Hi,
i have 1v1 95 wins to 90 llooses with whermacht....a guy who is in front of me in the ladder has 4 wins to 6 looses...i cant understand this, so it woulld be nice if someone can explain me how this ranking system is workinng...
if there is a almost existing thread wich explains this, iam sorry but i couldnt find....so the link to this thread is enough too of course!
thx for ur answers and sorry for my terrible english ;-)
leaderboard / ladder
20 Dec 2015, 22:43 PM
#1
Posts: 15
20 Dec 2015, 23:03 PM
#2
1 
Posts: 453
It goes based off percentage w/l ratio. Doesn't matter the mass of w/l.
20 Dec 2015, 23:18 PM
#3
Posts: 15
It goes based off percentage w/l ratio. Doesn't matter the mass of w/l.
aha, but if u read my text u will see that i have 95 wins to 90 looses....so more wins than losses and the other guy has 4 wins to 6 llosses-....i guress my ratio is better than the other one....
20 Dec 2015, 23:25 PM
#4
Posts: 621
Its based on your opponents and their skill level aswell
21 Dec 2015, 00:44 AM
#5
1 
Posts: 640
It is ELO based.
let me explain it...
E.g. you are rank 1034
You beat a guy who was rank 345 he has 4020 "Elo points" if you defeat him you will get an amount of "Elo points" (e.g. + 86 points now you have 2057 points)... if you lose against him you will not lose that much points because he had more ELO points then you had (e.g. you would lose -20).
The guy with the 4:6 stat probably won against bette enemies so he has more ELO points it doesnt depend on the Win-Lose Ratio!!
So if you search a game it will extend the ELO range in the positive and negative direction.
let me explain it...
E.g. you are rank 1034
You beat a guy who was rank 345 he has 4020 "Elo points" if you defeat him you will get an amount of "Elo points" (e.g. + 86 points now you have 2057 points)... if you lose against him you will not lose that much points because he had more ELO points then you had (e.g. you would lose -20).
The guy with the 4:6 stat probably won against bette enemies so he has more ELO points it doesnt depend on the Win-Lose Ratio!!
So if you search a game it will extend the ELO range in the positive and negative direction.
 | Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
21 Dec 2015, 07:33 AM
#6
Posts: 15
It is ELO based.
let me explain it...
E.g. you are rank 1034
You beat a guy who was rank 345 he has 4020 "Elo points" if you defeat him you will get an amount of "Elo points" (e.g. + 86 points now you have 2057 points)... if you lose against him you will not lose that much points because he had more ELO points then you had (e.g. you would lose -20).
The guy with the 4:6 stat probably won against bette enemies so he has more ELO points it doesnt depend on the Win-Lose Ratio!!
So if you search a game it will extend the ELO range in the positive and negative direction.
thank u for this answer!
there are still some things not clear for me:
- what means E.g. ? ;-)
- how did u calculate trhis elo points
- so the problem could be that i lloose to much against guys who are many ranks behind me ( loosiong more elo points than getting tham by winnings...)? becouse it still sounds crazy that 4 wins give more points than 95 independly from the enemy of this games....
21 Dec 2015, 09:13 AM
#7
1 Posts: 640
thank u for this answer!
there are still some things not clear for me:
- what means E.g. ? ;-)
- how did u calculate trhis elo points
- so the problem could be that i lloose to much against guys who are many ranks behind me ( loosiong more elo points than getting tham by winnings...)? becouse it still sounds crazy that 4 wins give more points than 95 independly from the enemy of this games....
- e.g. means "exempli gratia" = example
- I selected the ELO points above randomly to show you how the system works... I dont know how much points you have...
- exactly, the other guy won more games against "better" player than himself although he lost some
| Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
21 Dec 2015, 09:31 AM
#8
Posts: 762 | Subs: 4
Hi,
it woulld be nice if someone can explain me how this ranking system is workinng...
Hey, I can explain this to you properly so you can understand how it works
1. Each player needs to play 10 games with a faction in order to get a rank
2. In these 10 games, you will play against people of all ranks. You could play top 10, or you could play 8000 etc.
3. Depending on your performance against the different ranks you will be given a starting rank at 10 games.
Example
If during my first 10 games I won all 10 games and managed to beat someone in the top 50. My starting rank would be somewhere around the top 50.
If I played 10 games and lost a game to someone who was rank 3000, but won a game against someone rank 200, I would have a rank calculated somewhere between these two values.
So basically your first 10 games sets your starting position. And after this you rely on matchmaking and beating opponents higher than you to rank up!
21 Dec 2015, 10:11 AM
#9
Posts: 15
Hey, I can explain this to you properly so you can understand how it works
1. Each player needs to play 10 games with a faction in order to get a rank
2. In these 10 games, you will play against people of all ranks. You could play top 10, or you could play 8000 etc.
3. Depending on your performance against the different ranks you will be given a starting rank at 10 games.
Example
If during my first 10 games I won all 10 games and managed to beat someone in the top 50. My starting rank would be somewhere around the top 50.
If I played 10 games and lost a game to someone who was rank 3000, but won a game against someone rank 200, I would have a rank calculated somewhere between these two values.
So basically your first 10 games sets your starting position. And after this you rely on matchmaking and beating opponents higher than you to rank up!
alllright, thats what i wanted to know....thanks a lot to all of the helpers ;-)
21 Dec 2015, 19:09 PM
#10
Posts: 15
i guess i understood how it works, but in my oppinion this system is senseless than....
since my last post i lost 2 games and won 1 game....i ranked down for more than 100 ranks (was lvl8, now 6)....all of these enemys was higher rank than me....
the guy who had 4 wins and 6 looses, didnt play since a month and is still nearly same position...
since my last post i lost 2 games and won 1 game....i ranked down for more than 100 ranks (was lvl8, now 6)....all of these enemys was higher rank than me....
the guy who had 4 wins and 6 looses, didnt play since a month and is still nearly same position...
22 Dec 2015, 10:52 AM
#11
4 Posts: 1006
ELO will basicly tell you the possibility of someone winning the game. On the leaderboards you see the players their rank. This is not the same as their ELO rating. There are several good written articles about it on the internet.
ELO isnt the only system. There is also a system called TrueSkill and Glucko. If you want to read more about that: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/trueskill/faq.aspx
I might be wrong, but I think TrueSkill is better for teamgames. ELO works fine for 1v1's, it will also work for teamgames, but TrueSkill will give a better result.
- https://metinmediamath.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/how-to-calculate-the-elo-rating-including-example/
- http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=2833822
ELO isnt the only system. There is also a system called TrueSkill and Glucko. If you want to read more about that: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/trueskill/faq.aspx
I might be wrong, but I think TrueSkill is better for teamgames. ELO works fine for 1v1's, it will also work for teamgames, but TrueSkill will give a better result.
\
/ \
/
/ \/
22 Dec 2015, 11:01 AM
#12
4 Posts: 1006
i guess i understood how it works, but in my oppinion this system is senseless than....
since my last post i lost 2 games and won 1 game....i ranked down for more than 100 ranks (was lvl8, now 6)....all of these enemys was higher rank than me....
the guy who had 4 wins and 6 looses, didnt play since a month and is still nearly same position...
Because the CoH2 playerbase is not HUGE it is pretty rare to get mathed up with a player that is close to your ELO-range. But I have noticed that the skill level of people with rank between 100 and 300 can be close to eachother. So I guess that is the same for lower ranks to
When you have to play vs someone that has a much better rank than you, you will hardly drop in rank, but you can learn a lot of it. If you play vs someone with a much lower rank you will have an easy win but hardly any improvement in rank
Also, people that don't play for a time will decay in rank. So if you don't play for a couple of weeks your rank will drop down. After a month or two (not sure?) your rank will be hidden.
\/ \/
/ \/
22 Dec 2015, 11:18 AM
#13
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently BannedElo is broken, coz its dont find guys with you ranks or close, small player base or relic hands, but its dont work like need.
Relic killing our game, lets save COH2 from Relic 
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
22 Dec 2015, 18:14 PM
#14
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Elo is broken, coz its dont find guys with you ranks or close, small player base or relic hands, but its dont work like need.
Yolo300. After 5mins it tends to match you with whatever is on the field.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
22 Dec 2015, 18:57 PM
#15
1 Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15
ELO, and the ranking system is complete bullshit.
You are punished way too much for losing, and hardly given shit for winning, especially in random team games where you don't even have control over the teammates or enemies you get, especially since the matchmaker doesn't work right 69% of the time.
So you end up with these situations where someone has 900 wins, 700 losses and is below someone with 12 wins and 4 losses. Or someone with 55 wins 30 losses above someone with 180 wins 120 losses...It's just all over the place.
Losing to an At for example Should drop you 5 spots max. Especially at higher ranks. And I may or may not be salty about losing 50 spots out of USF top 10 because I lost 3 in a row to top 100 axis teams with a random that was sub-500 rank, after having ridiculous circumstances like 41,000 damage and twice the kills compared to my teammates and enemies ~20,000 damage. It's just bullshit. Nerf the leaderboard and ELO please.
You are punished way too much for losing, and hardly given shit for winning, especially in random team games where you don't even have control over the teammates or enemies you get, especially since the matchmaker doesn't work right 69% of the time.
So you end up with these situations where someone has 900 wins, 700 losses and is below someone with 12 wins and 4 losses. Or someone with 55 wins 30 losses above someone with 180 wins 120 losses...It's just all over the place.
Losing to an At for example Should drop you 5 spots max. Especially at higher ranks. And I may or may not be salty about losing 50 spots out of USF top 10 because I lost 3 in a row to top 100 axis teams with a random that was sub-500 rank, after having ridiculous circumstances like 41,000 damage and twice the kills compared to my teammates and enemies ~20,000 damage. It's just bullshit. Nerf the leaderboard and ELO please.
22 Dec 2015, 19:40 PM
#16
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently Banned
Yolo300. After 5mins it tends to match you with whatever is on the field.
Yolo, its find faster than 5 min players who are not in my ELO.
Relic killing our game, lets save COH2 from Relic
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
If you're not a ахіs lover when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a soviet fanboy by the time you're 30, you have no brain.
Relic delenda est
If Dane will be have son, he will be call him (Sturmgeschütz)
Brotheres, what we do in coh2, ehoes in eternity
22 Dec 2015, 20:18 PM
#17
Posts: 732
So is it true that how longer the 1v1 automatch search takes the more likely you get matches vs a player way outside ELO range?
22 Dec 2015, 21:06 PM
#18
Posts: 344
ELO, and the ranking system is complete bullshit.
You are punished way too much for losing, and hardly given shit for winning, especially in random team games where you don't even have control over the teammates or enemies you get, especially since the matchmaker doesn't work right 69% of the time.
So you end up with these situations where someone has 900 wins, 700 losses and is below someone with 12 wins and 4 losses. Or someone with 55 wins 30 losses above someone with 180 wins 120 losses...It's just all over the place.
Losing to an At for example Should drop you 5 spots max. Especially at higher ranks. And I may or may not be salty about losing 50 spots out of USF top 10 because I lost 3 in a row to top 100 axis teams with a random that was sub-500 rank, after having ridiculous circumstances like 41,000 damage and twice the kills compared to my teammates and enemies ~20,000 damage. It's just bullshit. Nerf the leaderboard and ELO please.
Man it wasn't my fault, im rank 1250 in 2v2 US and the OKW guy was rank 300, and you rage quited because I did't killed his Schwerer Headquarters while you were stomping the weaker Ostheer player. He outplayed me.
Also in this game I lost a full 6 men paratrooper squad with M1919A6 lmgs to a single mortar shell.
22 Dec 2015, 21:08 PM
#19
Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7
So is it true that how longer the 1v1 automatch search takes the more likely you get matches vs a player way outside ELO range?
True
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
13 | ||
 |
|
|
0 | ||
 |
|
|
311 | ||
 |
|
|
160 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231