Leaderboard level 15

[ShodaN]

Just a small question about the leaderboards: Have you ever noticed that some levels dont have any players on it?

For example level 15 in 1vs1. It doesn't exist at all. USF even lack a level 14. In 2vs2 there are a few level 15ners for Wehrmacht, but nobody else has it.

I was under the impression that the first few levels are based on a range of ranks and the lower ones are then according to "> than x% of the playerbase" (I read that at some point on CoH2.org).

But if there are gaps (and different ones per faction or mode), then this doesn't really fit now, does it? At least the part with the rank ranges. So what's the deal with that and what is it really based on?

[ShodaN]

Not one knows or cares?

[andrelemgard]

nope and those on top alt f4 when losing in order to keep their rank.

[A Table]

Maybe go to the official forums? Thet should know better.

[Bulanskovich]

Probably not enough players to fill all the levels? Maybe they removed some levels because they had trouble organising matches.

[ShodaN]

Originally posted by Andrew of Constanta:

Probably not enough players to fill all the levels? Maybe they removed some levels because they had trouble organising matches.

Well that's the question. Usually it should be possible to fill them all, because level is as I understand nothing but a represenation of a certain range of ELO score.

So why would there be such a huge difference? They should just bring the DoW2 system back where you can see the ELO score and the gain and loss post-match.

[Maschinengewehr]

Maybe no one fills the prerequisite for that ELO group? I dunno..

[Erwin Johannes Eugen Rommel]

Question...where do I see this level? :D

[ShodaN]

Originally posted by Fegelein 88:

Question...where do I see this level? :D

You can see them in the leaderboards if you click on the according button.

Here is a screenshot of that rift I was talking about in USF 1vs1:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=767020594

[Tensa!]

After 2 weeks without playing a certain game mode with a certain faction you get hidden from the ladder boards, but you don't lose your rank. This means, there are players with level 14 for instance, but they haven't played for weeks. Yet their ELO didn't decay enough for other level 13 players to take over their rank.

I don't know whether it works this way. but it would explain it.

[ShodaN]

I think I found the reason.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/39012/what-does-the-levels-mean-in-coh2-leaderboards

Ladder ranks to Level goes as follows:

Rank / Level
1-2 =20
3-13 = 19
14-36 = 18
37-80 = 17
81-200 = 16

Better than bottom / Level
6% = 2
14% = 3
20% = 4
25% = 5
35% = 6
45% = 7
55% = 8
62% = 9
69% = 10
75% = 11
80% = 12
85% = 13
90% = 14
95% = 15

So this is really the point where Level splits from just rank to being better than a certain percentage of the playerbase. Given that the playerbase isn't soo big and further split up into factions and modes here it is possible that nobody falls into that category mathematically.

Thanks for the replies anyways.

[lich0]

How come with a win ratio of 27% in 1v1 (3 wins/8 losses as Wehr) I was given rank 10?

According to my lvl I'm better than 69% of players, considering my W/L ratio it's quite the opposite.

[ShodaN]

Originally posted by lich0:

How come with a win ratio of 27% in 1v1 (3 wins/8 losses as Wehr) I was given rank 10?

According to my lvl I'm better than 69% of players, considering my W/L ratio it's quite the opposite.

It's based on ELO score and not win ratio. The initial score will be determined by your first 10 placement matches influenced by the ranks your oponents in those matches had. The result can be really inaccurate.

Ranking up or down is based on WHO you win or lose against, not only THAT you win or lose.

Example:
Let's say you win 3 times against a top 200 player, but lose 8 times in a row against top 50 players, then that still makes you better than most of the community. It just means you are somewhere between those two ranges. The key question is: Can you maintain this intial ranking or will it have to be corrected downwards.

[DASK]

Does that explain why my elo with a win loss at 39% in one faction equals the same win loss of around 55% vs okw for the exact same elo in teams ?

It seems a bit unfair otherwise being matched with players with higher W/L ratios. The win loss is still very lob sided. I thought matchmaking tries to get 50% / 50% balance

[ShodaN]

Originally posted by DMS:

Does that explain why my elo with a win loss at 39% in one faction equals the same win loss of around 55% vs okw for the exact same elo in teams ?

It seems a bit unfair otherwise being matched with players with higher W/L ratios. The win loss is still very lob sided.

How many times do you see people complain about uneven matches? How many complaints about matchmaking as a whole are on here? Who many about droppers, leavers, afk and even teamkillers? The system doesn't care how or why you lost, it just does the math anyways. For everyone.

That means if it puts you in an uneven match, it calculates the resulting scores based on this imbalance. A loss or win could count a lot or very little towards your resulting rank after the match.

The fact that the system tries to get your W/L to 50% counts for very little, if it's just unable to find anyone that would help to achieve that goal. Also consider that you are ranked against your faction comrades, but go up against those of a different leaderboard.

Let's say you are top 50 Allies and nobody with a score above you from the Axis leaderboard is currently playing the game. Then it just has to throw somebody worse than that at you. Even if it technically now has to get you a match that you would propably lose so your W/L drops. But it simply can't. So eventually a lot of wins pile up, but winning doesn't add a lot of points that way. This works the other way around too.

[Crystal meth enthusiast]

Originally posted by DarTH ShodaN:

Not one knows or cares?

Why should anybody care?