27 replies to this topic

[Colin Thrase]

I'm just curious whether there is a way to figure out your personal Elo score. I know it's not published, but is there a way to guess it? Also, since I'm not an expert on the subject, what's the overall range of possible scores, in order to determine whether my score is good/bad.

I haven't really worried about it previously, since I just trust the system to pair me with and against players with similar skill level. However, during this weekend's tournament (To The Victors), I've seen player feedback on this thread that is inconsistent with my in-game observations - so now I'm wondering just how far behind (or perhaps ahead?) my score is compared to the population at large, and whether I need a lot more practice or I'm doing ok skill-wise.

Names left out, of course, but here's some of the comments I'm talking about...

"This tournament is nothing but LRM spam" - While I certainly saw LRMs in use, I can't say it was more or less than usual. I don't own the module for dropping from radar when out of LOS, so I'm assuming if LRMs were more prevalent, I would have died to them more often. Most of my deaths were caused by 'the usual' enemy weapons: AC, Gauss, & PPC. Is LRM spam indicative of high-level or low-level play?

"Everyone is playing like cowards, unwilling to engage after they get a kill" - I saw maybe 2 instances like this (while spectating), but in one case the player had no weapons remaining and shut down, so I couldn't blame him as he couldn't contribute anyway. It was comical watching enemies wander in front of him who didn't realize he was still alive. I was actually impressed by his strategy, since he did survive the match and scoreboard indicated he got his kill & assist, and I wished I had thought of it myself. So I was wondering whether this indicates higher skill than mine, instead of less. Maybe this happened more often in another bracket.

"Too much friendly fire with people competing for the kill shot, and I got killed" - My observation was that some players would "crowd" the target, blocking shots to it, but that this was rare. Having played this game a long time now, I know the typical exchange results in two mechs seeming to orbit each other while shooting. However, during this tournament I often saw a friendly mech positioning himself between the target and the other players - often appearing to 'hug' the target, preventing others from hitting it, while moving to stay between the target and friendlies. Maybe this is the same situation as the complaint above, but my perspective is different since I'm not the 'hugger'. Is this considered 'skilled' to assure that you get the kill, or just greedy? * I'd like to point out that I didn't make any friendly kills during the entire tournament, so if you're one of the people this happened to, please don't blame me.

"The requirement for staying alive shouldn't be there". I personally try to stay alive in every game, and have done so since I started playing. I think of this more as a RP simulator than a typical FPS, and while running in with guns blazing and dying as a result may put your team ahead, it doesn't seem to me to match the Battletech fiction I read growing up. Your mech was often a family heirloom, and the single most important thing in your life. You didn't risk it like that, and you certainly didn't throw your life away carelessly. Sadly, my skill level is such that I die frequently, but it's not intentional. I definitely liked the stay-alive mechanic, even though that was the single most difficult part of the tournament (for me anyway), since that seems to be the most realistic one. You can't collect your prize if you're dead.

Anyway, with CW on its way, I'm hoping that future tournaments & CW battles have similar set-ups. However, I'm concerned with my Elo, as I'd like to play with the more skilled players even if I'm not quite at their level yet. If anything, I may learn something spectating them after I'm dead, rather than learning bad habits spectating the lower end of the spectrum.

[Captain Stiffy]

It basically doesn't exist in practice. The number of people queuing at any given moment is not enough for it to matter.

[Troutmonkey]

I could tell you that your elo was 2000 or 200 and it wouldn't matter, as there is no other references to make comparisons too. What's the average elo? No idea idea, I don't even know the maximum or minimum elo score. It could be 1-10 for all I know

[Vassago Rain]

Sure.

Do you go up against known community qualities, like LORDS, steel jags, and etc?
Do you find that most of your matches are ggclose clean sweeps (an indication that elo is actually working)?
Do you have to carry hard, or carry softly?
Do you think that LRMs are a competitive weapon?
Do you know how the game's mechanics work?

Things like that.

[SweetJackal]

Just to add to it, take a look at the average player you are paired with and matched against. That's a good indication of your ELO score.

I may be trash in terms of skill but I have enough skill to realize I am trash and the mistakes I have made in a match.

[Krivvan]

Once you get high enough the insanely long queue times start to become an indicator.

[Arkbird_]

Elo won't be in CW at release. So when it comes out get ready for very uneven teams and even getting put up against a full 12 man competitive teams that will rofl stomp your face in with their superior communication and maxed out mechs vs your derped out pug team with the newbie that can't shoot straight or even set up weapon groups yet. I might join a unit just so I can have a few teammates I can generally trust. I expect there will be quite a lot of variety in CW at launch.

There is no easy way to find your ELO as the matchmaker uses very loose terms for it in the matchmaker: You might get a terribad bottom elo player and also one of the best players from a competitive team to counter him out on the same team.

The only somewhat obvious indicator at the moment is that new players start in the middle of the ELO bracket and work their way up or down so if you get a lot of new players in your games that might be an indicator you are close to the average... Or that the games' getting a new healthy supply of newbies, it's always hard to tell without the actual numbers.

[Vassago Rain]

Krivvan, on 24 November 2014 - 10:27 PM, said:

Once you get high enough the insanely long queue times start to become an indicator.

Haha, also this. I'm so used to waiting 5+ minutes for drops now, I don't even notice.

We had a couple new players the other day, who got pretty antsy that they didn't get into matches in 30 seconds when they're grouped.

[Wintersdark]

You can't really guess your score beyond comparison with known factors. As vassago pointed out, who youre dropping with is about the best indication, but other things apply too.

Elo absolutely works in the middling levels, it's the extreme ends that get gimped due to player count. To your questions otherwise:

LRM spam: you _can_ find it anywhere except the highest level of play, but its effectiveness scales pretty much linearly downwards with Elo ranking. The better the players, the more worthless lrms are.

Cowardice: in the tourney, luck of the draw for most levels of play. Don't worry about it now. Outside of the tourney, passive play is generally indicative of low to average Elo. Note that "average" is a huge range, most players are average.

Friendly fire: endemic to tournaments and challenges. Its always bad in them, because players are more concerned with scoring in the match than being a good player. See it everywhere.

Staying alive: varying perspectives, unrelated to Elo. Ultimately, if you live or die is irrelevant, all that matters is what you accomplish. If rather my team be filled with aggressive players who score several kills each before being stopped than folks who hide in the back and don't accomplish anything.

CW and Elo: irrelevant, as there's no Elo in CW.

[Brody319]

As far as I am aware, ELO has 2 ratings.
Either you have a bunch of high tier group players who just wanna solo drop.
Or
You got Trials.

If there is an inbetween its basically an ocean of good, bad and okay players.

[Soulscour]

I dont believe elo works in practice with this game. I agree with others that the player pool is too low and the 12 player coop aspect is not accurate for this rating system. I think I recognize players because we play a lot. I'm not discrediting thier ability. I generally know the average performance of certain players that I recognized. There's a lot of people that think elo actually works and that they are measured to be a badass by it. Its easy to think that when you can't see the number.

[Sandpit]

If you're at the top end you can get a ballpark estimate, but realistically other than that, no not really. If you see yourself against top opponents then you can get an idea.

For 90% of the player population? Not really

[Tristan Winter]

People in this thread need to differentiate between solo queue and group queue. It's probably a lot easier to determine your Elo in group queue.

[Sandpit]

Nicolai Kabrinsky, on 25 November 2014 - 12:21 AM, said:

People in this thread need to differentiate between solo queue and group queue. It's probably a lot easier to determine your Elo in group queue.

actually it's even harder in the group queue
first you have to equate the group's average Elo, then you have to factor in the group multiplier. It's next to impossible to figure group queue Elo unless everyone in group is top bracket

[Iskareot]

We need another reset of it. JUST to make sure lol

[Myke Pantera]

If you spectate others after you've died and you think: Holly **** what are you doing man, learn to play, than your ELO is low

If you play against recognized pro players it's super high

If you're average you won't discover neither of the afore-mentioned. Also you might see me in game

[Tristan Winter]

Sandpit, on 25 November 2014 - 12:27 AM, said:

actually it's even harder in the group queue
first you have to equate the group's average Elo, then you have to factor in the group multiplier. It's next to impossible to figure group queue Elo unless everyone in group is top bracket

You're right. I was primarily addressing the people who believe themselves to be in top bracket though. It seems like the best players primarily play in the group queue, so you're not going to see certain players if you're in the solo queue. In other words, listing up x, y and z players as signs that you've reached the top doesn't quite work for the solo queue. But regularly running into the top units in the group queue is a pretty good indication that you've got a high Elo.

[Elizander]

Play in the solo queue during off peak hours. If your ELO is through the roof the MM should be forced to give you lots of cadets to average you out with normal players.

[kesmai]

easy. If you are winning 20 times in a row: Elo toO low.

if you are losing 20 times in a row: Elo too high.


o7

[DAYLEET]

You guys are cute, all of you. I love the way you rationalize your own game experience by blaming the MM or even funnier the guy next to you in your own team. Elo can not work in a chaotic TDM, it has no way to tell whos good and whos not, the best you can hope for is that wins is the only factor and that people with a few months are not put with the rest because unelited mech suck balls.

I wait for the day PGI release comprehensive stats like we have in Battlefield, then you realize how of little importance a match make has to be in such an environment with so many variables.

Edited by DAYLEET, 25 November 2014 - 01:33 AM.