Hive Skill Rank
MashpitSquared
Texas, USA Join Date: 2014-01-13 Member: 193053Members
Texas, USA Join Date: 2014-01-13 Member: 193053Members
Is there a post somewhere explaining how the skill ranking works? No matter how well or how poorly I perform in game, I always seem to get a skill ranking between 950-1050, and I'm rather confused as to whether the skill ranking was ever implemented properly. It generally doesn't affect my enjoyment of the game, of course, but I like being able to visually see that I'm improving at the game. As it is now, I get basically the same skill score at 20/20 KDR and 40/10 KDR.
Comments
It is the technical document that describes it in detail. Only the basics of that were implemented though.
Technical edit: It's not based on averages, since it doesn't have to remember past data. But the point is that it might deviate from your "true" skill value due to bad/good streaks but it will rebound in the long run and keep oscillating around that level.
It doesn't really work very well. The central conceit is that I can't control my team. If I as a comm or marine could kick or punish other players, I could be held responsible for not using that power correctly. In the current format commander has no power over marines and marines only have the eject option. It's quite disempowering for both, that's why teamwork is so important. The hive skill measures how many winning teams I have been on, but is labelled as an individual skill level.
Weird, almost all the games I play are played with forced even teams and I have close to a 1.0 W/L ratio, but my skill rank is almost always ~1000.
http://hive.naturalselection2.com/profile/84956848
i have roughly 1600 1600 win loss ratio and mine is 2000, i actually have a few more losses then wins
It doesn't work like that. If you play even games, then you are playing against a team that has the same score as you, and 50-50 wins lead to no one changing their score in the long run. There are no absolute values in the system, everything is relative to the players you play with.
You missed the key word: on average. If your individual skill raises your team's probability of winning from 50% to 55%, you will win more games in the long run even if you lose many games due to your team and not your lack of skill. Play hundreds of games and it will be correct, on average. Do not get bogged down by anecdotes and individual examples. I've lost count how many times I've explained this on these forums. No doubt people will still come arguing against this concept since yesterday they had an absolute terrible game where they went 50-1 but lost the skill system is broken please fix.
There are SO many things it doesn't take into account... Like the difference in alien/marine skill, or the fact that someone can carry their team to an insane extent, turning a clear 5 min defeat into a 20 min game of back and forth.. yet their score will go down even if they have triple the kills and score of anyone else on the server.
Of course those who support it will argue averages and numbers till they're blue in the face, it doesn't change the simple fact that the vast majority of shuffles end up as ridiculously one sided stomps. Until we get Hive 2.0 (which will hopefully take more factors into account as well as seperate alien/marine skill) the "skill" score is more or less useless.
I have also explained to you in detail what conditions lead to shuffle not always working as expected, and that it typically has very little to do with the hive skill system.
<1000 = Baddies
1000 - 2000 = Normal folk
2000 - 2500 = Really good normal folk
2500 - 3000 = Suspiciously good folk
>3000 = Hackers
I'm 3800 right now, and have been 4500. Guess I cheat.
1G?
It actually goes like this. So really, 835-1582 hive skill is the normal folk. These values are from players who have played sometime between January 1st and February 12th 2016 with 50 or more hours recorded in hive. I chose 50 hours because by that time their hive skill should have converged near the intrinsic value.
1000 is just one value among others, arbitrarily chosen to represent a new player. If actual rookies are not that good, they will quickly plummet to lower levels.
Everyone agrees that marine and alien skills should be separate, and I don't understand how that is not yet implemented. The rest of your post is complete nonsense from someone who still does not understand how statistics work.
It isn't a "skill" ranking. It is basically just a tally of your wins. The more your team happens to win, the more points you get. Broadly, having a high "skill" score doesn't necessarily mean you are "skilled" at the game. It just means that you happened to be on winning teams a lot of the time that you played. I personally know several people with high scores who aren't that good individually.
However, most of the players with very high scores (2000+) tend to be good at the game. They tend to be experienced, know how to use the flaws of the game to get kills, they play gathers with others of high game ability, or tend to stack on public servers, and bring about wins. For this tiny subset of the NS2 population, the "skill" score does reflect their actual ability.
If you are a casual-ish player you may do well in-game, but a foolish team, or poorly trained commander, will bring you loss and cause a reduction in your "skill" score. For the majority of NS2's surviving population, the "skill" score doesn't mean anything.
It is important not to compare the "skill" score of NS2 with other ranking systems such as DOTA2, SC2 or CSGO. Those games are far better at measuring your ability than NS2 is, mainly because those games have a far larger population on which to base "skill" measurements, and because the developers of those games actually make an effort to improve the ranking system to make it actually... useful.
The best policy is to ignore the "skill" number and just play the best you can, and try to have fun too. If it is causing you stress or frustration, it's not worth spending any time on it.
This, too, is ignoring statistics.
A player may or may not be good at the game. Let's call this his skill. Over the course of a lot of games, he may end up with a lot of crappy teams, he may end up in a lot of stacked teams, but due to the law of large numbers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_large_numbers) these will more or less even out. The only constant is the player itself. Due to his skill he nudges, on average, his team ever so slightly towards victory (or not). Statistically speaking, the effects of all other players he plays with even out over time, leading to a 1.0 W/L ratio. If the player is just a little better than the people he usually plays with, this will go a little up. If he's worse, it will go down. Since he is the only constant, it's the only thing that matters. Everything else evens out over time. The "skill rating" is simply a number representing his ability to nudge his team towards victory, factoring in everyone else's skill rating, player count and things like that.
If you keep winning more often than you should, according to the prediction of the model, your skill will go up to compensate. Likewise it will go down if you lose more often than you should.
If you are in a stacked team (in any direction) the accuracy will be thrown off a little, but over the course of the next 50 games or so this will matter less and less and less. Because the influence of other players on your skill evens out.
Yes.
Sadly.
Above ^^
Echo chamber auto-aggrandizement and groupthink self-validation. Root of almost every single problem this game has been plagued by.
Care to elaborate why you never even try to counter any arguments made by these so-called "self-validators", apart from shouting oppression?
Everyone in my comp team has scores of like 2.5k.
I used to switch teams all the time to try and make the games with the rookies fair during the sales, it seems now i can not undo the damage ^^
That seems strange, since the skill adjustments don't become smaller with time. Proof: My skill varies by about 300, depending on how I'm doing that day.
Agree 100% with this. Numbers should be hidden. Sadly those in control of the "skill" system like to brandish their own high numbers to prove... something.