|
On April 13 2012 15:50 EtherealDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 15:42 darkness wrote:
Awesome decision. I really hated the new match-making system for team games.
What about EU though? Lol good point, I had a funny game earlier where I played players who I swear couldn't have been higher than low diamond (they tried to 1 base for 20 minutes). Was pretty ridiculous rickrolling win where we took the entire map and sat on our ass waiting for them lol. We were high masters so.... was pretty unfair mathmaking to say the least.
I had 1 team where it was 2 diamond, 1 masters, 1 plat vs 4 legit silvers... it was quite sad. I honestly didnt enjoy my win and felt bad :/ lol
|
As gold I played diamonds a couple of times and got my ass handed to me. T_T
But then other times I'd play bronze and win easily. So you still average out as around 50%.. its just the games where you get steamrolled aren't fun :p
|
I liked it, it felt more like how a tournament is, good maps with random players of varying skill. Also mentally it helped me get over the ladder fear I've been having but it's ok because I feel like I'm over it now thanks to these past couple days.
|
They should have atleast gave it a week not 2 days -_-
|
On April 13 2012 16:24 Yndigo wrote:
So did I get this right? EU is still the same? Because I was really happy to get more mid and high master players, decreasing the time to promotion, as I won against a lot of them. (I am diamond.)
I have heard several times that a wider MMR range of your opponents would promote you faster. I don't think this is true. A matchmaking system normally increases or decreases your MMR in proportion to your chances of winnig against that opponent, and I don't think it can be implemented in any other way. It wouldn't work.
So, if you are playing against an even opponent your MMR would increase or decrease eg 5 points. If you play against someone you have 10% chance of winning against you would win 9 points or lose 1 point. Thus, if you play 10 games against this opponent you would win 1 time and lose 9 times on average, and your MMR would stay where it is, which it should.
If you are underrated, would your MMR incease faster with more diverse opponents? No. With even opponents you would gain +5, +5 etc. In the other case you would gain +1, +9 etc. Same speed.
|
On April 13 2012 15:19 warcralft wrote:
This is awesome. NO MORE PLAYING WITH RANK 1 GM(on sea) 8 times in a row~~~
this made me laugh. this is really what SEA is like sometimes though.
|
Now I can finally play a game without getting cheesed !
|
Well I liked it as diamond.
|
I hadn't even started playing yet. Was looking forward to it T.T
|
On April 13 2012 15:50 EtherealDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 15:42 darkness wrote:
Awesome decision. I really hated the new match-making system for team games.
What about EU though? Lol good point, I had a funny game earlier where I played players who I swear couldn't have been higher than low diamond (they tried to 1 base for 20 minutes). Was pretty ridiculous rickrolling win where we took the entire map and sat on our ass waiting for them lol. We were high masters so.... was pretty unfair mathmaking to say the least.
Well actually I had some funny moments too! In one game my partner misplaced his nexus by 3 matrix!!! In the other game I got a pearl from my tp:
2v2 game starts on a map where 1 natural is basicly inside our main, me zerg, saying
me: i fe
partner: fe against zerg? (we were against zp or zt team)
partner: lets hope the zerg has no braines and doesnt macro hatch lings
... needless to say I was a bit confused
|
On April 13 2012 16:42 Mendelfist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 16:24 Yndigo wrote:
So did I get this right? EU is still the same? Because I was really happy to get more mid and high master players, decreasing the time to promotion, as I won against a lot of them. (I am diamond.) I have heard several times that a wider MMR range of your opponents would promote you faster. I don't think this is true. A matchmaking system normally increases or decreases your MMR in proportion to your chances of winnig against that opponent, and I don't think it can be implemented in any other way. It wouldn't work. So, if you are playing against an even opponent your MMR would increase or decrease eg 5 points. If you play against someone you have 10% chance of winning against you would win 9 points or lose 1 point. Thus, if you play 10 games against this opponent you would win 1 time and lose 9 times on average, and your MMR would stay where it is, which it should. If you are underrated, would your MMR incease faster with more diverse opponents? No. With even opponents you would gain +5, +5 etc. In the other case you would gain +1, +9 etc. Same speed.
Ofc. If you win against a player with a higher MMR, you get more points (or more MMR points) and if you win against a player with a lower MMR you get less points (or less MMR points).
Same with losses, I dont think I have to explain that.
Example:
Depending on your MMR the system "thinks" your chance of winning against your opponent is like 10%, as you said.
If you win, you get more points than you would get in a even match.
Conclusion: you get more points in less time if you play opponents with a higher MMR (and win).
Saying that you win often, you get promoted faster if you play more people with higher MMR.
|
On April 13 2012 15:41 niteReloaded wrote:
This would be a perfectly good adition to the personal options....
"I don't mind playing weaker opponents" [ ]
"I don't mind playing stronger opponents" [X]
Sure, it would only work in cases where the weak and strong are looking for each other, but things like that make the service better.
They cant, honestly.
Not because technology isnt there, but because you need people to play on one system.
Most would check "I dont mind playing weaker opponents" but not many would want to play higher.
Why? Because MOST the population wants promotions, and wants to feel good about winning. That would happen more often if you have a higher % to play only lower.
For a system to work, everyone needs to adhere to the same standards.
|
On April 13 2012 17:25 Malpractice.248 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2012 15:41 niteReloaded wrote:
This would be a perfectly good adition to the personal options....
"I don't mind playing weaker opponents" [ ]
"I don't mind playing stronger opponents" [X]
Sure, it would only work in cases where the weak and strong are looking for each other, but things like that make the service better. They cant, honestly. Not because technology isnt there, but because you need people to play on one system. Most would check "I dont mind playing weaker opponents" but not many would want to play higher. Why? Because MOST the population wants promotions, and wants to feel good about winning. That would happen more often if you have a higher % to play only lower. For a system to work, everyone needs to adhere to the same standards.
My thoughts exactly. If they implement something like that you might as well throw the entire ladder system out of the window because ranks and leagues will have even less meaning then they already did.
|
i was facing mostly masters players (as a diamond player), and i enjoyed every game way more than i would have previously, knowing it meant more every time i faced a 'favored' opponent than it did previously
i'm a sad panda, but i understand why some people wouldnt want to face low ranked players 'all the time' as they so put it
|
On April 13 2012 17:21 Yndigo wrote:Saying that you win often, you get promoted faster if you play more people with higher MMR.
Yes, but you shouldn't get matched against people with high MMR more often than low MMR, unless you are in low bronze. It can happen by chance of course, but not on average.
|
^
This post makes no sense.
Even if you checked "I don't mind playing weaker opponents", the system WOULDN'T match you against weaker opponents who didn't check "Match me vs. stronger", so all is good.
|
On April 13 2012 17:25 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Why? Because MOST the population wants promotions, and wants to feel good about winning. That would happen more often if you have a higher % to play only lower.
No. Playing against lower league players will not get you promoted easier.
|
I can't see why this cannot be implemented in the leagues where it matters (silver - low master range?). Include all the people who have just started to understand whats happening to the ones that are becoming good. I also don't see why you can't prioritize certain matchups on ladder so I don't have to play ZvZ ten times in a row when I want to playing the game (I don't play too often). I guess it's Blizzard who doesn't want the ladder players to have any direct input in the matchmaking system at all. I can understand why it would be bad for the top 2-3 % but why not for the rest of us? According to most forums we in the 98% are terrible anyway so why not?
|
Playing GMs as a low masters is really nice... However, playing low masters as a GM probably sucks a lot.
|
hmm well im low masters and for me i felt like i got a lot of easy low dia opponents. got a few really good masters too where i almost lost all couse i still need to learn so much so i think its better if i get the same skill lvl again
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
