|
@Ribbon
You're wrong because skill is a changing variable, not an absolute.
To use dice as an example, the mean of a 6 sided dice is 3.5, but if you were to add a random number between 0.0 and 1.0 per trial (to simulate learning or progress in SC2) your resulted average would always be lagging behind your proposed mean.
You will learn something every game, but matchmaking cannot imagine what you learned last game, and cannot compensate for it. Because of this, it will match you against someone it considers on the same level (someone it might even claim is favoured to win) that you're actually better than, because you improved significantly between this game and the previous.
To put it back in dice terms, the mean is 3.5, but last game you "learned" one point of value, so while the computer is working with the mean of 3.5, you've improved and added one to the value of every side, making the ACTUAL mean 4.5. The computer has no way of knowing you've added one to the values on the dice until after it has been rolled, so the results seem above average, to the computer.
The computer will NOT realize you're adding 1 to the dice value every time and compensate for it. It cannot assume you're learning the same amount every game. It will always be one step behind in calculating your mean value. It cannot calculate the data until it has already happened.
SO, again, if you're constantly learning the computer will always match you against people it considers equal until you break 50% (through a win streak or consistent positive performance), at which point it will match you against people it considers better than yourself, but may not actually be better due to it being one step behind. Though it will try stop your winstreak by putting you against progressively better people, it still has no way of compensating for how much you learn, and as such may not actually stop your winstreak until it catches up to your rate of learning.
Therefore, it is possible and has been done to maintain an above-fifty percent win ratio over a large sample pool of games, because the computer cannot compensate for learning until the learning has already been shown.
(Also, + Show Spoiler +I'm a little wary of the "I'm bronze, but I'm really silver" line of thought is borderline insulting. That wasn't at all what I was saying. What I was saying was more along the lines of "I'm a bronze playing silvers, but neither of those mean anything.")
|
On March 28 2011 15:05 Staboteur wrote:@Ribbon You're wrong because skill is a changing variable, not an absolute. To use dice as an example, the mean of a 6 sided dice is 3.5, but if you were to add a random number between 0.0 and 1.0 per trial (to simulate learning or progress in SC2) your resulted average would always be lagging behind your proposed mean. You will learn something every game, but matchmaking cannot imagine what you learned last game, and cannot compensate for it. Because of this, it will match you against someone it considers on the same level (someone it might even claim is favoured to win) that you're actually better than, because you improved significantly between this game and the previous. To put it back in dice terms, the mean is 3.5, but last game you "learned" one point of value, so while the computer is working with the mean of 3.5, you've improved and added one to the value of every side, making the ACTUAL mean 4.5. The computer has no way of knowing you've added one to the values on the dice until after it has been rolled, so the results seem above average, to the computer. The computer will NOT realize you're adding 1 to the dice value every time and compensate for it. It cannot assume you're learning the same amount every game. It will always be one step behind in calculating your mean value. It cannot calculate the data until it has already happened. SO, again, if you're constantly learning the computer will always match you against people it considers equal until you break 50% (through a win streak or consistent positive performance), at which point it will match you against people it considers better than yourself, but may not actually be better due to it being one step behind. Though it will try stop your winstreak by putting you against progressively better people, it still has no way of compensating for how much you learn, and as such may not actually stop your winstreak until it catches up to your rate of learning. Therefore, it is possible and has been done to maintain an above-fifty percent win ratio over a large sample pool of games, because the computer cannot compensate for learning until the learning has already been shown. (Also, + Show Spoiler +I'm a little wary of the "I'm bronze, but I'm really silver" line of thought is borderline insulting. That wasn't at all what I was saying. What I was saying was more along the lines of "I'm a bronze playing silvers, but neither of those mean anything.")
You're greatly over-complicating it, and actually you couldn't be more wrong. The reason people have above 50% is:
1. If they were to make a new account, it takes a while for MMR to catch up with their actual skill level. 2. The higher your MMR is, the greater the chance that you will play someone below you, since at that level the game sacrifices some matchmaking accuracy for search time. Otherwise all top 200 players would have hour+ search times (like in wc3).
Or in your case, your MMR was so low that it takes an ungodly amount of time to raise it. People abused this all the time in wc3 to raise their win% artificially.
That is all.
|
honestly people dont realize that anything less than masters is bad. people think diamond is somewhat competitive when really if youre not in masters, youre bad. im bad and im in masters. so stop acting like 'ohhh plats should be able to see their losses because theyre high enough'. no plats are just as bad as silvers. but on the other hand, i just find it really obnoxious not to be able to see peoples losses even though i can see my own -_-'
|
I registered here cause of this and cause you get banned for complaining with any sensible argument on SC2 forums.
Let's be a bit frank here, even though Blizzard is doing their best to destroy the E-sports scene they built up during SC1 thanks to the dick in charge of Activision-Blizzard.
If you join a LEAGUE... If you engage in "professional" or "amateur" sports...competitions...events...YOU are subject to RANK. In every SPORT: You are subject to rank.
If you do not WISH to ladder because you do not wish for others to see your statistics you should abstain. There are plenty of custom games out there. And yes I do recognise the inability to put a title on them and name therm "Newbies only please" but this is not the issue at heart.
I do not want to see my wins without losses and if I was in charge of some official ladder I would bloody make every game public. I would have a HUGE database like that of google, remove any and all (automatically) text and make them public. Because a league is a league. It's a public e-sport place of competition.
Damn. At least LET me see my OWN stats. Do they enjoy fucking shit up like this? It took them 1 year to add a freakin search function to their game. What's wrong with them?
I'm really not buying anything from this company anymore except for perhaps the new expansions of Starcraft simply because the base they built it upon (SC1) is so damn good but so old.
Let's be fair, they haven't bloody done anything really new and positive in SC2. The only thing I can think of is that it's a bit easier to make custom maps special. But that's a mere tradeoff to the fact tat any modding is illegal.
I'm just disgusted here guys.
|
On March 29 2011 02:48 bigbeau wrote: honestly people dont realize that anything less than masters is bad. people think diamond is somewhat competitive when really if youre not in masters, youre bad. im bad and im in masters. so stop acting like 'ohhh plats should be able to see their losses because theyre high enough'. no plats are just as bad as silvers. but on the other hand, i just find it really obnoxious not to be able to see peoples losses even though i can see my own -_-'
It's asshats that you that make this stuff even possible.
Please don't ban me fellow moderators but fuck you. First of all the majority of people who bought this game don't play ladder or don't play it actively. Anyone who plays ladder and has consistent play is a pretty good player.
Anyone in Master is a DAMN good player. That is the top 2%. That's like Division 1 in every country for football. You know what, you make me more disgusted than Blizzard.
And all ya'll newbees who read this, don't listen to this bastard. Keep on playing, keep on competing and keep on improving. That's what sport is about.
User was banned for this post.
|
On March 29 2011 02:48 bigbeau wrote: honestly people dont realize that anything less than masters is bad. people think diamond is somewhat competitive when really if youre not in masters, youre bad. im bad and im in masters. so stop acting like 'ohhh plats should be able to see their losses because theyre high enough'. no plats are just as bad as silvers. but on the other hand, i just find it really obnoxious not to be able to see peoples losses even though i can see my own -_-'
Yeah stuff like this is very broad. For example, I have not played SC2 for almost 3 months on ladder properly. That was before Masters was there. So now that Im starting to play again, I am still a diamond player with an almost 2000 point bonus pool.
Will I get into Masters once I start playing again? Probably. Am I a GREAT player? No. Am I "bad"? I dont think so. Hell, there could be great players in bronze, silver, gold, platinum, and diamond but that just could not advance based on whatever reason.
The ranking system is wonky sometimes so lay off, broseph.
|
On March 29 2011 03:13 Ondskan wrote: I registered here cause of this and cause you get banned for complaining with any sensible argument on SC2 forums.
Let's be a bit frank here, even though Blizzard is doing their best to destroy the E-sports scene they built up during SC1 thanks to the dick in charge of Activision-Blizzard.
If you join a LEAGUE... If you engage in "professional" or "amateur" sports...competitions...events...YOU are subject to RANK. In every SPORT: You are subject to rank.
If you do not WISH to ladder because you do not wish for others to see your statistics you should abstain. There are plenty of custom games out there. And yes I do recognise the inability to put a title on them and name therm "Newbies only please" but this is not the issue at heart.
I do not want to see my wins without losses and if I was in charge of some official ladder I would bloody make every game public. I would have a HUGE database like that of google, remove any and all (automatically) text and make them public. Because a league is a league. It's a public e-sport place of competition.
Damn. At least LET me see my OWN stats. Do they enjoy fucking shit up like this? It took them 1 year to add a freakin search function to their game. What's wrong with them?
I'm really not buying anything from this company anymore except for perhaps the new expansions of Starcraft simply because the base they built it upon (SC1) is so damn good but so old.
Let's be fair, they haven't bloody done anything really new and positive in SC2. The only thing I can think of is that it's a bit easier to make custom maps special. But that's a mere tradeoff to the fact tat any modding is illegal.
I'm just disgusted here guys.
Well, to be quite honest I don't understand why you would say, "If you do not WISH to ladder because you do not wish for others to see your statistics you should abstain." To be quite honest about my opinion is that the problem is lower leagues not laddering. If I remember correctly, bronze and silver make up around 40% of the ladder. In effort to include a larger percentage of people to ladder, they have tried to remove the penalties of learning the game in the ladder. If more people increase their skill level, I can't see how this is a bad move. And this patch addressed a ton of map problems and I for one am happy with the way that they have taken an approach to fix it. They took their darn time but they certainly have attempted to solve an issue which is better than ignoring it.
|
Canada10919 Posts
I really think this issue could be solved by making the win/loss thing an option: Do you want it visible/invisible? You could even tailor it further- invisible to the public, but visible to you. And of course invisible to both or visible to both.
Coming from iCCup, I may have only hovered between D- and D, but I was/am proud of my 4 win, 16 loss season and my 3 win, 20 loss season (I finally got a handful of wins.) I understand some people are afraid to ladder, but others want to proudly display their blood, sweat, and tears even if they aren't that good.
|
I think it's working as intended - more players playing 1v1.
I'm 3.3k plat and have been #1 in my division for quite some time now. The past two nights I played, I've been getting matched up with quite a lot of Diamond players with less than 100 wins. I think I've won 90% of those games, and I honestly have seen stronger pushes from plat T's and P's than what I've been getting from these low Diamonds.
Hopefully these low diamonds get demoted to plat later on, while the stronger plats get promoted up.
|
On March 29 2011 03:17 Ondskan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:48 bigbeau wrote: honestly people dont realize that anything less than masters is bad. people think diamond is somewhat competitive when really if youre not in masters, youre bad. im bad and im in masters. so stop acting like 'ohhh plats should be able to see their losses because theyre high enough'. no plats are just as bad as silvers. but on the other hand, i just find it really obnoxious not to be able to see peoples losses even though i can see my own -_-' It's asshats that you that make this stuff even possible. Please don't ban me fellow moderators but fuck you. First of all the majority of people who bought this game don't play ladder or don't play it actively. Anyone who plays ladder and has consistent play is a pretty good player. Anyone in Master is a DAMN good player. That is the top 2%. That's like Division 1 in every country for football. You know what, you make me more disgusted than Blizzard. And all ya'll newbees who read this, don't listen to this bastard. Keep on playing, keep on competing and keep on improving. That's what sport is about.
Actually, you bring up a great example. Even Division 1 football players are horrible because 95% of them don't have the skillset to go pro. You can re-define what "horrible" means but we have an objective measure of what "not horrible" is and that is people who play this game professionally. The rest of us are horrible and only the degree of horribleness matters.
For the record, I'm mid-Masters but I'm fucking horrible at this game.
|
No you n00b.
Those who play professionally as in AJAX or Real Madrid are excellent at the game they play and are sometimes even idols. Those who play in division 1 are in almost every regard (except perhaps in a small country like San Marino) very skilled players and very good at the game.
Stop beating yourself up. If you're mid master you're damn good at what you do. At least tis is true if you've been a master consistently and have decent winratio.
|
On March 29 2011 03:52 Falling wrote: I really think this issue could be solved by making the win/loss thing an option: Do you want it visible/invisible? You could even tailor it further- invisible to the public, but visible to you. And of course invisible to both or visible to both.
Coming from iCCup, I may have only hovered between D- and D, but I was/am proud of my 4 win, 16 loss season and my 3 win, 20 loss season (I finally got a handful of wins.) I understand some people are afraid to ladder, but others want to proudly display their blood, sweat, and tears even if they aren't that good.
Yeah and that's what's pissing me of te most. To the point that I think I'm being intentionally fucked in the ass.
Why was there no option to search games earlier? Why is there no option to name a game you create even tough the likelyhood of anyone "searching" for it is low? Why is there no option to open more than one public chat room or create your own rooms? Why is there no option to show stats to at least yourself if not to everyone else? Why is there no option to allow people to chat with you without knowing your char code/make the char code public?
So many why's.
|
On March 29 2011 02:48 bigbeau wrote: honestly people dont realize that anything less than masters is bad. people think diamond is somewhat competitive when really if youre not in masters, youre bad. im bad and im in masters. so stop acting like 'ohhh plats should be able to see their losses because theyre high enough'. no plats are just as bad as silvers. but on the other hand, i just find it really obnoxious not to be able to see peoples losses even though i can see my own -_-'
Masters league is saturated, that is why they are having to reset it.
I beat masters players all the time, doesnt mean the system is gonna call me a "Master"
like you are good because you have some worthless title. go win a tournament if you are half decent
They have to reset masters because they found a good portion of these "master" players suddenly become inactive after getting promoted into masters. So they can keep talking about how they are in masters league yet don't play that bracket anymore.
|
I can tell you what kept me quite discouraged from playing SC1. I sucked, had a bad W/L, and got kicked from a lot of games. Occasionally I'd find a newb friendly game, but it felt near impossible to start to learn BW when everyone was ahead and all my experience was from playing the campaign.
Yes, there's a whole matchmaking system that pretty much negates that issue in SC2, but I can tell you how badly losses can lockout a player from making any progress in SC:BW.
I really don't see this loss removal as some "have a trophy" nonsense like in 10 year old soccer, but just as encouragement to play without any thing hanging over your head. People shouldn't play for stats, but they do. It's natural to want to show off, although I think most people know results matter more when the reward is greater, hence tournaments generally mean the most.
In addition to removing some "fear of playing" or whatever, there's actually more concrete reasons: Smurfing and cheesing. If people were cheesing for a high w/l before, or at least thought they could, this change discourages that. It also discourages smurfing for obvious reasons.
|
hi
User was warned for this post
|
At first i had to same gut reaction as many people that it was a ridiculus idea, but its true alot of player below masters realy do overvalue their win % and it just means they hardly ever actually play. After all if ur 70%+ and you play a decent amount of game you'll be in masters You get alot of people in gold/plat at like 80-95% wins with only 20 games or so. Get into a mindset that its better to leave it at 18-1 than play more get promoted and start losing. I know alot of my friends from wc3 have this problem as their raw RTS skill carries them to diamound at a high % but they know they cant beat top players
It will give the leagues more meaning aswell which i think is why they have the new icons for differnt ranks within your league.
|
i dont understand why you would remove the losses but keep the wins. it makes no sense.
|
It saddens me I can't see my loss count anymore. Makes me want to stop laddering. I was over 60% win, now I can't know for sure. (Just played some games after patch, I'm 3-1, so more than 60% still...)
Is there ANYWHERE where I can find my win/loss ratio?
|
I seriously don't understand y they removed the losses... it just doesn't make sense or look right.
|
|
|
|
|