New account, started PvP season directy in Gold

[frareanselm.1925]

I've my main core account, then bought another account with the Pof expansion.The problem is when i tried to play ranked in my new account I started directly in gold rank, which isn my opinion is totally wrong.Is there a problem with the client? Theres have to be some data in the client or something that took my previous ranks?I'd like to start from zero!

[Tayga.3192]

@frareanselm.1925 said:I've my main core account, then bought another account with the Pof expansion.The problem is when i tried to play ranked in my new account I started directly in gold rank, which isn my opinion is totally wrong.Is there a problem with the client? Theres have to be some data in the client or something that took my previous ranks?I'd like to start from zero!

Placements?

[kratan.4619]

Your first ten matches determine where you belong. Not sure how the first ten are determined though.

[Dantheman.3589]

No the formula starts you automatically at 1200 then you win or lose point per placement match so good is actually good on a new account. If u played the previous season you would start at 1200 averaged with last season and the u can talk about placing much higher

[Exedore.6320]

In Glicko2 a player with an unknown skill, i.e. a new player, is placed at the middle of the rating range - 1200 for GW2 - with a high volatility. The reasoning is that you have to guess somewhere, so guessing in the middle is best. That players rating will adjust by large amounts in the first few matches, as the system knows its guess is lacking data. As the system gathers more data i.e. you play more games, the system has a more accurate view of your rating and zeroes in on your proper rating range.

The placement matches are no different than any other match. They only exist to hide those large initial rating adjustments.

Also remember that gold rating is around the midpoint and that Glicko uses a Gaussian (bell curve) distribution model of the population's skill. in other words, there are many more average skill players than very good or very bad players.

Ending up in gold on a new account is not far fetched if the player is experienced in the game already. Remember, gold is average to slightly above average.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@kratan.4619 said:Your first ten matches determine where you belong. Not sure how the first ten are determined though.

dun dun dun ....dun dun

[Luthan.5236]

@"Exedore.6320" said:In Glicko2 a player with an unknown skill, i.e. a new player, is placed at the middle of the rating range - 1200 for GW2 -[...]Also remember that gold rating is around the midpoint and that Glicko uses a Gaussian (bell curve) distribution model of the population's skill. in other words, there are many more average skill players than very good or very bad players.

I'm wondering ... do we know where the actual "middle" for that Gaussian distribution is - for GW2's implementation of Glicko? I mean .. .the rating seems to go from 0-2100 but the lowest tier uses 0-900 and the higher tiers 0-300 per tier. (I guess it is just too easy to get to silver and they did want bronze 0-900 because of it.)

The middle here would be 1050 if you use 2100/2. But from the way the tiers are set up ... middle tier would be gold (and gold 2 here). 1350 or so. LoL for example seems to use this: https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/de/rankings/rank-distributionwhere silver has the greated amount of player.s (Though we don't see actual ratings behind that tiers.)

Personally I get the feeling that here silver/gold (border here between silver and gold) also might be the average (or the 1200 the system uses - would make sense with them using 1200 here. Would mean at the bottom we had only 300 more (grouped in bronze which has a span of 900) than at the top (where 600 are used but over 2 tiers each 300 for a total of 600).

I guess OP had just been lucky with the matches. I mean ... with the high volatility and considering that there might be others that get (as new players or after reset) to play near 1200 winning 6 and losing 4 might put him in gold somewhere.

[Tharan.9085]

Gold 2/3 is the average rating afaik

[Tayga.3192]

@Tharan.9085 said:Gold 2/3 is the average rating afaik

Average rating is G1ish

[Khalisto.5780]

i mean you have 5 divisions, gold is the mid division, what's so weird about starting in gold?

[Exedore.6320]

@"Luthan.5236" said:I'm wondering ... do we know where the actual "middle" for that Gaussian distribution is - for GW2's implementation of Glicko? I mean .. .the rating seems to go from 0-2100 but the lowest tier uses 0-900 and the higher tiers 0-300 per tier. (I guess it is just too easy to get to silver and they did want bronze 0-900 because of it.)

1200 as the midpoint is indirectly confirmed by ANet stating that the adjustment at the start of the season uses (rating + 1200) / 2.

The tier ranges could be better IMO. They currently don't mean much, and I feel we have one too many. Splitting on fixed rating amounts with sub-tiers makes it very hard for tiers to be meaningful. For example, plat2, plat3, and legend seem like a good grouping. plat1 feels indistinguishable from gold3.

[Leonidrex.5649]

@Khalisto.5780 said:i mean you have 5 divisions, gold is the mid division, what's so weird about starting in gold?

the fact that new player is not average ;p

[Khalisto.5780]

@Leonidrex.5649 said:

@Khalisto.5780 said:i mean you have 5 divisions, gold is the mid division, what's so weird about starting in gold?

the fact that new player is not average ;p

ya because that 1 pnt away from silver makes all the difference

[Khalisto.5780]

@Exedore.6320 said:

@"Luthan.5236" said:I'm wondering ... do we know where the actual "middle" for that Gaussian distribution is - for GW2's implementation of Glicko? I mean .. .the rating seems to go from 0-2100 but the lowest tier uses 0-900 and the higher tiers 0-300 per tier. (I guess it is just too easy to get to silver and they did want bronze 0-900 because of it.)

1200 as the midpoint is indirectly confirmed by ANet stating that the adjustment at the start of the season uses (rating + 1200) / 1200.

The tier ranges could be better IMO. They currently don't mean much, and I feel we have one too many. Splitting on fixed rating amounts with sub-tiers makes it very hard for tiers to be meaningful. For example, plat2, plat3, and legend seem like a good grouping. plat1 feels indistinguishable from gold3.

ya i feel we have something like 0 to 1280 ish, another group from 1280 1420, 1420 to 1580, 1580 and up

[Tharan.9085]

@Exedore.6320 said:

@"Luthan.5236" said:I'm wondering ... do we know where the actual "middle" for that Gaussian distribution is - for GW2's implementation of Glicko? I mean .. .the rating seems to go from 0-2100 but the lowest tier uses 0-900 and the higher tiers 0-300 per tier. (I guess it is just too easy to get to silver and they did want bronze 0-900 because of it.)

1200 as the midpoint is indirectly confirmed by ANet stating that the adjustment at the start of the season uses (rating + 1200) / 1200.

The tier ranges could be better IMO. They currently don't mean much, and I feel we have one too many. Splitting on fixed rating amounts with sub-tiers makes it very hard for tiers to be meaningful. For example, plat2, plat3, and legend seem like a good grouping. plat1 feels indistinguishable from gold3.

(rating+1200)/2*

[Hostility.4961]

Nothing against people personally, this is just what i observe in ranked with this current system in place. Again its not peoples fault its the bad dev ideas.

Fresh accounts start at 1200 rating, get put in matches with -/+ 300 rating ppl. Makes no sense at all. You might as well call gold rating elohell haha. Get two of these kinds of accounts in row and your own mmr will spiral you down 10 losses in row just cause it thinks you ain't where you supposed to be. It punishes gold ppl so much. It ruins the new ppl experience too. I'v had better matches in plat 1 and 2 (my skill ceiling hits there) and silver 2 (yep bad placements put me there) than any gold match in my pvp history.

Gold rating between 1200 and 1500 is a cesspool of bad variations and rng. Its why you can jump up and down 100-200 rating constantly if you are around g3 rating. If you get lucky not to have these "fake" gold players you will progress and have decent matches. But there's so many of them when the devs put in a PVE item as reward for ranked its like 8 out of 10 matches that someone is fresh and doesnt know anythin. I want new ppl in pvp but i want them there cause they want to pvp not to grind some pve item and leave. They come, "soil" the rating in a chain reaction and leave. Being in unranked untill you are rank 20 so u can go ranked is not enough to prepare them for a 1200-1500 rating placement matches. I would say those ppl are silver 1 ready tops.

Start everyone from 0 and let them grind up like we used to have season 1 and 2. From a few full rng matches this would eventually bring decent ppl up and away from fresh ppl. I mean its rng even with this current system unless you break away from this 1200 fresh curse. Sure, you would have to play more often and less casually, you might not hit your true placement as fast as now but it would be a more enjoyable matches when u eventually get away from the rng. Am i horribly wrong or?

[frareanselm.1925]

I've read hundreds of times that a guy switch to his girlfriend's account , join ranked and its EASY to play and win, like is carried by good players.I dont know if its a karma system that punishes or rewards depending on your historial of win/lose. But in my new account i never experienced this, all the contrary, I had to carry worse players all the time. Supposing there is a karma system, I inherited all the bad karma from my 2012 account stored in the client?