安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
Its also split into clearly defined leagues (wood, stone, bronze, silver, gold, platinum, diamond, master and Grand Master).
The final league is the top of the world, and they're ranked relatively, so there's only one Grand Master 1.
I understand the frustration. With the addition of the Leaderboards, finding top decks is relatively easy, and chances are you will end up facing many similar decks, if not straight replicas.
It's not all bad though. You know what to expect, and at what frequency. This enables you to build a counter-deck, or something with a good win percentage against the type of decks you face most.
I like this system, because it promotes deck creation. The people who copy decks will only make it so far in the ranks, but it can be frustrating while experimenting with new decks. I've lost quite a bit of ranking doing this, but I can't say it wasn't fun.
I'm not sure nearly double for a loss against someone so much higher rank is warranted...
I've been in the similar situation, where losing against masters lose me 70 points, winning gets me almost the same. I think it's because there isn't that many master/diamond players so it basically puts us in the same basket, even though we are technically 2-3 divisions apart, it's considered more or less same skill level for the time being.
As another example, say you end up facing the same person 10 times (that happened a few times to me recently) where you each win every second game... you'll both fall through the ranks even though it's obviously an even match (40 win - 70 loss = -30 points total). In this case you're apparently evenly matched so the logical thing would be keep the same rank for both.
Without access to the math behind the system we can't guarantee that the system is working as intended... but I would like to know whether or not this type of behavior is intended at least. ;)
Is the idea to give some semblance of progression / skill, or grind at specific times to avoid facing off against the top 20?
Keep in mind that this is still far out of reach of most players... it takes time to get the cards (though admittedly they come a bit faster than you think but starts to level off hard near the end).
The 37/38 after multiple wins is because the devs said that 3 win streak bonus stops in diamond+. It says "win streak", but it gives you normal elo/2, twice. Matching against the same ranked person and being tie while both losing... that is a bit weird. We would need dev's word on why that is happening, I don't really remember how my points against ranks go, but I know that I also need to win a lot, even against masters to climb anything. You don't really need cards to be viable in higher ranks, having only gray/greens still keeps you competitive, but yeah, higher can give you an edge in specific runs.
I'm saying this happens:
start off 15/460 diamond 1
-face diamond 2 and win, get 40 (55/460)
-face master 4 and win, get 40 (95/460)
-face master 1 and lose, lose 70 (25/460)
-face diamond 1 and win, get 40 (65/460)
-face master 1 and lose, lose 70 (455/460 diamond 2; rank drop)
...the number exact for D2 might be off, haven't been on the PC for a few hours but this illustrates the point. I'm winning against people my rank and losing rank to people who are much higher. I'm also winning with a higher than 50% rate.
This is exactly what happened to me earlier many times in a row before I got ticked off and posted. :P ... after 2-3 rounds of the above it would face me against a Plat which would bump me back to D1 and continue.
I'm "winning" but not winning. Can't help but think it's just re-enforcing the people at the top. Doesn't seem logical so I'm asking instead of ranting this time.
Edit: the 38 and 37 were oddball numbers I saw after facing the same person and winning every time over more than 10 matches. I think he was stuck in the same loop i was; though he started D1 with me D4 earlier in the day and the last I saw he was D2 while I was stuck in the loop bouncing in and out of D1.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/489520/discussions/0/144512942753114668/#c144512942759152010
The higher ranked guy that takes 70 off your points is not actually getting 70 himself. He most likely is only receiving 40 points too. And when you win 40 points from the other guy he will be losing more than 40. Possibly even more than 70. So points are taken out of the system.
So i am not sure how this system works. In Elo or Glicko ranking points can never be taken out, nor can extra be created for winstreaks. It has to be a closed system. This is evidently not the case for all the ranks prior to Grand Master.
then realizing how many points i was losing when i faced higher ranks... didn't make sense.
Having pushed through to M4 (i was #13 last i checked, probably dropped by now) recording all of the match info and rankings, the numbers seemed to be evening out a bit so I think you're right. It gets less crazy the closer you are to grand master...
Evenly matched should get you -/+80. Minimum, when very far apart, is +/-40 regardless of how many are in the ranks.
The system is not strictly ELO. We inflate the ratings with win streaks. That is why we have to introduce seasons. More on that later.
Try replicating a loss as Platinum 1 - 3 vs masters (leaderboard level) if you haven't already. I've been writing my gains and losses (with the name of opponent and their rank vs my current rank) since posting this and while I don't have any screenshots I can say that after hitting master 5 the gain/loss thing evened out. Before patch while still Plat 1-2 I was seeing the -70 regularly (as mentioned above).
Is this still the case in Master+? I can probably get you some screenshots of gaining 60-80 and losing 105 at a shot (recorded, he was only 4 ranks under me).
That makes more sense; and any time seasons are involved I automatically assume it's to cover up some weird math that would otherwise get screwy... Seasons are good anyway though so no complaints ;)
There were a few games where the matching system was great but after 2 weeks due to players who were not stable players (people leaving and joining) the ranking had to be reset... another, (ancient web-based game) reset every week. It's really weird to log in one week and find out you've moved 4000 ranks on the leaderboard because the game cut out inactives and added returning/new players.
Screenshot of it happening with losing 95 points
Opponent: Shiro Diamond 4
Me: 3FFA Diamond 1 230/450
Will email log now.
(I know this isn't even, just sending to make sure it fits ur formulas)