Ladder Update 4/27/2015
Forum Index > SC2 General |
LordOfDabu
United States388 Posts
| ||
Paukum
Norway59 Posts
Even though the badge doesn't "really" mean anything, there is a joy in suddenly getting promoted, even if it's a childish joy. I for one also find it encouraging to get closer to the top of my division, even if it doesn't indicate actual mmr. For people in higher leagues I can understand that they would prefer to see their actual mmr ranking. What I don't find encouraging is being stuck in gold since the beginning of hots after being plat for several seasons before that, so I look forward to see how these changes will affect my progress (haven't had time to play much since the season started). | ||
Striker.superfreunde
Germany1117 Posts
As you mentioned mmr requirment, i`ve a bit of a awkward question. How much has the mmr requirement (e.g for gold league) changed during WoL 2010 till today? Or any other given points in time to get a rough estimation. If it has changed at all. Thanks for working on and caring about the ladder | ||
y0su
Finland7871 Posts
On April 28 2015 19:13 Paukum wrote: I really like the idea of having more leagues. Would be cool if "wood league" actually came into being, instead of being just an insult. Even though the badge doesn't "really" mean anything, there is a joy in suddenly getting promoted, even if it's a childish joy. I for one also find it encouraging to get closer to the top of my division, even if it doesn't indicate actual mmr. For people in higher leagues I can understand that they would prefer to see their actual mmr ranking. What I don't find encouraging is being stuck in gold since the beginning of hots after being plat for several seasons before that, so I look forward to see how these changes will affect my progress (haven't had time to play much since the season started). But wood league was actually between diamond and master :D You'd actually be good, but not that good. Copper would be below bronze and maybe iron below it.... I've also always felt it was dumb how many 1 game accounts you'd see in any given division. Maybe think that they should reconsider the placement match amount. Something like 5 for returning players and 10 for new/mmr reset players. | ||
korona
1098 Posts
On April 28 2015 17:35 tar wrote: The top 20% invites are based on your Season 1 performance click me But what does the top 20% mean? Interesting dilemma: a) diamond, master, gm - These leagues are the top 20% based on Blizzards official communication. In this option MMR would not affect eligibility (e.g. if you were in master and tanked your MMR to silver level you would still get access) b) based only on MMR - Top 20% for many servers would likely include most platinum range and all higher leagues. In this model the league badge would mean nothing. If you were in master league and you tanked your MMR e.g. to silver range you would not get access c) based on MMR but some activity filtering - For example some requirement regarding maximum unused bonus pool d) top 20 of each ladder division on every league. The MMR itself would not be a factor - just that you have been active enough to reach top 20 of your division (usually you get to top 20 just by spending your bonus pool). Blizzard's German customer support speculated on Twitter that this would be their approach. e) some other way to define 'top 20%' But in some days we likely know more as Blizzard was aiming to start giving beta accesses later this week. More discussion regarding this dilemma can be found from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/483822-top-20-invites | ||
c0ldfusion
United States8292 Posts
The language they used is still too vague. You can tell it's basically the stat guy explaining to the community manager what the changes were and they had to awkwardly translate it for the general population. It's not like the community folks are going to answer any technical questions about the ladder anyway. That and 99%+ of ladder doesn't actually care about the details. They just want to know if the ladder "works". | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20152 Posts
This happens almost every time they change something drastic like this. The leagues will flex a bit and they'll adjust the boundries. Say ML used to be 2000mmr to get in. With people being promoted instantly at 2k it'll expand to 5%. Blizzard will adjust the boundry to 2200 the following season and we'll only see 2% again... There's no boundary that they can adjust. They're letting people IN but not OUT - there are only two possible outcomes 1; promotions into the league are too hard or even impossible 2; big inflation of league population % on the higher leagues as we get weeks deeper into the season Sorry I realize now that you meant it as a hypothetical example. That said; it's still hard with the division system to know. I mean; whats top 20% translate to? GM through top gold? GM through top plat? No one can tell for sure where the line is right now. Only Blizzard can. Previously (and i'm talking like WOL here, maybe early HOTS) the leagues were rooted to %'s much more solidly. The MMR numbers were about right, you were not promoted until you were solidly in the next league (or demoted unless you were solidly in the one below) and the league percentages stayed quite steady throughout the season. With these changes they're guaranteeing drastic inflation in masters and diamond. | ||
Oshuy
Netherlands529 Posts
On April 28 2015 22:33 Cyro wrote: There's no boundary that they can adjust. They're letting people IN but not OUT - there are only two possible outcomes 1; promotions into the league are too hard or even impossible 2; big inflation of league population % on the higher leagues as we get weeks deeper into the season That has been the case since they removed demotion (?june 2013?). Statistically, the % of players in masters would get to 100% if everyone played an infinite amount of games. I don't think the threshold removal will have such an impact. To my understanding, they only promoted when MMR got to ("lower_bound" + "threshold"), where "threshold" is the estimated standard variability of a player's MMR for a fixed skill. Removing the threshold only means that players at ("lower_bound" - "threshold") will get promoted at the highest of their standard variability. This is something that can easily enough be managed by redefining the bounds themselves. The overlap between leagues remains approximately the same, but it is between ("lower_bound" - 2*"threshold") and "lower_bound" instead of ("lower_bound" - "threshold") and ("lower_bound" + "threshold") | ||
wUndertUnge
United States1125 Posts
I really hope they find a way to make the ladder more meaningful and integral to the community experience with LOTV. | ||
korona
1098 Posts
On April 29 2015 02:03 wUndertUnge wrote: Just a quick report: I'm back in mid-dish Diamond, which is where I was before I stopped playing months ago. I'm at 40 games with a 50% winrate. The strange thing is I got promoted after 4 losses in a row to plats, but one win against a diamond. It's super wonky. I really hope they find a way to make the ladder more meaningful and integral to the community experience with LOTV. That promotion likely happened around 25th to 30th match? The system promotes after 25th match to your actual league if you already have not been promoted (if player was in calibration phase == 5 placements). It does not promote after lost games - only after wins. | ||
Striker.superfreunde
Germany1117 Posts
| ||
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
FaiFai
Peru53 Posts
| ||
korona
1098 Posts
On April 29 2015 03:57 Striker.superfreunde wrote: Are unranked matches included to those 25 matches? Let`s say i`ll play 15 unranked matches and then 10 ranked. Does the calibration grabs then too? Afaik unranked works with the same mmr as ranked does!? No. Ranked and unranked MMRs are separated. But it is likely that similar calibration period happens for unranked too (hidden placement matches and possible calibration period after that). | ||
Cyro
United Kingdom20152 Posts
That has been the case since they removed demotion (?june 2013?). Statistically, the % of players in masters would get to 100% if everyone played an infinite amount of games. I don't think the threshold removal will have such an impact. To my understanding, they only promoted when MMR got to ("lower_bound" + "threshold"), where "threshold" is the estimated standard variability of a player's MMR for a fixed skill. Removing the threshold only means that players at ("lower_bound" - "threshold") will get promoted at the highest of their standard variability. This is something that can easily enough be managed by redefining the bounds themselves. They're promoting people when their peak MMR hits X for one game, instead of the previous system where they promoted them after their peak MMR hit X+Y+Z (no more variability taken into account and no safety margin). I think it'll have a pretty big impact - with no demotions anyway, it's only a question of how fast masters+diamond inflates | ||
korona
1098 Posts
On April 29 2015 08:24 Cyro wrote: They're promoting people when their peak MMR hits X for one game, instead of the previous system where they promoted them after their peak MMR hit X+Y+Z (no more variability taken into account and no safety margin). I think it'll have a pretty big impact - with no demotions anyway, it's only a question of how fast masters+diamond inflates Even before the changes the uncertainty did not affect the accounts noticeably after calibration period was over based on MMR tool data. The MMR changes were quite predictable after the stabilization had happened And the safety margin that was there was likely quite small as there usually was no zigzagging near the threshold and most accounts were promoted with about the same MMR levels. Do remember that you can get pretty much similar effect that you got from a small safety margin just by adjusting the league offsets / thresholds. If the initial offsets / thresholds are not optimal, Blizzard can adjust them after the dust has settled (when majority of the accounts have stabilized and reached their 'typical levels'). It is shame that too many are now only looking at the league percentages on nios. The percentages are not that relevant at this point. The thresholds can be adjusted if the initial guesses (estimates what static offsets / thresholds would be ok) were not on spot and the league distribution ends up being off. The more important effect is that the MMRs should become skill ratings once again when enough accounts have went through calibration. And if the MMRs end up corresponding the skill levels better, the matchmaking improves. | ||
WGT-Baal
France3146 Posts
On April 28 2015 09:06 ROOTFayth wrote: I miss the good old WGTour ladder ranks from broodwar Me too. But even back then people complained a lot about the ladder. But at least the ranking system was clear. Yet there was no auto matchmaking. It was basically managed directly by the players in the way games were created | ||
NaboliC
Sweden130 Posts
| ||
Rollora
2450 Posts
On April 30 2015 23:27 NaboliC wrote: Finally I'm master again... And finally they made it possible to advance the league without playing 100 games. I once played 60 games and had 60 wins in a row with my brothers acc. Same here. After being re-ranked (5 games placement, got cheesed by 3 different 50 APM tosses. God how I hate this game sometimes. Inferior players shouldn't win because of single units abilities) to silver I had 100% winrate and after 15-20 games went to gold, 1 game later plat, 1 game later to dia. Where I still win, even offrace Looking forward to the LotV invite | ||
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
| ||