchmaking system is totally functional at this moment.
Blizzard wants to try something, let's go for it but it is unnecessary to assume this kind of statement.
I am glad this change comes. I was stuck at the top of my league for so long before getting promoted, even if I "stomped" players from superior leagues. In this sens the system was broken. A more dynamic ladder doesn't mean a dead ladder.
|
Sweden47 Posts
I'm actually excited about this change. Too often I stop playing ladder after 3-4 games just because it's so exhausting to that evenly matched. With this change the games will most likely end quicker so you can move on to the next ones without having to check the replay to find where you messed up.
|
On April 07 2012 02:18 Zombo Joe wrote:
Pretty sure they are doing this because there are always less and less players on the ladder and they need to match people up quicker.
Do you have numbers that support this claim? just curious
|
This is a good concept imo. You won't get any better by consistently playing the same level opponents over again, but rather from difficult ones. Also, if you lose to lower league players then its a good reminder to go back to basics of strategy and mechanisms.
|
I personally like the change, but I wish there was more of an option. Frankly I'd love to play much higher level players than myself over and over again. I don't want to play lower level players ever. If I lost my next 80 games but they were all to masters level players (I'm diamond, likely the low-end), I'd be learning and getting better and happy.
Contrastingly, if I were a pro, I'd never want to spend my ladder time facing players that weren't to my level. Honestly, if I were in GM and I wasn't facing strictly GM players I'd be annoyed.
I think GM should be the exception, and they should never face someone much lower than themselves in play. Hell I think they need to make GM 300-500 players, and have them only face off against each other, but that's just me.
|
On April 09 2012 16:15 Eifersuchtig wrote:
I don't feel this is a good change for the following reasons.
Extremes on the ladder:
-High GM will have even higher win rates.
-Bronze players will get defeated one-sidedly more often.
Ladder goals:
-Players that want to gain X points will have to deal with straight up losing a % of their games during a ladder session.
=This could be [theoretically] avoided by giving even more disproportionate amounts of points for wins/losses (+24/-3)
-Streaks can be convincingly cut short
Entertainment:
-Players often are able to easily beat significantly lower skilled opponents. Having very easy games occasionally isn't appealing or entertaining in the long run.
-Losses can be so crushing that they become demoralizing
-Potentially lower quality games*.
-Potentially more high aggression strategies from the lower ranked player, due to the pre-match Favored status information.
*I personally find (I am rank ~1 to 4 masters) that when I play a rank 8-10 master player, the game is incredibly easy. If I want, and as I often do in ladder games, I could cut it very short. Games with very different skill levels will be counter productive, insofar as the games will be of lower quality. That first "pressure" push, might make you straight up win. ZvZs might not get out of the ling/bane phase. PvPs can end incredibly quickly. Differences in macro-ability can make extended games unfeasible. These skill level differentials don't just exist between separate leagues, but also subsets of diamond and masters divisions. If the skill gap of searchable players is widened from (guessing) 400 point difference with +/- 200 pts to 800 pt difference occasionally, the resulting games will have this problem. To me, it's not good.
This changes nothing for Top GMs because of the MMR cap top players already face opponents they are favored against frequently. If they are at the bottom of the bottom of Bronze then everyone is already favored anyways so again, it changes nothing. You should think more carefully next time.
On April 09 2012 18:39 lunden0608 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2012 02:18 Zombo Joe wrote:
Pretty sure they are doing this because there are always less and less players on the ladder and they need to match people up quicker. Do you have numbers that support this claim? just curious
It's a generally known thing and it's also why Blizzard does shorter seasons. If you want your numbers go to sc2ranks.com and do the research yourself.
|
Really good for lower league players, really shitty for GMs, many of whom already have 60% winrates because they match up against bad players too much.
|
On April 10 2012 02:17 Pokebunny wrote:
Really good for lower league players, really shitty for GMs, many of whom already have 60% winrates because they match up against bad players too much.
Read my post above, it doesn't change anything for the extreme top and extreme bottom players. Everyone in between is affected equally.
|
On April 10 2012 02:19 SovSov wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 02:17 Pokebunny wrote:
Really good for lower league players, really shitty for GMs, many of whom already have 60% winrates because they match up against bad players too much. Read my post above, it doesn't change anything for the extreme top and extreme bottom players. Everyone in between is affected equally.
No, it does. GMs are already playing people below them, now they'll play people even farther below them. They'll still get the same amount of points, but it just makes for more shitty practice and higher winrates.
The MMR cap will still be in place. It just means we'll play vs a higher range of MMR opponents, which means people even lower below us than we were already playing. We'll be favored and more heavily favored even more frequently than we already were. Our range of opponents can't be extended more upwards (because there's nothing above top GM) so it will only be extended downwards (playing more mid/high master players.
|
On April 10 2012 02:26 Pokebunny wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2012 02:19 SovSov wrote:On April 10 2012 02:17 Pokebunny wrote:
Really good for lower league players, really shitty for GMs, many of whom already have 60% winrates because they match up against bad players too much. Read my post above, it doesn't change anything for the extreme top and extreme bottom players. Everyone in between is affected equally. No, it does. GMs are already playing people below them, now they'll play people even farther below them. They'll still get the same amount of points, but it just makes for more shitty practice and higher winrates. The MMR cap will still be in place. It just means we'll play vs a higher range of MMR opponents, which means people even lower below us than we were already playing. We'll be favored and more heavily favored even more frequently than we already were. Our range of opponents can't be extended more upwards (because there's nothing above top GM) so it will only be extended downwards (playing more mid/high master players.
This is correct. If they had not implemented the MMR cap, then you would be correct in saying that it changes nothing for GM players. However, since they put this arbitrary cap on MMR, grandmasters are playing against people far below their skill level anyway, and this is only going to increase that range.
I personally don't care about it since I'll get to play against progamers maybe once in a while.
|
I think it's a good idea, but they should cut out the top and bottom 5% of players. That way Grand Masters will consistently play Grand Masters and Bronze will be more evenly matched with their opponents so to not discourage them from playing.
|
I think it already happens in gm/high master because of the mmr cap so people of different skills still face each other because they are mmr capped. Also happens when the system can't find anyone of your skill level at that current time. I guess it's a very small change.
|
I'm just looking forward to this. =D
I think, that for players like me, who have 200+ wins/season, we have cemented our MMR. A more flexible system should help reflect recent jumps in skill. <3
EDIT: 400th post, woohoo~
|
Blizzard said it's an experiment for one season, can't blame them for trying something new. Maybe it's horrible for GM, maybe it's bad for bronzes, maybe it's bad for everyone... but maybe, just maybe, it turns out to be good for everyone instead.
Personally, i applaud blizzard for not being afraid to experiment, i just hope they aren't afraid to admit it if experiments didn't work out.
|
On April 10 2012 02:49 Morfildur wrote:
Blizzard said it's an experiment for one season, can't blame them for trying something new. Maybe it's horrible for GM, maybe it's bad for bronzes, maybe it's bad for everyone... but maybe, just maybe, it turns out to be good for everyone instead.
Personally, i applaud blizzard for not being afraid to experiment, i just hope they aren't afraid to admit it if experiments didn't work out.
Stand back. Blizzard's about to try SCIENCE.
|
The reason this has to be done is because laddering and casual playing in SC 2 were not separated in the first place.
People play RTS games for a variety of reasons - not all of it is to compete and be the best. In WC and BW, the concept of smurfing - highly skilled players pretending to be noobs in order to play quirky strategies against noobs - was extremely popular, and gave people a reason to improve their skill besides going pro. I don't know what effect it had on the pro-scene, but it did help the enjoyment level of casual gaming in WC and BW.
In SC 2, the custom game scene is very limited, and with the default mode of playing being competitive ladder, results in every game being a challenge except during season starts. While that is fine for competitive play, it is restrictive and monotonous for casual gamers, who then resort to custom games, and then quit SC 2 altogether when they grow bored of that.
Match making systems have to take into account casual players' desires to not be matched up with people of the same skill level every single game. Smurfing is a valid mode of playing, as is noobs challenging players way above them. Course, the ability of smurfs to ruin games was a problem in WC and BW, and as such a player has to have the option to refuse lopsided matches when they don't want it.
All in all, I think having a one-size-fits-all match making system is a problem in Blizzard RTS games going from WC 3 forward, and has been detrimental to the appeal of RTS games for casual gamers. The niche casual RTS gaming had in the games industry is being taken, today, by MOBAs - and the rise of pro-MOBA as the next big eSports scene is tied to that, for the casual and pro gaming scenes are intertwined.
|
On April 10 2012 02:34 p1cKLes wrote:
I think it's a good idea, but they should cut out the top and bottom 5% of players. That way Grand Masters will consistently play Grand Masters and Bronze will be more evenly matched with their opponents so to not discourage them from playing.
If you cut out the top and bottom 5% wouldn't there be a new top and bottom that gets affected in the same way?
|
Honestly it only depends on what slightly means, if I'm playing against plats i'll probably go crazy, but I doubt that's going to happen. Being mid masters, I'll probably play against some top masters, and some high diamonds, much like I already do. I don't understand what the big deal with the change is....
|
On April 10 2012 03:40 TheAngelofDeath wrote:
Honestly it only depends on what slightly means, if I'm playing against plats i'll probably go crazy, but I doubt that's going to happen. Being mid masters, I'll probably play against some top masters, and some high diamonds, much like I already do. I don't understand what the big deal with the change is....
I'm mid masters as well and I'd like to play high masters more often than I do now to expose weaknesses in my play.
I also welcome the chance to just completely crush someone every now and then to feel better about myself, a morale boost if you will.
|
This seems like:
"ladder is getting less busy so we increase the range of opponents to decrease waiting time"
instead it now gets a positive spin..
|
Looks like I may finally be able to get cannon rushed by combat ex!
|
not good for those who want to improve genuinely, maybe good to those who want to be promoted
|
Did this already go into effect? I played a GM protoss followed by a terran who 2 raxed against my 3 gate expo and didn't take his cc until the 10 minute mark and had like 40 apm. (like how the fuck did you get in masters bro)
|
All the doomsayers please leave. I have both a KR account at plat and a masters account on NA, both of which I get queues near instantly. Ladder isn't dying as you pessimists believe, this is a way to prevent the following.
You - favored opponent: lose
You - favored: lose
You - slightly favored: lose
You - even: lose
You - even: lose
You Favored - opponent: win
You - even: lose
They're trying to make it so it will be more so a win lose win lose win lose 50/50 W:L if you are struggling, not to broaden matchmaking. Use your heads, not hard.
|
On April 07 2012 01:27 GreEny K wrote:
This sucks, I don't want to play someone who will destroy me without trying... I like to get better, but getting beat on by a pro doesn't help me...
It may not help your confidence but i think its a bit better playing against subpar opponents who don't have super crisp timings or understand the game as well. I guess this is just one example.
i guess it also depends on the league as well.
|
Having a wider range of opponents should be pretty cool, as long as our points lost and won properly reflect the caliber of player we're playing against.
I do think a lot of people are going to get anxious when they suddenly start playing a bunch of people at the lower levels (thinking they're about to get demoted) or at the higher levels (thinking they're about to get promoted), but as long as this knowledge is passed around, it should be just fine
|
I think it's awesome. Ladder was too competitive for me. Doesn't matter how much you improved your gameplay - each next match was as difficult to win as the one before. Now you are gonna have some relax time winning again weaker opponents, which is gonna help you appreciate how good you are now, and you are gonna loose to some better opponents, helping you to improve. Also, you still should have a lot of close matches, to have brilliant competitive experience, just as before. It's more like real life fore me... If I go to play basketball I meet different people: some are better, some are worse than me. It helps to understand how good you really are and what you really need to improve. And allows to have more fun.
|
I'm not sure exactly how it will effect pros, while they will likely have more games against worse players, they might also be less likely to be stream sniped.
So take the positive with the negative, if it's worth it.
|
I'm not liking this change so far. I have played about a dozen games this season, and in perhaps eight of the twelve games I was placed against low-mid silver league players (I am high gold myself). I crushed them, and while at first I felt pretty good about my decisive win, when the score screen loaded and I saw that they were mere silvers, I felt very unsatisfied. I want to earn my wins and to actually know that I've played well.
|
Masters 4's RT is infested with plats and golds now, don't like the new system at all. Masters players who team up for RT (i.e. 3 people team up for 4's RT) will dominate even harder now...
|
Enjoyed it while playing 2v2 last night, withholding judgement until i've played some more 1v1, can't speak to the very top of the ladder though I feel that will have to be tweaked and tightened at the high end.
|
I don't like it, now I have to play diamond players in my smurf which is plat.
|
On April 11 2012 13:00 rhs408 wrote:
Masters 4's RT is infested with plats and golds now, don't like the new system at all. Masters players who team up for RT (i.e. 3 people team up for 4's RT) will dominate even harder now...
dont get me freaking started on this. played 8 or so games in random 2v2, half the game i got gold partner vs double diamond team. the whole game is 1v2. if people think theres a huge difference between pros/GM and high masters (which there is), the difference between gold and top masters is even more mind numbing
|
I think blizzard needs to give the player the choice. Like in some fighting games I've played, their matchmaking gives you the option to play people at your skill, widen the search range, or vs anyone for the fastest possible opponent. Something like this would appeal to different kinds of crowds.
|
its terrible. Ive just been crushing noobs all day. I dont mind one or two here or there but its giving me the illusion that the builds im testing are good when its really just a case of everyone else sucking.
|
I'm playing against a lot of gold players today. My placement match was against a high-diamond, low masters player who auto-quit his game, and my next match was against a plat player who auto-quit his game, but the rest of my matches were against mid-high golds who tried to play legit games (of varying quality). I'm platinum, and yesterday I lost a ton of games against low-high platinum players. However, I won the vast majority of my games against gold players today, which was a nice bonus but I'm still disappointed that everyone I played against are not a challenge. FYI, a 3 base Terran is better than a 2 base Zerg with no Hive tech fuck I'm drunk.
|
I don't like it here either. I've been facing high masters like 5 games in a row omg I had no chance against them. Checked their rank and they're like 15-4 and similar, some guy I checked was in the same top 8 as liquid'ret O__o
|
i just had a zvz, me platinum he gold and it was... well, very onesided. i think nobody involved had fun and having fun is one the main reason to play this game.
|
On April 11 2012 16:58 naex wrote:
i just had a zvz, me platinum he gold and it was... well, very onesided. i think nobody involved had fun and having fun is one the main reason to play this game.
Keep in mind that you only get matched against those players if your MMR is that low.
|
On April 11 2012 17:08 clayn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 16:58 naex wrote:
i just had a zvz, me platinum he gold and it was... well, very onesided. i think nobody involved had fun and having fun is one the main reason to play this game. Keep in mind that you only get matched against those players if your MMR is that low.
Keep in mind that the match making process changed for this Season.
|
Now's my chance to play IdrA
And lose in front of 12,000 viewers!
(Wait, the guy down the street just did)
|
On April 11 2012 17:08 clayn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 16:58 naex wrote:
i just had a zvz, me platinum he gold and it was... well, very onesided. i think nobody involved had fun and having fun is one the main reason to play this game. Keep in mind that you only get matched against those players if your MMR is that low.
Im pretty sure this has to do with the changes in the match making system, otherwise it wouldnt have been 60k points for me and 35k for him in a normal macro game.
I also won 7 of my last 10 games vs other people in platinum, which shouldn't match me with a player one league under me.
|
So far, I'm feeling pretty positive about this. I never really got a chance to see how far I've progressed. My first match was against a platinum protoss and we had a few engagements in the middle of the map. As soon as I started putting up my third, he just started crumbling and the final engagement was 190 supply to his 110 supply.
Next match was against a high diamond protoss. We both did some early game shenanigans with units out on the map for nearly half the game. We both get on 3 base and max out at the same time. It was so crazy watching the replay. I lost the last engagement because I positioned badly and couldn't get effective emps so I lose.
Last match I played was against a diamond Terran but I guess he was matching up with all the low leagues. Dude fast expands and techs to BCs. I get a quick third a little after I see his FE and mass marine/viking. Either he didn't care or he hates TvT, I don't know.
|
Hey, I think I might like this.
As a platinum player, I often find myself in games where I just just win or get beaten. And sometimes it gets frustrating to have such close games. I would love to sometimes know that I dominated my opponent or got uterly smashed by another, because it keeps things interesting.
My opinion is that I often don't enjoy laddering anymore because of long, close games. And since I won't be roflstomping people all the time, I don't think it will get boring either.
So I'm looking forward to this little experiment :D
|
I dont know what they made of changes, but i already hate it. just got into gold after being silver last season. i have played 15 matches today, all of them i was matched with diamond and platinum, wtf? I used to be silver, i suck at both macro and micro, having an impressing 85% loss rate, and still not meeting anyone at my level. why change something that is working ...
|
I dont like this really, been playing Master players whole day and just getting stomped by every single one of them.
|
i just won against silverguy and in the statistics i was 80k points above him. i got placed in bronze.
now i am playing against gold players who only build hellions and dont know shit about the game...just like the last 4 seasons....fuck my life i will never get out of this bronze league
|
On April 11 2012 16:35 Fearest wrote:
I don't like it here either. I've been facing high masters like 5 games in a row omg I had no chance against them. Checked their rank and they're like 15-4 and similar, some guy I checked was in the same top 8 as liquid'ret O__o
You don't know how the mmr thing works eh? You should search TL and read up on it.
|
On April 13 2012 00:50 Ventor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 16:35 Fearest wrote:
I don't like it here either. I've been facing high masters like 5 games in a row omg I had no chance against them. Checked their rank and they're like 15-4 and similar, some guy I checked was in the same top 8 as liquid'ret O__o You don't know how the mmr thing works eh? You should search TL and read up on it.
Why are there so many people responding who clearly didn't read the OP?
|
Yeah, the random team games seem to be really messed up. 3/4 of the games that I play, my teammates are diamond, or platinum, even gold, matched up against 3 master, 1 diamond or similar teams. It's really kind of pointless when you know your teammates are outclassed - it's not even their fault. They should be playing games with players of their own skill level. Instead, they just get mad at losing horribly.
|
I'm not feeling the change at all for the moment. Still playing a fair mix from low diamond to mid master like previous seasons.
|
Hm.. I didn't feel the change yet. I've played a few nubs but that's normal, the vast majority of my games were still around my MMR.
|
The thing that I really don't like about this is that one of my accounts mmr is apparently perfect to extend up to high+ masters and down to middiamond, but there's is an incredibly larger amount of people in mid/high diamond than there are in masters, so the majority of my matches are against diamonds. So my first day I went 10-2 on ladder, and in previous seasons would've expected at least 200 points from a record of 10-2, instead I was barely cracking 100. Even constantly holding 60-80% winrate I still see myself favored far far more often than I see them favored, resulting in few points for a win and lots of points lost, so even though I can look at my record and say 'yeah that's good' my points are holding steady or dropping because it sometimes takes 3 wins to make up the points of every loss I take. So even though I might be crushing every diamond I come up against and going 50% winrate against masters, if I get cheesed by a diamond and lose 20 points, and only rarely have the opportunity to make more than 6 points per win.. it's frustrating even when I'm doing well.
Granted this is also the account I didn't ever really ladder on so it's mmr wasn't so high to give me that natural point inflation that most people get (especially in masters) to start a season, and this problem isn't so noticeable on my other account, but once the mmr point inflation stops I think this will probably be a problem lots of people see.
|
On April 13 2012 01:16 Cornix wrote:
The thing that I really don't like about this is that one of my accounts mmr is apparently perfect to extend up to high+ masters and down to middiamond, but there's is an incredibly larger amount of people in mid/high diamond than there are in masters, so the majority of my matches are against diamonds. So my first day I went 10-2 on ladder, and in previous seasons would've expected at least 200 points from a record of 10-2, instead I was barely cracking 100. Even constantly holding 60-80% winrate I still see myself favored far far more often than I see them favored, resulting in few points for a win and lots of points lost, so even though I can look at my record and say 'yeah that's good' my points are holding steady or dropping because it sometimes takes 3 wins to make up the points of every loss I take. So even though I might be crushing every diamond I come up against and going 50% winrate against masters, if I get cheesed by a diamond and lose 20 points, and only rarely have the opportunity to make more than 6 points per win.. it's frustrating even when I'm doing well.
Granted this is also the account I didn't ever really ladder on so it's mmr wasn't so high to give me that natural point inflation that most people get (especially in masters) to start a season, and this problem isn't so noticeable on my other account, but once the mmr point inflation stops I think this will probably be a problem lots of people see.
Well the MMR/ladder system is supposed to work that way, that you don't get easy points for just beating diamonds. I don't think the matchmaking is an issue for points/MMR at all.
I do understand however that a lot of people are not pleased playing players with so different skill levels. Even with the old matchmaking there were enough games where I crushed somebody or was crushed. You have to consider that not only are you matched a bit higher/lower than your MMR, but also MMR is only an estimation of a players skill; and then there are additional factors like strength in particular matchups etc. That created enough diversity IMO.
I feel Blizzard should at least let people choose if you want to search player in a wide range of MMR or not. (this could mean, that no GM will do this, than no high master, ....)
But with the current system, I fear that for professional players ladder will become a total waste of time for practising.
|
On April 13 2012 01:16 Cornix wrote:So even though I might be crushing every diamond I come up against and going 50% winrate against masters, if I get cheesed by a diamond and lose 20 points, and only rarely have the opportunity to make more than 6 points per win.. it's frustrating even when I'm doing well.
I feared this would happen, because a similar situation existed in WoW arena (which uses the MMR system found in SC2, maybe slightly different) where a team could become quite highly rated, but not high enough to where they only faced the tip-top opponents (or even just because not enough people were queuing) and would be forced to fight lower rated teams for 4-6 points a win, and 20+ points a loss. It was common for my 5v5 team to play a couple hours worth of games, win all but one, and have a net gain of no points.
Granted, there's much more "randomness" in WoW arena than SC2 that would enable a lower ranked team to win, however, if you are testing out builds, or just playing a bit worse than usual, you can really drop a ton of points/MMR to lower ranked players.
|
On April 13 2012 01:16 Cornix wrote:
The thing that I really don't like about this is that one of my accounts mmr is apparently perfect to extend up to high+ masters and down to middiamond, but there's is an incredibly larger amount of people in mid/high diamond than there are in masters, so the majority of my matches are against diamonds. So my first day I went 10-2 on ladder, and in previous seasons would've expected at least 200 points from a record of 10-2, instead I was barely cracking 100. Even constantly holding 60-80% winrate I still see myself favored far far more often than I see them favored, resulting in few points for a win and lots of points lost, so even though I can look at my record and say 'yeah that's good' my points are holding steady or dropping because it sometimes takes 3 wins to make up the points of every loss I take. So even though I might be crushing every diamond I come up against and going 50% winrate against masters, if I get cheesed by a diamond and lose 20 points, and only rarely have the opportunity to make more than 6 points per win.. it's frustrating even when I'm doing well.
Granted this is also the account I didn't ever really ladder on so it's mmr wasn't so high to give me that natural point inflation that most people get (especially in masters) to start a season, and this problem isn't so noticeable on my other account, but once the mmr point inflation stops I think this will probably be a problem lots of people see.
same thing for me on two accounts, extremely frustrating to play against 80% diamonds, and loosind 17-20 points for one loss
|
I'm actually experiencing the same thing that Cornix posted.
Mid masters on NA but I'm playing 75% of my games versus diamonds, sometimes even low low diamonds who frankly aren't even a challenge to win against. I think I'm 15-4 right now on ladder, and it's rarely matching me up against mid/high master players, which is who I'm going to play against to get better.
|
I'm really disliking this change so far, though it has allowed me to play higher level players, though so far none of them have played any better than What I normally play against. I'm in diamond and one game I played a low platinum Zerg and the next I played a mid-Master Zerg. The Master league Zerg was Way greedier than most that I've played so far and outright died to my 7 minute +1 4 zealot pressure because he went for 4 hatcheries and rushed lair at the same time while BMing me the entire time. I didn't learn anything from the game against the platinum Zerg because he only built 43 drones and then started massing roaches so I ended up with a 10 worker lead and just killed him with a 7 gate blink attack while taking my third.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On April 13 2012 01:42 HyperionDreamer wrote:
I'm actually experiencing the same thing that Cornix posted.
Mid masters on NA but I'm playing 75% of my games versus diamonds, sometimes even low low diamonds who frankly aren't even a challenge to win against. I think I'm 15-4 right now on ladder, and it's rarely matching me up against mid/high master players, which is who I'm going to play against to get better.
I;ve been playing top masters and im in diamond. One guy has 400 points in master league rank 2 and another on a 11 win 1 loss streak. Why the hell are other people getting all the easy ones?
Im rank 6 in my div with a 25% win ratio because of the way the points work now but I don't care about ranking. I am not enjoying myself at all.
|
Maybe my massive lose streak in the previous season has affected it. I'm currently meeting diamonds in 80% of the games, crushing them with ease even while screwing and experimenting around with loose build orders. Already reached top10 masters, even though my mmr is nowhere near high masters.
Pretty relaxing though, fun to play as an aggressive zerg. Make units at some random timing and be super aggressive. Even though eco is sacrificed, still will be fine since most of them float over 1k anyway. This game will be so much more fun if the game is decided more by tactical prowess instead of build orders (yep shitty zvp matchups.. i'm looking at you).
|
The new system just irritates me, in my case 1 minute i find myself against a high diamond player and the next against a low gold,, i;m mid/high plat myself. Its just really irritating because i can;t prepare myself for the builds that are coming gold league is weird things al over the place and diamond most of the time just straight macro games..with good timings..
The old system was much better
|
I have played around 10 games now, can honestly say I haven't noticed any changes in calibur of opponents, still at 50% W/L.
Same old around my level people, one above, one below, one above, one below.
|
See, I wouldn't mind this new system if the range it matched you against was really small, say like from the top to a bottom of a league. As mid masters I'd play some top masters and some low masters, maybe 1-2 diamonds in like 20 games (assuming they don't have super high MMR to match the low masters). But now the range just seems HUUUGE, especially on the bottom end.
I was originally a supporter of it cause I thought I'd get to play against some progamers once in a while, but right now I'm not even getting good practice from laddering.
|
i like this new match making system a lot thanks bli²
|
I've been enjoying it somewhat, I get more games against Master league players than I was before, which is nice for learning, and with the games against the odd plat I might play the ladder points end up evening out.
|
I can see why higher leagues are upset but as a gold player there is nothing quite like beating down on a diamond player and getting that feeling of wow if I can play my best consistently then I can be pretty good. Before I had no idea whether or not I was improving but now I see the upside to my play and I'm encouraged to keep practicing
|
On April 13 2012 01:36 00Visor wrote:
Well the MMR/ladder system is supposed to work that way, that you don't get easy points for just beating diamonds. I don't think the matchmaking is an issue for points/MMR at all.
I do understand however that a lot of people are not pleased playing players with so different skill levels. Even with the old matchmaking there were enough games where I crushed somebody or was crushed. You have to consider that not only are you matched a bit higher/lower than your MMR, but also MMR is only an estimation of a players skill; and then there are additional factors like strength in particular matchups etc. That created enough diversity IMO.
I feel Blizzard should at least let people choose if you want to search player in a wide range of MMR or not. (this could mean, that no GM will do this, than no high master, ....)
But with the current system, I fear that for professional players ladder will become a total waste of time for practising.
To your first point, that's not what I meant.
Put it this way, if the MMR range I can play stretches up to the top masters, and down to middiamond, I'm going to get more favored matches against diamonds more often than even or unfavored against masters, even though the matchmaking system is 'working correctly'.
Why?
Because ALL of masters encompasses (supposedly) 2% of players, where as the top half of diamond players would compose of 9% of all players. Given blizzards original plan for the leagues (I don't know how much percentages have changed/how many inactives there are clouding those numbers) there are currently 4 and a half times as many diamonds in the range for me to play against than there are masters, meaning that statistically every time I click the play game button I am 4 times more likely to find a diamond opponent in my range than a masters opponent. So instead of getting an 'even' wash between facing people above and below myself, I get extremely skewed towards people below myself.
|
@Blizzard, Logical fallacy:
Just because two players are evenly matched doesn't mean both are playing the best they can. For example,
Bob plays the best he can whenever he ladders. He has little RTS experience, so he's Gold league.
Jimmy plays Plat level when he tries hard enough, but when he's sloppy he's Gold league.
I believe that this will be a bad change because the most fun games arise from most evenly matched games (SO TRUE in dota and SO HARD to achieve with match making in that style of game... but that's another discussion for another forum). If a player wants to ladder without trying as hard, then he just needs to decide to do so.
|
I honestly have no clue what Blizzard is thinking. Why would you take one of the best Auto MM systems out there and then intentionally break it? 1v1s I'm getting Diamonds that I completely stomp. That's not fun for me or them. In casual 4s it matches me with/against not only Diamond, but Bronze and Silver. Again that's not fun for me (even though I play team to just take a break) or them.
|
Oh my oh my the ladder just broke.. 100% all inn cheesy games all day.. This is getting old very fast.. and all these new 2player maps is cheesy-proxy-cannon-rush heaven.. ffs.. disheartening.. *cry*
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GydtM.jpg)
|
On April 13 2012 01:55 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 01:42 HyperionDreamer wrote:
I'm actually experiencing the same thing that Cornix posted.
Mid masters on NA but I'm playing 75% of my games versus diamonds, sometimes even low low diamonds who frankly aren't even a challenge to win against. I think I'm 15-4 right now on ladder, and it's rarely matching me up against mid/high master players, which is who I'm going to play against to get better. I;ve been playing top masters and im in diamond. One guy has 400 points in master league rank 2 and another on a 11 win 1 loss streak. Why the hell are other people getting all the easy ones? Im rank 6 in my div with a 25% win ratio because of the way the points work now but I don't care about ranking. I am not enjoying myself at all.
im mid masta terran and hav been playin 70% diamonds too rofl , im 9-1 now, only lost placement T.T
|
On April 13 2012 03:14 Twerrax wrote:
Oh my oh my the ladder just broke.. 100% all inn cheesy games all day.. This is getting old very fast.. and all these new 2player maps is cheesy-proxy-cannon-rush heaven.. ffs.. disheartening.. *cry*
You losing a lot != ladder is broken. Everybody has losing streaks from time to time. They suck
|
For me 50% diamond 50% master
Have played from low diamond to #1 master xDD
|
On April 13 2012 03:23 JDub wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 03:14 Twerrax wrote:
Oh my oh my the ladder just broke.. 100% all inn cheesy games all day.. This is getting old very fast.. and all these new 2player maps is cheesy-proxy-cannon-rush heaven.. ffs.. disheartening.. *cry* You losing a lot != ladder is broken. Everybody has losing streaks from time to time. They suck
I dont care that I loose, I care in what manner the games go. 100% all in games is what suck.
|
I wish Bliz what just hurry up and add a second ladder
|
This is kinda gay I'm mid masters 7-1 only 2 masters players I lost to one of them the other was top 8 and I beat him the rest are low diamonds..............
|
seems the win rates for the high GM players are even higher now. They are not losing on their streams as much :D
|
On April 13 2012 03:28 CajunMan wrote:
This is kinda gay I'm mid masters 7-1 only 2 masters players I lost to one of them the other was top 8 and I beat him the rest are low diamonds..............
you are 7-1 and lost to 2 masters players? and being top 8 in beginning of season means even less than normally... also pretty sure if you play more games your winning record will be close to 50% again.
|
even if this is a flop, who cares? I really enjoy the concept behind it, and the fact they said it's a "trial" or paraphrased as so. Blizzard is really turning my head back into SC2 after the opening year of shit (ui/maps/balance) and now is grabbing my attention again: D
|
I knew something was fishy when I was getting matched with Protoss played that would proxy two gate my natural right underneath an overlord, I was worried my MMR had dropped to terribad levels during the lock lol!
|
I was pretty optimistic about this but at this point I have to say I'm not a fan. It's one thing to adjust the settings so if you're searching for two minutes it opens up you to some different MMR ranges, but it seems like it's just doing it right off the bat, or at least fairly quickly, which I'm not a fan of at all.
Of course, the other part of me wonders how much we'd notice if Blizzard never told us, and how much if it is placebo affect, haha. But even then I feel like a lot of the complaints are legitimate at this point.
|
Fucking hilarous playing against people a league lower who cheese or go all-in...
|
On April 13 2012 03:25 Twerrax wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 03:23 JDub wrote:On April 13 2012 03:14 Twerrax wrote:
Oh my oh my the ladder just broke.. 100% all inn cheesy games all day.. This is getting old very fast.. and all these new 2player maps is cheesy-proxy-cannon-rush heaven.. ffs.. disheartening.. *cry* You losing a lot != ladder is broken. Everybody has losing streaks from time to time. They suck I dont care that I loose, I care in what manner the games go. 100% all in games is what suck.
mayb scout better? haha its not blizzard fault that u looses too chesses all time , its your fault
|
Is anyone else noticing that at the moment peoples ladder rank has very little to do with their skill . Im a gold T and started out on a nice win streak today all against gold opponents who were rather worse than me then I went on a loosing streak to a bunch of silver players who were way better than me and now Im playing plat players and they are all awful and I =m back on a winning streak. The ladder just seems all over the place to me.
|
this is great for everyone except grandmasters.
|
|
|
i hate this so far, been playing some 2v2 lately and my ally was a low silver (as was I) on 3 occasions and i got match against gold-plat, plat-diamond and gold-gold in the 3 matchups ... needless to say we lost badly in all three, not only are their skill sets higher, i always get matched with morons who never chronoboost or expo or upgrade
|
This is great, finally some variaty in the skill levels of my opponents.
Getting absolutely smashed once in awhile keeps you aware of mistakes you make :D
|
On April 13 2012 03:35 Kaitokid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 03:28 CajunMan wrote:
This is kinda gay I'm mid masters 7-1 only 2 masters players I lost to one of them the other was top 8 and I beat him the rest are low diamonds.............. you are 7-1 and lost to 2 masters players? and being top 8 in beginning of season means even less than normally... also pretty sure if you play more games your winning record will be close to 50% again.
No I said I lost to one of the masters players and beat the higher ranked one.........
|
you are probably gm material then xd
|
On April 13 2012 04:06 MarcH wrote:
Is anyone else noticing that at the moment peoples ladder rank has very little to do with their skill . Im a gold T and started out on a nice win streak today all against gold opponents who were rather worse than me then I went on a loosing streak to a bunch of silver players who were way better than me and now Im playing plat players and they are all awful and I =m back on a winning streak. The ladder just seems all over the place to me.
You'd be surprised by the tenacity of silver/bronze players.
|
I haven't noticed any change yet. Two times my opponent was favored, but one of them told me that it says "even" for him. And all games were close. So I don't think that there has been changed soo much as some of you assume.
|
Instead of mixing up all the skill levels, they should paire up cheesers together, so all ppl who have majority of their wins with <10 minute games should constantly play each other.
|
|
|
Say what you will about the crap that blizzard does, but they get some things right.
|
Disappointed this did not work out as concept was a good one
|
Sounds like the the effect on the bronzies and GM-caliber players were the reason for the reversion
|
On April 13 2012 04:37 ssg wrote:
Sounds like the the effect on the bronzies and GM-caliber players were the reason for the reversion
Yep. Unfortunate because I was enjoying the changes, but I can certainly see why it would be bad for the pros and the lowest skilled players.
|
This is so weird, ive been playing anywhere from low diamonds to top top masters..... i beat em all tho sup son sup
|
United States12235 Posts
Makes sense to me, and honestly those effects were predicted. I would say the effect on low Bronze is more complaint-worthy than GM, though. In GM, it's very common to play against people who you have no trouble beating, and playing against even worse players is not much different in that regard. In low Bronze, there is nobody worse than you so it's unfair to match against much better players where you're essentially just wasting your time. In both cases, you're only seeing half of the wider search range, but it's much more punishing for the lowest end and could result in declining Bronze activity.
What probably should happen is some sort of tiered approach where the minimum search range narrows the closer you are to the edge of the spectrum.
|
On April 13 2012 03:39 Deleuze wrote:
I knew something was fishy when I was getting matched with Protoss played that would proxy two gate my natural right underneath an overlord, I was worried my MMR had dropped to terribad levels during the lock lol!
You're the one that took my name!
Haha... D&G are two of the most profound authors of all time. I teach a class specifically on how they've effected postmodern critiques of capitalism.
|
On April 13 2012 04:43 Excalibur_Z wrote:Makes sense to me, and honestly those effects were predicted. I would say the effect on low Bronze is more complaint-worthy than GM, though. In GM, it's very common to play against people who you have no trouble beating, and playing against even worse players is not much different in that regard. In low Bronze, there is nobody worse than you so it's unfair to match against much better players where you're essentially just wasting your time. In both cases, you're only seeing half of the wider search range, but it's much more punishing for the lowest end and could result in declining Bronze activity. What probably should happen is some sort of tiered approach where the minimum search range narrows the closer you are to the edge of the spectrum.
i agree with this 100%
it makes sense to have higher league mobility when you're in the middle, ie in gold, because being in the true middle should be difficult. this would make it so that the league system is doing actual skill sorting, as opposed to the grinding that it is today.
|
On April 13 2012 04:51 XenocideFTW wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 03:39 Deleuze wrote:
I knew something was fishy when I was getting matched with Protoss played that would proxy two gate my natural right underneath an overlord, I was worried my MMR had dropped to terribad levels during the lock lol! You're the one that took my name! Haha... D&G are two of the most profound authors of all time. I teach a class specifically on how they've effected postmodern critiques of capitalism.
how do they?
|
I'm still playing against ppl with either me or them being slightly favored. I have yet to play an "even" match this season.....
|
Awesome, I'm so glad that blizzard is being responsive to 'feedback,' although I guess that it means I can't power level my smurf as fast as I wanted to :/
|
It was obviously a terrible change, so glad they rolled it back.
|
On April 13 2012 04:55 TheAngelofDeath wrote:
I'm still playing against ppl with either me or them being slightly favored. I have yet to play an "even" match this season.....
maybe inform yourself why. HINT its only at start of a season
|
On April 13 2012 04:43 Excalibur_Z wrote:
What probably should happen is some sort of tiered approach where the minimum search range narrows the closer you are to the edge of the spectrum.
You are making too much sense here. Unacceptable!
|
On April 13 2012 05:23 Escape wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 04:43 Excalibur_Z wrote:
What probably should happen is some sort of tiered approach where the minimum search range narrows the closer you are to the edge of the spectrum. You are making too much sense here. Unacceptable!
the wait times are already long enough at the end of the spectrum... i think one of the main reasons for this change was to reduce queue times for the players at the very top and bottom
|
lol though they seem to have taken it back i get a bigger variety of opponents now^^
|
i was mid gm and started with 20-5 into the season because 50% of my opponents were mid masters oO it rly was weird, glad they change it back
|
United States12235 Posts
On April 13 2012 06:25 KalWarkov wrote:
i was mid gm and started with 20-5 into the season because 50% of my opponents were mid masters oO it rly was weird, glad they change it back
But... pretty much everyone you face is going to be mid-Master anyway, because the season just started and GM hasn't opened yet. Point totals for divisions are going to take a lot longer than a single day to spread out.
|
Awww man. I'm going to miss playing against mid-golds from my position in mid-platinum. They were a fine bunch of players, though unrefined in macro and game sense. Platinum players are good too, but playing them feels like playing against myself, and I have no worst enemy than myself.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On April 13 2012 04:43 Excalibur_Z wrote:Makes sense to me, and honestly those effects were predicted. I would say the effect on low Bronze is more complaint-worthy than GM, though. In GM, it's very common to play against people who you have no trouble beating, and playing against even worse players is not much different in that regard. In low Bronze, there is nobody worse than you so it's unfair to match against much better players where you're essentially just wasting your time. In both cases, you're only seeing half of the wider search range, but it's much more punishing for the lowest end and could result in declining Bronze activity. What probably should happen is some sort of tiered approach where the minimum search range narrows the closer you are to the edge of the spectrum.
Right, but when you are the person being matched agaisnt far far superior players it stops being fun.
I don't mind playing against much better players at all, but the issue in my case was it was very uneven. I would not play anyone at a similar skill level, I played either people at the top of masters going on 10 - 12 win streaks vs worse players or play diamonds who were far worse than me. I am in diamond and played someone who was 1100 point master least season.
The system wanting to keep my win rate at close to 50/50 would place me against people much worse than me to make up for the losses vs high master players.
I think a better approach would be to search for an even MMR match and then scale up or down depending on search time or perhaps based on how many games have been played. I dont mind my 5th match to select a better or worse person, but to never select an even match is just wasting my time. I don't improve playing people far worse and I don't improve playing random people far better.
I practice with some people who are mid to high masters sometimes and I can practice defending a certain thing or preparing for an aspect of play like Terran drops.
|
I am technically high masters in 4v4 and 3v3, but I get people as low as mid gold on my team. But guess what, I still win those games most of the time
If you have a problem with the ladder system, go to a chat room and ask for someone at or above your rank if you want a challenge. Or, just dont lose on ladder and you will eventually play vs people you cant beat.
|
They reversed the change BTW. Its a shame since I really felt it did bring more variety.
But they said it affected Super low and Super high people so I guess its Ok.
E: Sorry I´m an idiot and forgot to include this
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/4427703901
E2: Just PMd the TC so that he can edit this in.
|
I don't know man.. My last 6 opponents have been 1350+ masters or mid GMs. Either im SOL or it's been reversed as the guy above me says.
|
On April 13 2012 08:12 EmilA wrote:
I don't know man.. My last 6 opponents have been 1350+ masters or mid GMs. Either im SOL or it's been reversed as the guy above me says.
you need to play vs people better than you to improve
|
I wish they would have kept it. :/
|
On April 13 2012 08:17 ishyishy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 08:12 EmilA wrote:
I don't know man.. My last 6 opponents have been 1350+ masters or mid GMs. Either im SOL or it's been reversed as the guy above me says. you need to play vs people better than you to improve
I'm 4-2 so no stress :p I't just that my mmr shouldnt be at that level tbh, but I've always felt that I hit broader during the pre-Gm promotions.
|
I am happy that they reverted the change. The MMR system was fine in my opinion. It was also a very bad change for GM players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
