<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 28 of 28   
GG: 5/21/2015 21:07:03


Nex
Level 60
Report
Looks like someone's trying to monopolize the real-time ladder's top 10. . . .


GG: 5/21/2015 22:10:12


Epicular
Level 46
Report
took me a moment...


...lol
GG: 5/22/2015 13:14:42


FlyingBender
Level 62
Report
yes is kinda fun :)
GG: 5/22/2015 14:26:52


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
At least Summer is ahead of you guys :)

We have the top 2 spots on Seasonal so far too:

https://www.warlight.net/LadderSeason?ID=4018
GG: 5/22/2015 15:14:30


Wohoo
Level 56
Report
Was it easier to get high rating before 03/01/2015?

After 61 games Summer had a rating of 2365, with 10 losses.
After 61 games Wohoo had a rating of 2010, with 9 loses.

Even after 77 games with 10 loses, my rating was just 2073, quite a huge difference...
GG: 5/22/2015 15:23:02


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
Wohoo, out of your 125 games, you played with people that had 2000+ rating only 3 times, most of your wins were ginst 1600-1700 players in contrast to Summer.
GG: 5/22/2015 17:38:03


Latnox 
Level 60
Report
We have the top 2 spots on Seasonal so far too

Yeah, welcome on seasonal ladder, where victories doesn't matter, and points are made up.

Edited 5/22/2015 17:38:15
GG: 5/22/2015 19:22:30


Wohoo
Level 56
Report
Wohoo, out of your 125 games, you played with people that had 2000+ rating only 3 times, most of your wins were ginst 1600-1700 players in contrast to Summer.
Win: 67 games, lose: 10 games.
Average rating opponents: 1608
Rating: 2073

Win: 51 games, lose: 10 games.
Average rating opponents: 1658
Rating: 2365

Winning 16 games more should be worth more then opponents with 3% higher rating imo. Also because the TrueSkill Standard Deviation should be lower for 16 more games. But a difference of 292(14,1%) is just absurd...

Edited 5/22/2015 19:27:52
GG: 5/22/2015 20:54:42


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
Average opponent rating is not the right number though. Sze said of your "wins" not "opponents"

For example, let's say two people have the same opponent ratings (opp 1-10, respectively):

1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000

Let's say both go 5-5, but player A beats opps 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and player B beats opps 1,3,5,7,9

Player A should have a higher rating because wins factor more into rating than losses.

^I hope that I am correct there.
GG: 5/22/2015 21:04:42


Master of the Dead 
Level 63
Report

"We have the top 2 spots on Seasonal so far too

Yeah, welcome on seasonal ladder, where victories doesn't matter, and points are made up. "



Care to explain? It's just Elo instead of TrueSkill right?
GG: 5/22/2015 21:26:55


Latnox 
Level 60
Report
IDK, I was 2nd, won a game and then end up being 5th. Summer rating is constantly growing, despite she didn't won any game.

I don't know what kind of algorithm is being used here, but it's definitely different one, than in real time ladder and in 1v1 ladder.

Edited 5/22/2015 21:33:28
GG: 5/22/2015 21:34:13

Hennns
Level 58
Report
The rating will keep going up- not only for summer, but everyone even if none of your games are finished. The way I look at it, during the season the ratings will be very wrong, the idea is that at the end it will be correct.
GG: 5/22/2015 21:55:14


Master of the Dead 
Level 63
Report
Latnox, I believe it is the same as 1v1 ladder(Elo rating) with a small difference.

Fizzer has added a component which awards points based on number of games you have played. This is to avoid people joining late, playing a few games and claiming top positions. The reason why you see ratings consistently increase is because of new games being allocated. Both Summer and you will receive these points as long as you are joined on the ladder.

Elo rating awards points retrospectively based on how your opponents fare as well. So if your rating has decreased it is because you beat someone who had a high rating and they have now fallen(due to loss etc).
Or if Summer's rating has gone up, it is because she beat someone who was underrated, but has now achieved their true rating.



In short, the rating in Seasonal has the same basis as the 1v1 ladder(the very same rating system with which you achieved your awesome streak :P). So do you still think it is all made up??
GG: 5/22/2015 22:23:22


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
The seasonal fluctuates a lot until the end because other people you play win/lose and it effects your rating. We are almost 3/4 done with this season (assuming people don't have lots of unfinished games), so it might not change that much going forward (outside your own W-L).
GG: 5/22/2015 22:36:15


master of desaster 
Level 65
Report
the Rating in the seasonal ladder is the same as in the 1vs1, but you get +40 Points for every game you finished (i think). Bad Thing on that ladder is that it highly supports stalling cause you get higher matchups and as consequence a higher Rating. really sad. it'd be a cool ladder beside that.
GG: 5/22/2015 22:48:36


Wohoo
Level 56
Report
Average opponent rating is not the right number though. Sze said of your "wins" not "opponents".
ChrisTMAS, in the real time ladder, you lose more point if you lose to a low rated player then when you lose against a high rated player. So to look only to the "wins" is less correct.

But next to that, I did hear that latest games count more then then older games, but that would work in my favor.
by the rating 2073 I had only 1 lost out of the last 34 games, and 2 lose out of the last 49 games, while Summer had her losses more spread evenly...

But the strange thing is not that she got a higher rating, but more the huge difference in rating.

I just want to know why that difference is so great, so i maybe can use that knowledge in the real-time ladder myself.

Edited 5/22/2015 22:49:13
GG: 5/22/2015 23:20:44


Master of the Dead 
Level 63
Report
"but you get +40 Points for every game you finished (i think)."


Nope. You get those points for every game allocated to you(which is why these ratings rise after the allocation of new games).
GG: 5/22/2015 23:27:57


Master of the Dead 
Level 63
Report
@Wohoo

I haven't taken a look at Summer's and your wins.

I think making comparison's like avg rating of opponent won't explain the difference. I would think Summer has beaten high rated opponents more than you have.

The number of victories is pointless. You don't get many points for beating low rated opponents(sometimes even 1 or 2 points). However you beat great opponents a few times and your rating rises to a very high level.. then it is just a case of maintaining it by winning(be it against low or high rated players).
GG: 5/23/2015 09:35:43


Latnox 
Level 60
Report
So do you still think it is all made up??

Thanx for explanation, but naah, that's just a poor attempt to cover the truth. We all know, that behind the scenes there is a guy who spins wheel of fortune every couple of days to determine how much points you will actually get.
GG: 5/23/2015 09:56:15


Krzysztof 
Level 66
Report

Win: 67 games, lose: 10 games.
Average rating opponents: 1608
Rating: 2073

Win: 51 games, lose: 10 games.
Average rating opponents: 1658
Rating: 2365


You are probable taking opponent's current rating for calculating those averages. It's meaningless, in RT ladder it's important what's your opponent rating when you play the game. It can change later, but it won't affect your stats

Edited 5/23/2015 10:02:05
GG: 5/23/2015 13:54:21


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
What Krzychu said. Also you should note, that the more games you play, the more accurate the rating is, so arguing Summer was 2365 can also be countered by simply saying, she is not anymore. Every rating system will have small flaws that'll need time to be corrected.
GG: 5/23/2015 15:40:29


[WM] Gnuffone 
Level 60
Report
We already explained lot of times how this rt ladder work.
Also what matter is true skill meant, not rating if the player you play vs.
After reach a standard deviation of 60, More you play, more your rating will decrease. Bc you will tend to lose more than you were used to.
GG: 5/26/2015 21:31:16


Nex
Level 60
Report
They now have six of the top 10, one of the top 1, three of the top 3 and 3 of the top 5.... not bad!
GG: 5/27/2015 17:00:26


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
Gnuff and Timi are crashing the party now.
GG: 5/27/2015 17:03:19


Nex
Level 60
Report
I think there should be more incentives to stay active on the ladders.
GG: 5/29/2015 16:09:57


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
You get free points, I think that is incentive enough. If you want more activity, fix the templates people don't like.
GG: 5/29/2015 16:21:31


Nex
Level 60
Report
You get free points, I think that is incentive enough. If you want more activity, fix the templates people don't like.


No, it is not enough incentive. Less than half of the 'top' players are actually ranked on the 1v1 ladder at any given moment. Think about it; is sze ranked? Gnuffone? Timinator? Let's check by clan: WG has five players ranked on the 1v1 ladder, and you guys have 12 players total. Apex has none ranked out of 10. [20] hasn't had anyone ranked in months. Lynx has four players ranked out of 21. GG has three players ranked out of 21.

Of course, this isn't taking into account factors like being busy in real life, etc. But you have to admit that the 1v1 ladder never actually shows the truth of things, because so many of the best players are never ranked at the same time. If everyone in the top competitive clans were to be ranked on the 1v1 ladder, at the same time, then the top 100 would look a lot different.

So, I say again, I think there needs to be more incentive to stay on the ladders, especially the 1v1 ladder, instead of just dropping out whenever it's convenient.
GG: 5/29/2015 17:08:31


ChrisCMU 
Level 60
Report
I thought you were talking about the RT ladder (which is why I made the template comment). Moving on to 1v1 ladder.

If I have already gotten #1, as many of the players not playing it have...why would I want to keep playing it? To keep sharp I suppose, but there is also promo league, clan league and other ways to do that. Points don't matter for those players, but perhaps they would if more unlocks were made at higher levels. The downside to that is you end up with more lotto games just to grab points. Perhaps boosting the points from ladders would help, I don't know.

Another thing that would help is a real clan ranking. Right now there is no incentive to get more points because spam clans can just add 3 nobodies and jump ahead anyway. But that only helps in the clan world (does nothing to encourage non clan top players to participate in the ladder).

Another thing that might help is a combined rank from all ladders. Total points, total rating, whatever the formula. Then people would be encouraged to play all the ladders and get a higher total rank.
Posts 1 - 28 of 28