ESOCommunity

Garja wrote:

gibson wrote:

Garja wrote:we are obviously talking of 1v1 max elo rating, idiot.

No literally nowhere did anyone say max 1v1 elo. Literally nowhere. Anyway it's a detail not the point. The Point is he's a top 16 player and just cause you're trying to use tournament seeding to force everyone to play on EP doesn't mean he should be excluded, if he wanted to play.

You said all time which is = max. And no he is not top16, simply because he isn't in top16 now Surely he can easily get there, but he has to do it like everyone else.
Using EP elo is not just to promote EP activity per se. It is to set a better long term objective method of seeding. It had to be started somewhen, and the time is now. Considering that rankings are fairly accurate it is not big deal at all.
You do realize if someone comes back and play 20 games his Elo changes a lot?

By all time I clearly meant current 1v1 NON ACTIVE elo. Anyways that's not the point. As diarouga said, seeding should be based on skill and not on pixel points. Now if there's debate on who's better of two close players, maybe use pixel points as a tie breaker. it's just dumb to have seeding based on an elo which is based on a patch that less than 5% of games are based on when you have a perfectly fine and more accurate elo readily available. Even basing seedings purely off of jap elo isn't great, better would be to base it on skill but it's certainly better than esoc elo lol.

It's almost like if players want a higher seed they should play more rated games because they know exactly how all seeds will be determined. Whoooaaaa what a concepptttt.

No one is fooling anyone -- the tournament admins aren't coming out and saying the EP Elo of today is the correct, objective measure of skill. But if no games are played between now and brackets, that is the seeding they will use. They told everyone exactly how the seeding will work, and it's simple, and everyone is given a month and a half to fit in a workable amount of games. If a player wants to change his or her seed they will play more AoE.

It's not perfect, but no method is, and it does remove all the arbitrariness of past seeding. All the marbles are on the table -- players know exactly what to do. This should not be about "well old, inactive player ____ isn't the seed I think they should be" and instead be "I don't think my current Elo is a fair representation of my relative skill, I will play more rated matches to improve my own seed."

No, it should be based on pixel points because that's an objective method. Skill means nothing if it is not quantified. And current EP elo is the best representation of skill level because it is new, coherent with the EP environment and up to date. JP elo is a clusterfuck, how many times do I have to say that. There are players on roughly the same level who are 200-300 elo points apart. And that's not something you can change from event to event. Some players peaked when the game had much more competition, others did when playerbase was way smaller.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:Yea, Tit got it.
Anyway, being top 16 is a matter of skill level, not pixel point. So if someone can easily get to top16, he is a top16 player, regardless of his current elo.

Also the current EP ladder isn't accurate at all. I'd say your current elo depends 50% on your skill level, 50% on the number of games you play.

Ex: (I don't want to be offensive, but it's something people need to understand)
Somppu is 3rd with a 50% winrate because he's the guy who's played the most games
You're 6th with like 56% because you've played a lot

How does it even make sense to have top 6 players with a 55% winrate? You two have a good elo because you've played a lot, and that's quite obvious.
For instance Raph's, mankle's and aiz' elos are much more impressive, as their win rates are close to 90% (though they've bashed some noobs).
Some guys just have a good elo because they've played a lot, not because they're good (Somppu and you are both good players, but no way somppu is 3rd, and no way you're 6th).

Isn't that exactly what you want? Motivating people to play more rated EP matches? I know it's what I want.

Hopefully it's obvious to all that both recent event performance and ELO should be used to seed players.

[Armag] diarouga wrote:Yea, Tit got it.
Anyway, being top 16 is a matter of skill level, not pixel point. So if someone can easily get to top16, he is a top16 player, regardless of his current elo.

Also the current EP ladder isn't accurate at all. I'd say your current elo depends 50% on your skill level, 50% on the number of games you play.

Ex: (I don't want to be offensive, but it's something people need to understand)
Somppu is 3rd with a 50% winrate because he's the guy who's played the most games
You're 6th with like 56% because you've played a lot

How does it even make sense to have top 6 players with a 55% winrate? You two have a good elo because you've played a lot, and that's quite obvious.
For instance Raph's, mankle's and aiz' elos are much more impressive, as their win rates are close to 90% (though they've bashed some noobs).
Some guys just have a good elo because they've played a lot, not because they're good (Somppu and you are both good players, but no way somppu is 3rd, and no way you're 6th).

Current elo formula is similar to the JP one. Somppu and me are there because we had good win streaks. Number of games played has nothing to do with that. He was out of top10 like 5 games ago.
As for winning rate I actually proposed to factor it in explicitly for the seeding score, together also with an activity coefficient which awards the sheer amount of games played. In any case the win rate is considered implicitly in the elo model. In fact you can have excellent win rate by just noob bashing or low win rate if you only play worthy opponents.

Anyway, just to make you understand the point, there was even an idea to reset the ladder or count only last X games for each event seedings. This is because the ladder works as an actual qualifier for the events, regardless of someone's supposed skill.

I am 6th ? you mean jp elo 1v1?
well idk I lose more than I win atm
btw I am more near to 68% 1v1 winrate ep and I was at 70% some weeks ago

(if you were talking about me ofc )

edeholland wrote:

[Armag] diarouga wrote:Yea, Tit got it.
Anyway, being top 16 is a matter of skill level, not pixel point. So if someone can easily get to top16, he is a top16 player, regardless of his current elo.

Also the current EP ladder isn't accurate at all. I'd say your current elo depends 50% on your skill level, 50% on the number of games you play.

Ex: (I don't want to be offensive, but it's something people need to understand)
Somppu is 3rd with a 50% winrate because he's the guy who's played the most games
You're 6th with like 56% because you've played a lot

How does it even make sense to have top 6 players with a 55% winrate? You two have a good elo because you've played a lot, and that's quite obvious.
For instance Raph's, mankle's and aiz' elos are much more impressive, as their win rates are close to 90% (though they've bashed some noobs).
Some guys just have a good elo because they've played a lot, not because they're good (Somppu and you are both good players, but no way somppu is 3rd, and no way you're 6th).

Isn't that exactly what you want? Motivating people to play more rated EP matches? I know it's what I want.

That's what we want, but we also want the tournament seeding to be fair. We don't want _H2O vs blackstar_op in RO32, nor do we want 2 captains playing against each other in RO32.

Aykin Haraka wrote:I am 6th ? you mean jp elo 1v1?
well idk I lose more than I win atm
btw I am more near to 68% 1v1 winrate ep and I was at 70% some weeks ago

(if you were talking about me ofc )

No it was talking about Somppu and Caria

oh ok ^^
but yes it would be cool for autumn tourney and other to have goods matches, not as you said good player vs good player and lower vs lower directly

The funny thing is that bsop is probably not even remotely thinking about aoe at the moment so all this speculation is ridicolous.
The planned seeding is great actually so you guys are all doing lot of mental fapperino for nothing.

zoom wrote:Hopefully it's obvious to all that both recent event performance and ELO should be used to seed players.

Sadly it's really not

Kaiserklein wrote:

zoom wrote:Hopefully it's obvious to all that both recent event performance and ELO should be used to seed players.

Sadly it's really not

Well I think they're aware that for the fairest seeding they should take into account tournament results as well. So clearly they value people playing more games on the EP more than they value achieving the best seeding; and I'm not sure it's a bad thing. I don't think it's gonna get EP to the critical mass it needs, but they've gotta try something I guess.

I'm just waiting for somebody from the Media team like @Mitoe to step in, write half an assay about this, get 15 likes and further fuel the discussion.

Garja wrote:The funny thing is that bsop is probably not even remotely thinking about aoe at the moment so all this speculation is ridicolous.
The planned seeding is great actually so you guys are all doing lot of mental fapperino for nothing.

he certainly isn't, he's just the best example for one of the reasons why using ep elo for seeding is bad

Aykin Haraka wrote:I am 6th ? you mean jp elo 1v1?
well idk I lose more than I win atm
btw I am more near to 68% 1v1 winrate ep and I was at 70% some weeks ago

(if you were talking about me ofc )

only cause you haven't played me much, Ill get u to 50% real quick.

gibson wrote:

Garja wrote:The funny thing is that bsop is probably not even remotely thinking about aoe at the moment so all this speculation is ridicolous.
The planned seeding is great actually so you guys are all doing lot of mental fapperino for nothing.

he certainly isn't, he's just the best example for one of the reasons why using ep elo for seeding is bad

Except it is a bad example because at 99% if he decides to sign up he will naturally play enough rates games to get a reasonable elo. Proving that the elo system works and that seeding makes sense.

If you can't even be bothered to log on and play some games in the next 2 months, you shouldn't get a top seed in the tournament. Simple as that. It's such a low bar to clear and seeing so many people complaining about it is really weird.

You guys are also conveniently ignoring the fact that many top players play 90% unrated games. It's just dumb to base seeding on recent activity when we already have 8 years of elo on a patch that's 10 times as active.

also that some players cant nerd the game for days on end

Papist wrote:If you can't even be bothered to log on and play some games in the next 2 months, you shouldn't get a top seed in the tournament. Simple as that. It's such a low bar to clear and seeing so many people complaining about it is really weird.

Not sure about that. I really want older, inactive pro's to join, and if they have to bash 5 noobs before they can seriously play in a tournament, that might be a reason not to join. For people like Blackstar, Samwise, Veni etc I would like them to join even if that means they have to get a manual seed.

I don't. It's an AoE tourney. If they want to play and get a good seed they'll play some AoE on the weekend. If they couldn't care less, I couldn't either.

Finally some new signature-worthy content for me.

deleted_user wrote:I don't. It's an AoE tourney. If they want to play and get a good seed they'll play some AoE on the weekend. If they couldn't care less, I couldn't either.

Basically, fuck 'em.

Yeah. It's not barring anyone from entering the tournament and it's only fair to take activity into account when we've seen players actively not practice for events, or withdraw, or make little effort to schedule. We might see an actual timely, full event.

But someone is letting inactive players know that EP Elo is the only seeding measure, right?