Bump these teams to SuperTitan please!!!

**TheQwertiest** · (This post was last modified: 02-19-2013 11:26 PM by TheQwertiest.)

(02-19-2013 11:21 PM)Necrocat219 Wrote: Make a unified decision to cancel all games vs them? That would actually solve the problem for us, if they refuse to play P2 games then refuse to play P2 games vs them. I know it shouldn' even be abusable in the first place but it's a compromise.

this would seem to be the best temporary solution

who exactly is "them"

Necrocat219 · 02-19-2013, 11:28 PM

The other ST team, according to WF they cancel most of their P2 games.

**TheQwertiest** · (This post was last modified: 02-19-2013 11:52 PM by TheQwertiest.)

ahh. then i take my previous statement back.
i think doing that will only put those who want to be promoted at a loss.
although being player 2 would put you at a disadvantage, playing with those 2 will give you the best chance of getting promoted and also youll lose less when you lose cause they have a higher skill rating.

if you dont understand what im trying to say, im sorry. i really suck at explaining xD

myninja527 · 02-20-2013, 12:05 AM

Yes, please address that issue of 2 v 2 cancels. I have brought it up multiple times. I suggest matching teams before assigning map and turn order. I have made this suggestion before.

GreatGonzales · (This post was last modified: 02-20-2013 01:21 AM by GreatGonzales.)

(02-19-2013 09:18 PM)Alvendor Wrote: There seems to be an misunderstanding by some how the ranking system works. Assuming reaching super titan requires you hidden skill to reach a certain threshold and that there is not any point inflation in the rating system (think they've said they've tried to avoid that):

A specific hidden skill does not indicate a specific skill level in absolute terms. It only indicates your skill level in in comparison to the rest of the player pool.

This means a couple of things:
* It requires a higher skill level now to reach super titan than it did 6 months ago as the overall skill level of the player pool have increased. The same is true for 1v1. Heck, I reached super titan back in the days just by defending with a bombshell and then counterattacking. Today you need to do more than that to reach super titan.

* The number of players in the pool determine approximately how many can reach a certain skill rating. That an additional team reach super titan does not necessarily mean they have become better, it could also be that they were the highest ranked masters and more teams have started playing allowing for higher rankings for the top teams.

If all players that wanted a larger super titan league created 10 alt accounts and lost 10 2v2 games in each and then waited a couple of months the additional points will propagate through the system and it's likely a third team will become super titan!

Yes, Alvendor is correct.

And coupling this understanding of the promotion system with some expectations about how the league system should work, I think it's clear that OML should get involved to correct the system. True, the number of STs in a player population is directly related to the number of players in the population, but we shouldn't have to jerry-rig the system by creating alt-accounts. It's also clear that there is a different ST-player base ratio between 1v1 and 2v2. Surely a 2 team ST league is in opposition to OML's intentions with the league system, especially when comparing to the 1v1 ST league which has had so many players, for so long.

Well, this is momentous! Alex responded to request for 2v2 top lists! His answer is disapointing...but, at least we know something about the top lists situation now.

Highlighted portion relevant to this thread:

(02-19-2013 04:59 PM)onealexleft Wrote: I just replied to two PM's regarding this issue so I'll just put my reply here as well:

It's not that the ranking is screwed up for 2v2 that is keeping me from doing a list, it's several other factors:
1. It's quite low on my priority list vs other things that effect a larger group of players in Outwitters
2. The ranking is not as cut and dry as 1v1. Ultimately, there'd basically be 2 lists (random and arranged)
3. If I somehow did find the time to do a 2v2 ranking list, I'd probably overhaul the system and just create an automated page all together for all game modes and call it a day.

As for the thresholds for leagues, we are tweaking that in the backend. We've pushed some changes for 1v1 leagues recently, but haven't addressed 2v2 (but will, just one thing at a time).

The RawkHawk · 02-20-2013, 01:33 AM

Word.

GreatGonzales · (This post was last modified: 02-20-2013 01:41 AM by GreatGonzales.)

(02-19-2013 03:02 PM)Mr.Banger Wrote:
(02-19-2013 02:50 PM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:I choose option 1. It would make absoloutly no sense for OML to make the 2v2 threshold higher. Absoloutly no sense whatsoever. It's just only 2 teams have passed this threshold of 2v2 ST that is the same as 1v1 ST.

I need to clarify your position: do you believe that:

A. 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are equally prestigious?
B. that the hidden skill threshold required to be promoted to ST is equal between 1v1 and 2v2? Or
C. Both A and B

Will respond to the rest when you can clarify this for me.

I feel this question is mined. But I'll bite and go with C

You're right that the question is mined in that these positions are in contradiction with the facts.

First of all - 1v1 and 2v2 are NOT equally prestigious. It's clearly much more difficult to become a 2v2 ST than a 1v1 ST. How do I know this? Because the 1v1 ST league became populous so quickly, relative to the 2v2 ST league. Even after 7 months we do not see a populous 2v2 ST league, and the 2v2 league is also smaller than the 1v1 ST league as a percentage of the relative population (someone did this analysis already by looking at the OSN, forget who is was).

Said another way: if the 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are intended to be equally prestigious, how then do you explain the state of affairs that we see currently? This is what I meant by bringing up the comparison between high 2v2 masters and low 1v1 ST. There ISN'T a clear distinction, in fact I would argue that high 2v2 masters are probably better relative to their population than low 1v1 ST. But that's a matter of opinion, take it or leave it. But don't come back with this argument that there is a big difference between 2v2 ST and high 2v2 masters, because there is also a big difference between high 1v1 ST and low 1v1 ST. Savvy?

Regarding the notion that the hidden skill threshold is the same for 1v1 and 2v2 ST promotion, we really can't say since it's a black box. But I think you're probably right, probably OML used the same skill threshold for 1v1 and 2v2 populations - which is why there is a problem. They probably did not incorporate the smaller population of 2v2 players, which would explain why the 2v2 ST league is artificially small. Or, if you prefer, why the 2v2 ST league is smaller relative to the population than the 1v1 ST league. Bottom line: the leagues are out of whack, between 1v1 and 2v2.

I guess this discussion is no longer necessary, since Alex has confirmed that they are working on a fix.

Mr.Banger · 02-20-2013, 02:27 AM

(02-20-2013 01:40 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
(02-19-2013 03:02 PM)Mr.Banger Wrote:
(02-19-2013 02:50 PM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:I choose option 1. It would make absoloutly no sense for OML to make the 2v2 threshold higher. Absoloutly no sense whatsoever. It's just only 2 teams have passed this threshold of 2v2 ST that is the same as 1v1 ST.

I need to clarify your position: do you believe that:

A. 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are equally prestigious?
B. that the hidden skill threshold required to be promoted to ST is equal between 1v1 and 2v2? Or
C. Both A and B

Will respond to the rest when you can clarify this for me.

I feel this question is mined. But I'll bite and go with C

You're right that the question is mined in that these positions are in contradiction with the facts.

First of all - 1v1 and 2v2 are NOT equally prestigious. It's clearly much more difficult to become a 2v2 ST than a 1v1 ST. How do I know this? Because the 1v1 ST league became populous so quickly, relative to the 2v2 ST league. Even after 7 months we do not see a populous 2v2 ST league, and the 2v2 league is also smaller than the 1v1 ST league as a percentage of the relative population (someone did this analysis already by looking at the OSN, forget who is was).

Said another way: if the 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are intended to be equally prestigious, how then do you explain the state of affairs that we see currently? This is what I meant by bringing up the comparison between high 2v2 masters and low 1v1 ST. There ISN'T a clear distinction, in fact I would argue that high 2v2 masters are probably better relative to their population than low 1v1 ST. But that's a matter of opinion, take it or leave it. But don't come back with this argument that there is a big difference between 2v2 ST and high 2v2 masters, because there is also a big difference between high 1v1 ST and low 1v1 ST. Savvy?

Regarding the notion that the hidden skill threshold is the same for 1v1 and 2v2 ST promotion, we really can't say since it's a black box. But I think you're probably right, probably OML used the same skill threshold for 1v1 and 2v2 populations - which is why there is a problem. They probably did not incorporate the smaller population of 2v2 players, which would explain why the 2v2 ST league is artificially small. Or, if you prefer, why the 2v2 ST league is smaller relative to the population than the 1v1 ST league. Bottom line: the leagues are out of whack, between 1v1 and 2v2.

I guess this discussion is no longer necessary, since Alex has confirmed that they are working on a fix.

I would argue back, but the point is moot now I guess

worldfamous · 02-20-2013, 02:28 AM

(02-19-2013 11:28 PM)Necrocat219 Wrote: The other ST team, according to WF they cancel most of their P2 games.

They're system is to stack the cue with 10+ games, wait for the games to populate, then choose which games they (he) want to play. It's not always P2 that they cancel. Either way, it's basically playing league games like they're friendlies. You get to choose your opponent, your map, and the turn order.

worldfamous · 02-20-2013, 02:36 AM

(02-20-2013 01:40 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
(02-19-2013 03:02 PM)Mr.Banger Wrote:
(02-19-2013 02:50 PM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:I choose option 1. It would make absoloutly no sense for OML to make the 2v2 threshold higher. Absoloutly no sense whatsoever. It's just only 2 teams have passed this threshold of 2v2 ST that is the same as 1v1 ST.

I need to clarify your position: do you believe that:

A. 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are equally prestigious?
B. that the hidden skill threshold required to be promoted to ST is equal between 1v1 and 2v2? Or
C. Both A and B

Will respond to the rest when you can clarify this for me.

I feel this question is mined. But I'll bite and go with C

You're right that the question is mined in that these positions are in contradiction with the facts.

First of all - 1v1 and 2v2 are NOT equally prestigious. It's clearly much more difficult to become a 2v2 ST than a 1v1 ST. How do I know this? Because the 1v1 ST league became populous so quickly, relative to the 2v2 ST league. Even after 7 months we do not see a populous 2v2 ST league, and the 2v2 league is also smaller than the 1v1 ST league as a percentage of the relative population (someone did this analysis already by looking at the OSN, forget who is was).

Said another way: if the 1v1 and 2v2 ST leagues are intended to be equally prestigious, how then do you explain the state of affairs that we see currently? This is what I meant by bringing up the comparison between high 2v2 masters and low 1v1 ST. There ISN'T a clear distinction, in fact I would argue that high 2v2 masters are probably better relative to their population than low 1v1 ST. But that's a matter of opinion, take it or leave it. But don't come back with this argument that there is a big difference between 2v2 ST and high 2v2 masters, because there is also a big difference between high 1v1 ST and low 1v1 ST. Savvy?

Regarding the notion that the hidden skill threshold is the same for 1v1 and 2v2 ST promotion, we really can't say since it's a black box. But I think you're probably right, probably OML used the same skill threshold for 1v1 and 2v2 populations - which is why there is a problem. They probably did not incorporate the smaller population of 2v2 players, which would explain why the 2v2 ST league is artificially small. Or, if you prefer, why the 2v2 ST league is smaller relative to the population than the 1v1 ST league. Bottom line: the leagues are out of whack, between 1v1 and 2v2.

I guess this discussion is no longer necessary, since Alex has confirmed that they are working on a fix.

How did you get that from his reply? I don't give a **** about 2v2. I just can't wrap my head around why it's time consuming. Don't you just plug the numbers in and it spits a list out? Obviously the original setup take time but...?