Jump to content

Making Our Elo Ratings Public Would Help This Community Grow, And Help Us Better Conduct Balance Discussion


597 replies to this topic

#1 PEEFsmash

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,280 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 06 June 2013 - 11:53 AM

I wanted to take a short break from discussing token balance changes and talk about something broader.

I believe that Elo ratings should be made public, and here is why.

Starting Point 1: Right now, very few players are of publicly-known skill-level. Players in the top clans or players who have done well on the leaderboards are known by some, but in general, nobody knows much about eachother.

Starting Point 2: There is a vast variety of players in this game, from very low-level players with no real videogaming background to the tippity top players with heavy competitive gaming backgrounds.

Starting Point 3: Balance discussions on the forums and elsewhere are being conducted with a random mix of low, mid, and top level players.

Starting Point 4 (the most important one!): The game is entirely different for low level, mid level, and top level players. What might be an extremely good technique at low levels (such as lights circle strafing heavies/assaults for example) becomes a somewhat risky maneuver at the mid level, and becomes utter suicide instant death at the top level. The game is entirely different at the various levels, and this leads to players at lower levels believing that they are all good players because they win half of their matches, they do well with whatever builds they are using, but because Elo is private, they don't know that they are playing primarily against lower-quality opponents (or getting paired with higher-quality teammates), and the main problems they face are due to their own poor mechanics (like bad aim or movement control). Players of different levels are playing different games, in a sense.

Conclusion: The input that players give in the forums is a horrid mishmash of tons of different players at different levels each arguing back and forth about certain balance changes that will affect them all differently. In discussions like these, EVERYONE MIGHT BE RIGHT, RELATIVE TO THEIR OWN LEVEL OF PLAY! So we get things like "I have just as much fun in my jump-jet light as I ever have! Doesn't really bother me" at the same time as "I am now unable to excecute extremely important maneuvers such as pinpointing certain components on my ascent in my jump-jet light because of screen/reticle shake." The former statement I have seen come from several low level players, and the latter statement is the consensus of all of the top light pilots I have spoken to. Each may be right, but they are really living in different worlds, and are each reporting from a play level with each its own issues.

Solution: Make Elo public. If player Elo is public, as players (and as developers) people will be able to look at someone's input and take it for what it really is. If we are trying to fix poptarting issues, we can see what is bothering low-level players, what is bothering top-level players, and see if there is a simple solution that helps both. (Hint: It's buff SRM damage!) The forums make it seem as if there is genuine disagreement among all players, and everything is a mess, but I do not believe this to be the case. In talking to many other top competitive unit members, the screen shake is a universally bad or at least unnecessary addition. However, it remains very popular among low and mid level players. I do not mean to generalize and say "only bad players want jumpjet shake," but there seems to be a strong divide between what seems imbalanced among low and mid level players, and what seems imbalanced to top level players. The reason isn't because of elitism or attending the "Church of Skill" but it is because there is such a vast difference between what happens in low elo pug games, and what happens in competitive tournament 8 man games. What is good and bad is genuinely different at different levels.

Public Elo would let us understand each person's opinion as it is. If we are wanting to make the game more accessable to new players or more enjoyable for low level casual players, then when someone with low Elo posts something in the balance forums with, people could better use that information to cater to that crowd. When there is an issue at the top competitive level, we would know exactly who has a high Elo and is qualified to speak on the subject. High elo players talking about Low elo issues helps nobody, and makes low-level players feel like their input doesn't matter. On the other hand, Low elo players under the illusion that they are good because of their 1.1 win ratio should not be clogging discussion of balance at the highest competitive 8 man level, because their win ratio is a function of playing against other lower level opponents.

Leaving things as they are right now will make balance discussions continue to be counterproductive, with nobody knowing where their opinion is most relevant, and choosing to simply insert it everywhere. Issues like "Jumpjet shake" and "Heat containment" are far different issues at different levels, and sometimes call for different or creative solutions. Throwing everyone into a pile and letting them go at it, each person not recognizing the perspective of the other (and most players not even able to know where their own perspective lies!) is leading to the awful forum debates that reduce to little more than attacks on fellow players (which I am myself guilty of!) Please, PGI or whoever is in control of this sort of thing, make Elo public.

EDIT: Another fantastic discussion on this topic: http://mwomercs.com/...o-game-balance/

Edited by PEEFsmash, 06 June 2013 - 04:17 PM.


#2 Svalfangr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 148 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 11:59 AM

No the last thing this forum needs is more elitism.

#3 CygnusX7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,803 posts
  • LocationA desolate moon circling a desolate planet

Posted 06 June 2013 - 11:59 AM

It's odd for me only because I play a different game where everyones stats are availble to be viewed and it does make things more fun and interesting. Mine is terrible but I could care less if someone saw my stats and rankings.

Edit:
I guess I should add that there is a respect policy with the other game I play.
Call someone out or if you're reported for disrespecting someone you'll end up taking a nice vacation from either the forum, the game, chat (in game voice coms) or all the above.

Edited by CygnusX7, 06 June 2013 - 12:11 PM.


#4 InRev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,236 posts
  • LocationConnecticut, USA

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:01 PM

Look at the WoT forums. Unicum this, W/L ratio that.

The amount of abuse people take because of public performance stats is astounding and makes for a very toxic experience.

#5 Xeno Phalcon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 2,461 posts
  • LocationEvening Ladies

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:02 PM

I can see it now: ELO 9000 ONLY CORP RECRUITING!

YOUR ELO IS TOO LOW **** OF MY THREAD NOOB!

MY ELO IS HIGHER THEN YOURS, CLEARLY I WIN THIS DISCUSSION!

YOU'VE BEEN PLAYING HOW LONG WITH THAT ELO? LOL YOU MUST SUCK BAD!

no.

#6 xDeityx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:05 PM

I agree. More transparency will lead to better decision-making.

From another thread relating to this topic:

View PostxDeityx, on 13 March 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

Why do bad players think they know the answers? This is a great reason why skill indicators such as stats and Elo rating should be made public.

From David Sirlin's Playing to Win e-book:

"The best players are usually doing somewhat weird things that most players don’t understand. I picture a bell curve of “valuations” that players have about their game. What I mean is that there is a large number of players in the middle of that curve who share common beliefs about what is good and effective, and what is not. They represent the “conventional wisdom” about the game. But there are a few players at the extreme end of the bell curve who have different views on what is good. In their world, some of the commonly known tactics don’t work on elite players, so they are worthless. Some moves or tactics are seen as worthless to most, but the elite player has a very specialized or refined use of them that makes them highly effective. Basically, because these players are on a higher level of understanding about the game—either with an explicit, logical analysis or through inexplicable intuition—they see the game through different eyes and see different relative values. Sometimes the conventional wisdom is just wrong about a game, and only the best players are able to step out of the mold and not be bogged down by how the masses incorrectly think the game should be played. And these elite players very often cannot explain in full, logical, step-by-step detail exactly why they value one thing so much more than another. I think the mental process for arriving at these valuations and the process for fully explaining them to others are very different things. You are better off watching what the masters do than asking them why they do it."


#7 Jonathan Paine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,197 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:05 PM

I'd like to see Elo translated into skill brackets both for matchmaking purposes as well being represented on the forums. The specific Elo number is of less interest - since the numerical difference translates badly to mwo skills. Why? The difference between hypothetical 2400 Elo and 2300 Elo is not the same as between 1200 and 1100 (1100 being given to new players) even though both are 100 points of difference.

Furthermore, neither the 1200 or the 1100 should be forced to fight either of the 2400 or the 2300 player - that difference leads to cruel beat downs.

Oh well.

#8 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:08 PM

I think public Elo would just make people complain more (e.g. waaaah my team had a bunch of 1200's and I was the only 1600). Uggg.

#9 xDeityx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:08 PM

View PostSvalfangr, on 06 June 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

No the last thing this forum needs is more elitism.


This would actually curb the elitism, or at least shine a light on whether it is justified or not. There are far more players who act like they are elite than there are players who are actually elite.

If someone is acting elite because they are in the top .01% of Elo ratings then what's wrong with that? They ARE elite, and I'd like to know what they have to say about the state of the game because they have a better understanding of it than 99.99% of the players out there.

#10 OneEyed Jack

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,500 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:10 PM

There are various factors that influence Elo. It generally measures success, not skill or knowledge. Someone who regularly plays on teams will have a higher Elo than they would if they PUGed more, for instance. And while twitch skill is certainly skill, it does not automatically equate to knowledge. Nor does using FOTM/OP/cheese-builds.

[Edit]
I'm not knocking skilled players, but knowing how to work the system and knowing how to improve the system are not remotely the same thing, even if occasionally they refer to the same person.

Edited by OneEyed Jack, 06 June 2013 - 12:12 PM.


#11 FactorlanP

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,574 posts
  • LocationMy Wallet is closed until I see real progress.

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:11 PM

View PostxDeityx, on 06 June 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

I agree. More transparency will lead to better decision-making.



Faulty logic really.

Only PGI needs the full picture to make decisions. They already have it. Which is why they frequently seem to ignore hot topics on these forums. They actually KNOW what is happening, and can filter a lot (not all) of the whining out of the equation.

#12 PEEFsmash

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,280 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:14 PM

View PostxDeityx, on 06 June 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:


This would actually curb the elitism, or at least shine a light on whether it is justified or not. There are far more players who act like they are elite than there are players who are actually elite.

If someone is acting elite because they are in the top .01% of Elo ratings then what's wrong with that? They ARE elite, and I'd like to know what they have to say about the state of the game because they have a better understanding of it than 99.99% of the players out there.


This is exactly right. Right now most elitists probably aren't elite players. Right now, the only verification we have is through leaderboard challenges or through analysis of performance in 8 man tournament play, etc, but that information is either limited or not publicized, so people can get away with saying something like "I'm elite...I just didn't want to grind the leaderboards and I am waiting for CW before I play competitively." This might be true for some, but it is a mask for others.

If someone is genuinely an elite player, then their opinion on issues regarding the top level of play should absolutely be relevant. The anonymity makes the truly elite players input just one of 100 posts, the other 99 by people who aren't qualified to speak on issues as they relate to competitive 8 man balance because they don't play them or are bad at them. On the other side of the coin, high level players probably aren't the right people to be speaking about how to make a game more accessible and enjoyable for newer or casual players.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 06 June 2013 - 12:15 PM.


#13 xDeityx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:14 PM

View PostCapperDeluxe, on 06 June 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

I think public Elo would just make people complain more (e.g. waaaah my team had a bunch of 1200's and I was the only 1600). Uggg.


At least it's a legitimate and informed complaint though. Right now we have players complaining that they are the only good player on the team anyway, but the reality is that they are probably just as average as the people they are complaining about.

Also having a public Elo rating would give people something to work on. I know I would enjoy the challenge of raising my Elo every night, it would get me in game a lot more.

#14 Mister Blastman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 8,444 posts
  • LocationIn my Mech (Atlanta, GA)

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:14 PM

Excellent post, OP. I've been an advocate of public stats and ELO for quite some time now. It can only help things, not hurt them. Unfortunately I fear there are many people around here who can't handle knowing what their ELO really is. It might defeat them inside or something.

The way I see it--who cares. Make it public! You never know where you stand on anything if you don't first try and measure yourself. Additionally, any measurement is useless without other data to compare it with.

#15 xDeityx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 753 posts

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:17 PM

View PostFactorlanP, on 06 June 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:


Faulty logic really.

Only PGI needs the full picture to make decisions. They already have it. Which is why they frequently seem to ignore hot topics on these forums. They actually KNOW what is happening, and can filter a lot (not all) of the whining out of the equation.


PGI has not demonstrated good decision-making though. Look at the roller-coaster that LRMs have been through for an example. I trust the best players in the community (I don't even know who they are to be honest) to make decisions about balance way more than I trust PGI, based on PGI's track record.

#16 DEMAX51

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,269 posts
  • LocationThe cockpit of my Jenner

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:20 PM

While I would love to know my own ELO rating, I have to disagree with the OP. I think people on the forums bickering over who's opinion matters more because of a higher ELO isn't going to help us have better conversations about game balance.

Furthermore, Devs can see our ELO ratings, and may well take that into account when processing feedback (I mean, they probably don't, but they could). Just because we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not being used.

#17 Bilbo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 7,864 posts
  • LocationSaline, Michigan

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:24 PM

A persons ELO rating has little to no bearing on their understanding of game mechanics, nor their ability to discuss them rationally. As the OP has already suggested, he and others will use it to discount and outright ignore others observations and opinions. Bad idea is very bad.

#18 PEEFsmash

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,280 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:28 PM

View PostBilbo, on 06 June 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

A persons ELO rating has little to no bearing on their understanding of game mechanics, nor their ability to discuss them rationally. As the OP has already suggested, he and others will use it to discount and outright ignore others observations and opinions. Bad idea is very bad.


I suggested that when it comes to discussing balance at the top competitive 8 man level, we should be looking for suggestions from players who actually play at the top competitive 8 man level. Is this really a controversial thing to say? Should the input from a low-Elo player who doesn't even play 8 mans be taken just as seriously? If these two opinions are equal on the topic of weapon balance at the top competitive 8 man level, then we will never accomplish anything with our discussion.

#19 Raso

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sickle
  • The Sickle
  • 1,298 posts
  • LocationConnecticut

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:29 PM

Yes, lets create a glorious master race of elite pros who know everything who can dictate what balance adjustments the unskilled masses should be behind and who can skill shame other players into conceding defeat in an argument on the merit that you are better than them. Why not? It makes about as much sense as anything else PGI does.

#20 Volthorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationCalgary, Canadia

Posted 06 June 2013 - 12:31 PM

View PostxDeityx, on 06 June 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:


PGI has not demonstrated good decision-making though. Look at the roller-coaster that LRMs have been through for an example. I trust the best players in the community (I don't even know who they are to be honest) to make decisions about balance way more than I trust PGI, based on PGI's track record.

And what if the "best" players only fight each other 1v1? Would you still trust them to help make decisions about how the game should be balanced? I sure as hell wouldn't.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users