SCLegacy SC2Ranks Division Discussion

[Hammy]

Q. What is the bonus pool and how are bonus points acquired?

A. The Bonus Pool (incorrectly called “Rested Points” in some parts of the UI) is an accumulation of points that every player receives whether they’re online and playing or not. They’re essentially used as a means to help give a player a catch-up boost if they haven’t played in a while. The pool does have a cap but it increases slowly until the end of a season.

Isn't that interesting...

In all fairness Hammy what Blizzard said at Blizzcon about the more games you play the better it can place you makes a lot of sense. It's hard to place players based on a few games given it's a computerised system. Unless they somehow develop some crazy algorithm that looks through your build, unit control, apm, money count, macro skills, etc like a pro who can instantly tell you where you rank. I thought the whole point of these ladders and leagues no matter what the game is to just put you where you belong in as few games as possible. Not sure how well Blizzard does with that goal though. Reasonably well i assume. But basically more data (more games played) would be immensely helpful in determining your ranking and skill level.

You're absolutely right, but I'm not comparing a chub with 20 games to a progamer who has 2000. 200-300 1v1 ladder games seems to be a reasonable amount of games at this point, but often times we'll see 'weaker' players with a lot more games rank higher because of how the system works.
Also, from my own point of view: bonus points are piling up a lot faster than I can use them, but my relative skill isn't going down at all. I still beat most of the same people who've been playing while I've been inactive, I still beat people who are X points away from the #1 on the server (used as a reference of the general increase in points), and yet my rank and points are lagging behind.

Which leaves me with my last question:
If points are supposed to reflect your skill, then why are they increasing so much faster than your skill?
=> Because bonus points are stupid. Go ELO.

[Todie]

i feel its rather safe to say that bonus points come ticking a bit too fast, also, due to the apparent cap on the bonuspool, players who are significantly inactive during a significant time will reach that cap and stop getting bonus, while the active players still have a growing bonuspool (counting both spent and unspent points) .... this is just awful. especialy since there is no actual way of keeping track of these numbers; i cant know if a player has a lower rating (or sum of rating + current bónus) due to having been very inactive previously, or from "being bad"

... we shouldnt expect a major overhaul or reinvention of the system. but im hoping for some tweaks come reset.


finally, im curious how high the bonus-cap is.

[JackhammerIV]

Well technically with 1 point every 2 hours in 24 hours you gain 12 points. So basically win more than like twice a day just to be safe and the points will slowly go down. Takes a long time but eventually they'll go down.:P Super long time. Months basically for a few hundred points if you don't play much.

My guess about the Blizzard points system is that it is an inherent reward in terms of ranking for experience. Which is exactly what Hammy is saying. Higher ranking for people with more games under their belt. Whether that ranking system is good or not is debatable. IMO i think without that kind of system a lot of people would feel more stagnant and just stop playing as much. Currently people would play lots of games to have a good ranking in their division. If the rank is based on skill then like a few weeks in a row of them being stuck at the same rank could just get them discouraged and stop laddering. Their skill rank wouldn't drop at all unless someone else is better than them and pushes them down in rank. You can be a crappy SC2 player and still manage to rise in the current Blizzard points ranks which acts as more encouragement than a stagnant and constant 80 ranking in terms of skill for example. Just my personal opinion.

[Norfindel]

The worst of it, is that as the matchmaker aims to give you a 50% win rate, if the amount of points you win/lose is the same, your points would be an accurate indicator of your skill, but bonus points give you a boost when you win a game, not when you lose one, so they just break the system by bumping players continuously up just for playing.

It's basically a prize for been a SC slave.

[SaharaDrac]

LOL. Wow. NO, I know you always GET points, but a person who doesn't play accumulates them and then applies multiple points to his wins, rather than the 1 point someone playing a lot is getting. Does this not make sense?

I think the problem is that a lot of you perceive ladder rating as a reflection of skill and nothing else. It's not just that, it's a reflection of skill AND dedication. If you don't play, then the people playing who are also skilled deserve to be higher than you. When you come back, you don't get special treatment just because of your "skill". You deserve to be punished for not playing, compared to those who are. That's the point of a ladder.

[Norfindel]

A good system wouldn't need the bonus pool at all. If the matchmaker aims to give you 50% win rate, you will lose the same points than you win when you reach your place in the ladder, and the number would be a measure of player skill, it wouldn't constantly inflate. Even more, they have a hidden skill number that they could use instead.

Go to see any sport, and check if the amount of time they practice is measured. It isn't. Only skill.

Of course, Blizzard wants to encourage people to play, that's why they did that. But it has nothing to do with sports. People that plays more should already have higher skill because of that, no need to inflate the points by giving extra points for wining a game over losing one. With that system, if you have bonus points and your win rate is 50%, your rank will still go up, what sense does that make?

Also, the bonus pool goes up quite fast. You really need to play a big deal to deplete it. I think i only depleted my bonus pool when i played maybe 5 games per day in the beta, and even then having at least 16 bonus pool was common.

[The_Blade]

More evidence that the ranking system is flawed: I'm trapped on a Gold league with over 2000 top 3 players... This is strange

[Hammy]

@Sahara: Ah so rank#1 isn't supposed to be the best player. I see, that's so smart...
Also, I don't see how I didn't correct you, since you seem to agree NOW that everyone gets the same amount of bonus points, whether playing or not.
Playing once your bonus points are depleeted constitutes a bit of a handicap, but if the system worked, your score should stagnate until your skill actually increases (through playing). That doesn't seem to be what's going on.

[Todie]

The downside of any system without any kind of extra incentive to keep playing at at least a certain rate, is that some players would actually stagnate their ladder play from sheer fear of losing; if you do good for a bit and achieve a really good rating, and take pride in that, maybe you are really afraid of ruining that? then you will start playing much less ladder..
this might be a better way of rating people, but its hard to say; the system might get clogged up by players who got their rating long ago, whose skill may not be comparable to that of those with similar rating at a later time.

... it makes sense to ask for a more straightforward way to tell how good players are compared to each other, but remember that playing ladder is the one way we get to use the match making system, and as apparent by this thread, people care about their progress... so i actually do think we need a system that rewards activity, and so far, i think i prefer the bonus pt. system to the "epxerience decay" system of the warcraft III ladder. (witch always seemed arbitrary to me; who has had their level decayed and who hasnt? noone but the palyers themselves know!)

like democracy, its the worst system ever, but its still better than the alternatives (LOL i wish i rememebred the exact quote!). lacking epic suggestions of something to replace it... we're gonna have to stick with it, hopefully it will recieve some tweaking and hopefully that will make it more barable.


i vogue for slower bonus point regeneration, whos with me?
other cool tweaks might be to enable easier filtering on bonus; like enabling showing unspent bonus on the ladder. as to let you know; am i better than these guys or am i just playing more atm?

[Norfindel]

The downside of any system without any kind of extra incentive to keep playing at at least a certain rate, is that some players would actually stagnate their ladder play from sheer fear of losing; if you do good for a bit and achieve a really good rating, and take pride in that, maybe you are really afraid of ruining that? then you will start playing much less ladder..

That shouldn't happend unless you get worse, or you keep the same skill and a lot of players go up.
With the current system, you're discouraged to play if the players on top of your league played a lot of games, so that it requires a stupid amount of games to get the points.

Not only that, but as the divisions are separate from each other, you have Gold players with 2000 points and Diamond players with 300, so the points actually mean nothing, but can get you stuck inside a division, which is very discouraging.