I kinda want to hug Math Wolf for that post :)

same here :)

"If I ever find some time, I plan to do some simulations on this to give an idea about the exact numbers."

I hope he finds the time soon...

"If I ever find some time, I plan to do some simulations on this to give an idea about the exact numbers."
Anything short of this will not convince me. It was a very good post but i disagree with the idea that 'If you play enough games that contradict the loss, TS will correct itself and you will get the same (actually, a very similar) rating as you would have when that loss never happened.' because sometimes ''enough games'' means hundreds and hundreds. If you start playing ladder as a nub and lose 50% of your games against an average of 1800 rated players and play 100 games then when you get good enough to regularly win 2000 rated games you will need to play a vast number of games to beat me (piggy) who joins, plays 2 dozen games and wins 19 of them with an average opponent rating of 1900. If i fluke 22 wins which i have done before then i am practically untouchable to anyone who has ever played the ladder as anything other than a pro. Guys like latnox, widz, gambler etc would never have a chance.

Edited 8/26/2014 16:25:45

I think the rating system does need to be explained A LOT on here. I find it fascinating, but don't know enough about it to vote on it. I suspect most players on here are the same. If Fizzer has a poll on ELO vs TS, we will simply vote for something new because the current system has issues. But which is better? Without explaining it to us in detail (pros/cons/flaws of each), how do we know what to vote for?

Here's a short discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueSkill

Here's a lot more detail (including all the "scary" mathematics; if you don't understand, feel free to skip those detail and only read the parts you do understand): http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/trueskill/details.aspx

You might also like the following blog post (which is the sixth hit when googling "elo trueskill comparison"), which has some relevance towards WL ;) http://blog.warlight.net/index.php/2012/01/trueskill/

Thanks, all good reads. I found this part very significant (and something I did not know):

"The disadvantage of this is that *when* you defeat an opponent matters. Say player A rises from #30 to #1 on the ladder. If you defeat player A when they’re at #1, you’ll get a much bigger ratings boost than you would have if you defeated them when they were #30. This isn’t true in Bayesian ELO, since the rating points you got from defeating player A rise as they rise up the ladder."

That is a big part of it. Personally, I like that aspect. There is nothing more frustrating than beating a good opponent on the seasonal ladder, only to have them quit and tank your rating. Instead your rating would be based on what they were when you beat them.

Some might not like that, since you could beat someone who eventually rises to #1 (and you only get credit for what they were rated at the time). But, shouldn't your win be based on their skill at the time, not what they are 3 months later when they are a better player (you may not have beat them then)?

Fizzer, why not create your own ranking system, something that is a tweaked basket of ranking systems that best suits WL? Or, maybe make it 50%-50% or 70% B-ELO, 30% TrueSkill (or whatever you think is best)? An average (of some sort) of the two ranking systems would be best I think: get the best of both, reduce the problems either might have.

-The Late Gui

Is this feasible? If so, I'd suggest something like that for the 2v2, 1v1 and potential 3v3, while keeping the existing TS for RT, and bELO for the Seasonal.

Fizzer was just waiting for Gui to leave :D

+1 Fridge, Pop-Up notification for RT-Ladder-Game would be helpful

3v3 EU Ladder (Random Teams)
Pop up for Real Time Ladder.
1v1 Ladder reduced luck to 0% WR.
1v1 Ladder Rating calculated in dual mode (detailed above).

random teams will make big problem...

Two big things for me. A random teams seasonal.

A pop up for turns in rt ladder.

Gnuffone why?

Idk if anyone has mentioned 3v3 euro ladder yet /s

But pretty please 3v3 euro :D

yes we all mentioned eu 3v3 ladder :D

@Arun: with random teamamtes in 3v3, less pppl will join. Most of team want play with friend in teams.

"/s" significa sarcasmo :)

ma non e negativo, plus o meno scherzo

ok :)

Yeah, at first glance I thought random team 3v3 europe would be cool. but unless the match making is done REALLY well, it could suck. I don't want some noob on my team.

Perhaps a random team seasonal is a better idea to try the idea out first and get it right. Leave 3v3 europe as set teams.

a lot to read so i'll wait for the available votes ...

but a 3v3 team (static) ladder would be very nice to play !!!

... even 4v4 or 5v5 of course too ...

but 3v3 seems to be the most wanted so far !

Edited 8/28/2014 14:05:16