Really, really, REALLY sketchy matchmaking once you get 7 wins in Breakouts H2H

Posts: 1188 |

2,630

phatalerror said:

To-may-to, to-mah-to.

ELO has two primary functions: Scoring and matchmaking. Scoring is obviously how the value of the result is weighted. You beat a casual with a low OVR team? Have a cookie and a couple points on your ELO score. You beat an MCS guy with a 40-2 record? You'll get many more points.

You may need to qualify to play quality opponents, and you do that by beating opponents of only slightly lesser quality. In true division play, the past record of users would have to play into this. The significant delays people are experiencing after many wins in the current Event are the most obvious sign that ELO is at work. That is the case regardless of what the opponent chosen may be doing in Ranked or any other Head-to-Head mode. In the context of the Event, the player has a higher ELO because they've won more, and so winning players are sought. EA doesn't want users waiting 10 minutes for matchups against other users with the exact same number of wins, so there's probably a sliding schedule where when it takes longer, the requirements are less stringent.

If this were a patent dispute, the defendant would lose. ELO doesn't become not-ELO because the game isn't chess, or because a certain sample is excluded from the calculation. The ELO factoring is simply modified to accomplish its intended purpose. In the context of Madden, this has the unfortunate effect of tending to pit winning players against dirty players, because dirty players tend to win more often due to their competent use of exploits.

give it a rest bud

Posts: 3366 |

3,790

#17

STRIKESHOT1 said:

give it a rest bud

I did. And I appreciate the admission implicit in your response. Have a great evening.

Posts: 1188 |

2,630

#18

phatalerror said:

I did. And I appreciate the admission implicit in your response. Have a great evening.

Everything you have said shows a clear and fundamental misunderstanding of what ELO is. If you spent one tenth of the time you spend typing out all your drivel doing basic investigative work, you would probably come to that same conclusion but instead you seem hellbent on staying entrenched in your ideas and 'winning' some imaginary debate only you are participating in. ELO is a defined concept and unfortunately, no amount of grandstanding will change that. You are more than welcome to go argue about it with the corpse of Arpad Elo, or a brick wall. Thank you, however, for again displaying your complete and total ignorance and stubbornness. Based on your most recent demonstration, consider this matter closed. But again, I'm sure a brick wall will be happy to listen you ramble, may you have the evening you deserve.

Posts: 3366 |

3,790

#19

STRIKESHOT1 said:

Everything you have said shows a clear and fundamental misunderstanding of what ELO is. If you spent one tenth of the time you spend typing out all your drivel doing basic investigative work, you would probably come to that same conclusion but instead you seem hellbent on staying entrenched in your ideas and 'winning' some imaginary debate only you are participating in. ELO is a defined concept and unfortunately, no amount of grandstanding will change that. You are more than welcome to go argue about it with the corpse of Arpad Elo, or a brick wall. Thank you, however, for again displaying your complete and total ignorance and stubbornness. Based on your most recent demonstration, consider this matter closed. But again, I'm sure a brick wall will be happy to listen you ramble, may you have the evening you deserve.

Dude, my "drivel" had more data than your response. I'll make this short: I saw your self-assured tone and thought I maybe I got something wrong, reviewed the Wikipedia page on "ELO rating system" (and along the way was greeted by an opportunity to donate to show appreciation for its value in settling "an argument with a friend"), and quickly saw that ELO is exactly what I thought it was: A way of evaluating the relative skill of players based on match histories. So what if EA doesn't use the exact same algorithm employed by another entity for the purpose of predicting the likelihood of a victory for each of two competitors, and therefore uses ELO, even in a highly contextualized environment, to pit against each other two winning players? Is there a better term that will be readily understood by readers here? Your narrow definition of ELO and your insistence on some sort of purity of concept is pointless and silly. You might as well correct grammar, especially in contexts where two different approaches would be acceptable according to the whims of the editor overlord wielding the style-guide hammer.

It was obvious from the beginning that the conversation was about. Why did you make ELO your rallying cry for algorithmic equality and justice? I would really like to know.

1 2