On November 20 2012 15:10 Kakaru2 wrote: Hots will have two separate MMRs for ranked/unranked play.
Will this "feature" make it impossible to use this tool to learn the true rating? Does it mean that all games versus unranked will have to be added/substracted 12 points since there will be no information from the webserver?
IF true then Blizzard just added another obfuscation to their list.
This depends entirely upon how Blizzard chooses to report the results of a match. If the results are not published to a player's match history, or if they come up as "Draw", then there is no issue because those results can be ignored. If they're reported as "wins" or "losses" then things become much less clear, because even a result of "loss" without any points attached can mean anything from "you lost a game to a far superior opponent" to "you had no points left to lose" to "this was an unranked game" which can potentially become very confusing. I think the most likely scenario is that players in the Unranked pool will appear to always be in placement matches on the game results screen (where no league icon appears next to the player's name), so perhaps if this is detectable by the RAM scanner it may be possible to correctly identify who is playing Unranked and who is not, but simply querying the web server would only produce unusable data points.
On November 20 2012 15:43 Excalibur_Z wrote: This depends entirely upon how Blizzard chooses to report the results of a match. If the results are not published to a player's match history, or if they come up as "Draw", then there is no issue because those results can be ignored.
It seems that unranked games are shown as wins or losses without points, so this can be a problem. Another problem is that a majority of the players, at least in the lower leagues, seem to prefer unranked games, so the number of unusable games will be much larger than before.
On November 19 2012 11:23 dicedicerevolution wrote: Not sure if this has already been brought up, but I get -10,000 values for my opponents and the values are at the BEGINNING (left most) of the graph.
I'm also unable to find the version of my MMR tools.
Please advise! >_<
you see the version like korona said. First line in the log. I will write filter to catch this mistakes in next patch. If it destroy your graph disable opponents so long.
On November 19 2012 13:22 korona wrote:
On November 19 2012 11:23 dicedicerevolution wrote: Not sure if this has already been brought up, but I get -10,000 values for my opponents and the values are at the BEGINNING (left most) of the graph.
One explanation is: It analyzes in chunks of 200 games. This happened to me couple of days ago too. Play more and it will fix itself when 'a good game' slips into the first chunk.
E.g. if you have played 205 games the chunks would be 1 to 5 and 6 to 205.
Did this explain your case (have you just played over 200 (or little over dividable by 200 amount) recorded matches after SC2 v1.5)?
Not any more. Since tiers are gone i dont have to calculate them any-more and the whole process is way faster. So i removed the chunk behaviour.
Hmm. I was expecting you to remove the analysis constraint, but there is still some kind of 200 games limitation. E.g. I have played 202 recorded games with one of my accounts after SC2 v1.5. Before reaching 200 games everything was fine. But now for 2 first games the MMR crashed to -9 999, just like in dicedicerevolution's case (if he is describing the same 'bug') and the last 200 are fine (my fifth game was 'a good game', so I think the graph will fix itself after I play 3 games more). Also the 'Analyser Log' lists first games 3 to 202 (chunk of 200) and then games 1 to 2. I will later PM you a picture and better description.
Edit: Sent PM with more details. Also tested out hypothesis that the graph would fix itself after playing 3 more games (added 3 games to games_new.dat). The graph did fix itself.
Will this "feature" make it impossible to use this tool to learn the true rating? Does it mean that all games versus unranked will have to be added/substracted 12 points since there will be no information from the webserver?
IF true then Blizzard just added another obfuscation to their list.
Blizzard employee... So you have to decode it: "Their will be two separate MMR. " "We strip the unranked one from your rank one" "They play in one big pool" = Their will be only one MMR. We just copy it and put it in the unranked opponent finder if you play unranked. But the unranked system dont change it. Big pool = just another instance of the opponent finder.
However the unranked have no impact on the ranked. So the calculation is not affected. I doubt they will change a lot in the system itself. In the end we know they are lazy.
@Excalibur_Z & @Mendelfist Games have a modus tag. So if they do it right they will add an "unranked 1v1" modus. Than its no problem at all. If they do it the lazy & dirty way, like always, they let them look like ladder games. In this case they can look like +- 0 games. The problem is that its hard to tell if their was an mistake in the calculation or if its unranked. Their is no clear "Ladder" Ram entry. Its hard to find out the gametyp ingame.
Possible Problems: Obvious it will create more idle places in ladder. With less ladder games played by our opponent, his MMR will be not as accurate. People will boost their MMR and than only play unranked because they are afraid to loose MMR. (Boosting = wait for winning streak stop playing, the GM - Method) Many people do this, what will increase the average MMR. But MMR is nothing else than the difference to average and will adjust. So its a reason more not to play ranked... and so on.
A skill system that is not allowed to judge your games is no skill system. Its a normal blizzard solution: Problem: Our system is bad and people are afraid of using it. Solution: We add a bad fix to it. Problem: Our System is even worse now. Solution: We add a second system that dont show anything. Problem: Now we have a bad system and a system without information. Why not making just one good system? Solution: Game sold, tell someone who cares...
Beside that: Lets look from the eyes of a software maker on the new system:
Real software engineer: We make an unranked system where you play someone. How will people use it? Their are different types of users: Some want to train against a specific race some dont care. So do we need an option for that? If not, people will just instant leave the game if the opponent is not the race they want. So you have to disconnect several times if you search for the race you want. If you dont care for opponent race, you still load the game for nothing because their is a big chance he will disconnect. Disconnect and Re-log is a terrible way to implement race-search. So we should add an extra option for that!
Blizzard employee: We make a unranked system where you play someone. What do we eat today?
Isn't having unranked/ranked players in same pool insanely stupid. Literally first thing that comes into my mind is win trading. Just queue against each other repeatedly and always let the one playing ranked win.
Also like Skeldark said above if you are playing unranked to practice a specific build or matchup ofc you'll insta leave all the games where you roll wrong race/bad map. I guess most ppl playing ranked won't mind the free points. Staring at the loading screen gets old really fast if every other game is a insta leave.
On November 20 2012 19:03 pulperi wrote: Also like Skeldark said above if you are playing unranked to practice a specific build or matchup ofc you'll insta leave all the games where you roll wrong race/bad map.
That won't work well because it will screw up your unranked MMR. It won't be much of a practice then.
On November 20 2012 19:03 pulperi wrote: Isn't having unranked/ranked players in same pool insanely stupid. Literally first thing that comes into my mind is win trading. Just queue against each other repeatedly and always let the one playing ranked win.
Also like Skeldark said above if you are playing unranked to practice a specific build or matchup ofc you'll insta leave all the games where you roll wrong race/bad map. I guess most ppl playing ranked won't mind the free points. Staring at the loading screen gets old really fast if every other game is a insta leave.
On November 20 2012 19:03 pulperi wrote: Also like Skeldark said above if you are playing unranked to practice a specific build or matchup ofc you'll insta leave all the games where you roll wrong race/bad map.
That won't work well because it will screw up your unranked MMR. It won't be much of a practice then.
I dont think there will be something like an unranked MMR. There will be just a copy of your ranked MMR. Unranked matches will not change anything. This way you can not win trade and leave dont affect your MMR.
Making an unranked MMR would be even by blizzard standard, insane stupid. Whats the point of an UNRANKED match making RANKING league? Than we just have a Hidden and a Super hidden league ...
Also: 7.4 Online in few minutes. I fixed the 200 games bug and the -10000 opponent value.
On November 20 2012 19:34 skeldark wrote: I dont think there will be something like an unranked MMR. There will be just a copy of your ranked MMR. Unranked matches will not change anything. This way you can not win trade and leave dont affect your MMR.
Making an unranked MMR would be even by blizzard standard, insane stupid. Whats the point of an UNRANKED match making RANKING league? Than we just have a Hidden and a Super hidden league ...
I'm pretty sure there are two independent MMRs in the beta at the moment. I'm playing both my main race ranked and at the same time offracing as terran in unranked games, and I do not get the same opponents. This post also agrees with me, unless something has changed: link
And I'm not sure why you think it's a bad idea. I think it's an excellent idea. The point is obviously to get even games. David Kim also said in a post somewhere that they are considering having three separate MMRs for each race when playing unranked.
On November 20 2012 19:34 skeldark wrote: I dont think there will be something like an unranked MMR. There will be just a copy of your ranked MMR. Unranked matches will not change anything. This way you can not win trade and leave dont affect your MMR.
Making an unranked MMR would be even by blizzard standard, insane stupid. Whats the point of an UNRANKED match making RANKING league? Than we just have a Hidden and a Super hidden league ...
I'm pretty sure there are two independent MMRs in the beta at the moment. I'm playing both my main race ranked and at the same time offracing as terran in unranked games, and I do not get the same opponents. This post also agrees with me, unless something has changed: link
And I'm not sure why you think it's a bad idea. I think it's an excellent idea. The point is obviously to get even games. David Kim also said in a post somewhere that they are considering having three separate MMRs for each race when playing unranked.
if this is true the whole system is a joke. IF you can play ranked vs unranked and the ranked is ranked on this game than its not 2 pools. Mathematical its the same Ladder with more than one account for each player! This alone is against the pre-sets of any skill function and make the result meaningless.
IF you can not play ranked vs unranked but there is an unranked MMR than the hole "unranked" is a joke. Its just another league where they dont publish the MMR. This time not even the "blizzard point MMR". You can not loose and get the same level of opponents what make training new builds pointless. So instead of a move ahead its a move back.
But this will not be my problem any more. I decided to stop this work with HOTS. I will publish all data and code i have then, for someone else to keep going. All map makers & Modders & Stats creator & Anticheat guys i know. left sc2. Im the last one left together with the creator of sc2gears. It just get boring to analyse this mess.
On November 20 2012 21:36 skeldark wrote: IF you can play ranked vs unranked and the ranked is ranked on this game than its not 2 pools. Mathematical its the same Ladder with more than one account for each player!
Yes, unranked and ranked are playing against each other (in the beta) and if David Kims suggestion is implemented (indepentent MMRs for every unranked race) you will essentially have four accounts for every player. Note that he only said he thought it would be a good idea, not that they will actually implement it.
On November 20 2012 21:36 skeldark wrote: IF you can play ranked vs unranked and the ranked is ranked on this game than its not 2 pools. Mathematical its the same Ladder with more than one account for each player!
Yes, unranked and ranked are playing against each other (in the beta) and if David Kims suggestion is implemented (indepentent MMRs for every unranked race) you will essentially have four accounts for every player. Note that he only said he thought it would be a good idea, not that they will actually implement it.
Instead of calculating a accurate skill and than hide it, they will mess up the skill function itself. In this case there is nothing to do any more. The whole system is pointless.
I stated this for the challenge to break what they said is unbreakable. But when you adjust all the mistakes of the hiding functions to final get the another inaccurate number, where is the point of using it? Also for me, its a lot of fun to analyse a well made complex system but no fun at all to analyse a bad one. Im just tired of undo their bugs and random rules.
On November 20 2012 22:00 skeldark wrote: Instead of calculating a accurate skill and than hide it, they will mess up the skill function itself. In this case there is nothing to do any more. The whole system is pointless.
Is your objection that people who are playing unranked will mess up the MMR by just fooling around in their games? I'm not too worried about it. I don't see it in the beta, and as long as the majority don't I think the system will be reasonably stable. And win trading won't be a big problem because you can't choose your opponents.
On November 20 2012 22:00 skeldark wrote: Instead of calculating a accurate skill and than hide it, they will mess up the skill function itself. In this case there is nothing to do any more. The whole system is pointless.
Is your objection that people who are playing unranked will mess up the MMR by just fooling around in their games? I'm not too worried about it. I don't see it in the beta, and as long as the majority don't I think the system will be reasonably stable. And win trading won't be a big problem because you can't choose your opponents.
Different player have different amount of accounts in the pool. This alone is against the pre set rules of any skill system. It will not be statistic independent because better players play more and will use more accounts. They will play statistic significant worse on their 2 account. If can analyse the impact on the skill distribution and try to undo it mathematical but we know blizzard will not do that. They even fail in easy task of distribute the leagues correct. Their are ways to make ranked and unranked systems. Done thousand of times by thousand of games. Blizzard just fucks all the math behind it and create again their own little bad designed system. By having 2. Different MMRs in one system with different scale but allow an interaction of this two systems is just like....
People dont like the ladder system because the fake data, that shows you better than you are, creates pressure. Instead of removing the lies and with it the pressure, they add a second view on the system, where they hide ALL information. Ignoring that this system mess with the math behind the main skill function.
BTW: You can choose your opponents if you do it clever.
I don't understand what you are trying to say. As I understand it it wont' be any problem at all for your tool. You can use your existing code almost as it is. There won't be different MMRs with different scales. There will be only one, the same one as today. It won't be possible to calculate your unranked MMR of course, and you will have to throw away all games where your opponent plays as unranked, but apart from that I see no problems.
On November 20 2012 22:38 Mendelfist wrote: I don't understand what you are trying to say. As I understand it it wont' be any problem at all for your tool. You can use your existing code almost as it is. There won't be different MMRs with different scales. There will be only one, the same one as today. It won't be possible to calculate your unranked MMR of course, and you will have to throw away all games where your opponent plays as unranked, but apart from that I see no problems.
The point is: Yes i can still calculate the MMR. And this MMR is garbage. It will still kind of represent your skill but not very accurate. I back calculate the real skill value. But with such a system there is no real skill value that worth the name.
TLDR: There is nothing of value left in the system thats worth calculating it.
On November 20 2012 22:39 skeldark wrote: The point is: Yes i can still calculate the MMR. And this MMR is garbage. There is nothing of value left in the system thats worth calculating it. It will still kind of represent your skill but not very accurate.
Why? The system is identical to the one used today, except that you get several accounts.
On November 20 2012 22:39 skeldark wrote: The point is: Yes i can still calculate the MMR. And this MMR is garbage. There is nothing of value left in the system thats worth calculating it. It will still kind of represent your skill but not very accurate.
Why? The system is identical to the one used today, except that you get several accounts.
What is against the rule of any skill function. Skill function calculate the diffrence of your skill compare to the average skill. By having different amount of account per user your average server skill is no longer the average user skill. So the skill functions works under a wrong assumption already. The affect dont have to be big. The point that very good sc2 players often play more than one account in not big, but already noticeable in the ladder. But if the better players have significant more accounts or if a significant different behaviour for 2. and 3. accounts exist, the skill derivation moves away form standard derivation. Without standard derivation, the skill function can not work. TLDR: the output skill value (MMR) will get more and more inaccurate over time until the point where the whole system collapse.
The effect can be in a manageable scale. But there is a negative effect, so you should try to avoid this situation and not create it. In fact, the skill is not in good derivation at the moment ( i can tell on offset changes) so you are in a situation where the last thing that you want to do, is to make it worse.
Beside that, i dont understand why would you do it. A "unranked" system that is ranked just make no sense at all. Where is the point of playing "unranked" when you get ranked? The word unranked, is just another lie. Just to get a second ladder account?
EPT
