Why Rank Rating is Pointless

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

> @"apharma.3741" said:

> > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:

> > @"Panda.3620" It doesn't on my gf's account though, as example. It's been 3 seasons now, I place her account and it always goes above 1700. Algorithm seems to never adjust her actual MMR or something. Doesn't make sense.

>

> You were openly saying and continue to openly say that you are playing on another persons account, which is very much against ToS and we’ve even had a fairly high profile player perma banned for it.

>

> It’s also worth pointing out discussing moderation on these forums is also against the forum ToS.

>

> I don’t care about what you think is right or wrong and my own personal views are not what I am stating here only that you are and continue to break ToS and wave your hands in the air claiming to have no clue what could possibly have been wrong.

 

Yup gotcha, thanks for the heads up. I've been getting a bit crazy on it. I was just trying to give good feedback.

 

In all seriousness though, I had done nothing on that account other than test placement out of curiosity. Then I realized I could just make f2p accounts to do it, so I don't even use her account anymore and I wouldn't again.

[amidare.9561]

Unfortunately I have to agree with OP. With my main account, 5 years old, I am usually placed slighty above 1500 rating, (57% win ratio according to gw2effi, always meta builds or slighty adjusted to my needs) and usually placement matches are "tryhard" matches and same by whole season. Two weeks ago I made another account where I went straight to pvp with vanilla D/D ele and i am amazed how good I am now with 80% win ratio. Something is fishy here.

[Chum Chum.7234]

Cal just let the cat out of the bag. Think about what he is saying... The system considers how many matches you've played when picking the 10 players. So you are more likely to face more experienced player if you're account has tons of historical matches. The difference in the slight bias is resulting in a massive difference in rating as noted by the OP.

 

It makes sense that ANET doesn't really want new PvP players to get stomped by highly experienced/skilled players, so they try to separate us as much as reasonably possible. Enter OP on an alt account stomping all the rookies.

 

Of course, all of this is pointless though as nearly all matches that I've played in this season have had some wintraders in them.

[Marxx.5021]

Most matches are decided by team composition in ranked - not by mmr.

[zoopop.5630]

> @"Marxx.5021" said:

> Most matches are decided by team composition in ranked - not by mmr.

 

I won games with double thiefs, ranger , and a Mesmer while I’m on HoLo against an actual team comp. in rank that isn’t the factor espically if players don’t know how to play as a team at all.

[Meteor.3720]

> @"HadrianBlackwater.5736" said:

> > @"Meteor.3720" said:

> > You gotta stop smoking crack and watching Fox News.

> > These conspiracy theories are getting crazy.

> >

> > Sometimes you get good teammates, sometimes you get bad teammates, sometimes you make a mistake, sometimes you don't. Enough with the "hidden mmr"/ new account rubbish.

> >

> > Just try to enjoy ranked - if you can do that with a dwindling population and whatever you want to call this meta, then you are already winning.

>

> You mean smoking "dope" and watching MSNBC and CNN. Your not one of those people that believes Trump calls Sean Hannity 3 times a day are you?

 

No I believe facts.

Hence why I don't watch Fox News

[Applesauce.5271]

I can personally attest rank doesn't mean squat, just finished my first 10 matches of the season and got put in platinum, that's right. You could end up with a platinum member on your team that only played 10 ranked matches :D

[BikeIsGone.8675]

The system isnt really biased against new players.....its actually quite the opposite.

Older accounts with lots and lots of (ranked) matches and participation in previous seasons are so much easier for any kind of "ranking algorithm" to sort into a more accurate bracket simply because of the sheer amount of data available.

As an obvious conclusion, with the system not having even remotely enough reference data, newer accounts are much, much harder to accurately place in a skill-appropriate environment.

 

Think of it this way:

Lets assume we want to determine what level of education two unrelated people have just by having them participate in a pop-quiz with just 10 multiple choice questions. (To keep the resemblance to the PvP placement matches)

 

For person A we know: Age, gender, hometown and even have access to their middle school grades.

For Person B we know: Absolutely nothing.

 

While we already have a pretty good Idea on how person A should do in our PoP quiz, we can literally say nothing about person B. Heck, we cant even say if they have finished middle school. And even IF they got a answer right, was that legitimate knowledge, or a lucky shot in the dark?

 

Anyway, What I am trying to say is, that it obviously takes a bit more than a measly 10/20/ even 30 games to appropriately determine a players true skill.

But dont worry: The more data you give the system (=the more matches you play), the more accurate your rating will become.

So I can almost guarantee, that even tho someone has 10/10 wins in their placements on an alt account, if they finish the season with the minimum game requirement of 120, their winrate will have become far more accurate and realistic.

 

 

[Abazigal.3679]

> @"BikeIsGone.8675" said:

> Anyway, What I am trying to say is, that it obviously takes a bit more than a measly 10/20/ even 30 games to appropriately determine a players true skill.

> But dont worry: The more data you give the system (=the more matches you play), the more accurate your rating will become.

> So I can almost guarantee, that even tho someone has 10/10 wins in their placements on an alt account, if they finish the season with the minimum game requirement of 120, their winrate will have become far more accurate and realistic.

 

That is totally different, since your example would fit for an 1v1 arena. We would here put one person B in a group of 4 other persons A or B. Having them get 10/10 doesn't mean that, if we placed the person B with 4 other persons, they would still a similar grade on a 2nd pop-quiz.

 

I agree with your point, but it's been shown in many games ( not in GW2 only) that you can have anyone at any rank ( except very top players), and having seasons restarting every 3 months isn't helping having an accurate system. Back in decades, games were like everyone starts at x rating and has to climb. + x for a win, -y for a lose. Nothing else. You have a much more accurate system, but it may be less entertaining since average players have no chance of getting top spots.