Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Demiax

New Leaderboard thoughr elo picking

Recommended Posts

I questioned the balance of it and I just got dropped from 25 to 45th place. Nothing to do with me loosing game, or even playing. I never was asked if I was gonna play next game I didn't accept anything. I questioned the system ever being balanced and i am more then ever convinced never will be. Yet again North America has to resort to politics rather then fairness. Can't say I am suprised.

 

 

We should all have started with zero score, instead Tukey implemented several games which inevitably put some people way ahead. In fact 11 games ahead. How can that be balanced? How can that even get even at the end, when some people have advantige in numbers from begining? If you question it, then you get dropped?

 

 

You dont have to have master in math to understand 11 games ahead is 11 games ahead. \And dropping people for not agreeing with system is wrong. Therefore I do not want to be part of it. I will not be part of it and whoever is is supporting bad politics rather then fairplay. You can NOT even out after a time WHEN some pople are 11 games ahead. We can ONLY even out when we all start at zero. Feel free to take me out of list, I can not respect that board and will not.

 

Yes I am a bich, I suck and...and every name you called me so far...I call ace an ace and I am willing to be all of it RATHER then be part of this stupid sham.

 

There are people who actually play for fairness in this game, they are obviously a minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dodging will now be recorded as -50 points. this may change as I personally think it should just equate to one loss.

 

 

tukey started with prior games so that it would be closer to balanced then starting at zero. it is undeniable (read: mathematical fact) that given more data, the elo ranking system will become more accurate. thus adding as much data as possible is better then adding no data.

 

What do you mean by 11 games ahead. Do you mean that they have more games recorded? because I don't see how that is an advantage... It just means their elo is more accurate...

 

Also, the games that were used to initiate the elo system will be removed after we feel we have reached a comfortable number of games played using the system. so no, 11 games "ahead" will not matter in 30 or so games.

 

Its not a race to a higher number of games....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not play and no one ever asked me if I would. Just got in channel asking if we can get captains. None of this has anything to do with my game or playing. If i did not play my rating should not go down.

And frankly your personality should get you many minuses knowing how much you rage every game :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you were going to play, but then rage quit and threw this hissy fit after you saw that the teams that were even by elo were not so even by your personal conceptions. that is called a dodge.

 

 

you gave 9 people, who were trying to explain to you that playing elo games would be the best way to make the elo system work, severe headaches that only served to demonstrate your own inadequate knowledge of how an elo system works. thank you and good day ma'am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one ever asked me if I wanted to inhouse, I just joined channel randomly. If I didnt not accept then I couldnt have dodged. But I did question the system thats true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also 11 games ahead is 11 games ahead...nothing balanced about it. No time will mend it...only make it more difficult to cross the gap. You should know that you are good at math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does, because those who were part of 11 games at the start were rated higher or lower then every other player. This throws matching system to a point where people they match have grossly inaccurate rating. Thus we have all stacked teams versus non regular players resulting in ever further imbalance. As stacked teams will win every time and get their rating higher and those who were starting at zero will always be below. Are you drunk?

 

 

Not to mention that 11 games whose rating was put in was 11 games where Tukey was in every single game. Wasn't even random. Fair game would be that we ALL started at ZERO so we all have even chance to progress at the same rate. And I cant even begin to describe how wrong it is that I was dropped because of politics as you are changing rules on the fly however suits your agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dodging will now be recorded as -50 points. this may change as I personally think it should just equate to one loss.

 

 

tukey started with prior games so that it would be closer to balanced then starting at zero. it is undeniable (read: mathematical fact) that given more data, the elo ranking system will become more accurate. thus adding as much data as possible is better then adding no data.

 

What do you mean by 11 games ahead. Do you mean that they have more games recorded? because I don't see how that is an advantage... It just means their elo is more accurate...

 

Also, the games that were used to initiate the elo system will be removed after we feel we have reached a comfortable number of games played using the system. so no, 11 games "ahead" will not matter in 30 or so games.

 

Its not a race to a higher number of games....

 

Its seems the system is being make up as per personal taste... with or without input from others. You were the one who made up the team, and insisted that your teammate being with you on the same team, no matter that both your rating are high, and others just will have to accept and play the game. And not playing it will be regarded as dodge... with no recourse.... I was there when that happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

 

Den, i don't think you understand how teams are aranged by the elo system. no one picks the teams. we put 10 names into the system and it spits out two teams of 5 based on the closest it can make the two team's average elos. and dodges reducing your elo is standard....

 

 

and demiax, your right. if you had 11 loses on the system, then yes, your rating will be lower then the base starting line of 1200 that is given to new players. How this is, in any way, unfair or even objectable, I don't understand. obviously there must be a starting point. and any starting point is better then none: an elo system balances based on the percentage a player/team will win/lose the game. if you started with say, 11 wins 0 loses, then the system obviously thinks you have a high chance of winning, and thus you have a higher rating. if it was (as you suggest) in any way innacurate, then they will lose future games because the rating system thinks they are better then they actually are. On the other hand, if your elo is below what it should be (as per Rakura, who started with like, 0 wins and 8 loses), then you will win games until it balances out. the key is GAMES NEED TO BE PLAYED. Which is what we've stated: that once people have all played 15 or so games, then the rating will already be damn accurate.

 

At that point, we will remove those 11 previous games from the system all together.

 

 

I don't think you understand any of this anyways, so I'll leave it at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can two people being in top ten rate on the same team???? While other team had no top players?

 

 

Again going back to what i was saying originally, its not balanced and it will only get more unbalanced as time goes on. Then you decided that Tukey will go onto another team...according from what I hear to "make it more balanced' ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we have players who are also worse then the players on the other team.

 

here, let me give you a basic math lesson:

 

5 + 11 = 16

 

8 + 8 ALSO = 16

 

the player with ranking 11 is your top player.

 

The player with ranking 8... is you

 

The player ranking 5, is the other people

 

savy?

 

The two teams are balanced because the average is the same.

 

 

not ONCE did i say "to make the teams more balanced, lets move these ppl around"

 

NOT ONCE

 

do you know why?

 

BECAUSE I HAVE NO SAY ON THE TEAMS, MY GOD WOMAN!

 

please, re read my prior post. the one that tells you that the system gives us the teams, not ourselves. tukey swapped teams because we removed your name from the 10 players, and added someone elses. thus the system rebalanced around it, and gave two new teams that it deemed balanced based on rating.

 

 

and you wonder why ppl have you muted... this is so frustrating explaining the same thing over and over again to the same blank and unreceptive blathering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

 

Den, i don't think you understand how teams are aranged by the elo system. no one picks the teams. we put 10 names into the system and it spits out two teams of 5 based on the closest it can make the two team's average elos. and dodges reducing your elo is standard....

 

 

and demiax, your right. if you had 11 loses on the system, then yes, your rating will be lower then the base starting line of 1200 that is given to new players. How this is, in any way, unfair or even objectable, I don't understand. obviously there must be a starting point. and any starting point is better then none: an elo system balances based on the percentage a player/team will win/lose the game. if you started with say, 11 wins 0 loses, then the system obviously thinks you have a high chance of winning, and thus you have a higher rating. if it was (as you suggest) in any way innacurate, then they will lose future games because the rating system thinks they are better then they actually are. On the other hand, if your elo is below what it should be (as per Rakura, who started with like, 0 wins and 8 loses), then you will win games until it balances out. the key is GAMES NEED TO BE PLAYED. Which is what we've stated: that once people have all played 15 or so games, then the rating will already be damn accurate.

 

At that point, we will remove those 11 previous games from the system all together.

 

 

I don't think you understand any of this anyways, so I'll leave it at that.

 

What you are saying is called paradox. I just proved my point to you and you agreed while still stubbornly clinging to idea that I do not know what I am talking about. :P

I do understand how it works .

 

This still does not address issue that i was dropped for no reason or any warning. That kind of political equation has no balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is definitely true. 5+11 = 16, same as 8+8 = 16. So is 3+13. Many way to do the math, and only one got chosen, with no input. But thats the way things are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we have players who are also worse then the players on the other team.

 

here, let me give you a basic math lesson:

 

5 + 11 = 16

 

8 + 8 ALSO = 16

 

the player with ranking 11 is your top player.

 

The player with ranking 8... is you

 

The player ranking 5, is the other people

 

savy?

 

The two teams are balanced because the average is the same.

 

 

not ONCE did i say "to make the teams more balanced, lets move these ppl around"

 

NOT ONCE

 

do you know why?

 

BECAUSE I HAVE NO SAY ON THE TEAMS, MY GOD WOMAN!

 

please, re read my prior post. the one that tells you that the system gives us the teams, not ourselves. tukey swapped teams because we removed your name from the 10 players, and added someone elses. thus the system rebalanced around it, and gave two new teams that it deemed balanced based on rating.

 

 

and you wonder why ppl have you muted... this is so frustrating explaining the same thing over and over again to the same blank and unreceptive blathering

 

The entire thing is based on SUM of numbers. But sum can not be accurate if rating IS NOT. Thus teams are imabalnced, not by little but GROSSLY and you have seen it with your own eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me give you a lesson in math. When rating is based on your win/loss ratio you will not get accurate rating when......a) teams are stacked against you because those who are top players are rated lower then should be b) tylor swift plays her favorite song c)when teams you play against are much weaker then your team because rating is thrown off.

 

By playing more that is to say more games which are unbalanced does not produce accurate rating at the end, it only deduces balance from already unbalanced system and is more then likely to produce inaccurate rating no matter how long you play and how many games you play. Because rating is based on imbalanced games. Equation can be achieved only when game starts at zero for all of us.

 

50:50 % (or your idea that somehwre along the line it will of even out by chance) does not apply simply because it can not. Game is thrown off 11 games ahead. I studied probability and your reasoning does not apply...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will say that i have played games where i was on the "Winning" team and "Losing" team from the start. but so far most of the games i have played with the elo system have been very good games often ending with both teams kills being within 5 of each other and both teams down to the t4 towers... i dont know how much more balanced u can get. i think that people on mumble have the wrong impression of many of the other players actual skill level and so they see a team that they deem unbalanced for what ever reason but most of the time the teams are even.

 

i dont think the system is perfect but i do think that it is a way to start at least getting more than just the 10-15 people to be picked by the captains every time. since we started it i have seen a lot more people on mumble and a lot of new faces

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×