149 replies to this topic

[L Y N X]

do you find that your scores(from the few matches you've had) and PSR movement match up with my findings or not?

[Tesunie]

On average, I would say yes. However, before coming across this thread, I have had a few matches that didn't. Very rare to happen.

I didn't screen the match, as I never knew that it would become relevant. As an average general estimation, I think your numbers are good and solid, with a clause that you may occasionally have a match that doesn't match up.

Edit: Seen as I'm talking 2 matches out of all the matches I can recall since you could see PSR changes... I'd say it's very accurate so far.

Edited by Tesunie, 24 October 2015 - 09:33 PM.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

im getting so much 243 240 247.... but anyway moved from T5 into T3 within 10 days.

[L Y N X]

Titannium, on 25 October 2015 - 01:55 PM, said:

im getting so much 243 240 247.... but anyway moved from T5 into T3 within 10 days.

Thanks Titanium for your update! I hope the info I shared helped you make positive progress! Good work! I am about 40% through T2 moving toward T1 myself.

I agree with the Devs at PGI, this is NOT a ranking system. This is a rating system. It does NOT rank players. Rather, it rates players according to their contributions to matches. Wins make it easy to climb higher, on losses, one must outperform the rest of the team significantly to go up and still perform well to not go down in rating.

I have noticed the magnitudes of the decreases have lessened from the first week the PSR system was introduced. Ultimately everyone can make it to tier 1, theoretically.

I discount that these watermarks are wrong until there is proof that they are wrong. I suspect without a screenshot that those making claim may have recalled their damage and not their match score, an honest mistake. I have had hundreds of matches and none of the match scores/PSR movement pairs fall outside the findings I have presented, the only exception might be on a boundary case of one match score point, and I think I made those corrections correctly, but leave it open. Ofc, PGI is perfectly capable to change these watermarks at any time since they have not published the values. I suspect we, the community will notice if and when that occurs.

Cheers
Lynx

[Not A Real RAbbi]

7ynx, on 24 October 2015 - 09:28 PM, said:

do you find that your scores(from the few matches you've had) and PSR movement match up with my findings or not?

So far, YES. None that buck the trend. For review, the following seem to be some of the rules for PSR change:

W, <100: =
W, >= 100: +
L, <250: -
L, >= 250 & <400: =
L, >= 400: +

Things we don't seem to know yet:

What score threshhold in a WIN leads to a drop in PSR?
What are the break points on either count for the difference between a SMALL and LARGE change in PSR?

SO, that established, so far ALL of my matches have met the criteria.

I'm considering pulling in my previous incomplete data to compare. PREVIOUS DATA ADDITION COMPLETE. Like I mentioned before, I'm now keeping track of EVERY individual component of the match score, as shown in the individual match summary screen.

So far, over 16 recorded matches since the 13th of October, I'm noticing a couple of potentially interesting things:

Three of my four best match scores had one or more SOLO KILL points.
The two highest TEAM DAMAGE scores were on two of my top four match scores.
Protected [weight_class] score is higher on matches where I finished with a higher score, generally.

Not sure, again, what in-game actions constitute "Protected [weight_class]" or "Protection Proximity". Could use some clarification, too, on "Brawling".

I'm trying to gain some understanding of how the various components are weighted into the match score, though it's fairly clear so far that the match score IS the PRIMARY driver of PSR tier movement. It's also possible that a match's score alone may not be the SOLE factor in deciding PSR tier movement, owing to the anomalous cases mentioned in previous posts. I'd ESPECIALLY love to see one of those outlier cases broken down point-by-point.

Sure, it'd be nice if we just HAD the equation/formula for summing up our performances for purpose of match score determination. We don't. We CAN observe, though.

Also, I think I should start tracking the tech base and weight class of the mech I pilot in each of those matches.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I offer that I will provide you a link to the document, stored in a public DropBox account, to access and add your own data, that we'll have a bigger sample size to work with. For instance, more matches with 0 TEAM DAMAGE means more we can infer from the remaining match score elements, and basically a control group for comparing matches WITH TEAM DAMAGE. And so on.

It's been suggested before that the match score includes 1/2 point per point of damage. Is that true, do you know?

Edited by TheRAbbi, 25 October 2015 - 09:45 PM.

[L Y N X]

TheRAbbi, on 25 October 2015 - 09:12 PM, said:

AND ONCE AGAIN, I offer that I will provide you a link to the document, stored in a public DropBox account, to access and add your own data, that we'll have a bigger sample size to work with.

Sorry Rabbi, I thought you were speaking to others on this thread with your offer. I feel my findings are complete, that is why I posted this PSR guide if you will. You are welcome to add to it. Everyone is welcome to add to it. But I ask that before you claim my findings are wrong, prove it, or go post in your own thread your own findings. Sorry, but I have no respect for other folks who cannot back up their challenges. I thank you for confirming my findings that falls in line with most folks I've been working with on this. Those few who still disagree and argue offer no proof in their challenge. They are entitled to their opinion.

Edited by 7ynx, 26 October 2015 - 01:01 PM.

[L Y N X]

TheRAbbi, on 25 October 2015 - 09:12 PM, said:

It's been suggested before that the match score includes 1/2 point per point of damage. Is that true, do you know?

I said it seems as if that is what is happening. Yes that is true, it seems to be about there, but really kind of hard to make that a strong assertion when it is not easily measurable. It is more an empirical thing, a pattern I have noticed after hundreds of matches. IT might not be 50% it might be 40% or 45%... really difficult to discern the exact relationship, but what is certain is that Damage is the biggest contributing pie slice to the pie that makes up match score. (exceptions made for exceptionally terrible shots;)

[Appogee]

I've been watching my scores and PSR changes closely. I haven't seen any score or corresponding PSR movement that wasn't consistent with the thresholds posted in the OP.

[Tesunie]

7ynx, on 26 October 2015 - 12:59 PM, said:

Sorry, but I have no respect for other folks who cannot back up their challenges.
...
Those few who still disagree and argue offer no proof in their challenge.

Although I've found almost every single match (with only two exceptions out of all the matches I've played so far) to match your data, I will add, where is YOUR proof? I've heard you talk about it, but never provide anything. (And yes, I know it would be a mountain of stuff.)

I'm not asking for your proof, but I don't like how we who happen to come across a strange oddity need to have definitive proof, or we are wrong (this is how you sound). But the same is not expected out of you?


Really wishing I had screen shot that 330 on a lose PSR went down end of match score. I've never had it repeat so I don't know, but it did happen. (I also thought nothing of it at the time.) Then again, they also could have done adjustments since then, as that was one of my first few matches when you could see your PSR adjustments. (I remembered it because I thought it was really strange to do so well, and still go down in PSR on a loss.)

Edited by Tesunie, 26 October 2015 - 02:07 PM.

[L Y N X]

Tesunie, on 24 September 2015 - 08:41 PM, said:

Just saying. Don't now why then, but I had a red down arrow when I lost. I only had the yellow equal symbol once when I had a rare (for me) match score in the 400s. (Which does match your data.)

Just want information to be as accurate as possible, even if I happen to be wrong.


I just don't feel it's right to preform better and lose and drop in PSR, and then preform worse and win and increase PSR.

I had tried to be as gentle as possible and got called names for it. If you are going to make a claim and then toss it up that you might be mistaken and I have a digital ton of work into this guide across dozens of players then I hope you'll understand why I stand by my position and still try and respect your opinion.

[L Y N X]

For those who are wondering about the PSR but have not yet seen this thread... The watermarks are quite solid, if I do say so myself.

[Jeffrey Wilder]

7ynx, on 24 September 2015 - 08:12 PM, said:

The New PSR (Player Skill Rating) Tier system.

This article is meant to present information PL has helped me to deduce through analyzing post match scores and player stats post match.

There are 5 tiers, the lowest being 5 and the highest tier being tier 1.

We do know PGI's distribution model is just fixed PSR watermarks to meet. As the PSR acual values are hidden, PSR watermarks used are irrelevant since all one sees is a PSR Tier progress bar on one's home page. After each match, under the player stats tab, a Green chevron pointed up indicates a PSR increase, a Yellow equal sign indicates no PSR change, or a Red chevron pointed down indicates a PSR decrease for that given match performance as measured by match score.

We have through trial and error deduced some of the watermarks for match scores on wins and losses that trigger a change or no change in one's PSR.

On a Win:
PSR goes UP a lot if match score is >400
PSR goes UP a moderate amount if match score is >250 but <=400
PSR goes UP a little if match score is >= 100
PSR has NO CHANGE for a match score <100

Note: I do not have data on a zero match score if that would cause PSR to go down on a win, but I suspect PSR does not drop on a win, at the very least I have not experienced that.

On a Loss:
PSR goes UP if match score is > 400
PSR has NO CHANGE for a match score >250 but <= 400
PSR goes DOWN a little if match score is <=250
PSR goes DOWN a lot if match score is < 100

On a Tie:
Both sides, all players see a NO CHANGE to PSR regardless of match score.

As you can see, winning makes it easier to improve PSR.
However, PSR can go up steadily if you can consistently match scores above 250 and 400 on losses.

So what goes into match score?

The short answer is almost everything from Spotting, flanking, protected formations, shooting down enemy UAV's to kills, assists, damage, etc. See more on this here.

Currently, the single largest contributor seems to be damage dealt. Assists seem to be the second biggest contributor and then kills, the rest are very small contributors in the present state of PSR (September 2015), and may possibly change over time.

It appears to me that about half the damage dealt contributes straight away to match score with assist, kills and all those other things making up the difference. Sometimes a PSR, no change on a loss, can occur without a high damage (>400, meaning obtaining well under 400 damage) if many assists are made. But that assumes the losing team made many kills... which means it was a close match anyhow.

This is what we know at present, with more data it is subject to change. PGI will very likely alter it and not say how since they have not shared the above information watermarks.

Info on PSR from Paul @ PGI

Great work.

I've done a fair bit of testing myself and your numbers are pretty close I must say.

There is one point however about MM on forming teams based on previous WIN or LOSS.

Assuming a T1 player in T5. Technically speaking, this T1 player should be able to breeze through T5 to T3 with ease with the occasional loss of 1 in 3 or 5 games.

However, I have a feeling MM does 'remember' the outcome of the previous game and pair the winner with losers. That explains why this T1 player doesn't breeze through T5 to T3.

The point I want to make is there's no advantage to artificially reduce yourself to T5 and hope for easier games. MM is going to punish you one way or the other by 'remembering' your wins.

Do share your findings with regards to my point.

[L Y N X]

JW, PGI has made it clear that T1 players will not get matches with T5 players. This is for the solo pug queues of course. Group queues cannot make that same deal work. I think what you saw could be an artifact of simply a low community population, which we hope will grow. With prime time weekend queues seemingly to be more populous, I would hope that you do not see this behavior. MM uses the PSR value, the Tier value is not used by MM or so we've been told. IF PGI is still using part of the old ELO system then it is possible that past wins and losses affect the team composition, but I do not think they are doing that.

Either way, I am not sure, and not equipped to measure it. But hope you find my opinion helpful.

Edited by 7ynx, 11 December 2015 - 01:23 AM.

[Chados]

I can tell you that for a player with a lot of bad matches and super low KDR, PSR moves like molasses in winter.

In early September after playing for six weeks my KDR was sitting at about 0.12. I got better, and today it's 0.51, and individual mechs I bought after about October 5 all have KDRs running from 0.80 to 2.1, and I've been in groups a lot with my team. Best mech overall, KGC with four uAC5, it's a monster. But I like mechs that aren't considered good, like the Catapult, Dragon, Victor, and Summoner, so I don't wreck face too much but I've become somewhat competent.

I get green arrows over red by a factor of about 2:1, and I've had several matches where I clocked +750 damage and got a green arrow when I'm on the losing side of a 12-3 wipeout. I hid PSR in my loading screen ages ago. So I checked last night. Still T5, and it's only gone up a tremendously small amount, maybe a couple millimeters on the bar.

Lot of Underhivers actually aren't bad pilots. Some are the best drop callers I've worked with. Something odd about how PSR is calculated, I think. You can't really put a lot of stock in it other than the consistent T1/T2 crowd that play all the competitive matches. They're uniformly monsters on the battlefield. Glad I don't see many of them outside group queue and CW.

Edited by Chados, 11 December 2015 - 03:46 AM.

[Jeffrey Wilder]

Chados, on 11 December 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Lot of Underhivers actually aren't bad pilots. Some are the best drop callers I've worked with. Something odd about how PSR is calculated, I think. You can't really put a lot of stock in it other than the consistent T1/T2 crowd that play all the competitive matches. They're uniformly monsters on the battlefield. Glad I don't see many of them outside group queue and CW.

That's something puzzling me as well.

[Moomtazz]

Jeffrey Wilder, on 11 December 2015 - 05:35 AM, said:

That's something puzzling me as well.

I may be wrong but I don't think CW counts towards PSR. So there are probably some players who spend the vast majority of their time in CW, where comms are important, but have a low PSR Tier.

[Bilbo]

Moomtazz, on 11 December 2015 - 06:45 AM, said:

I may be wrong but I don't think CW counts towards PSR. So there are probably some players who spend the vast majority of their time in CW, where comms are important, but have a low PSR Tier.

You are correct. No PSR in CW. It counted in the beginning but they removed it. No idea if they adjusted individuals PSR to account for that after doing so.

[L Y N X]

Try not to think of PSR as a SKILL rating, but rather as an EXPERIENCE Rating... how much XP you have accumulated. If you are efficient then your PSR will likely move up faster. If you are less efficient then then your PSR will go up slower. What I have noticed is that the magnitudes (hidden) have been adjusted and may continue to be tuned by PGI behind the scenes. I see my PSR go up in a greater magnitude for each win or losing match score > 400 more than it's reduction on a lose and match score below 250. I see the greatest PSR reduction from losses where I died early and did not even achieve 100 match score. Now whether it is my good luck or skill that those kind of losses no longer occur very often to me, it is certainly my good fortune. Also it is something to think about and work to avoid if you wish to see your PSR increase faster by taking fewer big steps backwards.

Now not everyone wants to increase their PSR, I understand that, but then I am not sharing this information for those players.

Last millennium, nearly a half century ago, my father explained to me about the pitfall of average. To be average he said, is to be the best of the worst or the worst of the best, take your pick. If you are going to do a thing, strive to be the best. I enjoy that journey, I am not always the best, in fact only in the confined company of average folk am I ever the best at anything, and even then I may often start out as the worst. However I always strive to be the best and be at my best! That is the fun journey!

[BoseMensch]

So I'm new to this game, and have only anecdotal evidence, but it seems to me that the ranking is extremely biased toward overall win/loss for determination. I have only around 100 matches played (I think its around there), and of those only probably 4 were played in the faction war section before I realized I was severely outclassed and only doing a disservice to those playing there. The reason that I went there, however, I think may be relevant to the conversation. When I played my rookie matches, I was (obviously and unsurprisingly) not very good. I didn't start paying attention to the PSR until several matches in, which were all losses. I noticed that I was at tier 5, but the problem was that even though I started to improve my skills, my tier was not really increasing that much. I spent many hours learning tactics and strategies to improve my skills by reading forums and watching vids, and it wasnt long before I went from doing around 100 dmg per game to doing around 250-300 per game in my hunchback. I was still stuck in tier 5 for a long time, because although I would outperform the mediums in my matches, I was on the losing team many times because the other players hadn't gotten away from the COD/Leroy Jenkins style of play and were just charging into fire and getting picked off one by one. I had a day where I lost probably 15 matches in a row, but was still performing fairly well on an individual basis (for a noob), due to teamwork fails. That is what prompted me to go to the faction wars portion, as I was thinking that there would be better teamwork, which would improve the chances for a win. I was correct, but not skilled enough to really participate and help the team, so I stopped faction play.

I then got lucky and was on the winning side for several matches, and bumped up to tier 4, which has markedly better skill players than tier 5. The whole point of my post is that it seems that the system is really weighted heavily on overall win/loss and damage count, which skews the ratings for lower damage/support role mechs like mediums and lights. At the higher tiers, I can see the win/loss being more important, because those players already know how to work together and the game (I'm assuming) becomes more strategic than tactical. (Sorry, I'm using chess terminology here. tactical (i.e. there's an atlas RIGHT THERE!!!) and strategic (controlling certain map sections to get overall domination of the battlefield)). At that level, the win/loss makes sense because each player is presumably contributing fairly equally to the overall victory. But at the lower tiers, it really doesn't account for anything other than being able to Mike Tyson an opponent to death, rather than take them apart like Floyd Mayweather. (maybe boxing metaphors will help)...

Anyhow, it seems to me that one way that it could be improved would be to base the PSR by comparing the player to the other players using the same weight class mechs in each match. I wouldn't think it would be too difficult to program that, as the game already segregates lances by weight class, so they are obviously being tracked. Just break the PSR down by the variable already being tracked. That way, a light mech who does an amazing job scouting and distracting with small damage hits would get a better PSR than one that just wandered around without doing much and lucked into being on a winning team.

Seems to me that would do several things: First, it would rank up good players who may have low damage scores due to mech selection, even if they are stuck on a team where every heavy goes to a different point on the compass. Second, it would be a more meaningful rating (again, at lower levels where learning is really taking place) for each player based on their preferred playstyle. Third, it would increase the overall enjoyment because players would be matched up with players of their actual skill level, not their damage output or tanking ability. I got sick of losing because everyone would just spread out and try to play COD with robots, so in my frustration I jumped way out of my depth into the factions, where I caused probably the same problem I was trying to avoid. If the tier ranking would have been comparing my performance to the other mediums, I would likely not have had that frustration, as I was doing better than the other tier 5 mediums.

Again, please remember that I am only comparing myself to the other brand-new players for the first few days I played. I am by absolutely NO means a good player yet, but I am consistently and intentionally trying to better my skills. I am just remarking on what my observations have been as a brand new player who is trying to figure out how to get better. Take it for what its worth, which isn't too much. Sorry for the encyclopedia post and random metaphors. Good hunting!

[Wintersdark]

7ynx, on 08 December 2015 - 03:58 PM, said:

For those who are wondering about the PSR but have not yet seen this thread... The watermarks are quite solid, if I do say so myself.

I've been tracking this, and my findings match 7ynx's completely, with zero anomalous matches.

It's say, at this point, if you're going to argue 7ynx's findings, you must post relevant screenshots to do so. Anything else, and the assumption will simply be that you're mistaken.

If there ARE findings that are different, I'd be very interested to see them.