Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules

  • No flaming or derogatory remarks, directly or through insinuation.
  • No discussion, sharing or referencing illegal software such as hacks, keygen, cracks and pirated software.
  • No offensive contents, including but not limited to, racism, gore or pornography.
  • No excessive spam/meme, i.e. copious one liners in a short period of time, typing with all caps or posting meme responses (text/image).
  • No trolling, including but not limited to, flame incitation, user provocation or false information distribution.
  • No link spamming or signature advertisements for content not specific to Dota 2.
  • No Dota 2 key requests, sell, trade etc.
  • You may not create multiple accounts for any purpose, including ban evasion, unless expressly permitted by a moderator.

  • Please search before posting. One thread per issue. Do not create another thread if there is an existing one already.
  • Before posting anything, make sure you check out all sticky threads (e.g., this). Do not create new threads about closed ones.
  • It is extremely important that you post in correct forum section.

  • Balance discussion only in Misc.
  • All art related (such as hero model) feedbacks go to Art Feedback Forum.
  • All matchmaking feedback should go here: Matchmaking Feedback
  • All report/low priority issues should go here: Commend/Report/Ban Feedback
  • No specific workshop item feedback. These should go to workshop page of that item.
  • When posting in non-bugs section (such as this), use [Bugs], [Discussion] or [Suggestion] prefix in your thread name.



In case you object some action by a moderator, please contact him directly through PM and explain your concerns politely. If you are still unable to resolve the issue, contact an administrator. Do not drag these issues in public.



All rules are meant to augment common sense, please use them when not conflicted with aforementioned policies.
See more
See less

Will there ever be TRUE personal performance rating?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Will there ever be TRUE personal performance rating?

    This has been bothering me for a while now. In their post that explained how the ranked system works, Valve said that personal performance is taken into account, and that you may end up winning points in a lost game or losing points in a won game.
    This is not the case. This is a very blatant lie.
    I am not sure if it's the same in every bracket, but at least in my rating bracket (~4500), it goes like this: Did you win? You get 21-29 rating. Did you lose? You lose 21-29 rating. This is very flawed, as eventually, given the "forced 50% winrate" argument, you just loop around the same bracket. There should be a way to calculate if a player has been doing good in a losing game and, if not grant him points, at least let him lose a significantly smaller amount of points. It's extremely frustrating when you keep losing rating because you get queued in those lovely, infamous games where you think to yourself "How the fuck did I get queued with these guys?", and you all know which ones I am talking about.

    But then again, this thread will just fall on deaf ears and I have no idea why I am typing all this shit.

  • #2
    Personal performance is taken into account when it comes to Valves anti-smurf algorithm.

    I do agree with you though. Elo is a flawed metric because it needs to be zero-sum. It will continue sucking until Valve ditches it for a non-zero sum system.

    Comment


    • #3
      why don't you develop one then?

      Comment


      • #4
        Obvious reasons, no?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Avidity View Post
          Personal performance is taken into account when it comes to Valves anti-smurf algorithm.

          I do agree with you though. Elo is a flawed metric because it needs to be zero-sum. It will continue sucking until Valve ditches it for a non-zero sum system.
          Why would you not want a zero-sum system?

          And by what do you mean flawed? I believe the whole point of rank system is for compare people relative to each other.

          Like, if a class of student all scored perfect/100/As, looking from scoring standpoint they are all great, but in relative to each other, they're all 'average'



          On topic:
          Short answer: Not in the foreseeable future.

          Longer answer: Depends on your definition of "TRUE" personal performance rating, because it's impossible to evaluate a single person with just a single number in a game with as much complexity as DotA.
          Every time someone make a false report.
          Making people's losses feel worse with just my name (don't ask me how it work, I certainly don't)

          Currently observed Orb(Unique Attack Modifiers), Critical, and Bash interactions for DotA2

          To:
          People who cry MM isn't fair: Maybe you're not as great as you make yourself to be.
          People who wants surrender: It exists, but I'm not teaching you how to do it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Take a step back and you may be winning the game 50/50 if you're lookning at 100+ games. Given the current ratings system, you are stuck with your given mmr after 10 matches. with + 25 -25 rewards for win loss, i am hanging out right where are started since my 3/7 first 10 matches. 2700-3000 mmr hell. I know i belong here thanks.
            I liked the game better with solo Q. Stacks are wack.
            The wc3 versions with list check did a better job at sorting groups.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by RoflCat View Post
              Why would you not want a zero-sum system?

              And by what do you mean flawed? I believe the whole point of rank system is for compare people relative to each other.

              Like, if a class of student all scored perfect/100/As, looking from scoring standpoint they are all great, but in relative to each other, they're all 'average'
              I don't mind current system. I just think it has a lot of room for improvement.

              Advanced model would let people get points even when they lost but played good. It's the ultimate holy grail of matchmaking and could make this game 3 times as fun for the majority.

              While it may be true that you can get 500-600 rating quickly, it doesn't mean the system is good. It might have been good to win those 20-25 games in a row but the matchmaking algorithm ruined the fun to all of your opponents in those games. It failed to recognize a high skilled player. Basically, because of this one player, 20-25 games turned to trash.

              20 x 9 people x 30 minutes per game = 90 hours of poor games caused by matchmaking flaw - and it's just for ONE miscalibrated player

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Avidity View Post
                I don't mind current system. I just think it has a lot of room for improvement.

                Advanced model would let people get points even when they lost but played good. It's the ultimate holy grail of matchmaking and could make this game 3 times as fun for the majority.

                While it may be true that you can get 500-600 rating quickly, it doesn't mean the system is good. It might have been good to win those 20-25 games in a row but the matchmaking algorithm ruined the fun to all of your opponents in those games. It failed to recognize a high skilled player. Basically, because of this one player, 20-25 games turned to trash.

                20 x 9 people x 30 minutes per game = 90 hours of poor games caused by matchmaking flaw - and it's just for ONE miscalibrated player
                Well, there's also flaw with your version.

                If 'good players' still gain rating upon loss, what happens when you're at the top end of the ranking? The winning team get points for sure, but since the losing team should also be 'good players', they also gain ranks? So the rank just inflate and eventually create a massive gap between them and anyone below them? Years pass and a new player who just join is immediately treated like the worst player on server because everyone else's rank are so inflated from being 'good players' for so long.

                And if just being good have such a massive impact on rating, then people wouldn't care about winning/losing but focus on trying to be that 'good player' despite if their action actually ends up costing them the game.


                Or for the system to remains as zero-rum (to not created inflated ranking values), then the rest of his team will have to suffer extra negative rating loss, or the winning team have to gain less, either way that 'gain' have to come from somewhere.
                So you satisfy a few and annoys others, just different kind of problem in addition to the potential of the situation I mentioned above.

                The system is NOT meant to make everyone happy, it's meant to give them a number to give them an idea of where they are, in relative to others of where they play.
                Every time someone make a false report.
                Making people's losses feel worse with just my name (don't ask me how it work, I certainly don't)

                Currently observed Orb(Unique Attack Modifiers), Critical, and Bash interactions for DotA2

                To:
                People who cry MM isn't fair: Maybe you're not as great as you make yourself to be.
                People who wants surrender: It exists, but I'm not teaching you how to do it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by RoflCat View Post
                  Well, there's also flaw with your version.

                  If 'good players' still gain rating upon loss, what happens when you're at the top end of the ranking? The winning team get points for sure, but since the losing team should also be 'good players', they also gain ranks? So the rank just inflate and eventually create a massive gap between them and anyone below them? Years pass and a new player who just join is immediately treated like the worst player on server because everyone else's rank are so inflated from being 'good players' for so long.

                  And if just being good have such a massive impact on rating, then people wouldn't care about winning/losing but focus on trying to be that 'good player' despite if their action actually ends up costing them the game.


                  Or for the system to remains as zero-rum (to not created inflated ranking values), then the rest of his team will have to suffer extra negative rating loss, or the winning team have to gain less, either way that 'gain' have to come from somewhere.
                  So you satisfy a few and annoys others, just different kind of problem in addition to the potential of the situation I mentioned above.

                  The system is NOT meant to make everyone happy, it's meant to give them a number to give them an idea of where they are, in relative to others of where they play.
                  That's unless you create the model properly.

                  It's possible to create an algorithm that looks at your items and grades your choices on a skill range. The more your item build looks like a pro build ( in any given situation - taking in account your opponents picks, your team picks and your opponents items ) - the more points you get for it. It can be used to calculate your skill rating. Additional points can be added/subtracted from your current pool.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    So the previously "recommended items" becomes "build these items or we won't give you as much points"?

                    I don't know about you, but my kind of fun doesn't include following a rigid build/meta that is defined by the 'pros' who plays differently than me to begin with.

                    How about this, you just give me a sample match result in your model, and go through all 10 players in said match and why each player gain/loss the amount of points they did.

                    After that ask yourself, do you want to play with a system like that?
                    Every time someone make a false report.
                    Making people's losses feel worse with just my name (don't ask me how it work, I certainly don't)

                    Currently observed Orb(Unique Attack Modifiers), Critical, and Bash interactions for DotA2

                    To:
                    People who cry MM isn't fair: Maybe you're not as great as you make yourself to be.
                    People who wants surrender: It exists, but I'm not teaching you how to do it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      That's just one quick example of many possible signals that can influence MM, and yes I would love to play with that kind of system.
                      It will still have ELO elements, but with slight modifications. Thus rewarding players who try harder.

                      ie:
                      - Game won +25points & +4points = +29(good skill/item build for that specific match up)
                      - Game lost -25points & +3points = -22(good skill/item build for that specific match up)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by aberjams View Post
                        Take a step back and you may be winning the game 50/50 if you're lookning at 100+ games. Given the current ratings system, you are stuck with your given mmr after 10 matches. with + 25 -25 rewards for win loss, i am hanging out right where are started since my 3/7 first 10 matches. 2700-3000 mmr hell. I know i belong here thanks.
                        I liked the game better with solo Q. Stacks are wack.
                        The wc3 versions with list check did a better job at sorting groups.
                        wait wait wait... If 2700-3000 is MMR hell(as you're saying) then 2400-2700(the current rating that i'm dealing with) what is? The seven hells of the underworld? Also i believe that some veteran on playdota demonstrated that elo hell or whatever doesn't exist
                        Last edited by Raspharus; 01-19-2014, 02:08 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Avidity View Post
                          That's just one quick example of many possible signals that can influence MM, and yes I would love to play with that kind of system.
                          It will still have ELO elements, but with slight modifications. Thus rewarding players who try harder.

                          ie:
                          - Game won +25points & +4points = +29(good skill/item build for that specific match up)
                          - Game lost -25points & +3points = -22(good skill/item build for that specific match up)
                          ...
                          Originally posted by Omnievul View Post
                          Did you win? You get 21-29 rating. Did you lose? You lose 21-29 rating.
                          So your example is potentially something already in the CURRENT system?

                          Or did you mean the whole team got that +29/-22?
                          If so, go back to what I said about the value inflating.

                          What your sample show is NOT a model, it's just an example, you're not going into specifics.
                          It's also really hard to put into practice for real time calculation.

                          For example, let's say a player pick Nature's Prophet, and he immediately buy Glove of Haste + 2 clarity for Midas rush, is that considered a 'good' option?
                          What if the opponent see NP pick, then get Bounty Hunter, buying Stout Shield and Quelling Blade to go harass him in jungle? How/When does the game decide it was a 'good' decision and award him that extra point for countering the opponent?
                          And does NP then lose his bonus because he got countered? (if not then go see point inflation again)

                          Or what if the above happen, but then NP go to lane and free farm because of something else? What then?

                          Or what if a Wisp and Tiny both get Necronomicon 3, then just split push and Relocate to drop double necro book + beat on tower all match? The item build is probably not 'pro', but in their game it worked for them. Are they award the +25 point for simply winning, or they deserve more for being GOOD to the point they can get away with such odd build?
                          Every time someone make a false report.
                          Making people's losses feel worse with just my name (don't ask me how it work, I certainly don't)

                          Currently observed Orb(Unique Attack Modifiers), Critical, and Bash interactions for DotA2

                          To:
                          People who cry MM isn't fair: Maybe you're not as great as you make yourself to be.
                          People who wants surrender: It exists, but I'm not teaching you how to do it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Avidity View Post
                            That's unless you create the model properly.

                            It's possible to create an algorithm that looks at your items and grades your choices on a skill range. The more your item build looks like a pro build ( in any given situation - taking in account your opponents picks, your team picks and your opponents items ) - the more points you get for it. It can be used to calculate your skill rating. Additional points can be added/subtracted from your current pool.
                            Algorithm that gives performance points based on item or skill build is not possible in any case in Dota. "Close build to pros" has nothing to do with player skill, because it's all very situational.
                            OT: Yes, it's true. It's also the same in the first ten games that "measure skill"- those just take your normal MMR but keep it hidden for 10 games. I had much worse performance in my party RMM than solo, including every aspect of the game (mostly supports though) but I still got 50 MMR more because I had one win more (in solo I had one game where I was 18-4 with mid NA and we were stomping against a Pugna Lesh early push strat but we got a muted Luna that was throwing on purpose because someone mocked her farm once... Never was in a teamfight, traded T2 for rax etc.). That is pretty flawed and I hope Valve does something about it. It also makes you play cores much more often if you want to get it up.
                            Last edited by posnisir; 01-19-2014, 02:15 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              personal rating in a team game?

                              If you have ANY problem with the MMR, go play team MMR which has been in the game for a year now. Because MMR isnt going to get any better. Because its good and theres no way to make it better, personal mistakes will still happen, it cant predict the draft etc etc.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X