New players and the rating system.

[keyser]

Same thing applies to ppl who play custom 1v1 in global, same thing applies to crater players outside crater, seton players outside seton ect. We don't have spearated ratings for seton, for crater ect. BUT we separate ppl that are actually capable to play great variety of maps by themselves without any help.

There was a reason ladder was separated from global in past. It was done by ZeP and he mentioned main reason being ability to drop rating quickly through ladder. This was done by Just_a_game for example. Now tell me does this fix an issue? We banned 3 players last week who managed to drop more than 1k rating - that's the answer for you about how that change works.

Another point was to prevent ppl from being "overrated". You will get even more overrated if you play custom 1v1s. Clear example: SB_NEXUS, KvaGa, Malantrius - all farmed 1800 on Winter duel at some point. Did unrated ladder prevent them from being overrated?

we are actually trying to find a way to make different map or mod having their own rating. Listen to people talking about trueskill2. As i said, it's not because the rating sucks already that we need to make it sucks even more. People spamming custom 1v1, or only 1 map are fucking up the rating.
Now you pointed 3 guys fucking up the rating because they abused the fact that you can get high rating playing custom 1v1, and what you are asking for is too allow all people playing ladder to f*** up their global rating. That is just a non-sense.
When i was hosting custom 1v1, i did unrate on purpose the game i was playing so that it doesn't affect the "global rating", which i think we should rename "teamgame rating".

[Apofenas]

When i was hosting custom 1v1, i did unrate on purpose the game i was playing so that it doesn't affect the "global rating", which i think we should rename "teamgame rating".

This is same rating fck up that ZeP tryed to change. At around the same time when he made ladder completely separated from global, he also made settings that were used to unrank games. These were adjustable game speed, auto adjust net lag mod and a couple other things if i'm not mistaken. It was done for the purpose to prevent one people from staying underrated and other ppl from keeping their precious points via unranking games they think would lose. So playing unranked games is not any different from intentional loss in that perspective.

One other thing ZeP made with it - removal of ranked/unranked indicator in top left. If you only knew how many ppl ask detailed instructions how to make game ranked...

we are actually trying to find a way to make different map or mod having their own rating. Listen to people talking about trueskill2. As i said, it's not because the rating sucks already that we need to make it sucks even more. People spamming custom 1v1, or only 1 map are fucking up the rating.

If i happened to choose between not doing anything or creating easy way for new players to gain starting rating+game count and get them into competitive game mode in return of 1% being "overrated" i'd defintely do 2d.

I don't remember seeing this many astrocraters and gaps neither so many overrated craternoobs, but i remember ladder was more alive when that system worked.

I don't even need to dig the example. How many times did you have to play nomads with me simply because ladder was dead and you had nobody to play with?

[keyser]

So playing unranked games is not any different from intentional loss in that perspective.

i was unrating games because i didn't want to impact the "global rating" as i said before. "global rating" that is used to balance teamgame. Completely different from people trying to get under-rated on teamgame by making them unrated.

If i happened to choose between not doing anything or creating easy way for new players to gain starting rating+game count and get them into competitive game mode in return of 1% being "overrated" i'd defintely do 2d.

we can still hope trueskill2 achieve the first one. And keep your random % for yourself, tyvm.

I don't remember seeing this many astrocraters and gaps neither so many overrated craternoobs, but i remember ladder was more alive when that system worked.

i'm not sure if there is any correlation between ladder rating not impacting the global rating and people spamming shitmaps. At least I would keep myself from doing such assumption.

I don't even need to dig the example. How many times did you have to play nomads with me simply because ladder was dead and you had nobody to play with?

some other random assumption. first i didn't stop playing ladder because it was dead. I did play nomads vs you because i like them.

overall i think we just digressed from the topic.

[Blodir]

I agree with keyser

However I do think ladder players need recognition. Custom game rating is just so much more visible that it's no surprise ladder is unpopular

t2 mex before second fac

I do this on majority of teamgame maps

[Teralitha]

This is why I just play coop or vs AI. I dont want to get stressed out. But I do enjoy watching pro or semi pro games like on gylecast or brnkofinsanity.

[Platinumizer]

Not sure if you are trolling about the "pro" casts. The game's potential can never be used in games against the AI .

[RoLa]

Maybe there is a simple solution.
- let players with less than 10 games play only against players with more than 10 games
- the opponents against players with less or equal 5 games dont change rating
- let players with less or equal 5 games play only against players with less than 850 rating

[Miuw]

One option would be to add handicaps to higher level opponents on early stage games, but it still would be too hard to calc rating values based on a logical level.
The skill level representation should consist of more than just some numbers, because people can play like a 0 or 2000 guy depending on the map, it's complexity and how good they are on the respective map, of course. For a RTS some primitive rank level assignments are simply not enough, but that's just my opinion.

[RoLa]

Maybe there is a simple solution.

Some explanations to my idea:

1st: I assume that most players starting with ladder games are frustrated playing the first games against strong opponents.
- let players with less or equal 5 games play only against players with less than 850 rating (new players against less than average)
- let players with less or equal 10 games play only against players with more than 10 games (a sufficent accurate rating is needed)

2nd: I also assume that even a week player with a substantial number of ladder games is not frustrated by being defeated very rare times from a new ladder player who is better than average.
- let players with less or equal 5 games play only against players with less than 850 rating (new players against less than average)
- the opponents against players with less or equal 5 games dont change rating
(an average player should'nt get rating points from winning against a new player starting at 1500, after 5 games his rating should have dropped to an almost reasonable number, or if he wins all 5 games he wont gain much points so he has 1505 beeing in reality a player beween 1000 and 2000+)

3rd:Finally I assume that a solution to this problem has to be very simple, 10-15 lines of code must be enough. This changes should have very little affect to the whole establihed trueskill system.