Welcome to The Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads and etc.

Sign in to follow this  
caelestis

Ranked tournaments- gaining rank

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Savage said:

Hi @Oxbentt

  1. The ranks are as follows:
    1. Bronze = 0 - 1199
    2. Silver =  1200 - 1399
    3. Gold =  1400 - 1599
    4. Platinum = 1600 - 1799
    5. Diamond = 1800+
      1. Raising your rating into these values will promote you to the next tier.
  2. This kinda answers both 2&3.
    1. Your last seasons rating will help your next season placements if you have an end rating above the starting rating of 1000. For now, we are awarding players the mean of their rating and the starting rating. We felt that this amount would allow for steady growth through the seasons, but not too much that its not fair or too easy. This amount will be adjusted as well as everything else due to everyone's feedback.
    2. If you are below the starting rating you will not be penalized by this carryover, and will start the next seasons placements at starting rating of 1000.

The rating system is a hybrid of a couple other rating systems. We expect to make a lot of tweaks along the way, so threads like this are amazingly helpful to fast track getting everyone the ranked poker environment they want and deserve.

Expect some Polls to be held on the website in the future about Ranked Games. Once a full length season or two have gone by, we would love to get everyone's opinions on some of the details like season length, rating carryover values, blind ramps, etc.

Thank you to everyone for providing all of this great feedback!

Hmm... so if I end the season at 1600, I'll start the next season at 1300?  And since rank changes are zero sum (if I gain 10 points, the sum total of everyone I played against had their ranks lose 10 points, right?) that means those 300 points disappear from the system entirely?

But wait, people below 1000 get bumped up, so the system's points will increase overall... except a good number of those people are bad players who won't be coming back.  If they're not playing after they get bumped up to 1000, it's like they never got a bump at all.

My sense is that this will turn into a deflationary environment.  Maybe month 2 will be easier than month 1 to place at the higher tiers, but I envision it tanking after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BedsideFungus89 said:

Any evidence yet on whether matchmaking will be geared towards rank.  Like if you get to diamond will you be matched with those of higher rank?

My assumption is that as you reach a higher tier, you can begin playing in that tier or the lower one. So if you are Silver, you can still drop down, although you won't get as much bump as if you were playing higher. People in Gold tiers can drop downs to Silver or Bronze, and so on. 

I think how matchmaking handles this is something we just can't know yet. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jayhawker said:

My assumption is that as you reach a higher tier, you can begin playing in that tier or the lower one. So if you are Silver, you can still drop down, although you won't get as much bump as if you were playing higher. People in Gold tiers can drop downs to Silver or Bronze, and so on. 

I think how matchmaking handles this is something we just can't know yet. 

I think that's a safe assumption. Even more so when we see the few silver players on the leaderboard still gaining rank. It's very unlikely that 6 of them are getting matched together at the same time, so they're clearly playing bronze games.

Edited by SevenSideSammy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with the ranking system of points, how you win more if you beat better opponents, and win less if you beat lesser opponents, etc. However the matchmaking completely sucks. How is it that every single game I'm the highest ranking player? That means I will be punished harshly for losing early and may even be punished for placing in 2nd! Get me a matchmaking system where I actually play people with similar skill or rating, then the system will be okay. Otherwise, right now, as a few people have already said, it is way too punishing for the higher ranking players.

Edited by jermzz
typos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As of yesterday there was only two players on XB1 over 1200. Once you start winning, it is always more likely that you will be the highest ranked. You need to give it time to let ratings spread out some. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Jayhawker said:

As of yesterday there was only two players on XB1 over 1200. Once you start winning, it is always more likely that you will be the highest ranked. You need to give it time to let ratings spread out some. 

I see what you're saying. It looks like it will take a lot of time for that to happen though. At this rate, the way the system is, it is working to pull everyone back down to Bronze. I can't see anyone making it near let's say Gold or Platinum because by that time, they will only be playing against way lower ranking players. Each win will probably be worth 1 point, and each loss will probably be worth -200 points (obviously exaggerated numbers but I think you understand my point.) All in all this ranked system doesn't seem to feel rewarding for any players currently.

Edited by jermzz
typos
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well whoever planted that stupid tree in this forum in the spring needs to come back to harvest it, because it is bearing fruit handsomely.

If you have a basic understanding of mathematical principles, statistical analysis and standard deviations you would be able to see how hard it will be to get to the top tier of ranking.

Someone with a ranking of 1200 has posted that unless they win a tournament their rank goes down. So maybe you would need to win a couple of hundred tournaments in a row to get there and for every loss add several more consecutive wins to recover from it.

Although you will not fully lose your ranking every month, some mean calculation is intended to be used I understand. By definition of mean calculations, if you have had a good month and gain rank at the end of the month it is highly likely your rank will go down at the reset (Depending on how this is calculated there is a very small scenario where this won’t be case for every player in profit). I like to call this the ‘Robin Hood Principle’ (Robbing the rich to give to the poor).

The dedicated player base I would surmise is too small to allow for a system of fully grading the players and putting like for like rankings together. This would lead to higher ranking players sitting in half filled lobbies needing to wait for longer than they are prepared to do.

Now the system used is the same for everyone so in that respect its fine, but it about engaging (what I’m going to call) your customers. I enjoy the game and was thinking of making a run at the tiers in January but a quick few calculations and I quickly realised there is no point. I will continue to play now and again but have dismissed the ranking system as irrelevant.

This has nothing to do with participation for all it about keeping customers (players) engaged and wanting to keep coming back. Not enough players the game will become unviable to keep going, which would be a sad thing. So please Mr Developer stop shooting yourselves in the foot.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devs have posted here multiple times that they are monitoring the results and plan to tweak the system.  In the meantime, it's still poker. 

I will tell you that a rating system could alienate bad players who think they are good, or those entitled gamers that have grown up on games designed to stroke their ego. That ain't poker. I fully expect someone to claim that everyone in the highest tiers are the bad players. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

I should have expected nothing less. Is there any chance the developers could rank people by there I. Q. So I don’t have my intelligences insulted by reading drivel.

Not wanting to go fully into my life but I’ve been playing poker for the best part of 25 years. I spend a month a year, playing the poker circuit in Las Vegas at the MGM Grand, Bellagio, Venetian, Mandalay Bay and the Aria. I have also taken part in events on the European Poker Tour and have previously at times made a living from poker, so think I am eminently qualified to comment on this GAME.

 So you will excuse me if I get frustrated by sycophantic inane posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the devs should just simply extend the season to 3 months in order to give players a chance to rank up and play in higher tiers. This would eliminate anxiety about progression resets and also give players a chance to play for more money. I think Rocket League is setup in quarterly seasons and it seems to be working fine within that community of gamers.

Hypothetically, after the end of a quarter season higher tier players, I think, should start off in silver rankings to insure competitive games and higher pay outs. I know players who have higher bankrolls probably don't want to kick rocks playing on 5k tables, but that's debatable.

All other players who ended the season in the silver ranking would be downgraded to bronze at the start of a new season. At that time new players can continue to use the provisional setup to rank in the tournament. I think changing the provisional games to 10 before ranking can put new players in the best tier possible instead of starting in bronze. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CyberGazza said:

Well whoever planted that stupid tree in this forum in the spring needs to come back to harvest it, because it is bearing fruit handsomely.

If you have a basic understanding of mathematical principles, statistical analysis and standard deviations you would be able to see how hard it will be to get to the top tier of ranking.

Someone with a ranking of 1200 has posted that unless they win a tournament their rank goes down. So maybe you would need to win a couple of hundred tournaments in a row to get there and for every loss add several more consecutive wins to recover from it.

Although you will not fully lose your ranking every month, some mean calculation is intended to be used I understand. By definition of mean calculations, if you have had a good month and gain rank at the end of the month it is highly likely your rank will go down at the reset (Depending on how this is calculated there is a very small scenario where this won’t be case for every player in profit). I like to call this the ‘Robin Hood Principle’ (Robbing the rich to give to the poor).

The dedicated player base I would surmise is too small to allow for a system of fully grading the players and putting like for like rankings together. This would lead to higher ranking players sitting in half filled lobbies needing to wait for longer than they are prepared to do.

Now the system used is the same for everyone so in that respect its fine, but it about engaging (what I’m going to call) your customers. I enjoy the game and was thinking of making a run at the tiers in January but a quick few calculations and I quickly realised there is no point. I will continue to play now and again but have dismissed the ranking system as irrelevant.

This has nothing to do with participation for all it about keeping customers (players) engaged and wanting to keep coming back. Not enough players the game will become unviable to keep going

 

 

Why are you assuming that I mean you. I'm sure you will be among the highest ranked players, even if the players are only reaching the Gold Tier.  You seem to be the uber math wiz here, so I'm sure you understand that variance and that over the long haul it reduces. 

So losing three matches on bad beats is a bummer, but I'm sure that's not normal for someone like you.  In the long run, you will win more than you lose. 

Thats my point. People are hung up on their tier instead of their rank.  I will say that in my experience that those with higher scores are playing a more solid style. This, of course, could be problematic for anyone whose ego is too heavily tied to their current rank. It's one thing to lose your buy-in and start a new tourney. But it's pretty hard to bluff or call a bluff if 30 ranking points are on the line. 

But then, this has made the 5K tourneys, the easiest to get started, much, much more meaningful. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

For the same reason you’re assuming I mean you!

After your condescending responses to my posts with regards to the Billionaire trophy thread you can understand why I thought, ‘here we go again.....’

I see my grasp of Mathematics and Human Psychology as essential tools in my Poker armoury and I’ve tried to use them to make the point I wish to get across.

My underlying point is that, as it always has been, this is a GAME, no cash can be won or lost, and it will only thrive if the people that play it are enjoying it and thus keep playing. I have no other ambition than to see this game be a success and would hope on the whole my posts would be seen as constructive.

 I really don’t care about the intricacies of ranking system or the tier requirements in itself. (At one stage several years ago I ranked as the 6th highest player on Party Poker based on winnings , now that’s a rank worth caring about). GAMERS (Not poker players) who will spend many hours building their rank just to see it all vanish in ten minutes, will think sod this and go do something that they will see as more rewarding of their efforts. My worry is the way it is structured will make people think this is a waste of time and effort and stop playing.

Losing the hands that I did was a bummer but as a Poker Player you take it on the chin and move on. I have a chuckle to myself when I read the posts of people describing in detail the hands and how they went, and how unlucky they were and I think to myself, you will never make a decent poker player if you feel the need to run to the forum and have a cry about ‘how you was robbed’. You play this game long enough you will see every conceivable outcome, get used to it.

As a footnote I am nowhere near the top of the rankings I’ve a played a couple of tournaments and got  it back to something like 1.060 I think but like I said in my previous post I’m treating it as irrelevant because I know the next bad beat is just round the corner.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't even realize it was you making the big deal about the Billionaire trophy.  That makes a lot more sense now.

You need a Participation Trophy.  If the game makes it too hard to rank up or collect chips, you just leave.  You might be right, though.  There may be a ton of gamers just like you, and creating a rating system that doesn't make every player feel good is going to run off a lot of players.  I hope not.

But you are still ignoring that fact that the devs have said they are keeping close tabs on this new feature and expect to tweak it if it is not having the desired effect.  I just hope the desired effect is not everybody getting to Platinum if they just put in enough time.  The goal should be that a very small percentage of players make it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

I’ve read what they have said that we should wait and see, that’s the exact response they gave on the Billionaire thread back in August, since then total silence on the subject. So I’m not sure I would put much hope in the fact that if ranking system does have a negative effect that they will come out and say so and try to rectify it within any timescale that would make a difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Billionaire request was dumb.  

In this case, they've said they are looking at this from the outset. They fully expect it will need tweaking.  Unlike you, a mathematical genius, they need to wait for actual data before making changes.

But hey, I'm sure Mr. Stupid Tree knows better.  Maybe they can add an Internet Asshole achievement for you to make up for the Billionaire achievement.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

I took the liberty of reading some of your posts on other threads and I now totally understand why you can’t grasp the points I’m making, it’s because you really are the biggest fruit on the stupid tree.

My particular favourite is where you try to use the antics of Phil Helmuth with regards to players sitting out. What Phil does is sit out the beginning of tournaments and join later on, which is totally the opposite to what the post was about, people playing at the beginning and sitting out the rest of the time. HILLARIOUS!!!

I also noted you recommend how people should learn to play this game in particular by reading books on the subject so I surmise from this that you yourself are book taught poker player. You would be any Poker Professionals dream opponent. It would take them about 30 minutes to figure you out and another 30 minutes to clean you out. If science ever comes up with the ability to duplicate the single brain cell you have we better have the fire service put on standby in case they rub together and start a fire.

Now I see no point in having a battle of wits with an unarmed man so, if you wish to respond to this post to have the last word then so be it, but just picture me here reading it and laughing at you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, great points CyberGazza, real intellectual stuff. 

I'm was ranked 5th on PS4 very briefly today, (now that's a rank worth caring about) now I'm back to a flat 1200. 

I stopped playing for a day, and might stop again for a couple days, because at the top, it is really punishing. I came in second and got 1 point. I just came in third and lost 14 points. 

But I don't think this is a flaw with the design, this is just a consequence of the short amount of time the ranking system has been out. At the top of the mountain the slope is easier to slide down, and this is especially true when you're dealing with a game that has luck as a factor. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blaze-Nine said:

Hey, great points CyberGazza, real intellectual stuff. 

I'm was ranked 5th on PS4 very briefly today, (now that's a rank worth caring about) now I'm back to a flat 1200. 

I stopped playing for a day, and might stop again for a couple days, because at the top, it is really punishing. I came in second and got 1 point. I just came in third and lost 14 points. 

But I don't think this is a flaw with the design, this is just a consequence of the short amount of time the ranking system has been out. At the top of the mountain the slope is easier to slide down, and this is especially true when you're dealing with a game that has luck as a factor. 

I think that's predominantly an issue with bronze, not the system in general.  Every other tier has a 200 point swing - if you're at the very top of silver at 1399, the worst person you can play against is rated 1200.  Compare that to bronze: At 1199, you can be playing against someone rated 900.  Last night I played against someone rated 850 (and he was as bad as you're imagining).  That's a 300+ point swing.  The ELO system is punishing: you don't get much by beating someone ranked 300 less than you because it's expected.  But if their first hand all-in 7/2 beats your AA (happens 1 in 8 times) you lose a ton of points.

You probably don't gain enough points the 7 times you win to make up for the 1 time you lose.

Edited by steves
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2016 at 9:37 AM, CyberGazza said:

I should have expected nothing less. Is there any chance the developers could rank people by there I. Q. So I don’t have my intelligences insulted by reading drivel.

Heh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote
7 hours ago, CyberGazza said:

I took the liberty of reading some of your posts on other threads and I now totally understand why you can’t grasp the points I’m making, it’s because you really are the biggest fruit on the stupid tree.

My particular favourite is where you try to use the antics of Phil Helmuth with regards to players sitting out. What Phil does is sit out the beginning of tournaments and join later on, which is totally the opposite to what the post was about, people playing at the beginning and sitting out the rest of the time. HILLARIOUS!!!

I also noted you recommend how people should learn to play this game in particular by reading books on the subject so I surmise from this that you yourself are book taught poker player. You would be any Poker Professionals dream opponent. It would take them about 30 minutes to figure you out and another 30 minutes to clean you out. If science ever comes up with the ability to duplicate the single brain cell you have we better have the fire service put on standby in case they rub together and start a fire.

Now I see no point in having a battle of wits with an unarmed man so, if you wish to respond to this post to have the last word then so be it, but just picture me here reading it and laughing at you.

 

 

** HILARIOUS (Wouldn't let me edit this typo)*

Edited by CyberGazza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool. Now I have the most intelligent stalker on the internet.

So tell me, Mr. Stupid Tree, what would the WSOP dealers do if Hellmuth walked away from the final table for the last 6 hours?

The point was that in any real tournament, no one would take the chips away from a player and kick him out of the tournament. 

If it makes you feel any better (it won't, because you are a douche), I don't think anyone's rating matters right now, because the entire population has played so few games that the scores are volitile. 

But I know you are anxious to brag about your lofty achievements, so just tell everyone how you totally owned some guy on a video game forum. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need Ceilings and maybe Floors.

I think, you should not be able to play the tier above you.

but maybe you can choose to play the tier below you as a choice.

 

This would mean unranked play unranked.

 

Edited by BL1P
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranked sucks when you make it to the top. I'm a 1204 and have only played in a game once with someone rated higher than me. There's only 30 players on PS4 ranked higher than me. I have no motivation to play and risk dropping a ton just to move up 10 points for a 1st place win when a 4 place loss could potentially drop me 40 ranked points. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranked is not about accumulation of points. It's about your rating and where you rank. You are 31st, which is fantastic. Who cares what tier it is. If you keep winning, you will move up. If not, you will move down. 

How else would you want ranked play to work. Every single player is dealing with the same conditions. The entire point of ranked play is to create conditions that encourages more thoughtful play. 

The devs will probably tweak ratings, but allowing for a slow expansion of the tiers means more of the higher ranked players are actually really good. As the upper tiers fill up, you will find more quality games. But this only works if there is a real downside of losing. 

I can't emphasize this enough. Your rating is not an accumulation of points, it is merely a number that represents where you rank among your peers.  You do not get higher ranked by just playing a lot. So the numbers needs to be volatile, but it will become less volatile over time.  But losing rating points has to be a part of the mix. Otherwise it's just another sort of bankroll. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this