43 games, it's held by Ragnarok. He had a huge string of boots beforeand though so most of the wins were vs. low-rated players.

@Ragnar, https://www.warlight.net/Forum/127654-warlight-hall-fame-2016

Turtle, you should definitely try to take back "your" record. But try to do it with someone who isn't puppeting you the whole way through.

Congrats guys! ;)

Congratulations! Gratulacje! ;)

Whether it's one person or two people, 22 wins in a row on any ladder is just amazing. The number one team on the 3v3 had one loss in 28 games. These are games against other formidable opponents. Give them credit where credit is due. Hats off to you guys in the top 10 of any ladder, you have earned your spot.

Polish players are impressive...

One more time - thank you all! This time from both: me and Ruil ;)
Cheers!
http://oi66.tinypic.com/wwhdup.jpg

Po naszemu zdrówko! Tak jakoś wyszło, że trzeba to było oblać Dorato ... :D

Edited 3/7/2016 22:57:06

Congratulations on your achievement. It's not easy putting together such a long winning streak. It's very well deserved and best of luck on extending the run.

Dobrze, że nie Amarena ;)

I didn't want to draw it out here but it's now or never.

Someone has pointed it oud: win records and not even 1st place. Now we have won 1 more game and falled down by points 19 to 3rd place. Something is just completely wrong with this counting system. Of course one might say that we have 3 losses and this is the reason of this relatively low rating. Sure. But in 1 month those games will expire. Then our rating will be calculated from this winning strike (and hopefully not any loss) and won't give a stunning number, I'm sure of it.

I don't want to offend anybody, but I've seen teams with e.g. 10 wins and 3 losses that had higher rating than we did winning 26 games and loosing 6. Also opponents rating worked in our favor. It's just simply unfair for me.

The first team (MotD & Beren) has 10 wins and one lossu unexpired.
Second (Me and Biches) 21 wins 2 losses.
Third (You guys) has 24 wins 3 losses.
The first team has played to rather all good teams and their loss is to 2200+.
Rather simmilar scores so Idon't know, though ofcourse the system is not perfect.

1st team - 10 wins, 1 losses, with 2 wins against 1900+ teams and 2 against 2000+. Rating: 2267
2nd team - 21 wins, 2 losses, 4 wins 1900+, 4 wins 2000+. Rating: 2240
3rd team - 24 wins, 3 losses, 5 wins 1900+, 2 wins 2000+. Rating: 2199.
4th team - 18 wins, 2 losses, 2 wins 1900+, 2 wins 2000+. Rating: 2164

7th team - 8 wins, 5 losses, 2 wins 1900+, 1 wins 2000+. Rating: 2088.

First of all - I don't mean to offend anybody. I respect results of all players.
What I'm getting at is that the first team has similar result as the second one and difference is close. That's fine. 3rd team has more wins but one more loss, 2 less wins against the top teams. The difference in rating is about 40 points. Understandable. 4th team with noticeably smaller record and lower opponents rating is only 30 points behind the 3rd team. Hmmm. 7th team is just shown for the comparison. 8 wons with, 5 losses, low opp. rating, high position with 76 points to the 4th place. Wow.

We have 68 points to the leadership having comparable results. Can you imagine us having 5 instead of 3 losses? Not even mention having 8 wins instead of 24. Does anybody thinks that our rating will be at ~2090 still? I don't.

The issue isn't the number of wins and the number of losses. It's not even whether some teams have more impressive wins than others. The only reason your rating is as low as it is is this loss: https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9702538

Losing to a team rated below 1800 kills your rating. Once that loss expires, your rating will probably jump by 100 points.

Your run is very impressive - it's just that losses to bad teams (even wins sometimes) really hurt.

Edited 3/11/2016 02:08:52

2251

If you won the game Beren is referencing that would be your rating. I'm not estimating, that's an exact calculation.

Ruil and Mohikanin vs Angi and Flippy
10670618 Angi and Flippy: 1631

Ruil and Mohikanin vs Peixoto and Ragnarok
10637605 Peixoto and Ragnarok: 2128

Ruil and Mohikanin vs ALE and fireice82
10632079 ALE and fireice82: 1592

Ruil and Mohikanin defeated Botanator and DrummingManiac1
10489044 3/4/2016 16:45:08 Botanator and DrummingManiac1: 1692

Ruil and Mohikanin defeated GrayFruit and FunkyT
10593955 2/29/2016 08:51:43 GrayFruit and FunkyT: 1565

You just beat two bad teams, you're playing two more bad teams, such games lower the average rating of your opponents, and thus your rating.

The problem on 2v2 ladder is matchmaking. It's very luck-based, bad opponents can damn you from reaching rank 1.

Loss against 1800- team can should lower rating, but by ~150 points? Isn't that too much?

Again till yesterday we've fallen down by 19 points without loosing any game or having any won expired. Damn, 19 points is a huge amount. Single win against team with rating about ~1800 gives us hmm 5 points? So we have "lost 4 wins" in fact.

If the frequency of choosing opponents with low rating is higher the rating possible to reach is simply much lower. Small prize for win and huge point-penalty if you lost makes those game unpleasant for any top team.

Nauzhror - thank you for your response (with the exact calculation). Can't wait to see this game expired to check how much it weighs.

Edited 3/11/2016 06:34:59

This system is bad in many ways. System not favor teams that want to play.
- Counting system
- Selection of opponents
- Less points for victory when you get the first pick
- Is that people are changing pairs when they lose a few games and from the victory with them we have nothing, and failure costs us 150 points, because their rating falls in short time to e.g 1800. After that they have new pair, and ahead us playing with 10 opponents ...

In my opinion, you win with the team, which is in the particular shape and the rating should be counted only from the start of the game and not to change after they exit ladder or change partner. In addition, the difference in rating between randomly selected pairs should not exceed 300 points.


I do not attack anyone personally, because it's a system in which we all play, but We agree that something would have to change?

I strongly believe the matchmaking is the key issue. You're playing two bad teams, and you just beat two bad teams. I don't believe you should have ever gotten any of those matchups. They were lose-lose scenarios for you.

It wouldn't matter if everyone played fair. Opponent pickers, players who do only runs and stallers are poison for a ladder. At least for everyone who plays fair.