49 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

What is the ideal Tier distribution according to your opinion? Perhaps something like:

• Tier 1: 5%
  
• Tier 2: 17.5%
  
• Tier 3: 55%
  
• Tier 4: 17.5%
  
• Tier 5: 5%

Which means that (2 * 17.5%) + 55% = 90% of the player base are in the Tier 2-4. Tier 1 and 5 are reserved for theelite and new comers, which slice is 5% (one in twenty) each.




EDIT (26 Sept' 2015):

According to these two threads, the distribution seems to be normal:

• http://mwomercs.com/...ts-for-science/
  
• http://mwomercs.com/...n-tier-seid-ihr

The first one in the GD could be more biased (right sided) because there's no poll. The second one has a poll.



Tier mechanics aside, I am pretty pleased because so far, it creates a normal distribution!

Edited by Hit the Deck, 25 September 2015 - 08:40 PM.

[FupDup]

It probably looks like this:

[Tastian]

I was thinking about that today. Any reason not to have the tier boundaries dynamic so that the playerbase is always 20,20,20,20,20?

[Khobai]

tier 1 me
tier 2 no one
tier 3 no one
tier 4 select few
tier 5 everyone else

[RF Greywolf]

FupDup, on 21 August 2015 - 05:32 PM, said:

It probably looks like this:

Thanks for making my night man!

[Hit the Deck]

Tastian, on 21 August 2015 - 05:46 PM, said:

I was thinking about that today. Any reason not to have the tier boundaries dynamic so that the playerbase is always 20,20,20,20,20?

What's the reason for an even spread?

[Mawai]

The problem with the distribution the OP suggests is that I suspect that it would be uncommon to have matches composed of all tier 1 players.

In addition, I hope that the matchmaker chooses people with the closest PSR ratings to form the match. This would mean choosing folks with as close to similar skill as possible buth within a tier and across tier boundaries. (Though I am still dubious that PSR actually reflects player skll in any meaningful way).

[Tastian]

Hit the Deck, on 21 August 2015 - 05:49 PM, said:

What's the reason for an even spread?

It'll keep each bucket fairly full so you don't have cross-bucket contamination and tier 1 and tier 5 don't see the same names every match.

[Kira Onime]

You're more likely to see 80-85% of the player within Tier 5 through 3.
T2 would be the good players while T1 should be pretty much comp level players.

[Davers]

With Elo you have the player base divided into a parabola



The highest point would be players who rated as average, with the numbers falling off at the extremes.

But Tiers makes it sound like a pyramid, such as everyone's favorite



Which would imply that there would be more Tier 5 players than Tier 4, more 4 than 3, and so on until you reached the smallest number of players in Tier 1.

Which one are they using?

[Sky Legacy]

That's unfair to reward the best players with the longest loading times so if tier 1 is only 2 or 5% of the population then their "pool" would be so small their loading times would be half hour per match. Unless ofcourse you open all the "valves" and allow them to play against tier 2-3 as supposedly is the case now

[Hit the Deck]

Kira_Onime, on 21 August 2015 - 05:59 PM, said:

You're more likely to see 80-85% of the player within Tier 5 through 3.
T2 would be the good players while T1 should be pretty much comp level players.

This could make sense if the influx of new players (assuming that we assign them to Tier 5) is pretty steady, i.e. the distribution curve is left skewed (the X axis values are low to high PSR).

[Davers]

Sky Legacy, on 21 August 2015 - 06:04 PM, said:

That's unfair to reward the best players with the longest loading times so if tier 1 is only 2 or 5% of the population then their "pool" would be so small their loading times would be half hour per match. Unless ofcourse you open all the "valves" and allow them to play against tier 2-3 as supposedly is the case now

There shouldn't be 'release valves' in the system, or if there are they should be rarely utilized. If the game pop isn't big enough for 5 tiers then they should have gone with less. What is the point of creating a system if you have to disregard it every other game to find a match?

[Kira Onime]

Hit the Deck, on 21 August 2015 - 06:08 PM, said:

This could make sense if the influx of new players (assuming that we assign them to Tier 5) is pretty steady, i.e. the distribution curve is left skewed (the X axis values are low to high PSR).

I'm basing my guess in prevision of the steam release which to me, this new PSR system is aiming for to as well.

Edited by Kira_Onime, 21 August 2015 - 06:11 PM.

[StillRadioactive]

Sky Legacy, on 21 August 2015 - 06:04 PM, said:

That's unfair to reward the best players with the longest loading times so if tier 1 is only 2 or 5% of the population then their "pool" would be so small their loading times would be half hour per match. Unless ofcourse you open all the "valves" and allow them to play against tier 2-3 as supposedly is the case now

From the way it was described in the patch notes, here's how it works...
Tier 1 can face off against Tiers 1, 2, and 3.
Tier 2 can face off against Tiers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Tier 3 can face off against Tiers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Tier 4 can face off against Tiers 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Tier 5 can face off against Tiers 2, 3, 4, and 5.

And this is a problem. 2 and 5 should never meet. Hell, I'd be wary of 2 and 4 ever crossing since 4 is where new players are seeded. Tier 2 is really ******* good at the game.

It should be:
Tier 1 can face off against Tiers 1 and 2.
Tier 2 can face off against Tiers 1, 2, and 3.
Tier 3 can face off against Tiers 2, 3, and 4.
Tier 4 can face off against Tiers 3, 4 and 5.
Tier 5 can face off against Tiers 4 and 5.

Edited by StillRadioactive, 22 August 2015 - 01:46 AM.

[Vlad Ward]

Why would it be anything but a normal distribution centered at tier 3 with delineations at each standard deviation?

[stjobe]

Hit the Deck, on 21 August 2015 - 05:24 PM, said:

Tier 1 and 5 are reserved for theelite and new comers

Day-one rookies get seeded into "mid-to-high range of Tier 4", according to the patch notes.

Which is something I've never understood. I believed it was a mistake to do it with Elo (and they did have to lower the score for new players, I think they did it twice or thrice), and I still believe it is a mistake to do it with PSR.

A pilot dropping into his first match should have a PSR of 0. Not 100 or 500 or 1,000. Zero.

[L3mming2]

i would say a 20% for eatch tier would be the logical choice for geting a good mm..

[Corrado]

Sky Legacy, on 21 August 2015 - 06:04 PM, said:

That's unfair to reward the best players with the longest loading times so if tier 1 is only 2 or 5% of the population then their "pool" would be so small their loading times would be half hour per match. Unless ofcourse you open all the "valves" and allow them to play against tier 2-3 as supposedly is the case now

And who preferers quantity (lower queue times) over quality (better players) should never again cry and whine about "his scrubs team" anymore.

i had so many bad pug games, i'd prefer a 60min queue if would push gameplay. i'd prefer to pick all the three regional servers and play with higher ping rather than eat my shoes after a lost 5kills 700-9000 damage match.

And after the PSR patch, gameplay did improve. 20 matches? 30 matches? dunno.. i feel it better.

Edited by Corrado, 22 August 2015 - 02:32 AM.

[STEF_]

Hit the Deck, on 21 August 2015 - 05:24 PM, said:

What is the ideal Tier distribution according to your opinion? Perhaps something like:

• Tier 1: 5%
  
• Tier 2: 17.5%
  
• Tier 3: 55%
  
• Tier 4: 17.5%
  
• Tier 5: 5%

Which means that (2 * 17.5%) + 55% = 90% of the player base are in the Tier 2-4. Tier 1 and 5 are reserved for theelite and new comers, which slice is 5% (one in twenty) each.

You are a gentle and optimistic guy if you think that only 22.5% of players are steering wheel underhive. (tier 4+5).

The truth stands in FupDup pic.