Bump these teams to SuperTitan please!!!

GreatGonzales · 02-19-2013, 03:44 AM

(02-19-2013 03:11 AM)Coolio Wrote: First off.... https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=w...8t9saDCRdQ

Second off .... (Using OSN statistics) 103 1v1 super titans/16,455 total 1v1 players = x amount of 2v2 super titans/1,312 total 2v2 players. Using cross multiplication this would come out to....16,455x = 135,136 Then dividing by 16,455 to isolate x you would get.... x = 8.2 (rounded). So, according to proportions, if Alex and Adam were trying to keep the same proportion of 2v2 super titans to the amount of 1v1 super titans, there should be 8-9 2v2 super titans.

Interesting, sounds about right. I feel like 10 is a good number. Thanks for doing that analysis.

CombatEX · (This post was last modified: 02-19-2013 03:59 AM by CombatEX.)

Just to be clear I don't think there should be any artificial injection of teams into ST. I do think that there is a problem though which needs to be addressed. The same was true of 1v1 where it was exceedingly difficult for the first few people to get into ST and then eventually it became easier until the proper balance was reached. It seems that this has still not happened for 2v2.

(02-18-2013 05:27 PM)Mr.Banger Wrote: The eagles got to being eagles after passing a certain hidden skill level no? If there were more people past the hidden skill level, there would be more STs right?

As hinted above, I think there is more going on than that. There could be another variable which makes it difficult for new players to join ST even if they have high hidden skill. This was the case with 1v1 ST when players were first trying to get into it. Since so many more 1v1 games are played, it may have been easier for people to break the barrier and eventually get in. However, for ST in 2v2 this hasn't happened. It is possible that it is just down to hidden-rating and only 2 teams being high enough, but from the 1v1 ST experience I wouldn't be so sure. The fact that you and alexjiang encountered that glitch where you left and came back with hundreds of extra wins could also be a culprit in making it difficult for other players to break into ST. For example, it could be that the hidden variable in addition to hidden-rating has something to do with number of games played and how sure the system is of your skill. If this value is compared to people in the league above that you're trying to get promoted to, then the fact that your 'sureness' variable is so high could get in the way of other players being promoted. Keep in mind that this could all just be BS, but the point is there could be other factors that we do not see.

(02-19-2013 03:44 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote: Interesting, sounds about right. I feel like 10 is a good number. Thanks for doing that analysis.

Yep, that's why I said around 10 ST because this was approximately the ratio when I did the calculation around two months ago. I guess things haven't changed much in 2v2.

GreatGonzales · 02-19-2013, 03:57 AM

Quote:Neither of those was a serious solution. An others have said in previous posts, it's not about population size or percentages, it's about skill level. On the one hand we have people saying they went 35 - 1 to reach ST, and on the other we have people saying they're maybe kinda winning 60% of the time, maybe, they think. I've been dodging around saying this, but the above teams are not STs because they are not good enough to be. You are not on the same level as the current STs. They are better than you, and have earned their distinction.

You are missing the point.

When OML first devised the required skill rating for ST promotion, they did so arbitrarily. It was their best guess at the dividing line for the population. Probably, they used the same threshold for 1v1. But they clearly did not account for differences in the two populations. I said this above, but probably you didn't read since I've posted so much: you should divorce yourself from the notion that because the promotion threshold has always been a certain way, then it must be ideal. We know more now and it's frankly obvious that we do not have an ideal delineation of players.

Are alexjiang/mr banger as gurleyman/krogoth the best two teams? Yes. Just as poweewee and Joelduque are two of the best 1v1 players. Would it be appropriate for their to be only 2 1v1 STs? Clearly not. Your contention is one I reject outright: that there is a significant enough difference in skill between high masters and ST. But even if you're right, the devs STILL messed up with the threshold. Their goal should be to create a meaningful delineation of the player population. Having 2 teams in the highest league has basically no utility; it is a failure of the system. Keep in mind, also, that it is entirely possible (and I think this is likely) that there are a group of high masters teams who are worthy of being in the highest league, but they continue to play each other and therefore cannot get ahead (because they are all excellent). Again I say: 7 months is long enough for the elite to emerge. It took 1v1 only 2 months to have many STs. I just reject your contention that there is not a similar high level player base for 2v2. If you look at this closely, it's clear that's not what's going on here; it's the promotion threshold.

Necrocat219 · 02-19-2013, 03:59 AM

Sorry but I think there's one factor that's been forgotton here: Every player in 2vs2 random is trated as an entire pair (e.g. Necrocat219 and RandomPlayer) so that would boost up the number of Supertitans that should exist. Also we have no idea what 2vs2 random matches have on 2vs2 pair games as they are pretty unpredictable, and also we don't know how their rating is calculated. Is both players avarage rating put together and used to figure it out? Who knows.

CombatEX · (This post was last modified: 02-19-2013 04:09 AM by CombatEX.)

(02-19-2013 03:57 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote: Are alexjiang/mr banger as gurleyman/krogoth the best two teams? Yes.

Actually I wouldn't even be sure of that if you read what I wrote above. The only way to know for sure is for OML to release hidden-rating rankings for 2v2. Another issue is what I posted in the most recent weekly top 200 on how I believe promotion and demotion work. It could be that a Super-Titan is ranked lower than a Master (as we can clearly see is possible on OSN) as the Super-Titan could have fallen beneath the promotion threshold (but not past the demotion threshold) since the time they were promoted. In the meantime a Master team could pass the Super-Titan team in hidden-rating but just not have reached the promotion threshold yet. In this way a master team like worldfamous and diemfdie could have surpassed a super-titan team like gurleyman and krogoth in hidden-rating since the time gurleyman and krogoth were promoted.

(02-17-2013 04:49 AM)CombatEX Wrote: Say the range for Master is 500-1200 hidden-rating. Then, to get promoted to ST from Master you need to exceed 1200 hidden-rating. However, to get demoted to Master from ST you need to dip to 800 hidden-rating. This prevents a player who just got promoted to ST at 1203 points from being immediately demoted after losing 1 game and going to 1195 (and then being promoted again after a win... and so on).

In this case, there could be many Masters AND Super-Titans in the 800-1200 range. The Super-Titans aren't low enough to be demoted (<800), but the Masters aren't high enough yet to be promoted (>1200). So instead you have some Masters who are ranked higher than Super-Titans but who have yet to be promoted.

alexjiang1 · 02-19-2013, 04:07 AM

(02-19-2013 03:16 AM)worldfamous Wrote: If skill rating is solely based on wins and losses, having nothing to do with population, and the necessary skill level for ST is 700 while mine is 690, I am perfectly ok with remaining a master. However, if it is population based and only a certain percentage of players get it, I am not ok with it at this point. Let's say there are 1000 players and only the top .002 can be super titans. Now we say ST team 1 is a skill rating of 1000, team 2 999, and I come in at 998. Do you all not think that's just a little absurd at this point? I don't know if I'm that guy at 998 but I do know that someone is and I know that I am constantly matched up against the 999 team and beating them a fair percentage of the time. If Terenceahiu loses to poweewee 60 or 70% of the time but beats every other super Titan 75% or higher, should we bump him to masters? That's roughly what's going on here due to lack of population. At least that's my guess of what's in the black box.
As for the Gurleyman Krogoth being one person, there is one circumstantial piece of evidence. I just checked and see that Gurleyman is a master in 1v1 and Krogoth isn't even ranked. I realize it's totally possible to never have played 1v1 but it does seem odd to be a ST in one and not even play the other. I'm not saying that's what's going on but since Necrocat brought it up I thought I'd look.

About the terence powewee comparison, it isnt viable because Terence is beating OTHER ST so of course he shouldnt be demoted. I would say the same thing in 2v2, if you consistently lose to Gurleyman/Krogoth but consistenty beat us at a 75% rate, youll definately get promoted, theres no doubt

amoffett11 · 02-19-2013, 04:52 AM

(02-19-2013 03:57 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:Neither of those was a serious solution. An others have said in previous posts, it's not about population size or percentages, it's about skill level. On the one hand we have people saying they went 35 - 1 to reach ST, and on the other we have people saying they're maybe kinda winning 60% of the time, maybe, they think. I've been dodging around saying this, but the above teams are not STs because they are not good enough to be. You are not on the same level as the current STs. They are better than you, and have earned their distinction.

You are missing the point.

When OML first devised the required skill rating for ST promotion, they did so arbitrarily. It was their best guess at the dividing line for the population. Probably, they used the same threshold for 1v1. But they clearly did not account for differences in the two populations. I said this above, but probably you didn't read since I've posted so much: you should divorce yourself from the notion that because the promotion threshold has always been a certain way, then it must be ideal. We know more now and it's frankly obvious that we do not have an ideal delineation of players.

This is where you're missing the point. I don't think they 'guessed' at a dividing line for the population. I don't think they care how many supertitans there are, or whether it accurately represents a certain percentage of players. Keep in mind that for a very long time there were no supertitans in 2v2; I don't think this bothered them in the slightest. You think it should reflect a percentage of players. Great. I don't think the developers could care less, rather, they set a threshold, and waited to see who could reach it. So far only two have.

Here's my metaphor: "you must be this tall to ride the roller coaster". You're not going to let more people on just because the population was shorter than expected. You could design a roller coaster built for shorter people, but than the roller coaster would be less fun. No, it's up to the short people to keep on growing.

The RawkHawk · 02-19-2013, 04:55 AM

(02-19-2013 04:52 AM)amoffett Wrote:
(02-19-2013 03:57 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:Neither of those was a serious solution. An others have said in previous posts, it's not about population size or percentages, it's about skill level. On the one hand we have people saying they went 35 - 1 to reach ST, and on the other we have people saying they're maybe kinda winning 60% of the time, maybe, they think. I've been dodging around saying this, but the above teams are not STs because they are not good enough to be. You are not on the same level as the current STs. They are better than you, and have earned their distinction.

You are missing the point.

When OML first devised the required skill rating for ST promotion, they did so arbitrarily. It was their best guess at the dividing line for the population. Probably, they used the same threshold for 1v1. But they clearly did not account for differences in the two populations. I said this above, but probably you didn't read since I've posted so much: you should divorce yourself from the notion that because the promotion threshold has always been a certain way, then it must be ideal. We know more now and it's frankly obvious that we do not have an ideal delineation of players.

This is where you're missing the point. I don't think they 'guessed' at a dividing line for the population. I don't think they care how many supertitans there are, or whether it accurately represents a certain percentage of players. Keep in mind that for a very long time there were no supertitans in 2v2; I don't think this bothered them in the slightest. You think it should reflect a percentage of players. Great. I don't think the developers could care less, rather, they set a threshold, and waited to see who could reach it. So far only two have.

Here's my metaphor: "you must be this tall to ride the roller coaster". You're not going to let more people on just because the population was shorter than expected. You could design a roller coaster built for shorter people, but than the roller coaster would be less fun. No, it's up to the short people to keep on growing.

The problem with your metaphor is that people can only grow so much. And it does little benefit to anyone if you make a roller coaster for people who are 8 feet tall.

GreatGonzales · (This post was last modified: 02-19-2013 05:11 AM by GreatGonzales.)

(02-19-2013 04:52 AM)amoffett Wrote:
(02-19-2013 03:57 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:Neither of those was a serious solution. An others have said in previous posts, it's not about population size or percentages, it's about skill level. On the one hand we have people saying they went 35 - 1 to reach ST, and on the other we have people saying they're maybe kinda winning 60% of the time, maybe, they think. I've been dodging around saying this, but the above teams are not STs because they are not good enough to be. You are not on the same level as the current STs. They are better than you, and have earned their distinction.

You are missing the point.

When OML first devised the required skill rating for ST promotion, they did so arbitrarily. It was their best guess at the dividing line for the population. Probably, they used the same threshold for 1v1. But they clearly did not account for differences in the two populations. I said this above, but probably you didn't read since I've posted so much: you should divorce yourself from the notion that because the promotion threshold has always been a certain way, then it must be ideal. We know more now and it's frankly obvious that we do not have an ideal delineation of players.

This is where you're missing the point. I don't think they 'guessed' at a dividing line for the population. I don't think they care how many supertitans there are, or whether it accurately represents a certain percentage of players. Keep in mind that for a very long time there were no supertitans in 2v2; I don't think this bothered them in the slightest. You think it should reflect a percentage of players. Great. I don't think the developers could care less, rather, they set a threshold, and waited to see who could reach it. So far only two have.

Here's my metaphor: "you must be this tall to ride the roller coaster". You're not going to let more people on just because the population was shorter than expected. You could design a roller coaster built for shorter people, but than the roller coaster would be less fun. No, it's up to the short people to keep on growing.

I'm sorry man, you're just not thinking about this very critically.

1. 7 months is long enough for the elite to emerge in a population of players.
2. There were many supertitans in 1v1 after a mere 2 months; 2v2 only very recently has 2.

These are the facts that make your position nigh untenable. I feel like a broken record - if you want to continue arguing this, please address the above.

For you to be correct (that is, that current league assignment is appropriate), there would have to be an enormous divide between the highest 2 teams, and everyone else. We simply do not see this.

Your defense now seems to be that the devs don't care? I don't know if it bothered them that there were no 2v2 supertitans for a long time or not, but it should have! What is the utility in having 2 teams in a league? Almost nothing! What is the utility of having 0 teams in a league for approximately 5 months? Actually nothing. Do you not think maximizing utility is an admirable goal? That the devs "don't care" that their system is not ideal should be a disappointment to you just as much as me!

**connor34911** · 02-19-2013, 05:38 AM

(02-19-2013 04:55 AM)The RawkHawk Wrote:
(02-19-2013 04:52 AM)amoffett Wrote:
(02-19-2013 03:57 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
Quote:Neither of those was a serious solution. An others have said in previous posts, it's not about population size or percentages, it's about skill level. On the one hand we have people saying they went 35 - 1 to reach ST, and on the other we have people saying they're maybe kinda winning 60% of the time, maybe, they think. I've been dodging around saying this, but the above teams are not STs because they are not good enough to be. You are not on the same level as the current STs. They are better than you, and have earned their distinction.

You are missing the point.

When OML first devised the required skill rating for ST promotion, they did so arbitrarily. It was their best guess at the dividing line for the population. Probably, they used the same threshold for 1v1. But they clearly did not account for differences in the two populations. I said this above, but probably you didn't read since I've posted so much: you should divorce yourself from the notion that because the promotion threshold has always been a certain way, then it must be ideal. We know more now and it's frankly obvious that we do not have an ideal delineation of players.

This is where you're missing the point. I don't think they 'guessed' at a dividing line for the population. I don't think they care how many supertitans there are, or whether it accurately represents a certain percentage of players. Keep in mind that for a very long time there were no supertitans in 2v2; I don't think this bothered them in the slightest. You think it should reflect a percentage of players. Great. I don't think the developers could care less, rather, they set a threshold, and waited to see who could reach it. So far only two have.

Here's my metaphor: "you must be this tall to ride the roller coaster". You're not going to let more people on just because the population was shorter than expected. You could design a roller coaster built for shorter people, but than the roller coaster would be less fun. No, it's up to the short people to keep on growing.

The problem with your metaphor is that people can only grow so much. And it does little benefit to anyone if you make a roller coaster for people who are 8 feet tall.

LOL great.