<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 17 of 17   
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 10:39:26


ps 
Level 60
Report
Just noticed the newest 1v1 ladder #1 and checked his list of games.

It's not new that you can get all time high rating with new runs by accumulating wins against (mostly) lower tiers and delaying your losses.

But it left me wondering if there shouldn't be a better way to attribute ranking than the current minimum 20 games thing.

Maybe something like minimum 3 games against the players surrounding your current rating (+/- 10 ranks) would be more accurate representation? So if you skyrocket your rating you would need to finish a couple of games on your new tier level before getting your new ranking.

Edited 10/11/2017 10:40:58
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 11:33:46


Cowboy 
Level 57
Report
I 100% agree with this, but I also like the threshold of the MDL trophy. Holding first for ten straight games or hell even 5 to be able to get the trophy would be an improvement in my opinion. Trophy seems to go out to players at a dime a dozen, which just makes it unimpressive.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 14:47:03


Bugs Bunny
Level 52
Report
Stop stalling?
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 14:48:14


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
These cases will be gone as soon as the "new" ladder rules will be approved and enforced
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 14:48:40


Buns157 
Level 67
Report
Just accept the 1v1 ladder is fairly easy to get the trophy and is just the warmup to getting the MDL one
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 15:09:11

Nauzhror 
Level 56
Report
MDL and 1v1 are apples and oranges. They're incomparable. One shouldn't be inherently harder than the other, as one is a savant ladder, and the other is a jack of all trades ladder.

Having to hold rank 1 for 10 games before getting the trophy on 1v1 would likely work wonderfully, very few people would ever earn the trophy, but for the few that did it'd mean something.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 15:16:23


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
^ which one of savant and jack of all trades is the 1vs1 ladder? :P
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 15:17:23

Nauzhror 
Level 56
Report
1v1 is obviously the savant ladder, it's the same template every game.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 15:34:44


Buns157 
Level 67
Report
MDL currently is obviously harder, and that's not just due to having to perform well on a range of templates/settings and the better rating system.

1v1 ladder is the warm up to getting first on MDL ;)
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 16:28:34

Nauzhror 
Level 56
Report
That's like saying becoming a chess GM is the warmup to mastering blackjack and poker.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 16:30:06


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
If you disagree, feel free to try the mdl :) will be harder to enter the top 10 than on the 1vs1 and having different templates isn't the reason for it ;)
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 16:47:49

Nauzhror 
Level 56
Report
Different templates is absolutely the reason. Rating system and who's participating matter as well, but who's participating varies on every ladder as time passes. Getting rank 1 on MDL right now is hard. Sure. But so was getting rank 1 on 1v1 when Dead Piggy was rank 1. He had 2422 rating with 5 unexpired losses, even stalled runs had trouble passing him.

I'm not arguing what's "harder". Difficulty is subjective. A single template ladder however is without question more focused around a single skillset, which is what I was referring to as being savant-like.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/11/2017 16:55:59


#Master [QB] 
Level 61
Report
The skillset you need on the 1 v 1 ladder is to win the picking lottery and to show up at the right place at the right time often by pure chance
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/31/2017 07:26:25


ℳℛᐤƬrαńɋℰ✕
Level 57
Report
Wow...
Are people really after years of playing starting to realize that 1v1 Ladder Earth map with current settings is shiity. I am all for that this 1v1 Ladder should be on one Template, although I like the idea that map could be variable: roughly same in size with standard bonuses.

Sorry ps for diverting from the talk. My offered solution has always been:
  • To get ranked minimum 10 games required
  • To get ranked must have some surrounding matches (be it 3 or 5 from +/- 10 ranks or 100 score etc.)
  • To get trophy First positions has to be held for X amount of games (be it 5, 7 or 10)
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 10/31/2017 15:20:36


knyte 
Level 58
Report
Original criteria suggested by OP are probably overkill as games will likely cause players' rank to change so it could be a moving window (and you could get ranked but then unranked if one of your opponents changes ranks themselves).

10-win window makes more sense. Alternatively, I think Bayeselo also has a standard deviation for every player's rating and that value is probably much higher for players who have mostly or only faced weaker players. Maybe use criteria like the RT ladder where your standard deviation has to be below a certain threshold?

New ladder rules would make this a moot point, but ladder runs vs. weak players can still happen without stalling.

Another approach: Once a player becomes eligible for the #1 rank, have them beat the current #1 (or highest rated active player) to earn the trophy or even just the rank.

Edited 11/1/2017 04:46:28
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 11/1/2017 04:22:00

Nauzhror 
Level 56
Report
All a "day" window would do is encourage stalling even more.
Discussion on the criteria to get ranked: 11/1/2017 04:46:20


knyte 
Level 58
Report
Sorry, meant a 10-win window.
Posts 1 - 17 of 17