| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Hypatio
549 Posts
IMO, it would be better if I am still placed against players on my level as determined by MMR but that my score increase is determined by the score differential rather than the MMR differential. Would this be better? Or is the current system acting as it should? It's just frustrating to me when I see someone who clearly isn't doing bad (facing me isn't the result of a losing streak) and has 1.7k points is treated as an even match with me. What do you think? | ||
|
ThirstyFroG
Malaysia8 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
IamBach
United States1059 Posts
| ||
|
Uhh Negative
United States1090 Posts
| ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:38 Hypatio wrote: I'm about a 1.1k diamond at 78/68 win/loss with about 400 unused bonus points as I don't play too often. It seems that on average, I am placed against people with about 1500 pts and probably half of them are 1550-1750. This is considered an even match by the ladder system. Now, I understand that I am placed against people with a higher score because it thinks that I am better than people with my score, but it seems that in terms of my score I am punished because it is harder for me to increase my score than someone for which 1.1k is their actual skill level. IMO, it would be better if I am still placed against players on my level as determined by MMR but that my score increase is determined by the score differential rather than the MMR differential. Would this be better? Or is the current system acting as it should? It's just frustrating to me when I see someone who clearly isn't doing bad (facing me isn't the result of a losing streak) and has 1.7k points is treated as an even match with me. What do you think? Yeah I agree. Basing matches on actual points instead of MMR would be so much better. It makes no sense to get only 10-14 points (without bonus pool) if you beat someone who has over 500 more points than you. | ||
|
Mutaahh
Netherlands859 Posts
So this makes the ladder points useless in the end. edit, to make it more specific. You can never know your actual place in the ladder...... | ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
Right now, I think you get 12 bonus points a day on top of the thousand points already accumulated this season. For a casual player, I doubt they will ever use up all the points. | ||
|
LeafBlower
United States115 Posts
| ||
|
MoreFaSho
United States1427 Posts
| ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:46 Mutaahh wrote: I think it does punish them(Infrequent players) on a way that they always feel as an underdog, but certainly aren't an underdog, cause MMR always tries to get a played at your skill ratio. So this makes the ladder points useless in the end. edit, to make it more specific. You can never know your actual place in the ladder...... That's basically it. If matches are based on your MMR, then why is your MMR hidden? Points have little value, especially with bonus pool which has no impact on who you play against. | ||
|
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:44 Deathstar wrote: Yeah I agree. Basing matches on actual points instead of MMR would be so much better. It makes no sense to get only 10-14 points (without bonus pool) if you beat someone who has over 500 more points than you. No of course you should get only 10-14 points. Your opponent having more points doesn't make him a better player per say considering your skill is based on MMR and not your points. He only played more then you which resulted in having more points it doesn't actually make him better. So for people that have large amount of points but suck ass giving away tons of points would be imbalanced. You get an amount of points rewarded considering your opponents SKILL/MMR. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
since 1000 is "favored" he must have higher MMR than the 1700...yet both have about 200 games, how is this possible? winning/losing streak? higher rating players giving me lower points than lower rating players doesn't make sense even if it could be the MMR since all these players had over 200 games... | ||
|
Licmyobelisk
Philippines3682 Posts
| ||
|
s1eger
United States126 Posts
| ||
NonY
8751 Posts
| ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
| ||
|
NonY
8751 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:44 Uhh Negative wrote: The way that points are now, there is pretty much almost nothing you can infer from points. This is pretty much the bottom line. It sucks but you have to ignore points. Blizzard simply did not find a global ranking important enough to implement in this system. Luckily for top players there will be a solution with grand master league. For the thousands of other competitive players, it doesn't look good. | ||
|
kaztah
Norway1221 Posts
Yes you will never really catch up in points, unless you actively try to play enough to spend your entire bonus pool, but you will always play people at your equal level skillwise. I'd say that's far more important then just some random numbers which gives me a random ranking in a random division. Quite frankly I don't care if I have over 800 bonus pool left, I'm still playing the people far ahead of my points and where I know I would've been if I had played more. Other people don't care about my ladder ranking anyway, so why should I? | ||
|
FrostedMiniWeet
United States636 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:38 Hypatio wrote: but it seems that in terms of my score I am punished because it is harder for me to increase my score than someone for which 1.1k is their actual skill level. It is not harder for you to increase your score assuming you use all your bonus pool. You have 400 bonus pool, which is 400 free points assuming a 50/50 win loss ratio, placing you at an effective 1500 (1100 + 400) ladder score. If the system pitted you against lesser players until you used up your bonus pool, it would be unfair to them. Also, your points are not determined by MMR differential, points are determined by the differential between your Ladder score, and their MMR. | ||
|
Ryka
United Kingdom254 Posts
On November 03 2010 05:56 Liquid`Tyler wrote: I think points are calculated based on your opponent's MMR vs your actual points. So you are playing people who have MMR's lower than their actual points. It just happened to me yesterday. 2200 vs 2400 win 7 points, 2200 vs 2200 lose 19 points. If points were based on actual points, it would've been around +20 and -12. But of course points aren't comparable across divisions so the points of my opponents were probably deceptive. Perhaps if they were in my division they'd have less points than me, but I guess they're in divisions where points are easier to come by. If it's anything like WoW's ladder system for arena this should be the case. But the only reason people were sometimes lower MMR than their actual rating is if they were on a big losing streak. This doesn't seem to be the case from what I've seen so far. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
Ultimate Battle
Rush vs BeSt
Replay Cast
Rogue vs Classic
Patches Events
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
