my skillrating grew when I was loosing to players who more skilled than me

lol

pretty sure it's somehow score dependant. Even if you just score 4-5 frags vs someone who has a significantly higher skillrating it's gonna lower his and boost yours. (talking about duel)

QL doesn't match skill anyway. In duels I usually get either opponents with 2x or 3x skillrating of mine (95% of the time), or some noobs probably with rating like 5 (can't know exactly, but they can barely strafejump). I don't even remember last time I had even a remotely closely matched duel...

can't know exactly, but they can barely strafejump

It is not easy to strafejump withour ur shoes, u know

Funny you should say that cos I always find myself vs some random Polish in duels (not that I duel much though)

Does the skill-matching system account for things like frag-difference (how close the game was), or is it really as simple (stupid), as wins and losses only?

It is like u like it and it is retarded. Actually, at least half the problem is because of that and if it only counted win/loses it would greatly improve.

The 2 main bottlenecks of their system are:

1) It counts the scores
2) It is very sensitivity (1 game is enough to vastly change your rating, when it should had been at least 100)

The 1st supports the 2nd (probably wouldn't even exist without the 1st). Therefore, the 1st is the biggest glitch of the current system, even though you praise it.

I am talking about duel. Simple is smart in this case. id thought they are clever like u and they fucked it up.

so if you're Rapha's practice partner and you don't pub it up every so often, you could theoretically be the 2nd best dueler in North America but your rating would still have you in lowest tier even if he wins by less than 5 points every game?

omg, u need examples? My hands will heart from writing. Honestly, I prefer debating if the earth is flat, than this.

Also, losing to rapha doesn't mean shit. I mean it shouldn't change ur rating at all. Rating systems don't work like this. They count vs who u win or lose. If I lose to kasparov in chess 1000 times, it shouldn't make me the worst player in the world.

I will tell u the exact opposite of what u said. I play only with my noob brother and I always win with 30+ frags. Should that make me the best player in the world? Your example is flawed and win/lose doesn't work like this. On the other hand I can give u a dozen of examples shawcasing how counting scores ruins the current system.

That's what I'm saying.

"Actually, at least half the problem is because of that and if it only counted win/loses it would greatly improve."

seems to imply that the score shouldn't matter, only wins/losses. I was giving an example of why counting only who won the game, rather than the score, would be worse. You make a great example of why only showing win/lose wouldn't work when you mentioned that playing against only noobs and winning 30+ doesn't make you the best player in the world.

???

read again. I am saying the exact opposite (btw the 30+ frags is a SCORE).

I was giving an example of why counting only who won the game, rather than the score, would be worse

your example was flawed (read my post again to see why). If you though were giving an example of why counting only who won, rather than who won vs who, then u would had a good point, since the opponent is very important indeed and should be taken into account. The score on the other hand, only creates problems and single handed ruins the skill ratings.

oh that's what I thought you meant. Counting only wins/losses and not the score or opponent etc. Now I understand.

in regards to skillmatching in north america, i simply need to mention incubus who is now reincarnated as pth
http://www.quakelive.com/#!profile/summary/pth

Screenshots:
http://img716.imageshack.us/i/incpht1050.jpg/ (105-0)
http://img218.imageshack.us/i/incpht900.jpg/ (90-0)
http://img31.imageshack.us/i/incpht680.jpg/ (68-0)
http://img543.imageshack.us/i/incpht1016.jpg/ (101-6)
http://img823.imageshack.us/i/incpht748.jpg/ (74-8)
http://img852.imageshack.us/i/incpht1001.jpg/ (100-1)
http://img33.imageshack.us/i/incpht922.jpg/ (92-2)
http://img192.imageshack.us/i/incpht8310.jpg/ (83-10)
http://img848.imageshack.us/i/incpht850.jpg/ (85-0)
http://img231.imageshack.us/i/incpht1010.jpg/ (101-0)

and those were just the games he played on his first and 2nd day on quake live
http://www.quakelive.com/#!profile/matches/pth/2011-03-29

oh and for those thinking it isn't affecting people, making them rage, see here: (bimnutz was in one of those games where pth pwned him and others)
http://www.quakelive.com/forum/showthread.php...-open-spot

just read the posts in that link. and id wonders why everyone has flocked to clan arena over ctf and tdm

#care

Reaching Jamerio level stalking.

esr needs an ignore feature that goes by anon+ip

you can ignore all of pth's games and his tierslumming by ignoring me, but it doesn't change the fact its' happening.

you don't seem to understand. I DONT GIVE A FUCK

I don't want to ignore "all" anon posts by putting the user on ignore, i just want to ignore your wall of text/ranting ass.

Yeah never understood the skill matching as well, especially in duel.
I was waiting for an opponent on an alt account with pretty poor stats (tier 3, ~100 duels ~50% wins) and the only players who joined were people with at least 2000 duels played and some solid stats. A few days after, exactly the same scenario happens.

I don't really get the point of having a whole matchmaking system if some obvious stuff like that can happen without any problem.

I guess for players who've played online FPS games without a skill matching system for ~15 years find it a bit silly that someone tried a skill matching system, it doesn't work to newer players' expectations and they complain about it.

I mean what do you expect? This isn't the internet chess club where tens of thousands of accounts can have like 1000 blitz games each with a thoroughly tested and examined elo system.

Plus we have team games, where your own performance can absolutely be lowered by your teammates. Also some gametypes/maps/#players can have a high degree of randomness.

Imho, we should get rid of the tier system and matchmaking. The only way to get better is play better players. Because of the matchmaking, some people only play noobs, clicking on green servers and never get to be better or even see what the game really is about. I enjoyed 10 years of gaming without a matchmaking system and I think it's fun both to get owned and own sometmes.

pretty much agree. quake live will never be skillmatched. The gap in skill is simply too wide and quake live's playerbase will never get enough players to make the tiers work. At this point though, id won't get rid of tiers or skillmatching (as evidenced by their new profile tier legend) for the main reason that it attracts players interested in an even game (since it doesn't exist in other games either). It was a notable effort but for id to continue claiming "easily play against others at your skill level" is nothing short but criminal. it's simply not true and reeks of false advertising.

it's not false advertising 'cause it's not their fault more newbies aren't signing up. It's the fault of the tier slummers.

Getting owned is fun if you have a clue what's going on. (read, someone like you or me playing an actual pro) If you can't even grab a weapon before you're spawn raped you go find a fun game instead.

my duel skillrating sometimes goes up or down by 30 after 5-10 games against randoms. the ugc final's server with the world's 2 best players on it had a skillrating of 64. the system is broken by itself, it's nothing to do with tierslummers.

Isn't the skillrating of specs weighed in as well?

possibly, would be retarded enough to fit into ql

Yes, but not like u think (it doesn't average them). The skillrating of a server is the skillrating of the player with the highest one, including specs (that is in duel).

I thought the Skillrating is only affected by the players who are ingame or in the queue to play, not by the specs.

ah so you agree it's the fault of the tierslummers...... well maybe until it's fixed (never) id should remove that ad on their home page as it does not prove true at this time (and never will).

Sure it could have worked (when ql first opened up out of closed beta) but it's not working now and hasn't for quite some time, so yes at this point in time it is a "false advertisement". When the tiers get fixed (lol never) then they can put it back up.

I agree. I would love to see a proper skill system (see sc2 for example), but the current one is simply rubbish (maybe it's not even possible to have a working one with such small playerbase but anyway). It can be very disappointing, especially to beginners when you join a game, expect a fitting opponent but get raped. I'm possibly wrong but I think people would rage less if there wasn't a vision of balanced matchmaking. Also this makes people care about stats way too much, which ruins public team modes. Everybody tries to be a hero, shuffles don't happen because people don't want to be in the same team as the guy who had the worst stats in the previous round in a damn CA game.

while i disagree with you, this is one of the things that matchmaking definitely brought us: hordes of newbs complaining about having to play a better player, i mean what?

i used to love getting owned in quake simply because i realized it's the only way to improve, i still hate playing the same randoms where my mind can wander off for minutes without anything happening to me.

I disagree because I play only skill matched games (duel) and the skill range is huge. I even saw dem0n on my skill lvl which is obviously a joke but it confirms that you'll find better players all the time.
A few weeks ago I played vs draven two maps. First one was t7 and I was able to keep the score pretty close for 2-3 minutee but after he got map control the game was over for me. 20-x isn't a big rape but I didn't learn that much either because vs such a stronger player you make way too many mistakes without learning from them. I mean I knew where he was going what he did and what not but I just couldn't do shit against it. So the whole "get raped go pro" thing is kinda flawed imo.
On the other hand I like to play vs players which are like 1 or 2 levels above me. I might still lose by a fairly big margin but the games are usually much closer as the score outlines. I still do plenty of mistakes but I learn from them and improve in the next game.
I could play 10 games vs k1llsen and I wouldn't improve a bit but after 10 games vs twister or any other decent player I learn a few things.
You even have to play vs weaker players from time to time.
Try to keep map control or even let him control in the beginning and then take it back. The same story applies vs a weaker player too. If he sucks like hell and can't even strafe properly you won't learn anything but if he is just a bit weaker you can improve your control game.

The skillrating is badly designed but the idea behind it isn't bad.

one day i can lose to a newb because i don't care
another day i can win a higher rated opponent in good mood

is matchmaking system to blame for this?

definitely!

also, I often change my mice. not because I feel uncomfortable with any of them, just a hobby of me. quake should lower my skill rating upon connecting another mouse, but... it doesn't. EVIL QUAKE.

i think without some form of official competition system (ladders etc) there is no one good way to design an accurate skill rating system