COH2.org ladders: Something fishy here?

First off, thanks for making the ladders available now that Relic couldn't figure out to make it in-game from the beginning.

That said, I have been wondering if the ladder position is actually working right.

What got me started was that I was like position 1.600 one day and the next day - without playing at all - I was at 6.000 and something.

I thought that might just be because I had been surpassed by other players who had scored wins in the meanwhile. After all, the player base must be growing (albeit slowly?).

However, yesterday something odd happened. In the - for competitiveness totally unusable - 3v3 category, I was at a non-aweinspiring 98.000-something place(yes, lots of losses due to ppl not ocooperating in automatch 3v3+). My win ration was 42%

Then, after 1 win (yes, it DOES happen), my win ratio was up by about 1%, BUT MY POSITION HAD JUMPED 90.000??

Now, I understand that these ladders use ELO? And that they probably include a lot of players who may not have played more than a few games. Or maybe it even includes players without any multiplayer games in 3v3+ categories at all. So maybe these players are lumped together in the middle of the ladder and not moving ever.

In that case, however, I would expect them all to be standing with either a 50% ratio or with a zero ratio/zero rating. In either case, my single win should hardly let me overtake all these idle players?

Because I assume, that is why I jump 90.000 positions. It can hardly be that as many as 90.000 players have ratings that close that one single win promotes me that much?

A final explanation is ofc, that there is a technical problem with the ladder. I have no idea, I just wonder what is actually going on?

Your losses (and wins) in 3v3 were vs people with very low elo rankings. Finally you played people with high elo rankings and ended up winning, thus pushing you past not just people who don't play much 3v3 but also people who can't win in 3v3 except vs low elo players. The way elo works is that the better the person you beat is, the higher up you go in the rankings. People who haven't played enough 3v3 to beat anyone on the ladder are the sorts of people you will blow past once you win a game vs a team with a high elo ranking.

That makes sense enough - but really? Jumping 90.000 Places up on one win doesn't sound odd to you?

After what I read there must be something like just 100k to 150k players, so this is a big deal.

There will be massive swings during your placement matches. That's part of how the Elo system works. You go through a "probation" period (in chess it's usually around 20 games) where it uses a different formula with bigger swings to take you more quickly to your appropriate position. After your "probation" is over, and you are placed generally where you belong, the Elo points gained or lost will be less volatile after each match.

The big problem that I see now is that some inactive players have extremely high Elo's that are untouchable. That makes the ladder stagnant and no fun. Relic needs to reset and introduce seasons, or introduce some form of ladder decay. Right now the ladders count games from the beta, and show players at the top that haven't played in months... that's no good.

Ah, ok. That makes a lot more sense.

I've passed 50 games in my most played category. I assume the placement should be narrowed down now?

I think the last 3 wins 'only' moved me about 10.000 positions.

As discussed elsewhere, there seems to be a problem with the way automatcher uses the rating, though. Even in my 'stabilized' category, I still draw teammates with next to no xp. I suppose they just got the game recently and that you don't start over on xp if you rename your account?

Or is it possible to wipe your COH2 user in Steam and start at zero xp, but keep the rating?

In that case, low xp players might make sense in automatching with high xp, but in general I find that the have no clue and it really does take the last bit of balance out of team games to get someone with <20 xp.

There will be massive swings during your placement matches. That's part of how the Elo system works. You go through a "probation" period (in chess it's usually around 20 games) where it uses a different formula with bigger swings to take you more quickly to your appropriate position. After your "probation" is over, and you are placed generally where you belong, the Elo points gained or lost will be less volatile after each match.

The big problem that I see now is that some inactive players have extremely high Elo's that are untouchable. That makes the ladder stagnant and no fun. Relic needs to reset and introduce seasons, or introduce some form of ladder decay. Right now the ladders count games from the beta, and show players at the top that haven't played in months... that's no good.

Rank 2 as Ostheer 4 life.

There will be massive swings during your placement matches. That's part of how the Elo system works. You go through a "probation" period (in chess it's usually around 20 games) where it uses a different formula with bigger swings to take you more quickly to your appropriate position. After your "probation" is over, and you are placed generally where you belong, the Elo points gained or lost will be less volatile after each match.

The big problem that I see now is that some inactive players have extremely high Elo's that are untouchable. That makes the ladder stagnant and no fun. Relic needs to reset and introduce seasons, or introduce some form of ladder decay. Right now the ladders count games from the beta, and show players at the top that haven't played in months... that's no good.

This. It also makes us active players less incentive to play. Game is currently unbalanced, people who dont play stay at really high rank..

the ladders are really boring right now, no new faces are conquering the scene.

Ladder needs to be reset.

it should reset after each season, so other players who didnt do that good in the beginning could join climbing ladder

I think its just the top 20 are more set in stone, I am not sure though but the names on the forum side page always seem the same?

For me personally I still frequently go up and down the top 50-200 scale as I play and try out different stuff. I think there is much room to move below the top 50 imo, so the majoirty of people won't really be discouraged. If there was a stat reset I couldn't care less.

I actually thought the majority of people are against that though, I remember Basilone being burn't down about it...

there should be a penalty or a higher one for that matter if there is already one in place, for people who don't play, makes no sense that Hans is still at #2 position after all the games he's played.

I think the last 3 wins 'only' moved me about 10.000 positions.

As discussed elsewhere, there seems to be a problem with the way automatcher uses the rating, though. Even in my 'stabilized' category, I still draw teammates with next to no xp. I suppose they just got the game recently and that you don't start over on xp if you rename your account?

the upper you go on the ranking and the less positions you will climb per win obviously (think of ELO distribution between players like a gaussian distribution (bell curve)).

In team games your teammates aren't necessarily of your same ELO rating, they could have any. The team gets an overall ELO that's the average of the players', then the automatch looks for a team with a similar average ELO

ladder season resets +1

can't be bothered to spam games to pass people with lower win % just because they played a lot more than I did.

Season reset would be great. Or decay, or both in conjunction. Either way, needs a tweek.

can't be bothered to spam games to pass people with lower win % just because they played a lot more than I did.

yeah, that's exactly how it works

decay needs to happen or seasonal resets.

In team games your teammates aren't necessarily of your same ELO rating, they could have any. The team gets an overall ELO that's the average of the players', then the automatch looks for a team with a similar average ELO

Evidently what it might be trying to do, but I don't think it makes sense.

Average rating for a team isn't enough. Players also need to be within some range of eachother to make for an effective. 1 player at level 100 (made up numbers) plus two at level 10 isn't as good a team as three players each around level 40.

As it is now, it feels like the automatching for team games has a slipery slope of its own: I can't get decent 2v2 partners because I got into a losing streak initially. I'll be lucky to draw somebody who is active AND knows the basics.

So I keep losing 2 of 3 games and keep dropping in level. I could care less about 3v3+ because that mode is mostly for fun, but it bothers me that I'm in a pit with 2v2 that I can't seem to escape.

I really hope they bring in seasons or even leagues like in sc. it would be cool
To see advanced, intermediate and beginner ladders and seasons. Once you become a good enough player you get a chance to go to a higher league or season with better players and such i think this would be awesome. But that's just my opinion. If anyone can pull it off its coh2.org