|
Intro
Throughout the Beta and release many players have been lobbying for a single competitive ladder. Blizzard hasn't met that demand and as such, the community has taken it upon itself to make a bunch of division tracking websites that rank players according to their points. As such it's only natural for players to use that as their qualifying statement "I'm XXX points in diamond!" One problem though, points aren't directly comparable among divisions. You already heard/know that of course, but players still seem to that it's quite accurate.
I will argue that points AND division rank are FAR LESS comparable among divisions than the community thinks.
A Misguided Importance Given to the Bonus Pool
In my opinion the reason many players believe that points are comparable among divisions is because they think the Bonus Pool is the primary difference. To those that believe that, the formula for your points would be something like (Match Making Rating + Bonus Pool) * (league modifier). If that was the case, it would make a LOT of sense to compare points across divisions. It's certainly possible that the Bonus Pool is A difference among divisions (maybe older divisions have received more). However it is VERY unlikely given blizzards stance on the issue plus some data that I will show you from some of my own games that the Bonus Pool is NOT the deciding factor when it comes to separating division points.
Blizzards Stance on the Issue
by Benzenn
18 Mar 2010, 19:43
Sorry I misunderstood what the OP was referring to. I didn't mean to imply that one division is ranked better than the other, but simply explaining the basics of divisions. As far as comparison across divisions it's certainly something we've considered but there are issues, such that the rankings in one division don't directly translate to the other divisions. So you couldn't compare division 10 to division 48 and compare one player's points to another.
Blizzard's top 200 seems to have been a conformation of this. I don't have the old ladder points from the day of their top 200 but I remember hearing that were some significant changes such as with Dayvie (who dropped from near 1st to 49th IIRC). There is almost NO WAY that it unused bonus points bringing Dayvie up on the point comparison when almost all of the players above him were active enough to use all of their bonus points. What I would imagine blizzard used when they were ranking players was their hidden Match Making Rating.
Results from some of my games
d means diamond
p means platinum
the plus after their points is their current bonus pool
Last eight games
Result | Opponent Points/Rank | (Opponent Gain/Loss)
Loss (-12) vs 737d(+2) (112-90, 8th in Duke Xi) (+24)
Loss (-13) vs 479d(+8) (31-23, 43rd in Talematros Eta) (+14)
Loss (-6) vs 648d(+0) (110-87 66th in Medic Mu) (+14)
Loss (-10) vs 664d(+0) (113-94 29th in Drone Whiskey) (+12)
Win (+20) vs 378p(+202) (15-11 29th in Reaper Eta) (-2)
Loss (-11) vs 742d(+9) (56-35 1st in Hauler Sierra) (+26)
Win (+28) vs 483d(+31) (23-14 37th in Turaxis Yankee) (-4) - He was plat then
Win (+26) vs 946d(+0) (266-238 1st in Artanis Upsilon) (-13)
Some other significant games
Loss (-11) vs 452d(+43) (21-13 64th in Tassadar Charlie) (+24) -My Division
Loss (-12) vs 566d(+15) (59-45 47th in Drone Whiskey) (+28) -Another Drone Whiskey
Win (+26) vs 567d(+0) (105-98 24th in Talematros Eta) (-12) -Another Talematros Eta
Important Notes on the games
-I'm 345d(+96) (28-22, 95th in Tassadar Charlie)
-All of my games were in diamond
-My opponents stats are 2 days late compared to when I played them but are similar expect for the one guy that was bumped up from platinum.
-ALL of my wins were doubled from bonus points
-I don't know how many bonus points my opponents used. It seems certain that 5 of their wins were doubled.
Thoughts on the Data
-I received more points for beating a platinum player who now has 483 diamond points than a #1 diamond player with 946d. This seems to be a very strong indication that points received depends on the hidden MMR of an opponent rather than their position/points within their division. Furthermore if that is the case the platinum player would have a higher MMR than the #1 diamond player.
-If point loss/gain is based on MMR then almost all of my opponents are fairly even with me (because I consider +/- 12 to be even) other than the guy in Medic Mu
-The point loss from the guy in Medic Mu was really strange. It brings up the issue if a player in 66th in a power division like Medic Mu can have much stronger MMR than a #1 player in another division over hundreds of games.
-The loss from the guy in Medic Mu also lead me to wonder if the strength of your division factors in to the amount of points you gain or lose. Relative to some of the guys in his division (TTone/Drewbie/Idra/Louder/Antimage) it would further place me as a very weak opponent to his entire division. That could account for one of the reasons why Dayvie seems to have a higher point total than his record would indicate. He's in a much weaker division than many other top players so if I played him he might receive more points for beating me than a similar MMR player in Medivac Alamo or Medic Mu.
-Division MMR could be a reason why you recieve WAY more points when your in lower leagues than you should be. Rather than there being some sort of league modifier maybe the division system just calculates the strength of your opponent relative to your division and it bumps up your points received.
-Point loss/gain among players in the same division seems consistent. I lost less points to the a higher rated player in Drone Whiskey, The lower rated player in Talematros Eta got a more favorable point gain than the higher player would have gotten although and I had a higher MMR when I played the higher player.
Conclusion
I think Blizzard wants point values/ranks to NOT be comparable among divisions. A huge part of the whole system seems to be obscuring where you stand in relation to everyone. If it was as simple as saying I have xxx points in x league that would kind defeat the point. The results from my games certainly provide strong evidence that there's a lot more to the system than just MMR + Bonus Pool. There is just NO WAY I would get more points from a platinum player without remarkable stats than a #1 diamond player if division rating was fairly consistent.
Anyways it's kind of a long winded post, Thoughts/Opinions? I know I probably need some more data as well to really validate any of my thoughts.
|
skimmed through it, but your sentiments regarding pts and MMR are correct in a sense, as his sigma is going to be a factor in the calculation.
|
TLDR version: OP got more points beating a platinum player than he did from beating high diamond players.
This alone refutes our understanding of ranking and shows that the entire system is full of bullshit numbers.
I really don't see why they make it this hard to find your world-wide ranking.
The bonus point/division rank system is plenty to stave off noobs. They really don't want to know how bad they are. But people at the top really do want to know how they compare.
Going off ratings should be enough, but I guess they wanted it to be harder than that.
|
Which order where these games played? Top to bottom?
|
On August 21 2010 13:57 Lunacy wrote:
Which order where these games played? Top to bottom?
Bottom to Top, there's also some missing games between the top 8 and bottom 3 games that I had.
|
You ever take into account win/lose streaks. if somebody in diamond is 90-60 with a 10 lose streak and somebody is 100-90 in platinum with a 8 win streak, i would expect to get more points from a platinum player. Then again i only expect 5-10 points a win and 20 a lose, so i'm currently fucked
|
The idea is that MMR and league standing converge over time. Given enough games, a player will be placed most accurately based on their skill.
|
On August 21 2010 14:04 RivalryRedux wrote:
Bottom to Top, there's also some missing games between the top 8 and bottom 3 games that I had.
Well that blows up my theory then.
The only reasonable thing I can come up with, behind points awarded based on division, is that the lower level diamond player you beat had far fewer games played than the #1 player. As previously mentioned, his sigma would almost certainly be higher. Also, considering he was recently promoted to diamond, we have to assume he has been playing very well. Maybe those things together caused this..
|
On August 21 2010 14:08 blacktoss wrote:
The idea is that MMR and league standing converge over time. Given enough games, a player will be placed most accurately based on their skill.
If your saying that people will be accurately rated within their own division over time I agree. On the other hand Points across divisions do not seem to translate as closely as people currently think IMO. I would expect that #1 guy that I beat to have fewer points if he were in the division Medic Mu. From looking through his games he seems to be receiving favorable points for playing clearly lesser opponents than someone of comparable rating in Medic Mu would.
As a good example he received +13 for beating the person right above me (352d(+47) 27-25). Both him and the guy from Medic Mu that beat me for +7(+7) have played so many games that it doesn't really make sense for such a difference in the points they're getting for beating comparable players.
|
Good post dude, thanks for making some more sense out of it. 
I really think Blizzard should consider letting us know our MMR, so we actually could compare cross divisions.
|
Thanks, been looking for that quote. Now I can shove it people's faces when they talk about their points. 
But I don't really agree with the rest of your post. All it really confirms is you get points based on MMR and not why the points in each divisions aren't comparable. So what if you beat a platinum player and got a lot of points? It just means he had a very high MMR and is stuck (promo system is notoriously slow at times).
But I do think it likely calculates points based on the rest of your division. Probably does factors in the competitiveness of the division. Just like you said.
Just a hunch. Let's say there is a hidden ranking in your division sorted by MMR. So if you joined a really noob division and the #1 guy there, JoeShmoe, had 1000 points but 300 MMR, you'd likely start earning huge amounts of points to take you above JoeShmoe because your MMR became 400 at some point after joining so the system compensates by awarding you tons of points so you go above 1000 points and place you as #1. Then if you were in a highly competitive division the #1 guy there might have 1000 points and 900 MMR and you'd be placed around ~50-60th or something. So not even division rankings translate over to other divisions. But I think that's an extreme case.
I still think the rankings, typically, are an indicator of actual MMR and that those rank #2 in a division all have similar MMR to other #2s. Generally, when I look up people I played with on ladder their ranking is usually around +-10 rankings. For example I'm ranked 97th in diamond and tend to play against people who are 80-100 in diamond and 1-20 in platinum. Of course there are those few people who are #1 in their division but are far and above any other #1s. And this seems more like an anomaly of diamond league, because these players have no where else to be promoted to.
|
It's unbelievable...
THE esports game of the decade, and we're stuck with divisions whose numbers can't be used for ANYTHING. I mean who cares if you are no. 1 in diamond, at this point i'm not even sure if it means I'm better than the bottom diamond players in the SAME division, that's how confusing the divisions are.
Effectively we don't have a ladder for StarCraft II, the only time we have one is when Blizzard decides to do their "math" and let us now who is in top 200, if you didn't make the cut, then you have no way of knowing how well you are doing.
GG Blizzard.
|
interesting. this pattern has happened to me latetly. I play against an 11-1 stats platinum player and get +14 (or +13?) points for even match, then I beat a 800 diamond Terran and get +10 because I'm slightly favoured (I'm 500 diamond). This is really weird.
|
Isn't this what has been noted previously. Rating converges toward hidden elo?
What is the difference compared to that theory?
|
I still don't see anything that would disprove the simplest and most logical formula: that point gain/loss is decided by the difference between your displayed rating and the opponent's hidden rating (MMR).
|
Does the lenght of the game affect the points gained/lost? It would make sense to give more reward for 40 minute game than a 15 minute one.
|
I don't believe the intention was to make all the divisions comparable in the first place since there are so many factors determining rank, points gain/loss etc on the list for each one.
|
I tend to agree with the view that all this proves is that the points you win from a game aren't based on your division/point score in the division but rather your hidden MMR - WOW arena points were not that different really. However, the points you win from a game are what is recorded against your total score in a division so I don't see how this can be used to argue that they aren't comparable across divisions. Obviously when Blizzard does their rankings they take a lot of other factors into account and it would be nice to have more visibility of that
|
Btw how come there are different divisions? I mean why not make a single diamond league?
|
On August 21 2010 21:52 Teddyman wrote:
I still don't see anything that would disprove the simplest and most logical formula: that point gain/loss is decided by the difference between your displayed rating and the opponent's hidden rating (MMR).
If you're saying that it applies across all divisions exactly the same (ex. two people at 500 in different divisions would get the exact same amount from me if my MMR held constant), then what you're saying needs more explaining if you look at the numbers I posted.
Loss (-6) vs 648d(+0) (110-87 66th in Medic Mu) (+14) +7 without bonus
Loss (-12) vs 737d(+2) (112-90, 8th in Duke Xi) (+24) +12 without bonus
You would basically be saying that my MMR jumped hundreds and hundreds of points after losing games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
