test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Scoreboard Rankings?
ripyourlipsoff
Member Posts: 1,552 Arc User
Could you kindly explain why even though I have higher Wins, More games played, positive K/D ratio I am being passed by other GF with far less?
There are pages upon pages of guys with far less statistically then I but are ahead of me!
There are pages upon pages of guys with far less statistically then I but are ahead of me!
Shieldbash 60 GF ~ Iron Vanguard 19.0k
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
Post edited by ripyourlipsoff on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
> http://nw-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?682951-So-how-does-this-PVP-Standings-thing-work
I'm just gonna not care about it from now on till we get an explanation about how it works ^^
It bothers me because as GF I don't really have much to be proud of these days, at least I can be a Better GF! Its all I got but for whatever reason I am 20 pages behind others with less wins, K/D, and games played...
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
Overpowered 60 CW ~ Thaumaturge 14.5k
==========================================
~ GF Buffs were great we are much better, please fix the bugs now... Thank you!
I believe he means the actual score of the match (+300 for capped tower, +25 per assist, etc.).
Title has been edited accordingly.
Great Weapon Fighter: Because when is today not a good day to die?
PC and PS4 player. Proud Guildmaster for PS4 Team Fencebane. Rank 5 Officer for PC Team Fencebane. Visit us at http://fencebane.shivtr.com
The Leaderboards are all based on "ELO" rating. What that means to you, is that wins/losses, Kills/deaths all that dont really mean much.
WHY?
Ill give you an example.
Lets say YOUR ELO is 1000. Your teams average ELO is 800 and you beat another team whose average is 600. Well even though you win, you were expected to win and wont gain very much ELO from this game. In fact, there are many times when your ELO is really high (in this example lets say 1900) and your opponants are SO low, that even when you WIN you LOSE ELO. Fair? No.
So how does someone have more wins and worse ELO? simple, the games you won, your teams average was that so you were expected to win (IE NOT an upset) so you didnt gain much ELO versus a guy on a team who DOES get an upset, that game could easily be worth 2-3 of your wins.
My Suggestion:
Try que-ing for pvp with less of a premade (like 2-3 ppl) and youll have a higher chance of getting games with a better average and thus move up the leaderboards...
This is partially correct but also incorrect.
it is true that you will step up on the leaderboard MORE if you que solo or with 2 max in ur party.
But it is mostely based off of points, so if your up against someone with more points then you in total for example if you have 400,000 points and u face someone with 600,000 points you will gain more.
and people with 600,000 + points in domination do not necesarrily have a " High Elo ".
Has nothing to do with it, If you look back at my link there is a friend of mine who has won 176 games and only lost 1 time... So whats his win percentage? Yet I am above him or better yet, look at the #3 player who was 138 wins and 20 losses....
Also to the post above yours, thats also not correct. If that WERE the case, explain how people LOSE rank on the boards while winning games? You only gain "points" for winning you dont lose them... Ive had countless games where I go 15-0 and win and get over 3 or 4000 individual score and STILL go down....
The underlying issue is how they calculated ELO rank for each person.
Their issue was that if people ONLY won, the top "tier" players would never have anyone to que against. So in an effort to combat the top 1% of players never having any games, they made it so it will match you with the "best" match possible (still no clue how/why they came up with this) but if you win against too low of an ELO ranked team you actually DROP in ELO to allow for "better" matchmaking in the future.
Otherwise youd have like 3 guilds have 3 teams who never lose, who can never get a que pop. who are maxed out in ELO ranking and never play anybody except those other two teams.
I get the idea, I dont get the implementation about matching and with leaderboards I dont think you should be able to lose rank on the boards by winning a game
1. Why do matches sometimes seem so lopsided?
This is a hard question to answer, for several reasons. There are a lot of factors that determine match quality, and the system attempts to weigh all of them and give you the best possible match without waiting forever, which causes you to sometimes be placed in a suboptimal match rather than waiting indefinitely for a perfect match. We have several dials we can turn up and down to attempt to adjust matchmaking, but all of these things carry some degree of risk when we adjust them so we try to tune them little by litte. However we are watching matchmaking quality and are actively trying to weigh that against how long it takes to get and play a match.
2. Why do I sometimes drop on the leaderboard after winning a match?
This one is actually a matter of how frequently the leaderboard is updated. Our leaderboard UI cannot update constantly, so when you leave a match you see it update again. While it is theoretically possible in the math for your rating to go down when you win, it is *incredibly* unlikely. Most often what is really happening is that while you rise a bit from winning a match, other people have risen as well when you are in that match which makes it appear that you fell in the rankings.
3. Why don't you calculate for Gear Score when doing matchmaking?
We looked into it, but the data we have shows that Gear Score isn't a valid metric for matchmaking in our PvP. We have kept track of the average Gear Score of players at various matchmaking tiers and it turns out the difference between the top 10% players and the players in the 50th percentile is less than 2%. Also interestingly, the players with the highest numerical Gear Scores tend to fall close to the middle of the rankings. We have discussed doing some kind of adjustment for a player with no matchmaking history based on their Gear Score, but it would no longer matter after the first handful of matches that were played.
I hope this answers some of the questions surrounding PVP matchmaking.
Chris "Gentleman Crush" Meyer
But let's make it simple and use the Hunger Games rating system as an example. Ideally the system would put 5's against 5's and 10's against 10's. That is not always possible in Neverwinter for various reasons such as player population. So let's say it puts a 5 against an 8. If the 8 wins the system will say "meh, that's what I expected to happen" and nothing major changes. However if the 8 loses to the 5 the system will say "oooh, that's not right. Maybe that 5 is actually a 6 and maybe that 8 is actually a 7."
Now this is very simplistic and thus drastic changes compared to the actual events especially because there should be at least two if not three more digits on the numbers but the premise holds the same. The system doesn't care how many times you win or lose, it cares who you win and lose against.
If you win a lot you will naturally rise up the ladder because you are obviously performing better than your competition and if you lose a lot you will naturally fall down the ladder because you are obviously performing worse than your competition. However if you think about it, matching fairly equally skilled players against each other should result in an equal chance to win. In other words 50/50. So if everything is perfect then players with a challenge rating of 1 and players with a challenge rating of 10 would both have a 50/50 win:loss ratio.
I don't know if the developers did tie kill, death and assists into the system or not but in an ideal world they wouldn't have. If you never die because you are off doing something which is not helping the team win you should not be ranked higher than somebody who dies a lot doing something which is helpful to winning. I can say, though, that even if they did tie in kills:deaths then it would absolutely be a very minor role.
This happened to me every time I win against the team that has leavers. Maybe there is a mistake in the math?
I can confirm this.
If you're on the top 1-3 pages, you usually know the people there, and you know if they are online, or playing.
And you WILL drop if you win against weak opponents, even as the competition near you is not even online...
This is not an exceptional occurrence, it happens all the time.
Since you are explaining ELO matchmaking in a thread about the leaderboard are we to take this as conformation that the leaderboard is in fact ranked by ELO?
Why on earth would it be ranked by anything other than player ELO rating? That'd be like ranking chess players by the number of pawns they've captured.
Encounter Matrix | Advanced Foundry Topics
Im in a PvP guild, and when we are bored of queing with 5 man, we split 2+3 and que up. And we usually end up in the same party, against terrible players. How is it that the matchmaking system dosent put us at least against each other and split the pugs to make the teams even. But as i said, if my guild que 2+3 we end up as a 5man party.
Yesterday, i started on page 3. I dident lose one game, and won at least 25 or something. 5 of those won matches were against premades from people on page 1, 2 and 3. And today i am on page 7 on leaderboard. It just makes little sense.
Im glad you dont, because thats just ridiculous.
As much as I like every bit of clarification about the current system, you gotta be aware that currently neither GG, Domination nor Open World is a competitive environment by any means. GG is a nice idea for guilds vs. guilds theoretically I think, but because it's randomized and you go 20v20 most matches end up being gigantic zergfests without any strategy. Oh yeah, and Delz still wins most of the time, so faster campaign progress depends on the faction.
Open world is open world, you group up and hunt down individuals. Whatever. I also don't think, even with working Dominations, that too many players are into it really. The true PVP playerbase seems to be much smaller than I originally thought. Most players just do their dailies and hope they aren't approached, flee or log off in case.
So classic Domination was supposed to give PVPers their competitive ground with a meaningful ranking. Most people don't care how and why certain things do or don't affect this and that, they are subjectively not getting the sense that the system is working correctly and thus will (and are already) just exploit Domination for max glory, campaign progress or whatever. I have a PVP character myself but as a pugger it's really not desirable to put all the effort in to climb the ladder after you start recognizing players in the top pages and realize how they got there.
Since you seem to do legit empiric work with your data, have you evaluated the causality between premades and ranking? Do players that frequently premade (number of players being a variable) generally own a better ranking than others? This assumption alongside the proven fact that matchmaking will deliver lopsided encounters on low population is my biggest gripe and why I wouldn't call the system remotely significant.
It's really a shame. I think the PVP community, as small as it is, deserves a competitive environment in which they can truly match themselves and grow. It's quite ironic that with the last few patches the situation for them has worsened although PVP content has been added. They can no longer prearrange matches (I guess) and can't continue showcasing after the match is over.
I think there is still the preview server where two teams will always be matched up against each other because no one else is in the queue, but on live no chance.
Yes, the situation post Tenacity patch and pre mod3 was really balanced compared to now. Also mod3 for some reason brought the epidemic of pot abusing to ****, for some reason. And imo Domination PvP should be a place where same rules apply to both teams, same term to both teams, aka no pots and bullcrap.
Maybe the math is so accurate it's figured out that you're getting carried by your premade.
In NWO though, where Elo is implemented in a Cryptic way, the very unbalanced matched are not discarded and the stronger side loses rankings while the losing side wins. Ok maybe in NWO the losing side also loses rankings, but that is another, different issue in Cryptic's implementation of Elo.
It is very likely, and happens regularly. How can I tell? Well say someone is 1-2 places above me on the leaderboard. I go into a match, win, and when I come out to check the leaderboard I have lost 2 pages while the person that was 1-2 places above me (in my guild, and not playing in a match) is in the same location they were before.
So it is not that "Most often what is really happening is that while you rise a bit from winning a match, other people have risen as well when you are in that match which makes it appear that you fell in the rankings" because both my guildmate that was 1-2 places above me on the leaderboard - online but not participating in PVP - and I are not losing ranking.
The person that plays and wins loses 1-2, or often 3-5 pages on the leaderboard. Meanwhile a player that is 1-2 positions above them on the leaderboard, or even below them, as I have tested, stays where they are at while the victorious player tanks rating.
I've brought this up elsewhere.
I understand you guys have an idea of how the system is designed. How it is suppose to work. But has anyone actually looked to see if it is working how you intended it to work?
I can't wrap my head around losing 5 pages on the leaderboard, for a win.
TLDR: I am in the middle of page 6. Player_B is 1 position below me, and not doing pvp. I go into a match, win, and come out on page 9. Player_B is still on page 6. If the leaderboard were updating slowly and others are advancing up the leaderboard, knocking us down, Player_B would also have been knocked down pages, instead of staying where they were.
Again, herein lies the issue. Dev's aren't seeing it in practice.
The leaderboard system might look great on paper, but I invite you to try it in reality.