Can I get some actual factual data on how this new system works, and how it is fair?

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LogicalTautology

Senior Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Endaar View Post
Do you have a source that says the new MMR is in fact, simply just ELO?
It's kind of obvious. Elo is the MMR of choice for most games, and obviously Riot is one of those. If you want an exact quote, here you go:

"League of Legends uses a mathematical system to match up players of similar skill in the “Normal” and “Ranked” game types. Each player is assigned a number that represents his relative skill level, which is determined by the outcomes of his previous games. When a player enters the queue for these game types, the system determines his relative skill level. This number is called an “Elo Rating”, taking its name from Arpad Elo, the mathematician who developed the system. The system then attempts to assemble two teams based upon the Elo Rating of all players in an attempt to create a game wherein both teams have as close to a 50% chance of winning as possible."
Source: http://na.leagueoflegends.com/learn/...ay/matchmaking


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Endaar

Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalTautology View Post
It's kind of obvious. Elo is the MMR of choice for most games, and obviously Riot is one of those. If you want an exact quote, here you go:

"League of Legends uses a mathematical system to match up players of similar skill in the “Normal” and “Ranked” game types. Each player is assigned a number that represents his relative skill level, which is determined by the outcomes of his previous games. When a player enters the queue for these game types, the system determines his relative skill level. This number is called an “Elo Rating”, taking its name from Arpad Elo, the mathematician who developed the system. The system then attempts to assemble two teams based upon the Elo Rating of all players in an attempt to create a game wherein both teams have as close to a 50% chance of winning as possible."
Source: http://na.leagueoflegends.com/learn/...ay/matchmaking
That explains what Elo is, but does not say that the new MMR = Old Elo, nor could it, because that is a post from over 2 and a half years ago.

You say I am accusing people of speculating... well when you cannot provide any hard proof, yes, you are just speculating.

You are the first person I have seen try to claim that the MMR in the new ranking system is just ELO. Sorry if that offends you.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Endaar

Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntler View Post
If you are winning about 50% of your matches, you do not have a reasonable expectation to climb in league standing.
Why are people winning under 50% of their matches climbing, then?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LogicalTautology

Senior Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Endaar View Post
That explains what Elo is, but does not say that the new MMR = Old Elo, nor could it, because that is a post from over 2 and a half years ago.

You say I am accusing people of speculating... well when you cannot provide any hard proof, yes, you are just speculating.

You are the first person I have seen try to claim that the MMR in the new ranking system is just ELO. Sorry if that offends you.
It's not a claim, it's obvious to anyone who thinks and understands how numbers work.

There was always a hidden MMR in Normal games that worked literally the exact same way that Elo did in Ranked except it was hidden. There is now a hidden MMR in Ranked games. Are you really trying to claim that I need hard proof that the hidden MMR works the same way as the other hidden MMR? Even though I just linked you a post that says all MMR uses the Elo system?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

noxToken

Senior Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Endaar View Post
The people (my friends) who I have been talking to and monitoring their stats, some have UNDER a 50% win rate and have climbed up 5 or 6 divisions already, gaining 30 LP for wins and only losing 8 for losses. They will literally win 3 games in a row and go straight to promotion matches from 0 LP, in some instances. I agree that it is logical a ~50% win rate should mean you are in the right division, and I honestly don't even know if I should be higher or lower - that isn't why I made the thread. I am wondering how people with less of a win percentage than myself have been able to climb so easily and quickly, while I have been clamped from the start, and remained in the same league the entire time with a positive win ratio.

Thank you for your reply!
I just thought about my last post after your reply. As I said before, MMR should put you at about 1:1. Under this assumption, then someone that's under 50% would be gaining less MMR per win and losing more MMR per loss. This would attempt to place the player at a 1:1 spot. But I didn't think about whole "which team has a higher MMR" factor.

For simplicity, let's use a player that's 1-9. This will have put the player in a bracket after all placement matches are done. I have a theory about what would happen to this player.

Placement matches are just a throw of the stone. Riot felt that 10 matches is a good starting point to place players in the ladder. In this case, the the MMR system takes those placement matches just as any other match. This matches up the idea of confidence that has been posted before. Our 1-9 player would still be gaining MMR at a slower pace and losing it at a faster pace. In terms of team MMR, a loss against a higher team will not hurt the MMR so much as a loss to a lower MMR team, but a loss should still deduct more than a win would give.

Arbitrary numbers would be something like Target MMR (M) = 1500 and Player MMR (P) = 2000 with our player at a 4-6 record. T1 = higher MMR team and T0 = lower MMR team:
  • Player loses against T0: M = 1500, P = 1900
  • Player loses against T1: M = 1500, P = 1950
  • Player wins against T0: M = 1530, P = 2025
  • Player wins against T1: M = 1560, P = 2050

As you can see, the target MMR only increase in the case of a win, and it will increase more against matches with a higher team MMR. This will make losses at 4-9 hurt less than at 1-9, because the target MMR stays constant with losses and increase with wins.

Where does LP fit into all of this? LP would be somewhat proportionate through an algorithm to the amount of MMR gained and lost per match. Your friends that are lower than 1:1 are gaining LP so quickly because (presumably) they are winning and losing matches against higher MMR teams. A win against a higher MMR says, "Holy ****, maybe you're better than we thought." A loss against a higher MMR team says, "We expected you to lose, so only a marginal penalty should be imposed."


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Endaar

Member

02-25-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amarond View Post
I just thought about my last post after your reply. As I said before, MMR should put you at about 1:1. Under this assumption, then someone that's under 50% would be gaining less MMR per win and losing more MMR per loss. This would attempt to place the player at a 1:1 spot. But I didn't think about whole "which team has a higher MMR" factor.

For simplicity, let's use a player that's 1-9. This will have put the player in a bracket after all placement matches are done. I have a theory about what would happen to this player.

Placement matches are just a throw of the stone. Riot felt that 10 matches is a good starting point to place players in the ladder. In this case, the the MMR system takes those placement matches just as any other match. This matches up the idea of confidence that has been posted before. Our 1-9 player would still be gaining MMR at a slower pace and losing it at a faster pace. In terms of team MMR, a loss against a higher team will not hurt the MMR so much as a loss to a lower MMR team, but a loss should still deduct more than a win would give.

Arbitrary numbers would be something like Target MMR (M) = 1500 and Player MMR (P) = 2000 with our player at a 4-6 record. T1 = higher MMR team and T0 = lower MMR team:
  • Player loses against T0: M = 1500, P = 1900
  • Player loses against T1: M = 1500, P = 1950
  • Player wins against T0: M = 1530, P = 2025
  • Player wins against T1: M = 1560, P = 2050

As you can see, the target MMR only increase in the case of a win, and it will increase more against matches with a higher team MMR. This will make losses at 4-9 hurt less than at 1-9, because the target MMR stays constant with losses and increase with wins.

Where does LP fit into all of this? LP would be somewhat proportionate through an algorithm to the amount of MMR gained and lost per match. Your friends that are lower than 1:1 are gaining LP so quickly because (presumably) they are winning and losing matches against higher MMR teams. A win against a higher MMR says, "Holy ****, maybe you're better than we thought." A loss against a higher MMR team says, "We expected you to lose, so only a marginal penalty should be imposed."
This is similar to the only conclusion I could come up with, too. But then I gotta ask, why are some people only/always matching against higher MMR teams than the ones they are being put on, and others (such as myself) are only/always being placed on higher MMR teams vs. lower ones?

Ideally, wouldn't everyone sometimes be on the higher MMR team, and other times be on the lower MMR team, so that your gains and losses vary? I have never had a game where I gained anywhere close to 30 points (my highest ever I can remember is 21), and some people I've spoken to say they have never gained less than 20...

It's a good theory, though, this is getting interesting!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

IR RAID BOSS

Junior Member

05-21-2013

Originally Posted by Amarond
I just thought about my last post after your reply. As I said before, MMR should put you at about 1:1. Under this assumption, then someone that's under 50% would be gaining less MMR per win and losing more MMR per loss. This would attempt to place the player at a 1:1 spot. But I didn't think about whole "which team has a higher MMR" factor.

For simplicity, let's use a player that's 1-9. This will have put the player in a bracket after all placement matches are done. I have a theory about what would happen to this player.

Placement matches are just a throw of the stone. Riot felt that 10 matches is a good starting point to place players in the ladder. In this case, the the MMR system takes those placement matches just as any other match. This matches up the idea of confidence that has been posted before. Our 1-9 player would still be gaining MMR at a slower pace and losing it at a faster pace. In terms of team MMR, a loss against a higher team will not hurt the MMR so much as a loss to a lower MMR team, but a loss should still deduct more than a win would give.

Arbitrary numbers would be something like Target MMR (M) = 1500 and Player MMR (P) = 2000 with our player at a 4-6 record. T1 = higher MMR team and T0 = lower MMR team:
Player loses against T0: M = 1500, P = 1900
Player loses against T1: M = 1500, P = 1950
Player wins against T0: M = 1530, P = 2025
Player wins against T1: M = 1560, P = 2050

As you can see, the target MMR only increase in the case of a win, and it will increase more against matches with a higher team MMR. This will make losses at 4-9 hurt less than at 1-9, because the target MMR stays constant with losses and increase with wins.

Where does LP fit into all of this? LP would be somewhat proportionate through an algorithm to the amount of MMR gained and lost per match. Your friends that are lower than 1:1 are gaining LP so quickly because (presumably) they are winning and losing matches against higher MMR teams. A win against a higher MMR says, "Holy ****, maybe you're better than we thought." A loss against a higher MMR team says, "We expected you to lose, so only a marginal penalty should be imposed."

I wish this made sense but I experienced something very odd that says different. I duo q'd with a friend last night. His win ratio is higher then mine. So is his Division( I am in silver 5 and he is in Silver 2). So far everything is normal. We Q up and he is first pick. I am last pick as expected. The game ends and we have won. He gains 26LP and I gain 12. This would suggest that my MMR was higher then his which cannot be the case. We won 4 games in a row. He continue to gaine 19-26 Lp. And i only gained between 9-16. We then lost a game. He lost 9Lp and I lost 26. Oh and to add to this confusion, after our winning streak (my 5th but OUR 4th, I had won one previously) I was standing @ 80LP. After losing that last game I was sitting @ 50....yep. 80-26 is not 50. Something is definitely flawed.