EPT[Part 3] Matchmaking Changes - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
JitnikoVi
Russian Federation396 Posts
| ||
|
neo_sporin
United States516 Posts
On April 26 2012 06:52 JitnikoVi wrote: i have been #1 plat for 2 days now, ive played over 20games in those two days and won 15/20 of them, ive currently beat 4 diamond players in a row... yet i am still not promoted, i thought this new change was supposed to make it easier? It CAN make it faster/easier if you are supposed to be. As an example using small numbers just kind of made up Before in previous seasons you could play someone +10/-10 points away from you in skill, so in theory if you beat someone you would only be able to move up whatever amount that would correspond to towards promotion Now though, you can in theory play someone +15/-15 points away from you. If you are still generally playing someone 7 points better than you, you're still moving the same speed as before. you are now just given the opportunity of having the possibility to play someone even better, if you beat them you would move your mmr faster towards that promotion line. It is not easier in the sense that the skill requirement is lower, nor that you gain more points per win, its just that your opportunity for faster movement is higher. Again--simplified (and maybe even more confusing for you now) explanation of what they meant when they said "easier" | ||
|
JitnikoVi
Russian Federation396 Posts
On April 26 2012 07:02 neo_sporin wrote: It CAN make it faster/easier if you are supposed to be. As an example using small numbers just kind of made up Before in previous seasons you could play someone +10/-10 points away from you in skill, so in theory if you beat someone you would only be able to move up whatever amount that would correspond to towards promotion Now though, you can in theory play someone +15/-15 points away from you. If you are still generally playing someone 7 points better than you, you're still moving the same speed as before. you are now just given the opportunity of having the possibility to play someone even better, if you beat them you would move your mmr faster towards that promotion line. It is not easier in the sense that the skill requirement is lower, nor that you gain more points per win, its just that your opportunity for faster movement is higher. Again--simplified (and maybe even more confusing for you now) explanation of what they meant when they said "easier" sorry my english not so good i need a more simplified version from you, for the record though 3 of the games ive lost ive lost only 3 points, adn several games i win +12 points, im already about 100points above anybody else in my plat division and 2 days ago i was last in plat(just did my placement matches) EDIT: how to rank up? is it count by points? or consecutive wins? i thought it was always the latter but your explanation (maybe i am confuse) makes me think it is by points? | ||
|
scotth85
United Kingdom6 Posts
On April 26 2012 06:47 Zheryn wrote: You can always learn more from playing a very good player. In any league under Master, people can't really execute any build properly, so you can win a lot of the games due to your oppoonents mistakes. For example, I (diamond player) don't really enjoy winning against someone who does some kind of timing attack for example if I know the same attack could potentially come 1 minute earlier if executed perfectly. I might barely defend it and then I would treat that as a loss since I should have lost if my opponent didn't play bad. Or if I kill of a drop that he should have gotten away with if he was watching it, I just get ahead without actually doing something clever. It would be much more worthwhile to play vs an opponent who did save that drop, then I would get to think "is there any way I can kill of that drop?", and I might come to the conclusion that I need a spore, a burrowed infestor or something. All people will of course make mistakes, but playing against someone who do less mistakes and who executes builds etc properly teaches you much more about how you need to play vs different stuff. The point I'm trying to get across is that say a gold terran will perform an all in a lot worse than say a high platinum terran trying to do the same thing, and I could still lose to the gold anyway. It's just with the gold player he is performing worse so I can see where to improve. When I get stomped by the high platinum terran it isnt that he is executing it perfectly, but he is doing it a lot better than the gold player, there is a very noticeable difference to how fast I lose to someone over a league higher than the other and I really don't pick as much up at all. I dont know if my build order was wrong, I should have expanded, I microed wrong or whatever because it's most likely a whole range of things that I did wrong. The difference is vs the gold I am a lot more likely to be able to pick out 1 major mistake, improve on it, win next time. And besides, I don't understand why you would stick up for the new system, I mean under the old system if youre learning and improving from your games, you should be winning more which means that you'll face better opponents like you want anyway, so surely the old system is more suitable all round for everyone, whether you enjoy facing a lot of higher skilled opponents or not. Bear in mind that Blizzards main aim is for this change to be fun for people (edit: and judging by the posts here not so many people find it fun) because they get some variety in their games - not necessarily to help people learn from pros (which I dont think you learn so well from getting destroy easily). | ||
|
HyperionDreamer
Canada1528 Posts
On April 26 2012 06:00 ipwntbarney wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 26 2012 05:54 HyperionDreamer wrote: Yeah, it's actually huge.... There's no arbitrary cap on game time played to be put in master league, in fact you can be placed directly into master right from placement matches, the only league you cannot go RIGHT into is grandmaster. At higher levels the skill gap is exponentially increasing, like the difference between a 80 rank 100 pt masters player and a top 5 800+ point masters player is gigantic, I'd say even larger than the entire skill difference from bronze to plat maybe even diamond. And when you get up to that level, the skill difference between that top masters player and a top GM is even larger. People actually underestimate just how much better top pros are than top masters players.... Like if I played 100 games against Idra I would lose literally 100% of them unless I got lucky in a coinflip or something to win 1 game out of 100. And the skill gap increases for top korean pros etc etc.... The highest you can be placed into is platinum (I've tested it on 3 different accounts). And as a diamond who plays with both my bronze league brother, and mid-masters friend, I'd say that saying diamond is closer to bronze than to masters is a -little- bit of a stretch. But yeah, the difference between low masters and high masters is huge, and I honestly think they should make it 2 different leagues. The thing is that you're actually wrong. It doesn't matter how many accounts you've "tested" it on, you can be placed into any league except grandmaster. Check out Excalibur's league/ladder thread, he states it in there. Plus, I know from personal experience.  Up to mid masters, people don't actually execute any builds properly, nor do they really make that many intelligent decisions during the game, this is why I say that diamond is closer to bronze than masters in terms of skill and game understanding. When you're playing against another top masters player, and you go over the replays, you'll see the other person making decisions, adjusting things, playing mechanically well.... Most diamond players will not do any of those things at a top level. | ||
|
ipwntbarney
United States141 Posts
On April 26 2012 07:40 HyperionDreamer wrote: The thing is that you're actually wrong. It doesn't matter how many accounts you've "tested" it on, you can be placed into any league except grandmaster. Check out Excalibur's league/ladder thread, he states it in there. Plus, I know from personal experience. Up to mid masters, people don't actually execute any builds properly, nor do they really make that many intelligent decisions during the game, this is why I say that diamond is closer to bronze than masters in terms of skill and game understanding. When you're playing against another top masters player, and you go over the replays, you'll see the other person making decisions, adjusting things, playing mechanically well.... Most diamond players will not do any of those things at a top level. I went undefeated on placement matches on a brand new account and on a gold account that had taken a couple seasons off, and both placed into Platinum. And my Platinum friend won all 5 of his after taking 3 seasons off, and he got placed back into Platinum. So the only way to be placed into Masters seems to be if you were already in Masters, which isn't -really- placing into Masters, at least not in the same sense as placing into other leagues. And my point was that Diamond players aren't -literally- closer to Bronze than to Masters in terms of skill. I'm fully aware that I'm nowhere NEAR low-masters, let alone high Master/GM. But there's a much larger skill gap between Diamond and Bronze than Masters to Diamond. | ||
|
A-p-p-l-e-s
Canada314 Posts
Playing harder opponents are kind of fun though nice on that part | ||
|
HyperionDreamer
Canada1528 Posts
On April 26 2012 08:00 ipwntbarney wrote: I went undefeated on placement matches on a brand new account and on a gold account that had taken a couple seasons off, and both placed into Platinum. And my Platinum friend won all 5 of his after taking 3 seasons off, and he got placed back into Platinum. So the only way to be placed into Masters seems to be if you were already in Masters, which isn't -really- placing into Masters, at least not in the same sense as placing into other leagues. And my point was that Diamond players aren't -literally- closer to Bronze than to Masters in terms of skill. I'm fully aware that I'm nowhere NEAR low-masters, let alone high Master/GM. But there's a much larger skill gap between Diamond and Bronze than Masters to Diamond. It doesn't only depend on how you did in your placements, it also depends on the MMR of the opponents you beat. If you come back on an account that was previously in Platinum, the system has already some idea about where to place you. You didn't read Excalibur's thread, did you? Let me link you. The part about placement is about 1/3 of the way in, it comes right up if you Control-f the word "placement". http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195273 | ||
|
6xFPCs
United States412 Posts
I'm a low masters zerg. Still, I do feel like the chance for a serious trial-by-fire makes these changes more beneficial than not. Hopefully that terran has the same mindset. | ||
|
ipwntbarney
United States141 Posts
On April 26 2012 08:24 HyperionDreamer wrote: It doesn't only depend on how you did in your placements, it also depends on the MMR of the opponents you beat. If you come back on an account that was previously in Platinum, the system has already some idea about where to place you. You didn't read Excalibur's thread, did you? Let me link you. The part about placement is about 1/3 of the way in, it comes right up if you Control-f the word "placement". http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195273 Yeah, I've read his thread. What I was saying is that, realistically, the only people who are going to place into Masters are people who were already in Masters. Which is completely different from someone placing into Masters on a brand new account. | ||
|
HyperionDreamer
Canada1528 Posts
On April 26 2012 09:03 ipwntbarney wrote: Yeah, I've read his thread. What I was saying is that, realistically, the only people who are going to place into Masters are people who were already in Masters. Which is completely different from someone placing into Masters on a brand new account. It's possible to place in Master on a brand new account as well. You would have to be very good (ie. actually that league caliber) and get very lucky with who it matches you up against, but it's possible if you 5-0 it against good people. | ||
|
korona
1098 Posts
On April 26 2012 09:58 HyperionDreamer wrote: It's possible to place in Master on a brand new account as well. You would have to be very good (ie. actually that league caliber) and get very lucky with who it matches you up against, but it's possible if you 5-0 it against good people. Probability to face high enough players (MMR wise) with totally new account in placements to be placed in master league is low, but possible. Most likely scenario to get such opponents in placements is to get boost from team game MMR as MMR from other game types is used as starting point for the first placement match. Nowadays it seems typical to be placed either in platinum or diamond by winning all 5 placement matches. E.g. when i bought my US account last fall I got placed in diamond. | ||
|
Zheryn
Sweden3653 Posts
On April 26 2012 07:07 scotth85 wrote: The point I'm trying to get across is that say a gold terran will perform an all in a lot worse than say a high platinum terran trying to do the same thing, and I could still lose to the gold anyway. It's just with the gold player he is performing worse so I can see where to improve. When I get stomped by the high platinum terran it isnt that he is executing it perfectly, but he is doing it a lot better than the gold player, there is a very noticeable difference to how fast I lose to someone over a league higher than the other and I really don't pick as much up at all. I dont know if my build order was wrong, I should have expanded, I microed wrong or whatever because it's most likely a whole range of things that I did wrong. The difference is vs the gold I am a lot more likely to be able to pick out 1 major mistake, improve on it, win next time. I don't understand your logic. If you lose to the platinum players all in, then that's great, now you can check the replay, see what you needed to have to stop it and improve on that. If the gold player doesn't execute it good and you win just because his push was way too late/too few units, and then you counter-attack for the win, what do you learn? "Yeah my build is perfect against gold all ins, no need to change anything"? A better player will exploit your weaknesses better, making you see them easier. For example, today I got matched against a high master player who abused my late ling speed, making me realise I need to get it a bit earlier, compared to if I had only met diamonds who didn't abuse it. Anyone who aims to become better should always want to play against high masters players if that was possible. Of course if someone's happy with being in gold, and don't wish to climb the ladder, there's no real reason to learn to defend against the masters all in. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On April 26 2012 09:58 HyperionDreamer wrote: It's possible to place in Master on a brand new account as well. You would have to be very good (ie. actually that league caliber) and get very lucky with who it matches you up against, but it's possible if you 5-0 it against good people. This is false. Back in Beta, before Masters and GM were introduced, it was possible to place directly into Diamond (I did it myself). In the interest of making the status of Diamond more impressive, Blizzard made it impossible to place higher than Platinum in 1v1. This change was never reverted. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 ladder can place you directly into Masters, but 1v1 is limited to Platinum. Placing BACK into your league is not hit by the same restrictions. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On April 26 2012 13:51 Zheryn wrote: I don't understand your logic. If you lose to the platinum players all in, then that's great, now you can check the replay, see what you needed to have to stop it and improve on that. If the gold player doesn't execute it good and you win just because his push was way too late/too few units, and then you counter-attack for the win, what do you learn? "Yeah my build is perfect against gold all ins, no need to change anything"? A better player will exploit your weaknesses better, making you see them easier. For example, today I got matched against a high master player who abused my late ling speed, making me realise I need to get it a bit earlier, compared to if I had only met diamonds who didn't abuse it. Anyone who aims to become better should always want to play against high masters players if that was possible. Of course if someone's happy with being in gold, and don't wish to climb the ladder, there's no real reason to learn to defend against the masters all in. Well, you shouldn't be playing against people who are so much better than you that you can't even see what you're doing wrong. You should be playing against people moderately better than you, which is what the current system allows. To take the argument to its absolute extreme, if you matched up a Bronze League player against a Code S player, the Code S player would stomp them so firmly doing absolutely anything that the Bronzie could never learn what they were doing wrong, except possibly that they're bad at this game. If they go up against a Silver League player, then they could see "oh, this guy had a bigger army than me because he expanded one more time", and factor that into their play. | ||
|
korona
1098 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:04 Acritter wrote: This is false. Back in Beta, before Masters and GM were introduced, it was possible to place directly into Diamond (I did it myself). In the interest of making the status of Diamond more impressive, Blizzard made it impossible to place higher than Platinum in 1v1. This change was never reverted. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 ladder can place you directly into Masters, but 1v1 is limited to Platinum. Placing BACK into your league is not hit by the same restrictions. In late beta Blizzard indeed did set that in 1v1 you could not be placed into the highest league. In the early retail the second highest league was platinum. This changed when master league was introduced in January 2011. After that point you could be placed into diamond. About month later GM was introduced. After that you could be placed into master league although it's very rare as most of the time you do not get MMR wise high enough opponents in placement matches. As I said couple of posts earlier most people who win all their 5 placement matches with a brand new account are either placed into platinum or diamond depending on their luck with their placement match opponents. I myself was placed with my brand new US account directly into diamond last fall. My EU account was placed into platinum when SC2 was published, which was the highest league where you could be placed at that time (diamond required a promotion). | ||
|
HyperionDreamer
Canada1528 Posts
On April 26 2012 14:04 Acritter wrote: + Show Spoiler + On April 26 2012 09:58 HyperionDreamer wrote: It's possible to place in Master on a brand new account as well. You would have to be very good (ie. actually that league caliber) and get very lucky with who it matches you up against, but it's possible if you 5-0 it against good people. This is false. Back in Beta, before Masters and GM were introduced, it was possible to place directly into Diamond (I did it myself). In the interest of making the status of Diamond more impressive, Blizzard made it impossible to place higher than Platinum in 1v1. This change was never reverted. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 ladder can place you directly into Masters, but 1v1 is limited to Platinum. Placing BACK into your league is not hit by the same restrictions. I linked a previous poster to Excalibur's league and ladder thread. In there he clearly states that it is possible to place into any league except grandmaster. In addition, I have personally witnessed a brand new account being placed into Master. Please actually read the thread before posting random stuff, I've posted the same answer multiple times. | ||
|
Mendelfist
Sweden356 Posts
| ||
|
mango_destroyer
Canada3914 Posts
On April 30 2012 01:53 Mendelfist wrote: It looks to me like the reverted reverted changes have been reverted again, or at least toned down quite a bit, ie you are no longer matched up against opponents with wildly varying skill. Does anybody agree? Seem that way for me. | ||
|
noidontthinkso
Greece94 Posts
On April 30 2012 01:53 Mendelfist wrote: It looks to me like the reverted reverted changes have been reverted again, or at least toned down quite a bit, ie you are no longer matched up against opponents with wildly varying skill. Does anybody agree? same for me.. looks like they dont know what they want to do lol.. | ||
| ||
