SC2SEA.com - Starcraft 2 SEA eSports Community Site

**nirvAnA** · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 7:13 PM

Credit goes to Camilto on TL for solving the mystery.

SEA DIVISIONS

S-Rank (+0)
Corruptor Tango
Zealot Epsilon
Khala Bravo

A-Rank (+63)
Queen Foxtrot
Firebat Sierra

B-Rank (+126)
Kagg Gamma
Feld Indigo

C-Rank (+189)
Scarab Nu
Siege Tank Alpha
Changeling Victor

D-Rank (+252)
Roach Sigma
Drone Romeo
Zekrath Beta
Carrier Kilo
Stukov Pepper
Felanis Phi

E-Rank (+315)
Turaxis Tau
Hanson Delta
War Pigs Dixie
Zekrath Theta
Infestor Yankee
Ulrezaj Zeta
Umoja Hawk
Stukov Xi
Zergling Lambda
Hydralisk Lima
Prelate November
War Pigs Iota
Valkyrie Charlie
Khaydarin Omega
New Folsom Mars
Tabrenus Whiskey
Kaloth Juliet
Zer'Atai Eta
Warp Prism Zed
Viking Rho
Ghost Echo
Viking Tau
Banshee Quest
Moria Pi
Hanson Foxtrot
Ladranix Omicron
Baneling Chi
Kaloth Mu

F-Rank (+378)
Overlord Psi
Kerrigan Pi
Carrier Gamma
Aleksander Alamo

(alot of bad divisions, wow)
Current cut off point to get into top 200 - 2002 + Multiplier.
Do with this as you will

Latest Top 200 List

+ Show +

HuT · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 7:15 PM

Needs an edit yo.. looks messy.

Brultze · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 7:22 PM

lol im in E rank

NvPinder · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 7:26 PM

Corruptor Tango represent

PinkandWhite · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 7:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brultze

lol im in E rank

i am not even E! haha

Xeen · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 8:12 PM

B rank Kagg Gamma.

Dogsi · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 8:24 PM

uh... what?

Dogsi · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 8:32 PM

read tl... interesting read, got it now.

I thought it wasn't about points but turns out it is... guess I need to work my rating back up if I want to get back in the top 200 :-/

NvPinder · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 8:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogsi

read tl... interesting read, got it now.

I thought it wasn't about points but turns out it is... guess I need to work my rating back up if I want to get back in the top 200 :-/

if it was on MMR rather than points the top 20 would look fairly different i'd think :P

Benji · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 9:31 PM

I fail to see how being in a different division makes you a significantly better/worse player

cayore · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 9:32 PM

are those all the sea diamond divisions?? or are there more below F rank

Xeen · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 9:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benji

I fail to see how being in a different division makes you a significantly better/worse player

The idea is that it sorts divisions by MMR and win/loss - for the same reason it uses divisions at all. If all of you have similar win/loss ratios, then the top of the division is the one who plays the most, and therefore it's easy to see 'progress' when playing. This is to encourage people to play more, just like divisions are to let people have hope that 'wow, I'm top X in my division' rather than 50000th in the world. The TL thread explains in more detail.

Obviously it breaks down somewhat once people are sorted though.

Benji · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 9:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xeen

The idea is that it sorts divisions by MMR and win/loss - for the same reason it uses divisions at all. If all of you have similar win/loss ratios, then the top of the division is the one who plays the most, and therefore it's easy to see 'progress' when playing. This is to encourage people to play more, just like divisions are to let people have hope that 'wow, I'm top X in my division' rather than 50000th in the world. The TL thread explains in more detail.

Obviously it breaks down somewhat once people are sorted though.

So how it works now is Player A could be 3000 rated in his division, and simply because other people in his division don't play much/at all, he ranks lower than a 2700 player on the top division. Thats what I don't understand.

Xeen · Wed, 22nd-Dec-2010, 10:30 PM

The division 'modifier' is applied when you join the division, so the Blizzard top 200 ranking simply ignores that and uses the absolute points you have.

You can't be 'cheated' out of points by the system, it just tries to adjust you for the division rankings. The top 200 ranking ignores the applied modifiers, so that 3000 point player A was 'gifted' additional points when joining diamond anyway in your case.

**HDPhoenix** · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benji

I fail to see how being in a different division makes you a significantly better/worse player

It does seem a little wonky and frankly, I'm disappointed Blizzard took such an easy path for "Top 200". An ELO with hidden rating, adjusted to perhaps 3x that of regular ladder would have been so much better

Unstable · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 10:33 AM

Dont worry Benji, i dont like the system anyway, it certainly doesnt help the better players it rewards mass laddering

Xavi · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 12:08 PM

the ladder system is stupid, the more wins you have the harder it is for you to get points, so like a 1000 point diamond with a 60 wins and 20 losses or something will most of the time be put up againest a 2000-2500 point diamond with 400 wins 300 losses and be favoured.

I mean thats why i think glade, legionnaire, nirvana etc don't have high points and are not ontop of there divisions. They kind of give up with ladder because they would have to play alot of games to get to the top.

I could be all wrong

NvPinder · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavi

the ladder system is stupid, the more wins you have the harder it is for you to get points, so like a 1000 point diamond with a 60 wins and 20 losses or something will most of the time be put up againest a 2000-2500 point diamond with 400 wins 300 losses and be favoured.

I mean thats why i think glade, legionnaire, nirvana etc don't have high points and are not ontop of there divisions. They kind of give up with ladder because they would have to play alot of games to get to the top.

I could be all wrong

The bonus pool is what's ******* up top players attempts at coming back to SEA to ladder, I did a big post about it here: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=171285

mGMUSE · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 1:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPMoney

The bonus pool is what's ******* up top players attempts at coming back to SEA to ladder, I did a big post about it here: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=171285

I think the problem doesnt lie with bonus pool/blizzard's system per se, the problem is that you have too high of an mmr and are at the end of the bell curve. Other people seem to gain points easy but that's because they have lower mmrs and lousier ratio. Thus they get matched up with easier people and gain points faster - but once their bonus pool has been burned they'll have to put in alot of effort to move up the top200 list.

If you want to gain points easier you'll have to start losing games and get matched up with people who will give you more points, repeat and rinse.

However if you do manage to clear all your bonus pool(or even half of it) playing normally I believe you'll end up being #1 on SEA top 200 and possibly your divison as well.

TL;DR

If you want to play on ladder like a normal player, then lose some games and start laddering, repeat and rinse. However if you want to be an elite player then that is what you must expect. Though I'm sure if you get people like nirvana, ice, oxygen and glade together and start laddering together you'll clear all your bonus pools and end up top5 on sea easily.

Xeen · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 2:00 PM

I'd rather just see the bonus pool removed. It turns laddering into a chore even to just keep your rating where it is, and has all sorts of other problems.

It's not necessary.

**Mezza** · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 2:48 PM

basically the ladder system rewards consistent play
conversely, if the top players laid off for really long, and sitll mantained their ladder positions, how would the new players break into the scene and end up in the top 200 if they never got to p[lay the top dudes, there has to be some way to equalize it all.

therefore, they reward consistency (ie. ladder grinding), there ain't a perfect system but i guess in their eyes its fair.

**nirvAnA** · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 2:57 PM

a guy in pinders blog commented on how the bonus pool is really an XP decay system, but reversed so pple don't feel mad for losing points or having their XP decay. sounds logical but it shouldnt be that much of decay/bonuspoints and it shouldnt be tied in to how players with high MMRs cannot not find games.

ZergGirl · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 5:04 PM

I didn't want to be S-rank anyway....

Dogsi · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 5:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

a guy in pinders blog commented on how the bonus pool is really an XP decay system, but reversed so pple don't feel mad for losing points or having their XP decay. sounds logical but it shouldnt be that much of decay/bonuspoints and it shouldnt be tied in to how players with high MMRs cannot not find games.

I think the problem arises because they are mixing the ladder and MMR. Either use MMR to determine your rank OR use a point system to determine the difficulty of your opponent. They shouldn't be doing both.

Dogsi · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 5:38 PM

what if you make diamond to quickly for it to accurately give you an mmr? I went 7-0 (5 placements, 2 plat matches) and got placed in a bottom tier diamond division.

Xeen · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mezza

basically the ladder system rewards consistent play
conversely, if the top players laid off for really long, and sitll mantained their ladder positions, how would the new players break into the scene and end up in the top 200 if they never got to p[lay the top dudes, there has to be some way to equalize it all.

therefore, they reward consistency (ie. ladder grinding), there ain't a perfect system but i guess in their eyes its fair.

The newer players wouldn't end up in the top 200 because they haven't achieved the same standard of play that that the top players had. If they did, they would pass the 'top' players that weren't playing. There's no issue about 'play the top dudes' because matchmaking is based on MMR which isn't factored into ranking whatsoever.

I'm not seeing the problem here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogsi

what if you make diamond to quickly for it to accurately give you an mmr? I went 7-0 (5 placements, 2 plat matches) and got placed in a bottom tier diamond division.

All the division does is add/subtract a different buffer of points - so in the end, the bliz top 200 is ranking everyone on the same scale without said adjustment.

If you win a lot and earn a lot of points, you'd have earned them in any division, and thus you'll move up. It's the displayed ranking that's being moderated iirc, not bliz's.

Benji · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 6:14 PM

Also, look at these 2 divisions:

Feld Indigo: http://sc2ranks.com/div/15092/division-feld-indigo
Viking Rho: http://sc2ranks.com/div/18120/division-viking-rho

Rating wise, Viking Rho is significantly better in almost every respect, yet Feld Indigo is B-Rank (+126) and Viking Rho is E-Rank (+315).

/rant :P

Xeen · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 8:22 PM

That's the point. When players were placed into Viking Rho, they received +315pts to their score relative to the players put in a +0 division. Players placed into Feld Indigo received +126. This is why Viking Rho members would appear to be 'deflated' in terms of how they place on the Blizzard top 200 compared to their visible score.

yamite · Thu, 23rd-Dec-2010, 11:11 PM

nGenLight is F-rank...lol

**TAEdgE** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 1:10 AM

Was easier to do than i thought (6 hours since i understood how to do it and all the concepts beforehand), just needed to wait for the top 200 to actually come out this week.

Glad it's promoting discussion

.

**nGenLight** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 2:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yamite

nGenLight is F-rank...lol

Without me my division would be absolutely dead... although seems like I can't carry my division =/

It is a little annoying that I need so many more points to get a higher rank... but I feel glad, and sympathize with the top tier players who just can't get any more points. If the ladder gets reset and MMR remains, how on earth are players like Azz going to earn any points?

**TAEdgE** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 4:55 AM

I think when it resets, the higher the MMR, the better off you are, i forgot how. That's why i'm trying not to lose alot

.

Unstable · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 8:17 AM

I think you will find divisions will be reset dependant on MMR rating hence the need for 1 placement match

Xeen · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 9:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

Without me my division would be absolutely dead... although seems like I can't carry my division =/

It is a little annoying that I need so many more points to get a higher rank... but I feel glad, and sympathize with the top tier players who just can't get any more points. If the ladder gets reset and MMR remains, how on earth are players like Azz going to earn any points?

Well, to be fair, the extra points you need to be of the same rank as an A-div player are exactly the same as the extra points you got when you were placed in diamond. It's just a pain in the ass when you look at the whole thing a few months later. However, because the divisions are sorted so that whoever plays the most games should end up on top, it makes sense that you're miles ahead of the rest

Edge, from what I recall, having a high MMR means you'll end up getting more +20s after matches early on because of how MMR vs displayed rating is compared to determine your score, or something. I really can't remember either.

**cure** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 9:53 AM

Any way at all to determine your current mmr ?

**nGenLight** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 11:42 AM

I don't get it, I read somewhere that the first 100 players go into a division? I started out like 2 months after release. Kinda lame, because matchmaking of MMRs have nothing to do with divisions. But I guess the entire Top 200, Divisional rank and point system just makes you feel like steadily improving rather than seeing a not-so-fluctuating MMR.

I've got the mass gamer mentality as Nirvana described (adrenaline junky), but I think I'm improving at a steady pace, though probably not efficiently because I don't tackle it analytically all that often and just keep queueing games for the hell of it.

Kaz: I don't think Blizzard has released any data of that kind... I personally just compare it relatively to my peers.

Whisky · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xeen

Well, to be fair, the extra points you need to be of the same rank as an A-div player are exactly the same as the extra points you got when you were placed in diamond. It's just a pain in the ass when you look at the whole thing a few months later. However, because the divisions are sorted so that whoever plays the most games should end up on top, it makes sense that you're miles ahead of the rest

Edge, from what I recall, having a high MMR means you'll end up getting more +20s after matches early on because of how MMR vs displayed rating is compared to determine your score, or something. I really can't remember either.

The system compares your displayed rating to your opponent's MMR, and vice versa for your opponent. So as games played tends towards infinity, your displayed rating will tend towards your MMR!

Xeen · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

I don't get it, I read somewhere that the first 100 players go into a division?

From what I know, divisions aren't simply filled by 100 at a time (maybe at the start when there were less), but players are slotted into ranked divisions based on win/loss rate and maybe some other factors.

It's likely you ended up with a lower-tier division because of how many games you play, and that you probably had a lower winrate when you started out.

**nGenLight** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 1:01 PM

I got into diamond with 11-0. I blame good players like Bull and Ninpo in my division for being inactive!

NvPinder · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 1:37 PM

tbh if anything for e-penis rights you're better off being in a F-rank division, you get more rating easier and whilst you have to 'get higher rating' to get on the top 200 list, it's still EXACTLY equal to what you'd have to do in any other division to get top 200, you just get to look like a baller with an easier atainable 3000 points or w/e.

yamite · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 2:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

I got into diamond with 11-0. I blame good players like Bull and Ninpo in my division for being inactive!

lol I thought that even if suddenly your division was filled with Azz/Nirvana level players the system still considers the division to be F rank so its better for you they aren't active so you can keep #1 easy?

Also, about the top 200 thing, I checked the TW server top 200 (http://tw.battle.net/sc2/zh/blog/147660#comments).... and #189 (lovecd) is in PLATINUM. There are also a lot of sub 1k diamond players on their top 200 list.

So what's the reason for that? Seems weird especially since there are these division modifiers yet there is a guy with 2.3k diamond (1st comment) who isn't top 200 on TW.

I know that this isn't entirely related to SEA, but I was hoping this would help Edge and others who are trying to decrypt blizzard's crappy system

Edrahil · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 3:29 PM

Actually, how I think it works is, new divisions open up as the old ones fill up. So it is not so much that those divisions are better, just that you are in a newer division. The point boost is given to the newer divisions I presume to help balance the point totals of the old division, which would be needed if everyone played just as much and as consistently.

Of course the above is merely what appears to be happening, a reason for that could be that everyone promotes to diamond fast without much history and thus the newly promoted diamond players are always ranked lower than currently established players, and since the only way to move between divisions is to promote or demote, you don't see any movement.

Xeen · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 5:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

I got into diamond with 11-0. I blame good players like Bull and Ninpo in my division for being inactive!

Well shit, I've no idea then

I got into B-rank with 17-7, so maybe the period when you reached diamond matters somewhat as well. Does the TL thread mention that anywhere?

JP's right though, having a lower-tier div just means you have inflated points to look awesome, but doesn't hinder you in terms of total points gained for top 200.

**TAEdgE** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 5:22 PM

You can't get in to diamond without a loss at least Light o.o?

I'm pretty sure it's 5 losses to gain a trust factor. Most people get in around 17-6 or so, and some players go like 35 wins and advance (these players are the ones that normally are in a higher division, due to losing alot of points.. well that's part of it.)

If you really were 11-0, maybe that's why you got F-Rank. who knows.

yamite · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 7:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdgE

You can't get in to diamond without a loss at least Light o.o?

I'm pretty sure it's 5 losses to gain a trust factor. Most people get in around 17-6 or so, and some players go like 35 wins and advance (these players are the ones that normally are in a higher division, due to losing alot of points.. well that's part of it.)

If you really were 11-0, maybe that's why you got F-Rank. who knows.

Nah you don't have to lose a game to get diamond (at least for 2v2/3v3/4v4). There are teams out there who are 78-0 in diamond 4v4.

I think Light was just beating scrubs so he got F-rank division lol, or all the other people in his division were bad before Light joined and somehow there was space so he got stuffed in.

**nGenLight** · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 10:21 PM

I think what Edrahil said makes the most sense, new divisons are created when older ones are formed. The older divisions will naturally have higher points and will be in a higher league rank.

Pinder: But the MMR match making has nothing to do with what division you are in. If I was in a S ranked division, I still vs the same opponents and lose/win the same points but will require 3xx less points to be in the top 200 position I am now. The problem with the top 200 is that players like yourself and Edge simply cannot earn enough points cause of your high MMR, activeness on the ladder plays a big role too. I'm winning mor than 70% of my games these days but the -20s just hurt ridiculously.

It was a long time ago but I'm pretty sure I got to diamond in the 1x wins, maybe a loss or two, but I was just suggesting how they dont put you in divisions base on mmr or win%, but on a chronological order.

Dogsi · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdgE

You can't get in to diamond without a loss at least Light o.o?

I'm pretty sure it's 5 losses to gain a trust factor. Most people get in around 17-6 or so, and some players go like 35 wins and advance (these players are the ones that normally are in a higher division, due to losing alot of points.. well that's part of it.)

If you really were 11-0, maybe that's why you got F-Rank. who knows.

Not at all. I went 5-0 placement. 2 plat matches. Promoted to diamond.

Xeen · Fri, 24th-Dec-2010, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

I think what Edrahil said makes the most sense, new divisons are created when older ones are formed. The older divisions will naturally have higher points and will be in a higher league rank.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excalibur_Z on TL

New divisions of all tiers -- even S-Rank ones -- are created all the time. I really need to update the OP and spell out for people that the ages of the divisions are completely irrelevant because for some strange reason people aren't understanding.

A lot of this discussion has been covered.

**nGenLight** · Sat, 25th-Dec-2010, 9:37 AM

I'm going to take a stab at this.

From what I presume divisional class is based on the average mmr of the players, and since movement across diamond divisions does not happen, if that division is filled then new players cannot join that division, so new divisions are formed and/or incomplete ones are filled, in that case age of divisions do play an indirect factor. Anyways not going to try to understand this anymore, merry xmas!

Xeen · Sat, 25th-Dec-2010, 6:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

Anyways not going to try to understand this anymore, merry xmas!

Good call. I wish Bliz would just make the information public so we didn't have to slam our heads into it trying to figure this stuff out.

Merry Christmas to all.

Dogsi · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xeen

Good call. I wish Bliz would just make the information public so we didn't have to slam our heads into it trying to figure this stuff out.

Merry Christmas to all.

Why do you need to figure it out? You get to the top the same either way... play and win games...

Merry Christmas to you too!

Xeen · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 1:04 AM

You don't see a point in understanding how the game handles the ranking of players?

I'm really not sure how to reply.

Dogsi · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 1:26 AM

You can't pick who you play and knowing how it determines the ranks doesn't improve your chance of winning at all. So, no, not really.

Xeen · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 2:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogsi

You can't pick who you play and knowing how it determines the ranks doesn't improve your chance of winning at all. So, no, not really.

Simplistic. You might argue that having rankings is pointless altogether, then.

We have rankings so that we have a general scale of how players compare, for players of all levels. The entire reason for division structure is so that people can feel progress, can feel like they've improved or have a degree of competition when they're not players who can play tournaments. If ranking is not entirely transparent in terms of how it is done, it is good for the community to figure it out, because it matters to people.

Dogsi · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xeen

Simplistic. You might argue that having rankings is pointless altogether, then.

We have rankings so that we have a general scale of how players compare, for players of all levels. The entire reason for division structure is so that people can feel progress, can feel like they've improved or have a degree of competition when they're not players who can play tournaments. If ranking is not entirely transparent in terms of how it is done, it is good for the community to figure it out, because it matters to people.

There is a use to having rankings.

Again, you didn't address how it is useful. But I don't feel like arguing :-P I think it's an interesting piece of trivia that has no bearing on the game itself :-P

DsDxiaohao · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 1:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xeen

Simplistic. You might argue that having rankings is pointless altogether, then.

We have rankings so that we have a general scale of how players compare, for players of all levels. The entire reason for division structure is so that people can feel progress, can feel like they've improved or have a degree of competition when they're not players who can play tournaments. If ranking is not entirely transparent in terms of how it is done, it is good for the community to figure it out, because it matters to people.

simple, if one feel that one should be in the top 200 and not there, go msg the person whoever you feel should replace, for a personal best of 7 and claim your bragging rights, and a round of applause from the good pple of sc2sea.

Ryukku · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 1:36 PM

i like to see the system as a simple one... win more = higher placed. play more + consistent = higher position. ill leave all the theorycrafting to you guys kaka..

haha im actually glad im not top tier in SEA. gives me a little of excitement when i still see some players as favored. cant imagine how its like for top 5... everyone would be unfavored lolol or even at most.

its strange how i only played one game this week and i won against a favored player and i went up in the top200... lolol

Xeen · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 1:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogsi

There is a use to having rankings.

Yes. One of the main concepts of having a ranking system is that it ranks things on clearly-known criteria, otherwise it's obscure and pointless. As it stands, we don't know all of these criteria as to how the division sorting system works. Does Light know why he's in an E-rank division, artificially boosting his points? Could people be potentially annoyed that they're ranked below people with lower visible rankings? Or that, upon reaching silver, their points seem to disappear while their friend's go up?

Revealing the algorithms is not important, but coming out to say 'players are arranged into divisions in XYZ manner' would clarify a lot. People like to understand how things work, I'm stunned that this needs explanation.

Please also note that rankings have implications, specifically when it comes to playing for Code A qualifications, or Master League, or who knows what else may come up.

NvPinder · Sun, 26th-Dec-2010, 4:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nGenLight

Pinder: But the MMR match making has nothing to do with what division you are in. If I was in a S ranked division, I still vs the same opponents and lose/win the same points but will require 3xx less points to be in the top 200 position I am now. The problem with the top 200 is that players like yourself and Edge simply cannot earn enough points cause of your high MMR, activeness on the ladder plays a big role too. I'm winning mor than 70% of my games these days but the -20s just hurt ridiculously.

afaik it's not actually the players own 'mmr', which gives you 'favoured' or 'unfavoured' etc. It's simply your points (As taken using division modifiers) vs their mmr, however the points automatically add your bonus pool.

so for example, say someone is sitting at 2k right now with a 1k bonus pool, and they play someone with an mmr equivilant of 3k, they would get 'teams even' for that fight.

if someones sitting at like 1.5k and like 1.7k bonus pool, and they play an mmr player of like 2.9k, the 1.5k player will be favoured, meaning that it becomes incredibly difficult to climb the ladder in this spot, because you simply have a high enough rating + bonus pool, that you're favoured vs 90% of people you play against, this is my personal understanding of why some of us struggle to get rid of our bonus pools, it actually has nothing to do with our mmr, infact if our mmr was lower, causing us to rank against lower ranked players (since it's only mmr that decides who you play), it would make it EVEN harder to climb the ladder unless you lose a LOT in order to drag your points all the way down too.

Either way, im 99% sure it's just as easy for a person in an F-rank division to get #1 in top 200 as it is for an S-class division. You have to get 'more points', but like i said, the points 100% come easier to you, since your 'true' rating is actually in no way harder to obtain than their 'true rating', it just shows misc different modifiers because blizzard likes to make the system needlessly complicated.

feel free to skip what i read down here unless you disagree with my rating vs mmr theory on how it decides who's favoured etc:

Just for an extra example of why i think the system works on the basis that i described above (which in short is, to match you up against a similar opponent, it will match two people of equal mmr, regardless of points/division etc.) For anyone that played when the game was first released (and was at all good), i'm sure you'll remember how everyone was like "Wtf not favoured against everyone yet im like 30-4 stats?" and people where like "How can we have a game where we're both seeing the opponent as heavily favoured against one another, this makes no sense!?!?!?". In the way i described, it makes PERFECT sense, and it would almost be silly any other way.

Say the ladder is just released, me and moonglade are both 10-0 and bump into each other on ladder, lets say i have 400 points and he has 400 points, both still platinum, however our MMR's are through the roof since we literally haven't lost a game and have been stomping other people who would also have much higher MMR's than points at this stage, so as in an example we will say our MMR's are both 1000.

for me: I have 400 points, his MMR is 1000 points, he i see him as heavily favoured.
for him: he has 400 points, and my MMR is 1000 points, so he sees me as heavily favoured.

So why the hell isnt this stupid? Because both of our MMR's are really high, we should by the ladder's standards be at those points, and it's mega unfair to punish either of us harshly for losing a game to someone with 1000 MMR when we're only at 400 rating ourselves, so we get a ton of points to quickly boost us up to our appropriate rating if we win, and we won't lose barely anything if we lose since we only have 400 rating and the person we lost to is a 1000 MMR player anyway.

edit: this also explains how, for example, moonglade can smurf his way into NA top 20 in under like 150 games, because his MMR is so high so quick since he is allergic to losing, he's instantly playing people at like 3k rating even when he's still really low rating, however he's constantly seeing them as the heavy favourites, giving him a ton of points when he wins, and the occasional games where he loses, he loses very few.

**nGenLight** · Mon, 27th-Dec-2010, 5:20 PM

Everything makes more sense now, thanx Johnno.

Xavi · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPMoney

afaik it's not actually the players own 'mmr', which gives you 'favoured' or 'unfavoured' etc. It's simply your points (As taken using division modifiers) vs their mmr, however the points automatically add your bonus pool.

.

Then why do i go evenly matched againest 2200-2700 rating players when im only 1600? i think favoured unfavoured evenly matched is done by wlr.

Xeen · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 10:29 PM

It's your points vs their MMR.

If you grab a new account and play a ton, everyone will be favored vs you. However, they'll see you as an even match, even if you're 500 points against 3000.

Xavi · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 10:35 PM

and this is why i dont like the ladder system, there is so many systems to make it structured and have correct matchmaking, that it fails 60% of the time

NvPinder · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavi

Then why do i go evenly matched againest 2200-2700 rating players when im only 1600? i think favoured unfavoured evenly matched is done by wlr.

Just looked at your profile, you have ~700 bonus pool saved up, meaning if you add that to your account, you would have ~2400 rating.... meaning being 'evenly matched' makes perfect sense for you against those players.

**TAEdgE** · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 10:56 PM

JP Money is amazing.

Xavi · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 11:10 PM

huh, thank you for that, but wouldn't having someone like me playing againest more experienced players, eg: players who have played lots more games still be unfair?

Xeen · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xavi

huh, thank you for that, but wouldn't having someone like me playing againest more experienced players, eg: players who have played lots more games still be unfair?

If their MMR is the same as yours, they clearly aren't going far past you due to said experience, otherwise they would be considered favored.

Xavi · Mon, 3rd-Jan-2011, 11:58 PM

yeah thats probably right

Comma · Tue, 4th-Jan-2011, 4:19 PM

New list is up. Coincidentally I'm not on it (And I should be, both by regular points and adjusted division points). Discussion being had in thread about it. I think I've just been winning too much recently

**cure** · Tue, 4th-Jan-2011, 4:52 PM

Ladder seems rubbish imho.