Duelingbook Forum

There are simply too many times I have seen multiple people including me not getting a consistent rating. Like if you lose a match you can lose 28 rating but if you win a match you can get like 9 rating. The rating system is too inconsistent and feels like it is just random. What determines the amount of rating you lose if you don't win? What determines the amount of rating you get if you win? Not fully related to the original topic but there should be a rating reset it should have reseted once POTE came to TCG.

Sound4 wrote:There are simply too many times I have seen multiple people including me not getting a consistent rating. Like if you lose a match you can lose 28 rating but if you win a match you can get like 9 rating. The rating system is too inconsistent and feels like it is just random. What determines the amount of rating you lose if you don't win? What determines the amount of rating you get if you win? Not fully related to the original topic but there should be a rating reset it should have reseted once POTE came to TCG.

Your evidence being? If this is such an inconsistency, screenshot your duel records page of your most recent rated duels as demonstration of this.

I believe it depends on the rating of your opponent. You are to be rewarded more points if you beat an opponent that has a high rating or significantly higher rating than you. The opposite is also true.

There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it. The system is working as intended.

Though some of you are experiencing random harsh rating drops to 100 rating from like a few hundred or over a thousand. If you do experience that please report it to me so I can have it fixed.

Wek wrote:

Sound4 wrote:There are simply too many times I have seen multiple people including me not getting a consistent rating. Like if you lose a match you can lose 28 rating but if you win a match you can get like 9 rating. The rating system is too inconsistent and feels like it is just random. What determines the amount of rating you lose if you don't win? What determines the amount of rating you get if you win? Not fully related to the original topic but there should be a rating reset it should have reseted once POTE came to TCG.

Your evidence being? If this is such an inconsistency, screenshot your duel records page of your most recent rated duels as demonstration of this.

https://imgur.io/5jqDkNs
Here is a screenshot of a high rated player in Jon James. Literally losing 30+ rating just for losing a few games while gaining 0 rating for winning a game. I will show you mine soon.

Genexwrecker wrote:There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it. The system is working as intended.

Though some of you are experiencing random harsh rating drops to 100 rating from like a few hundred or over a thousand. If you do experience that please report it to me so I can have it fixed.

None of this answers a single question in my post. "There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it" so you are basically saying it is random or you don't even know yourself.

One of them is how similar the ratings are, like with ELO. If someone with a higher rating beats someone with a lower rating, the will get less points, or none if the disparity is large enough, because of course a 2000 is going to win against a 50, and of course, less points will be lost by the loser. The opposite is true, because if that 50 beats a 2000, that 50 will become like 200 while the 2000 goes down to 1900 or something, because of how unlikely the upset was.

Sound4 wrote:

Genexwrecker wrote:There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it. The system is working as intended.

Though some of you are experiencing random harsh rating drops to 100 rating from like a few hundred or over a thousand. If you do experience that please report it to me so I can have it fixed.

None of this answers a single question in my post. "There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it" so you are basically saying it is random or you don't even know yourself.

No, we simply do not disclose what all the factors are to avoid people abusing that knowledge. As for Rating, as said before there are numerous factors that go into how much you gain/lose. This isn't uncommon among games in general. Take Valorant for instance. How much "RR" (Ranking points in that game) you gain/lose comes from a ton of different things, such as Kills, Deaths, Defuses, Plants, Headshots (iirc), and so on. It's not random.

Sound4 wrote:

Wek wrote:

Sound4 wrote:There are simply too many times I have seen multiple people including me not getting a consistent rating. Like if you lose a match you can lose 28 rating but if you win a match you can get like 9 rating. The rating system is too inconsistent and feels like it is just random. What determines the amount of rating you lose if you don't win? What determines the amount of rating you get if you win? Not fully related to the original topic but there should be a rating reset it should have reseted once POTE came to TCG.

Your evidence being? If this is such an inconsistency, screenshot your duel records page of your most recent rated duels as demonstration of this.

https://imgur.io/5jqDkNs
Here is a screenshot of a high rated player in Jon James. Literally losing 30+ rating just for losing a few games while gaining 0 rating for winning a game. I will show you mine soon.

One of the highest rated accounts on the site loses matches vs players 300-600 points lower rated than them. Yeah, I'd expect that to be a serious blow to their rating. Not sure why this would throw you.

Sound4 wrote: I will show you mine soon.

You weren't ready to disclose your own duel records that you can just pull up and screenshot but had the duel records of a completely different person on hand to show?

itsmetristan wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Genexwrecker wrote:There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it. The system is working as intended.

Though some of you are experiencing random harsh rating drops to 100 rating from like a few hundred or over a thousand. If you do experience that please report it to me so I can have it fixed.

None of this answers a single question in my post. "There are a lot of unseen factors that go into it" so you are basically saying it is random or you don't even know yourself.

No, we simply do not disclose what all the factors are to avoid people abusing that knowledge. As for Rating, as said before there are numerous factors that go into how much you gain/lose. This isn't uncommon among games in general. Take Valorant for instance. How much "RR" (Ranking points in that game) you gain/lose comes from a ton of different things, such as Kills, Deaths, Defuses, Plants, Headshots (iirc), and so on. It's not random.

I doubt you judges even know the odds. Since you aren't developers of the site do there is no reason why you would know. Plus valorant and shooting games XP system is completely different than DB so not a valid comparison.

Wek wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Wek wrote:
Your evidence being? If this is such an inconsistency, screenshot your duel records page of your most recent rated duels as demonstration of this.

https://imgur.io/5jqDkNs
Here is a screenshot of a high rated player in Jon James. Literally losing 30+ rating just for losing a few games while gaining 0 rating for winning a game. I will show you mine soon.

One of the highest rated accounts on the site loses matches vs players 300-600 points lower rated than them. Yeah, I'd expect that to be a serious blow to their rating. Not sure why this would throw you.

Sound4 wrote: I will show you mine soon.

You weren't ready to disclose your own duel records that you can just pull up and screenshot but had the duel records of a completely different person on hand to show?

Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

Sound4 wrote:

Wek wrote:

Sound4 wrote:https://imgur.io/5jqDkNs
Here is a screenshot of a high rated player in Jon James. Literally losing 30+ rating just for losing a few games while gaining 0 rating for winning a game. I will show you mine soon.

One of the highest rated accounts on the site loses matches vs players 300-600 points lower rated than them. Yeah, I'd expect that to be a serious blow to their rating. Not sure why this would throw you.

Sound4 wrote: I will show you mine soon.

You weren't ready to disclose your own duel records that you can just pull up and screenshot but had the duel records of a completely different person on hand to show?

Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

Again, it's because their opponents don't have nearly enough rating

Sound4 wrote:

Wek wrote:

Sound4 wrote:https://imgur.io/5jqDkNs
Here is a screenshot of a high rated player in Jon James. Literally losing 30+ rating just for losing a few games while gaining 0 rating for winning a game. I will show you mine soon.

One of the highest rated accounts on the site loses matches vs players 300-600 points lower rated than them. Yeah, I'd expect that to be a serious blow to their rating. Not sure why this would throw you.

Sound4 wrote: I will show you mine soon.

You weren't ready to disclose your own duel records that you can just pull up and screenshot but had the duel records of a completely different person on hand to show?

Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

One of the highest rated players on the site winning matches vs players nearly 700 points below them has the same idea. If there is an enormous gap between players then the higher rated player is the major favorite to win and so will gain little for accomplishing it and lose a lot for failing it. I'm assuming other factors kick in, such as a 2-0 probably getting you more than a 2-1, etc. as well. Eventually that gap is going to result in no gain if it gets big enough. After all, to take things to the far extremity, if a top tier meta deck was facing off against kuriboh beatdown, even if they played 1000 games the top tier deck would be expected to easily win them all, so even a 1 point gain would understate the gap. So there is a point where a victory is so empty as to be meaningless. Some gaps are probably obvious enough just by rating to always be 0, for DB if there's some deviations based on other factors in-game there are probably ranges where 0 is a possibility but not the only option. I don't know where that exact barrier is, but it doesn't surprise me that the top player of the site facing someone nearly 700 points below them could stumble into it.

There's always the possibility of an individual game bug of course if one individual result seems extreme enough too. Not my first guess for that outcome, but who knows.

greg503 wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

Wek wrote:
One of the highest rated accounts on the site loses matches vs players 300-600 points lower rated than them. Yeah, I'd expect that to be a serious blow to their rating. Not sure why this would throw you.



You weren't ready to disclose your own duel records that you can just pull up and screenshot but had the duel records of a completely different person on hand to show?

Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

Again, it's because their opponents don't have nearly enough rating

Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

Sound4 wrote:

greg503 wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

Again, it's because their opponents don't have nearly enough rating

Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

And? A Matchmaking Algorithm wouldn't know that. It can only know that there's a subtantial difference between ratings, and by so, will adjust the amount of rating awarded to each player.

Sound4 wrote:

greg503 wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Noneof this explains why he got 0 rating for winning a game while losing 30+ rating for losing other games. It makes no sense. I don't duel too often so it is better to show high rated players rating but I will show you mine soon.

Again, it's because their opponents don't have nearly enough rating

Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

Once you play enough games for it to get an idea, the ratings will tend to separate players of different skill levels. Win/loss ratios can help in a few aspects as well. If they're getting close to losing nearly as much as they're winning they're probably hitting their level and fairly early at that since usually there's a lot of easy wins to get up there at first. If it's extremely lopsided like 10-1 or something then they probably haven't, since they're mostly facing players they are beating extremely consistently. There are some players that are really bad and manage to lose more than win even after a few dozen games, though it's not something I encounter very often. They can stick around lower ratings where the win/loss is such that they get way more for a win than a loss to help cover the ratio issues. That's probably an indicator they've hit their rating peaks at some point, though since they stack over the formats it can be a bit of a mess to tell if they're presently at that or not.

On an unrelated note you've taken forever to screenshot your duel records, lol. Where did that go? It's been around a week since you last said you did it soon, and frankly idk why you didn't just post it then.

Lil Oldman wrote:

Sound4 wrote:

greg503 wrote:Again, it's because their opponents don't have nearly enough rating

Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

And? A Matchmaking Algorithm wouldn't know that. It can only know that there's a subtantial difference between ratings, and by so, will adjust the amount of rating awarded to each player.

I am saying it should be taken into consideration

Sound4 wrote:

Lil Oldman wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

And? A Matchmaking Algorithm wouldn't know that. It can only know that there's a subtantial difference between ratings, and by so, will adjust the amount of rating awarded to each player.

I am saying it should be taken into consideration

And the answer is no.

Sound4 wrote:

Lil Oldman wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

And? A Matchmaking Algorithm wouldn't know that. It can only know that there's a subtantial difference between ratings, and by so, will adjust the amount of rating awarded to each player.

I am saying it should be taken into consideration

Why would it when the current matchmaking works perfectly. It does it's task on pairing similarly skilled players, and rewarding each one accordingly.

Sound4 wrote:

Lil Oldman wrote:

Sound4 wrote:Rating doesn't often mean skill. It mostly means how much time you spend playing the game.

And? A Matchmaking Algorithm wouldn't know that. It can only know that there's a subtantial difference between ratings, and by so, will adjust the amount of rating awarded to each player.

I am saying it should be taken into consideration

That's what the rating does, hence the change in rating after the outcome of the match.