What is this RollsRoyce guy doing with 2.4k rate on the DM 1v1 ladder... it's total BS... 10 games won and 2.4k... you shouldn't be able to top a ladder without playing (and winning) vs top players...
That's literally unbelievable... just when I thought this matchmaking and ladder system couldn't get any sh*tter.It is all about the connection between the ladders. If you have a high rating on another ladder and you start on another, then you dont start at 1000 elo, but at the current elo of another ladder.
I am still waiting for a pro to make a smurf account, get to 3k+ RM TG rating before playing any 1v1. Then start playing 1v1. I am sure that that smurf account will hit #1 on the RM 1v1 with a big difference.
Wait forever, no top player has the patience necessary to do this... there is a reason if 90% of the top players have a tg rating lower than mine, they just hate tgs.I am still waiting for a pro to make a smurf account, get to 3k+ RM TG rating before playing any 1v1. Then start playing 1v1. I am sure that that smurf account will hit #1 on the RM 1v1 with a big difference.
That's literally unbelievable... just when I thought this matchmaking and ladder system couldn't get any sh*tter.
Wait forever, no top player has the patience necessary to do this... there is a reason if 90% of the top players have a tg rating lower than mine, they just hate tgs.
If dm players don't play the ladder, ofc some weaker player will get #1 without meeting them, in 1v1 this won't happen because you'll meet mbl on your second game. Everybody agrees that this ladder slingshot exploit makes no sense but it's here to stay.
Team games and 1v1 are NOT the same.... the level of skill in team games is generally terrible on DE, so its such an abuse of the system to do this.
Team games and 1v1 are NOT the same.... the level of skill in team games is generally terrible on DE, so its such an abuse of the system to do this.
There is some correlation between all ratings. I dont think anyone can deny that point at all. A good player in DM 1v1 is at least pretty decent in RM 1v1 too. You can't be top 10 in DM 1v1 while having you RM 1v1 below 1000 as example. To make an even more clear example: It looks like Hera never played DM on DE. If he decised to start at DM, is it reasonable to assume he is 1000 elo as starting point. Or can we assume he has decent knowledge of the game already, so he might be some where at the top already? It kind of make sense to let him start with a higher rating then 1000 based on his performance on other ladders. That is the logic behind the system. That sounds reasonable well, as long as all ladders have the same distribution.
So using your elo on different ladders when you start at another ladder isnt really the issue. The main issue is that ladders on all rankings dont follow the same distribution. If they all followed the same distribution, the system would pretty much work. I have seen many complaints about inflated TG elo. All this weird behaviour comes down to these issue issue in the end.
I would advice the devs to rescale all ratings on all rankings so that the distribution on all ladders will be the same. That means if 2.4k is the highest rating on RM 1v1, it is also the highest on RM TG, DM 1v1, DM TG. Also they need to fix the inflated elo in team games as well. Hopefully the devs know the source of the inflation, so they can fix that part as well. This solution is in line with the solution of Plappertfan, but i just take it a step further as well.
Rescaling the ladders is only a temporary solution and since it changes people's ratings they might get upset.
Normalizing the ladders (in the maths calculations) before comparison is easy, would fix the problem, and doesn't change anyone's ratings.
If you're top 10 in DM 1v1 it does not equate to being great at RM 1v1. No doubt your late game and military micro may be good though.
There is no reasonable argument at all for a player to be 2.4k rated with 10 games played, where the best players who have played over 600 games have a rating of less than 2.2k.... IT IS ILLOGICAL.
They only got there through playing a lot of RM I remember when unleashed started playing rm and didn't know anything about the upgrades or which to get first he was able to win some games but more because his opponent had worse military/macro controlJust look at the examples in the DM top 10: Almost all players with a 1v1 RM rating (not all players have a RM 1v1 rating) have a rating above 1500 elo. Many of them are even top 1000 RM 1v1 (which has much more users). Only exception seems to be True.