FAQ: Blizzard's AMM System Explained

[JackVance]

THE AMM EXPLAINED
(last updated 6/8/2004)

In the new AMM design, level 28 is the new average level, and anyone, noob or gosu, *will* reach that level if they play enough games. During all the games you play that it takes to get to this average level, the AMM system will gauge your skill and give you an ELL, which is a shadow level that represents the level (of skill) you should be at. This is an elegant way to stop smurfing: If you want to start a new account, you have to go through hundreds of games again just to get to the average level of 28 and have the ELL correctly callibrate to your skill. So in order to understand the new AMM, you have to get over the idea that level 20+ is good. It isn't anymore. After anyone plays enough games, they will be 20+. Being below level 20 simply means you haven't played enough games yet. Real skill can be measured by people being in the 35-50 level range.

Q: Old AMM was fine - if it ain't broken, why fix it?
A: I agree that it was fine, but it didn't work out how Blizz intended. They wanted the full range of levels to be occupied by all the players, not have 99% of bnet below level 15. This way skill between the realms can also be evaluated more clearly.

Q: So the "pretty decent" players will all end up at level 50?
A: Pretty much. Love it or hate it, it's what Blizzard intended.

Q: But in FFA, an average game takes over an hour, how am I ever going to get the 100+ games that are needed to be evaluated properly?
A: Agreed, the AMM doesn't sync well with the FFA gametype.

Q: What about the abuse? Leaving games on purpose to get more experience?
A: This is indeed very real, but you have to realize that this is not a problem with the AMM design, but with the implementation. It should reward good players, not punish them. Blizz is looking into this and hopefully it will be fixed soon.

Q: Grubby and Showtime get 0 exp per win, while some noobs get tons of exp for beating crappy players.
A: The main problem is that the new AMM doesn't work well with high level people who got to keep their high level. The new AMM would have worked a lot better with a ladder reset, but Blizzard didn't want to take away people's hard work from the past. There is no easy fix to this, other than the top player playing hunderds of games vs lesser skilled opponents until his ELL matches up to his skill.

Q: People with good records have to wait very long to get a game, why?
A: Very true, another implementation flaw, not a design flaw, that will hopefully be dealt with soon.

Q: How is ELL calculated? Does it work?
A: While the exact mathematics haven't been disclosed, Blizzard assures us it is pretty accurate. They can predict the outcome of a game that you play with only a 2% error margin. Pretty damn decent.

Q: How can I tell if someone is good? What if they are level 12? How about their win percentage?
A: About the level 12 guy, all you can basically say is he hasn't played enough games yet. Win percentage is trickier to evaluate, because the AMM will try to pair you off against people of your skill as good as possible, so it will push you towards 50% a lot more than the old AMM did. The only time you can really tell something about a person's skill is when they have played 200+ games (under 1.15) and are level 40+. That means they got skillz.

Q: What was Blizzard thinking? I don't have time to play hundreds of games!
A: Many people, the more casual players usually, have a problem with the magnitude of games that have to be played in order to simply get to "the average level". But you have to understand Blizzard did this by design!

The things that matter to rank on the ladder:
Old AMM: How good you are.
New AMM: How good you are *and* how much time you devote to the game.

We are largely accustomed to the concept of simply having to be good to reach the ladder top. Showtime plays ~150 games on the US servers, reaches number #1 and stays there forever. It's what we were used to, but Blizzard hated it. So they changed the AMM to reward devotion and time spent on the game aswell. This idea is not as strange as you might think. MMORPGs like Everquest basically do the same thing. The best players aren't at the top, it's a combination of skill and devotion, time spent. But JackVance, this is not an MMORPG! This is stupid! Don't shoot the messenger plz. I'm just explaining what Blizzard did.

Q: Is your ELL the same for all gametypes? And why don't they just use your ELL to rank you?
A: Yes your ELL is the same for all gametypes. Go 0-100 in RT and you will be considered so sucky that you can get tons of experience off sucky players in any other gametype. (this is the prime abuse right now) On the flip side, if you don't abuse and are very good at team-games and get incredible scores there, you will be facing similarly top players in solo and FFA if you decide to venture there. (even if your solo skill isn't the same as your RT skill) If you have a great solo record and you play some AT, you will similarly get good opponents, even if this is awkward because this is the first time you play with this particular team-mate.

Showing your ELL or using it to rank you would defeat the purpose of rewarding devotion and time spent. Showtime could make a new account and get the highest ELL of them all after a few games. If the ELL is shown, or used to rank people, top players could get high on the ladder from a minimal amount of games and stay there forever. This is exactly what Blizzard wanted to avoid! Once the bugs get removed from the experience system, the real strength of the ELL will be shown, and people will think twice about dropping their ELL by losing games.

Q: What exactly is the problem that is being abused?
A: There are two conflicting forces at work

1. Depending on how well you do, you get an ELL, the level you should reach if you play enough games.

2. If you beat a player who is better than yourself, you will be rewarded greatly with experience. If you beat lesser players, you will get little exp.

While both ideas make sense, they don't work together at all. People artificially lower their ELL to use #2 to get good experience and level up fast. (Note however that no noobs can abuse this system, for they cannot usually beat top players. The top "abusers", while maybe not the best players on the realm, aren't noobs. They are pretty decent players.) To be consistent with the ELL, blizzard has to remove the conflict between these two ideas, possibly by giving better experience to people with a good ELL and less to people with a bad ELL (even if they beat better players- this will improve their ELL and thus reward them later anyway).

<!-- / message -->
Post additional questions in this thread and I will attempt to answer them. I will also keep this post updated with any changes or explanations from Blizzard.
<!-- / message -->

[Xler]

why cant i find any games

[PartisanRanger]

Nice explanation, made things a little clearer. However, I don't understand why Blizz doesn't jack up the experience you get at levels below 28 if that's the "average level". I've won all but a few solo games since 1.15 and have only gained 2 levels...

[satchmo]

I like the new amm, I was a bit confused about the xp (it kept going up!) but this article has cleared it up. Overall the skill of my opponents has been pretty close to my own and I don't seem to get totally pwned as much anymore which is great. I remember starting to play this game on battle net and how hard it was to get one win on solo cause of all the smurphs - really frustrating experience and I nearly stopped playing. I can see why blizz changed things, they want to stop the barriers to entry to ladder play. This should increase the number of players using battle net and make the experience better for all. Nice article.

[wow.Mad]

Ths Vance, this is pretty useful and it make me realize that i'm not that good at lv 23 :/

[MiMiKo.MiX]

amm sucks period

[THe5thDAWN]

amm sucks period
Agreed I can't get over it and I can't beleive that blizzard would do this to us. The New amm Sucks because of it's structure and EEL is gay. The best way to fix is to remove EEL or to make EEL your leval. If someone is leval15 and has 99% that means that he is a good player.

[LOVE AND PEACE]

heh, i think the new amm is a cool idea. too bad they cant really just reset the ladder without people crying about losing their levels.

[KillerBeehive]

Why not just raise the maximum level that you can have then? Say make the max level past 50 to 60... And then make it so that in that 10 levels you only play against players of similar levels (which could mean really rare games), so that really gosu players still would find it challenging.

[Krucifix85]

I don't understand why Blizz doesn't jack up the experience you get at levels below 28 if that's the "average level". I've won all but a few solo games since 1.15 and have only gained 2 levels...

your experience is actually meant to be jacked up below lvl 28 for this reason.
When you create a new account, your ELL is lvl 28 (or thereabouts). This obviously means, your actually level is WAY below your ELL, meaning the exp system SHOULD inflate your experience won, and deflate your experience lost. The only reason I can think for in your case, is that perhaps your ELL isn't very high? It is hard to tell if it wouldn't be high, but some reasons are;
low amount of games compared to level (this is why the extreme gosu's are winning 0 exp)
poor record since 1.15 (this would just mean that you're AT your ELL level already, so no inflation will occur)

Not sure why else you wouldn't get inflated experience (although I obviously haven't seen your Record yet, so can't tell you EXACTLY what's wrong).

:D

[CraZyKoKeNo]

this might be a stupid question but how do i find what my ELL is? and for that matter, how do i find other player's ELL? (if possible)

[Krucifix85]

this might be a stupid question but how do i find what my ELL is? and for that matter, how do i find other player's ELL? (if possible)
sorry atm, it isn;t possible to work out exactly your ELL, other than playing many many games, and eventually reaching it.

[Van Houten]

Agreed I can't get over it and I can't beleive that blizzard would do this to us. The New amm Sucks because of it's structure and EEL is gay. The best way to fix is to remove EEL or to make EEL your leval. If someone is leval15 and has 99% that means that he is a good player.

No, it means that they got lucky with their smurf account and beat up on n00bs without running into any other hardcore smurfs. I don't like the new AMM system either but win % is a terrible gauge of skill if you keep playing against level 6-10 players.

[wow.Mad]

As for me, I like the new amm, I now play against people of my avergae skill almost EVERY games and I can now level, even if it doesnt mean lots now, instead of getting 1 level every 3 weeks while I'm in a winning streak!

Also, I have the opportunity to play against top ladder, what was impossible in 1.14 and before.

At last, the thing that it now required more game to be a ladder is interesting because people don't use smurph and it makes % be less importnat (at least, in the channel I hang)

[rGc.Ponder-]

even once all of the issues are fixed, there is still a very fundamental problem: over two games played (assuming 50%, which is average) you only gain about 30 exp. this means it takes *alot* of time to reach a level where you are actually where you should be. most of us do not have time for hundreds of games, personally i get like 15 a week max, often 1-5 games, which is pretty average. pre-1.15 i had reached level 17 and stayed there for quite some time: it was good, i played opponents around my skill level and won about 50%. now to get to my actual level (low 30's) is impossible for me, too much time, and so the game, for me, is essentially broken. the old ladder ranked on skill (you eventually get to a point where you win 50%, so net exp is zero), the new ladder would rank on skill if everyone played 50+ games per week, but most do not have the time, so it ends up simply ranking on who has played the most games. this sucks.

[Pegasus.A-Z]

I have a horribly bad % on my acc about 49-50% play RT 3vs3 (played mostly at odd hours, weird ppl) and after the 1.15 patch and this new system I never get to play a decent game. Excuse my French but everyone I team up with or often play against f** suck! (aka noobs, as a lot of people like to cry out!) Have played like 3 good games out of 100! Start new acc? And what does this ELL go after? Kills, hero exp or overall score!? If that is the case I have played about 100 games and almost always have the best end score, so shouldn’t that mean that I should get to play with better players!?

[The_Beef]

1. Why do we have to use a 'shadowed' level, that we can't even see? The current level system by experience, depicts a players level, yet it does not entail any sort of classification, so why use it? We have the 'shadowed' level, which is a much better measurement of skill. Can't we have the ELL as our system to show our level? Or can we just have both shown? I think its possible to show the ELL level, as Blizzard claims that they're maths to it is quite accurate.

2. Is it possible for blizzard to discourage the new AMM abuse, by implementing a certain penalty to those who quit a game? Such penalty maybe: players who quit (including disconnects i guess) a game in less than a certain ammount of time (say 3 minutes), will have no effect on the ELL. I believe if this is possible this will decrease the amount of abuse that is already so abundant these days. There will be a few who might still do their quiting, but it wouldn't be so smart, for they will just waste a lot of time.

[Fenril]

Look this player:

http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/war3-player-profile.aspx?Gateway=Lordaeron&PlayerName=Badniteelf%5bsn%5d

They will have to create a separate ELL for each game type.

[Krucifix85]

Blizz stated (somewhere) that obvious abusers, will get accts reset. i guess this would count as abuse. (i guess they would do that AFTER they fix it so it is un-abusable)

[the_darsh]

I have a horribly bad % on my acc about 49-50% play RT 3vs3 (played mostly at odd hours, weird ppl) and after the 1.15 patch and this new system I never get to play a decent game. Excuse my French but everyone I team up with or often play against f** suck! (aka noobs, as a lot of people like to cry out!) Have played like 3 good games out of 100! Start new acc? And what does this ELL go after? Kills, hero exp or overall score!? If that is the case I have played about 100 games and almost always have the best end score, so shouldn’t that mean that I should get to play with better players!?
Then play solo if you dont want newb allies. 3v3 has the most newbs in the game after all. Gj with explaining the amm though =D

[hiaaa]

new AMM is so sh it,

[CraZyKoKeNo]

I have a horribly bad % on my acc about 49-50% play RT 3vs3 (played mostly at odd hours, weird ppl) and after the 1.15 patch and this new system I never get to play a decent game. Excuse my French but everyone I team up with or often play against f** suck! (aka noobs, as a lot of people like to cry out!) Have played like 3 good games out of 100! Start new acc? And what does this ELL go after? Kills, hero exp or overall score!? If that is the case I have played about 100 games and almost always have the best end score, so shouldn’t that mean that I should get to play with better players!?

haha i know what its like bro ;) just played a 3v3 at about midnight, got a lv 29 and lv 20 and lv 7 enemy..with lv 24 ally and some newbie as other ally. we won! having won about 4 games while being lv 12 now, im about 2 wins away from lv 13 -_- nice amm eh?

[TheApostle]

I agree with rGc.Ponder

this game has turned into a system of boosting the players who play the most instead of who plays the best... its so jacked for anyone with a life or a job, aka ME.

damn system

[MiX-]

illl put this plainly... the amm is complete trash i dont give a f u c k about some idiot game masssing noob LOOk AT THE STATS 1/4 of the total games played and 1/2 people online and blizzard is still too stubborn to admit making a dumb mistake

[Zythius]

Hi.

I dont get this thing.. In 1.14 I was going up lvl's pretty fast by 3v3 RT noobing, this does not work anymore, guess thats ok but I dont win ANY games now(Feels that way)... How do you think I feel when the match is loading and i have lvl 4 and 13 guys on my team VS lvl 23, 17 and 10.
We get totally outmircoed, and I end up with beating the crap ou of my monitor after 5 losses in a row :crybaby: Many times i feel that I have done my job perfectly, but we loose cuz one other guy with 2000 gold just stops producing berzerks when we despratly need AA... :censored:
This is how I experience 3v3 RT today.

yeah, I know, this is a whine-post. : P

[Bisc]

Well it is very hard to get win% greater than 50% now. If the AMM match you with 2 noob allies that mean you ELL is high and it is giving you a harder game to play. After you lose a few you will get easier games. Overall I think the new system is good and the games are closer in general.

[TheSHneeSHnee]

IMO people don't like the new AMM because u can't tell if anyones good anymore and level's are pointless. So why not make the ELL visible on bnet so u actually can gauge someones skill?

[Krucifix85]

level's are pointless
can we stop saying that, because its such an untruth!

levels mean the same thing as they did in the old system. in the old system if u smurphed (say u had lvl 35 ability) but was only lvl 10 due to lack of games, nobody complained then, while this is only the EXACT same thing. if u don't like it, start a new acct now, and see how *almost* perfect the system is.

LOOk AT THE STATS 1/4 of the total games played and 1/2 people online
where r ur stats bro?
edit: last time i checked games played had certainly increased since january (approx)

[SliceP228]

i think i am getting the shaft experience wise because i am very slowly leveling, but even when i lose i dont lose exp.

this new system has some flaws and some peole get the shaft and some people get a gold mine of experience, but ELL is pretty damn good if for no other reason than because EVERY single game i play is a gg. i never have to play noobs and i rarely get stuck with some super ultra gosu. i think blizz will work out the kinks in the new system and people will adjust to how level 28 is average (when before it was pretty damn good). kind of sucks taht blizz didnt attempt to explain the new system at all on the B.Net news or whatever. lot of people would be less pissed about it if they understood it.

[horst]

http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/W3XP-player-profile.aspx?Gateway=Northrend&PlayerName=hardgamer sorry but this guy is DEFENITLY NOT skilled... and he is lvl 50 and high ranked... he lost to lvl 12 random with bad stats... 1.14 apm70 was rank 1 in northrend now high rank is just for guys who play 12 hours a day... you think this is good? you are retarded?

[Krucifix85]

can u plz go and get 1200W-1000L rec and then speak to us... its not as easy as u obviously think

[Vicotnic]

I think the amm is pretty good, however the lvl system sucks, it reward you for sucking. bad player gains more exp then good player cos they mkaes a huger achivement when tehy beat a medicore player.

And I also would like to see the hidden lvl of ppl cos currently tehir is no way to judge a persons skill by jsut watchign hes account, and that is abit annoying aspecially when you are looking for AT partners.

Currently lvl emans shit, look and so does ranking look at the top 20s, of the gateways they are swarmed with noobs(well maybe not noobs but atleast it ain't top players >.<).

[Pittball]

it whill be fine if blizzard shows the ELL lvl on the profile of each player !

PLZ DO IT :)

[Pitmclord]

can u plz go and get 1200W-1000L rec and then speak to us... its not as easy as u obviously think
So you admit that to get a high lvl you just have to play alot of games? If what that guy says is true, that this guy does really suck then why should he be lvl 50?

[OdourlessGarlic]

Ok article. Helped somewhat.

[Da_ganja]

Still don't get why they changed the system -.- It worked find for everyone in the previous patch... And how come blizzard didn't respond to all the people writing in their forum about how the system were abused and stuff like that. Most of the people who were in the betatest of the patch (1.15) also wrote comments about how the ladder whould be fucked up... Blizzard just ignored them.

If someone could explain some of those things to me, it would be nice.

[Cealin]

So level 28 is average, and 35-50 is for good players. Why don't they push it up to level 75 or something, and only really gosu players can get to that top level?

And it sucks that only true nerds who play 24/7 can be high level..

There still is much to be changed.

[Grafikzwerg]

I think, Blizz did not want that at least only the gosu's and the average players play on bnet, they wanted the whole range of skilled players, from completely noob to gosu. If not, they could not sell so much WC and TFT's...before the patch, bnet was real fun only for high-skilled players and gosu's...the medium ones had no, really no chance, to be noob was a real shame (me: hi gl hf, him: stfu fucking noob..)...and yes, mee too, I nearly stopped play on bnet....but now at 1.15 with a new acc, I can tell that 2 of 3 matches, the opponent has similar skills and I have a interesting game...now I am lvl 12 with 84 wins/76 losses, yes I know I am very noobish (every second opponent still remembers you that you are even if he looses;-) , but how I told before WC is not only for gosu's ...like this it is okay for me and I like playing on bnet...
But yes, I see the prob for the high-skilled players and gosu's, too...but hey, Blizz cannot make it right for everyone...

Just my two cents
Montparnasse

[Groet]

How do you lose a level in new patch (except from decay.)

[LiquitySplit]

That guy is obviously the God of Abuse... yeah, i guess Blizzard has to do something about this!

[toon]

so if the AMM was working how blizzard intended shouldn’t every1 be 50% or bloody close to it? and if that is what this new AMM intends (and to me it seems like it does) what is the point in the ladder? is the number 1 just the person with the most games? Plz answer some1 im lost

[horst]

hahahaha i would get 1200 1000 easily if i had time for it but no i haven't... blizzard is master in destroying their games, just look d2 everything wasrightn classic then came LoD and with it overpowered chars, duped, hax. it took blizzard 1 year or more to make a patch that fixed all issues... now we have 1.15 with a ladder system that made alot of people to stop laddering... and why? couz some noobs complained in blizzard forum that they suck and it's not their fault, no the stupid smurfers own them... i think in 1.14 were 0,01% of gamers smurfers... so they destroyed the game couz some noobs played bad against a little more expierenced players... thx blizzard... plz listen to people who know about the game and the comunity not some stupid kiddies, now flame me plz if you feel like

[Gladiator]

ive quit warcraft3 because of the new amm, ill put it this way. i have a life, and i cant afford to play 300 games to get my actual level, sorry.

edit- gg aether, he plays only one hour a day. he'll start losing levels crazy fast, and he won't be able to practice vs anyone good. pity blizzard had to ruin another game.

[YouMustDie.]

Well , The AMM is fine , but the exp giving is kinda stupid , good players dosent get any exp... and Bad players get alot :/

[anti~]

Is there anyone out there who believes that warcraft gaming experience is in playing close and exciting games? And how many thinks that is lies in having some luck with the AMM to gain levels. Is this really what is fun.. gaining levels?

I, like the mayority of battle.net only play every now and then. At most 1-2 games
a day. And since this new AMM has arrived. My opinion is that it is far better than the last one, since I now almost always face someone my skill level. Sure i have faced some lvl 35 dude who kicked my ass, but hey in the prior AMM that happened a lot more.

[Lord.Richmond]

In the old AMM i was often matched up with way better players....that wasn't just very educating for me....I started a new account when 1.15 arrived and now i play against ppl of equal skill which is both more fun and educating...so i like this new AMM

[AMP]

My two cents? Blizzard made a mistake, but have you noticed that instead of admitting it publicly, they simply said in a little FAQ later on that they're working on it. Instead of wasting time apologizing, they go right on and start working to fix it. Yes, I believe the AMM has a flaw, but only in implementation. Easily abusable, but still works for those who don't abuse it. Only the experience system is truly flawed. For those of you, like Gladiator, who are leaving simply because, "i cant reech my troo lvl in lader!!" I must say, you are a loser. If you play, play for love of the game, especially since if you play fairly every game (don't abuse to gain levels) you should reach your 50% mark quite faster. Which should also get you to the point where you can still win, but if you are willing to learn, can still improve.

[lemartin]

Just ridiculous system , the top 20 is full of noobs exept apm70 and 1 or 2 others....

The top 20 is for best players , NOT FOR PLAYERS WHO PLAY 24 HOURS A DAY THAT'S RIDICULOUS !!
All those new lvl 50 players have not the same skill as apm or inso or all other "real" gosus and they are in top 10 , this amm just killed the ladder...

[Raistlin]

well, so with all of these changes, doesn't there has to be a change to ladder? since it's based on level//expirience there's no point that all good skill ppl will reach level 50 and the top players wont be at the top of the ladder just because they dont play enough? what's the point of the new amm if it completly disables the ladder rankings?
i hope u got some nice answer to that ;o

[lemartin]

Hey guy , in a ladder the n°1 is the one who is the best or the one who play the more ?

To my mind the n°1 MUST BE the one who is the best.

[Fangs]

well, so with all of these changes, doesn't there has to be a change to ladder? since it's based on level//expirience there's no point that all good skill ppl will reach level 50 and the top players wont be at the top of the ladder just because they dont play enough? what's the point of the new amm if it completly disables the ladder rankings?
i hope u got some nice answer to that ;o


Not ALL good players will reach 50 stupid...reason some "noobs" (as you call them, but would beat all your sorry asses most of the time) are 50 now, is cuz of abuse of the IMPLEMENTATION, not the DESIGN og the AMM system. What that means is that the AMM is buggy at the moment. They will patch it, and abouse won't work. ALSO : as was JackVance's point, ALL players WILL reach level 25, if enough games are played. If you tooootally suck, and lose every game, then the AMM system will put you against totally retarded people like yourself, and you will HAVE to win sometimes (and then reach level 25 ...of course much later than normal people).

The new AMM rules totally over the old system, for mediocre players. It sucks for really good players, because they have to play MORE games to get their ELL up where it should be. A poorer player will see the change sooner, and will be happy sooner.

One thing though. I think most of the whiners around here are either very good or very stupid...I've had ALOT more fun in 1.15, that b4. Simply because : No more f**** smurfs (I played smurf like 2 out of 5 games b4. Now maybe 0.). No more compleeeeete nooobs (I met them 1 out of 5 games).

But I am a mediocre player who struggled to get over level 10 in solo (much because of smurfs before (losing like 150 xp to smurfs every games sucks). :censored:

[Malystryx]

My question was i have played 1200 RT games, if the ELL is based on the number of games played as well as % does that mean my ELL is high, or will it count also/only my total win %. Also does it count overall % or % in the specific ladder (RT,SOlo, Ffa)

[Malystryx]

Also with the Gladiator guy claiming they've ruined another game, ok fine some people may not gain levels fast enough but for the others with no loss of xp a lot more players are willing to play RT due to the lack of " noobs and smurfs" now, more games means more experience and in most cases a boost in skill and confidence.

[Casters]

Agreed I can't get over it and I can't beleive that blizzard would do this to us. The New amm Sucks because of it's structure and EEL is gay. The best way to fix is to remove EEL or to make EEL your leval. If someone is leval15 and has 99% that means that he is a good player.


definately. what about the pple with talent?

everyone can now be lvl 28? how ridiculous and retarded is that

[CraZyKoKeNo]

Hi.

I dont get this thing.. In 1.14 I was going up lvl's pretty fast by 3v3 RT noobing, this does not work anymore, guess thats ok but I dont win ANY games now(Feels that way)... How do you think I feel when the match is loading and i have lvl 4 and 13 guys on my team VS lvl 23, 17 and 10.
We get totally outmircoed, and I end up with beating the crap ou of my monitor after 5 losses in a row :crybaby: Many times i feel that I have done my job perfectly, but we loose cuz one other guy with 2000 gold just stops producing berzerks when we despratly need AA... :censored:
This is how I experience 3v3 RT today.

yeah, I know, this is a whine-post. : P

this happens to me alot man. except i win those 3v3 matches. i can usually pull a win out of my ass if i have a fast expo, and especially if im UD (not that i play ud, but because dk/fiend/stat/cl/abom is rediculously overpowered for even a very average ud player like me..) ive beaten multiple lv 20+ ppl with it keke

[Malystryx]

JackVance can you tell us how the new AMM affects AT matchups Please?

[Aku_Soku_Zan]

I think this system is ok, and i have no sympathy whatsoever for all these losers that cant do anything but whine over the fact that everyone has a chance now. Dont get me wrong, this AMM definetly has its flaws but on the other hand it also offers some great advantages. For instance, all those pll saying 'All those noobs are getting on the ladder now because they have no life and i do' should just go f*ck themselves. Those "noobs" are putting alot of their time i this game and I must say I believe its a good thing that Bliz tries to motivate that.

However, Bliz really should try to find a balance between skill and number of games played to restore kind of an 'elite' status to say.... the top 100-200.

[Infested_Thrall]

This new system is defenetly makes it harder to judge wether a player your facing is good or not, until you play him, the old fasion was fine because the less skilled players where normaly under level 15, which was fine, they shouldnt reach high levels if they dont deserve them. But its blizzard, what can you do, they make the decisions not us. But I still do not agree with the new AMM system, the old was fine, why change it. If you put enough effort into something you can become really good, so players should of just tried harder to reach the levels that are now given like water is found.

[azureXsmurF]

Its' still crap ^^

[iKaº]

´pretty useful, though i thinlk this game will never be balanced, so AMM.

[Kleezs]

Post additional questions in this thread and I will attempt to answer them. I will also keep this post updated with any changes or explanations from Blizzard.

I don't think JackVance has the time to answer ALL these questions. (though it would be immensely cool if he did ;))

----------------------------

I believe they should change the system with the following things:

1. Fix the XP system, so that abuse is no longer possible. This also involves rewarding more XP when you beat a player with high EL (instead of lvl) and less when you win of some noob.

2. Change the effect that the amount of games played has on lvl, so players that play a normal amount of games (1-4 games a day) can level quick as well, if they are winning most of their games.

3. Make an option to show EL to everybody, so there is a decent way to gauge someones skill. This requires fixing of the EL of the top players as well. (which should be the highest, but they are penalized by it now)

4.(optional) Allow for a wider distribution in levels, by raising max level to 100.

This will mean a distribution like this:
* 0-25 newbie
* 25-50 average
* 50-75 above average
* 75-90 very good
* 90-100 gosu / elite (the likes of top-tournament players now)

------------------------

I can't give "exact" solutions of how they should accomplish this all (only what should be done IMHO), since blizzard breaks with its own company standards, by not informing the community sufficiently how this darn thing works.

I am convinced that making sure players are rewarded for winning against good players, (by levels and better ladder rankings) instead of # of games played, will improve the overall competative spirit on B-net.

Most of the real gosu's have stopped playing ladder. This is one of the worst things that could happen to the value of the ladder itself. Currently it rewards ppl who have insane amounts of time, which is wrong. If they can't win from the best, they don't deserve to have the highest level/ranking.

And what's up with that shadow lvl BS, its cool that they try to improve our experience, but why not replace actual levels with expected level entirely, if this system is so accurate?
There's really no point in having a level when just anybody can reach it. If there really is need for something to get ppl to play more games for, make new icons or something.

When they put expected lvl in the "Old" 1.14b level's place, you can gain a little more satisfaction by doing well, as you can see that you are improving yourself.

------------------------

Man ... what a rant :happy:

I actually care about this subject a lot, hence the long post, but I also must say that the game itself is still fun.
This game is about Orcs, Nightelves, Undead and Humans, who very much like to bash eachother's heads in. Enjoy the game to the fullest, even with a strange AMM/XP system. Blizzard will eventualy do their job and make us all satisfied again.(as they have done in the past)

Peace :)

[Fangs]

This new system is defenetly makes it harder to judge wether a player your facing is good or not, until you play him, the old fasion was fine because the less skilled players where normaly under level 15, which was fine, they shouldnt reach high levels if they dont deserve them. But its blizzard, what can you do, they make the decisions not us. But I still do not agree with the new AMM system, the old was fine, why change it. If you put enough effort into something you can become really good, so players should of just tried harder to reach the levels that are now given like water is found.


Maybe atm. But before for under lev 12 players, he could be a 35+ lev, or lev 1...You wouldn't have a clue. Over lev 15 would be fairly accurate, as it would be pretty hard to reach level 15. But because of smurfers (alot of them in my book) it would be damn hard to reach level 15, cuz of the massive loss of xp when u lost to a lev 2 smurfer.

The old system was VERY simple and very crap, and easily abusable (smurf f.ex). It is hard to get good at anything if you lose to VERY experienced smurfers. Try to be good at tennis when only playing Agassi f.ex. If you don't get any rewards when playing, it will tear you confidence down, and you will stop playing.

New AMM rules alot...give it time and you lot will agree also. If Grubby says it sux, doesn't mean it does for everybody. After his ELL has risen to his current lev, he'll start gaining xp like everybody else. Just have to play more games for his ELL to go up. Too bad for him. I think it is bad that the "gosu"'s started slagging of the AMM right away, and got the whole noob/fanboy community with them...That is democracy for you.

[Krucifix85]

omg, this went from a good tutorial about what us outsiders know of the 'mysterious' new amm/exp system, to some more whinging n whining about stuff... i started PMing ppl as not to make this thread into a whingefest, but after some hours, and coming back, it seems that was always gunna happen :(. the funny thing is almost ALL of your questions have been answered somewhere along the line...

i'll answer 3 now, because i feel i've been here too long tonite :(
so if the AMM was working how blizzard intended shouldn’t every1 be 50% or bloody close to it? and if that is what this new AMM intends (and to me it seems like it does) what is the point in the ladder? is the number 1 just the person with the most games? Plz answer some1 im lost
yes, every one should be very close to 50% but 50% @ lvl 10 is VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY different, to 50% @ lvl 40.
the amm is set up to do this:
if u are a lvl 10 player, you will play vs other lvl 10 players. (now can u see where the 50% comes into it? u will on average beat sum1 50% of the time, if he is the 'same' skill as u) this means, u will be at the level 10 stage, and get to play against ppl ur skill level most of the time.

========

How do you lose a level in new patch (except from decay.)
we are only seeing (for the most part) ppl lose minimal exp from losses, because they are all WAY below their ELL. (due to the average level being bumped up to ~28) this has been explained b4, and i will briefly go here:
if u are below ur ELL, u will gain MORE exp than normal, and lose LESS exp than normal.
if u are above ur ELL, u will gain LESS exp than normal, and lose MORE exp than normal.
once u are at ur ELL, you will get experience change, as ur ELL dynamically changes.

(i'm not using too high language here am i? this IS simple isn't it?)

=========

3rdly and last for the nite:
well, so with all of these changes, doesn't there has to be a change to ladder? since it's based on level//expirience there's no point that all good skill ppl will reach level 50 and the top players wont be at the top of the ladder just because they dont play enough? what's the point of the new amm if it completly disables the ladder rankings?
i hope u got some nice answer to that ;o
well do u want me to directly quote blizzard on this? no?
k k k, here i go:
a ladder system such as this, is based on TWO (not ONE) idea's. a players skill, and a players 'attendance'(games played). now if the ladder was ranked by ur ELL, we would have players at extreme high levels after 50 games, so doing that is out of the question.
only way to fix that, is to bring an 'attendance' modifier into things. this means, if u are of level 50 quality, but have only played 50 games, u will be a lower lvl, than another lvl 50 quality player who has played 100 games. this is where our ultra gosu's are getting their problem they got to extreme high levels on the old system, on extremely low game counts, which just doesn't work with this new system.
all good? if they kept just pottering along, winning / losing as it may be, they would eventually start experiencing the same win/loss exp sa they would be used to.


and i just would like to say this:
to the ppl who think tL.Sorimachi abused his way to lvl 50 (including himself) funny thing is, even if he didn't 'abuse' he still would have got to lvl 50, due to the level bumpage and experience inflation. owned.
(omg my post is too long again!)

[Fangs]

And what's up with that shadow lvl BS, its cool that they try to improve our experience, but why not replace actual levels with expected level entirely, if this system is so accurate?
There's really no point in having a level when just anybody can reach it. If there really is need for something to get ppl to play more games for, make new icons or something.


The ELL is your estimated level, so say if you start an acc and win 10 games in a row, your ELL will skyrocket to a psycho high level (like, say 30). Reason it is HIDDEN is so that people can't abuse this (I can see smurfers having a field day with this one). What they mean by accurate, is that after many games, the ELL will stabilize more and more, and the xp given (or taken away) will decrease as your SHOWN level starts getting close to the ELL. (This is all just my thoughts...it is probably not entirely accurate, but the message of it is).

There is NO point in removing the SHOWN level we know, and replacing it with the ELL. It just doesn't make sense. Try to understand the system, before critizising it (like so many other do).

If you do want to critizise AMM you might want to ask if a player skills dramatically increases (like he puts a lot of effort into new tactics or whatever) after the KNOWN level is the same as the ELL. Wouldn't it take a whole lot of games for him to get his KNOWN level to be accurate? As his ELL will be hard to budge around then?

[TheMountain]

Can you explain this clearly,

How does LOSING end up getting you more XP. Why playing in this patch with a 90% record get less XP then someoneplaying with a 50%. HOW DOES LEAVING A GAME GIVE YOU MORE XP WHEN YOU WIN...

How could blizzrad make somethign like that, is it a mistake? Did they overlook something?

[Casters]

i mean a noob can be lvl 28 while a better player can be lower just because he doesnt spend so much time playing

[Kleezs]

There is NO point in removing the SHOWN level we know, and replacing it with the ELL. It just doesn't make sense. Try to understand the system, before critizising it (like so many other do).

Try to read posts better, before critizing them ... :(
I understand the system fairly well (at least no less than most) , I clearly stated that LVL has no meaning to me (and a whole lot of other ppl) with the new system. I suggested to swap it for the expected level, because that is supposed to accurately display skill.

Even if the actual levels will reach the shadow levels eventually, (which would be extremely hard for casual players) there is no way for us to determine the skill of someone NOW. Its not a perfect idea to show ELL to everyone, but at least it gives us something to work with for the time being.

[GoooN]

omg t that guy fenril. he is too clever by half! :) all losses in RT, all wins in solo...... u'd be gutted if he was ur ally in RT I think :)

[Fangs]

Try to read posts better, before critizing them ... :(
I understand the system fairly well (at least no less than most) , I clearly stated that LVL has no meaning to me (and a whole lot of other ppl) with the new system. I suggested to swap it for the expected level, because that is supposed to accurately display skill.

Even if the actual levels will reach the shadow levels eventually, (which would be extremely hard for casual players) there is no way for us to determine the skill of someone NOW. Its not a perfect idea to show ELL to everyone, but at least it gives us something to work with for the time being.

Well, level means alot to some people. And if the ELL was the only level shown, that would mean we would be back to smurfing again. So we won't win anything by doing what you suggested.

Actually if you don't play much, your level will be close to your ELL alot faster then if a guy that plays much, by that if you don't play much, your ELL will be alot lower, than the guy that plays much. (I.e Play alot = good skills/high ELL, play little = low skills/low ELL).... get it?

The new AMM is better for the lower level players at the moment, because they are already closer their ELL now. For Gosus it will take alot longer cuz of their current level, and the ELL is trying to catch up.

With the old system, it was impossible to know how good your opponent was, when playing < 15(due to smurfs trying to get good win %). New AMM is better this way. For > 15 it will be bad for awhile until all the higher level players have got their ELL up, and the ladder has evened more out around level 25 (rather than level 10 as it was before) as JackVance said.

[huggles]

A question.. when playing RT, is the order where the nick appears based on ELL?

[fanou]

-_-

[ShoeFactory]

hardgamer loses to shitty ppl though he has lvl 50? he loses to 300/200 and 60/30. when ppl in lordaeron and azeroth get lvl 50 it just shows that the amm is screwed.

[Kleezs]

omg, this went from a good tutorial about what us outsiders know of the 'mysterious' new amm/exp system, to some more whinging n whining about stuff... i started PMing ppl as not to make this thread into a whingefest, but after some hours, and coming back, it seems that was always gunna happen :(.

Its kind of logical, if ppl were happy, they wouldn't whine... Though I don't necessarely approve of addressing these posts as "whines", since some ppl put a lot of effort and time in it. :disgust:

Since you did so as well, here is something I noticed:


we are only seeing (for the most part) ppl lose minimal exp from losses, because they are all WAY below their ELL. (due to the average level being bumped up to ~28) this has been explained b4, and i will briefly go here:
if u are below ur ELL, u will gain MORE exp than normal, and lose LESS exp than normal.
if u are above ur ELL, u will gain LESS exp than normal, and lose MORE exp than normal.
once u are at ur ELL, you will get experience change, as ur ELL dynamically changes.

(i'm not using too high language here am i? this IS simple isn't it?)

It is perfectly clear, as it was before. The problem isn't with HOW it works, but its in the way the ppl WANT it to work. I don't consider this an ideal system, since almost everything about it depends on blizzard's shadow level calculations. (of which we don't even know how that works)

The XP rewards are strange, because it rewards you by looking at how good you could be, instead of how good the players are that you beat. It is also hard to improve with this system, as it will resist you in leveling up when you are at your ELL.

and i just would like to say this:
to the ppl who think tL.Sorimachi abused his way to lvl 50 (including himself) funny thing is, even if he didn't 'abuse' he still would have got to lvl 50, due to the level bumpage and experience inflation.

But he even says himself that he shouldn't be lvl 50 at all, which is the reason he abused the system in the first place, to show us just that. Again, it is not about the workings of this system, but about how it should be.

A huge amount of players are unhappy with this system. That alone should be enough reason for Blizzard to make some necessary adjustments. (and is, they said they were working on it)

(omg my post is too long again!)

Yeah, but thx for taking the time :)

[Rhodry]

This clears up the new AMM, think I'm gonna start playing Ladder again ;)

but I often face ppl with either verry low skills or very high... can't find even players ;(

[Roaddog14]

Horrid explanation.

[Kleezs]

Well, level means alot to some people. And if the ELL was the only level shown, that would mean we would be back to smurfing again. So we won't win anything by doing what you suggested.

Level meant a lot before and it probably still does to some extent, but you have to agree, that at least during the time this system is used, it is a lot less of an accurate measurement of skill than it was before.

Actually if you don't play much, your level will be close to your ELL alot faster then if a guy that plays much, by that if you don't play much, your ELL will be alot lower, than the guy that plays much. (I.e Play alot = good skills/high ELL, play little = low skills/low ELL)

I don't agree with the fact that you reach your ELL faster if you play less, because it takes way more time for the system to truly discover your true ELL.
On the other point, I agree 100% that practice results in better playing skills, but talent also means a great deal. Some ppl take forever to improve for whatever reason and other ppl just learn faster. If the ELL is so good at guessing player skill, then it should reflect this as well.

The new AMM is better for the lower level players at the moment, because they are already closer their ELL now. For Gosus it will take alot longer cuz of their current level, and the ELL is trying to catch up.

With the old system, it was impossible to know how good your opponent was, when playing < 15(due to smurfs trying to get good win %). New AMM is better this way. For > 15 it will be bad for awhile until all the higher level players have got their ELL up, and the ladder has evened more out around level 25 (rather than level 10 as it was before) as JackVance said.

They could have made a cap on the # of accounts per player (per realm) and that would have solved the smurfs, I believe. I'm not saying the old system was perfect, but it didn't have so many inconsistancies as the 1.15 one.

Anyway, I agree to disagree and am done with it, I'm already using up too much post space as it is, it is supposed to be a faq ;)

[Kael'thas]

well, thanks a lot for the explanation, I finally understood this amm thing :P
gotta foward this to some friends that are confused as well

[wizzard]

Well if Blizz really said that theyre going to ban abusers... thats really poor. Make a system with a lot of flaws and than ban people who do nothing but play within Blizzards own rules. But well.. I don`t care about levels anyways.

[Malladine]

I too very much appreciate the changes Blizzard made to the AMM. Awesome job. Every game I play now is close enough for me to feel satisfied if I win and pissed if I lose ;). I mean EVERY game.

I can't see why anyone could argue with this system unless they're used to creating smurfs every time they reached a lvl where they regularly faced equally skilled players. Bout time those ppl grew up. Stiff upper lip and all that :rofl:

[VaLoR]

I'm not sure that the average lvl 28 thing is all that accurate. Where did you read/hear that? From Blizzard's site? It may just be that less good players are playing on US west now but since 1.15 I started at lvl 20 and have rocketed up to lvl 31 with a really shite record of like 100-75 (added on to my current solo since the start of 1.15). While its true that I do beat people like ares.pro and vic)just_orc (ostensibly very good players) I lose all the time, and to newbs sometimes. Despite this, for every win I get 50-100 exp (sometimes as much as 170 for beating a lvl 41 for instance) and for every loss I lose about 6 exp. The point of my explaining all this is to emphasize that once I passed lvl 28 (the average lvl) the exp didn't change. I still gain exp at the same rate and lose it at the same rate. If this level was the bar after which my ELL should be fully calculated shouldn't my lvling slow down?

Thanks for the article though, enlightening.

Edit: After having read 5 pages of newb whining I'd like to add a little more.

The smurf problem was seriously not as bad as you RT whiners make it out to be. When I first started playing RoC solo I got called a smurf a lot, and again in TFT, even when my record was abysmal (like 45-15). Just because you get owned doesn't mean it was by a smurf. It is VERY possible (especially if you're RT filth) that you are just an awful player and you got beat by someone of the same level or lower than you.

Very few excellent players make smurf accounts. The majority of the "smurfs" that you complain about as having "lvl 30 skill" are in fact just AT whores who are more likely at about lvl 15 skill.

Another huge problem with the ladder is the RT system. The function of the RT system reminds me of Europeans colonizing the new world. You have this ecosystem (the RT system) occupied solely by savages (newbs) and they play only against each other and they win and lose accordingly. This gives them to thinking that they are as skilled as their level indicates. I have heard on many occasions from the mouths of rt newbs that RT lvl means as much as solo lvl. All I can do is laugh. Then when this ecosystem of pure newbs comes into contact with an agent of the opposing systems (solo or AT), where everyone is better, they quake at how they are cut to pieces without mercy, just as the native americans were wholly devastated by Spain's horseriding, guntoting, steel sword waving, disease carrying soldiers. They call these agents, few and far between though they are, "smurfs," and they might well call them conquistadors.

The problem, then, lies not with smurfs but with a pervasive RT culture that permits the absolute bottom of the barrel, by playing with and against each other all the time, to think that that is not where they are, and that when they are beaten soundly they are beaten by a lvl 30 solo player on a smurf account. The solution of which can be none other than the wholesale abolition of the RT system.

On a final note, about the Gosus leaving: win % in a particular game type should matter more in determining how much exp one gets than the disparity in skill levels between the opponents. For instance, a player at lvl 30 with an 85% solo who beats ANYONE THEY MEET should gain a lot of exp because, their % being what it is, they are obviously far below their ELL. Thats how it should be anyways.

[Fuct]

yes i like this artical very much

[ades]

Ok, you've done a great job explaining all this stuff. now plz explain this to me :

I'm level 23 ATM so I should get a lot of xp for wins vs high level, right? ( the ~28 thingie? ). But... I win vs level 50 and I get like 130xp.. I win vs level 44, 46, 40, 41, 43 and I get like all between 20 and 60 xp... WHY? Shouldnt I get more than 100 xp? and then something really strange happened to me.. I won vs a level 21(or somethign like that) and got 125xp (?!?!?!?), that's the 2nd most exp I've ever got. from a 21?!

[HanGar]

Simply because I'm now pretty much guaranteed of a good game. I've won about 50% since 1.15 came out, and that says to me that my opponents are about as good as I am.

But as regards stopping smurfing...does it? A L1 smurf will have ELL of 28. So will many level 10 players. So will an honest level 5 player who hasn't played much. And a level 10 player etc. Won't we still be being matched up against smurfs? Perhaps they'll only get 2-3 smurf games out of their account, rather than maybe 10.

This might be harsh, but couldn't you limit the number of accounts per CD key? I know that some people share CDs, but I think a limit of say 4 or 5 would be sufficient. If you need more (eg. big family, club etc) you could apply to Blizzard for them.

Food for thought anyway.

[Insight]

And how will this li'l abuse be prevented? 0-100 stats ( FFA or RT) and abt 100-0 in solo bcuz of playing with 7-8% people !!!In this way ( just if i have the needed number of games i can abuse the ladder in TOP 100 with more than 95% even if im not gosu ( I am a little above average player ).cHECK THIS PLAYER FOR VERYFYING : http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/W3XP-player-profile.aspx?Gateway=Northrend&PlayerName=amm-test
He really became my idol :rofl: :lol:

[Insight]

Really Reset The Ladder!!!!!!!!thats The Only Way ( Even With The New Amm)
When Things Will Be Ok...i Think Balance In Top50 Is Much More Important Then If Someone Does Or Doesnt Have A 1500 Win Icon !!!

[LiquitySplit]

VaLoR has a point there... Insight> that player you're talking about is lvl 8 solo... ?!?!? wtf?

[Murr]

Valor, maybe you're ELL isn't too much higher or you're playing opponents with high ELLs, or maybe a bit of both. Quit bitching about RT. If you know you're better than them than just leave it at that. Does Blizzard start giving out money to people that are high levels? I don't see how you have anything to lose. Besides, there ARE indeed some people who are quite good at communication and have the great ability to make others play the way they want them to play. I have seen it done and I have seen the rediculous win/loss ratio it creates. Yeah, they're less likely to be good at solo, but good soloers often do bad in team. And IMO, great communication is a more impressive skill than how fast you can click. Lets not get cranky because we're only good in one.

Ades, maybe the lower level players have been rated better by blizzard.

[andyxxxx]

THE AMM EXPLAINED

Q: Old AMM was fine - if it ain't broken, why fix it?
A: I agree that it was fine, but it didn't work out how Blizz intended. They wanted the full range of levels to be occupied by all the players, not have 99% of bnet below level 15. This way skill between the realms can also be evaluated more clearly.

<!-- / message -->

I disagree with this, THE AMM on Northrend(europe) was totally abused pre 1.15, by high level smurfers, and now those high level players are whinning, they have themselves to blame for the way the ladder went... AND I HAVE NO sympathy for them, as they are now saying that there levels are devalued.

before anyone says anything, I did try to do something about it I posted many times on battle.net forums with a good solution which would please everybody and it got many positive responses.. but there yougo, you got to try or nothiung woill change...

[bogus]

new AMM is totaly retarded and flawed, while old system was perfect with no flaws.

[MiX-]

WHY PUNISH THE THE GOSUS FOR BEING GOOD? f u c king god... its your own dam.n fault if you cant beat people... not the amm's... only newbs complain about this amm. I cant even level anymore cause im getting 15-30 exp a win and losing about 10 a loss please someone that was above lev 20 before patch like the amm( its not going to happen because they dont exist)

[Rhodry]

the levels are pointless now cus they do not show how good you are, just how much you have played, before 1.15 level ment alot more cus' then u faced people with the same experience level. so now the experience level is pointless, they should change so that you see the ELL instead of experience level...

I DO NOT SEE THE POINT WITH EXPERIENCE LEVEL, THAT'S WHAT I'm TRYING TO SAY ;) :flex: :cool2: :) ;) :rofl: :clown: :lol: :disgust: :cool: :( :blush: :annoyed: :censored: :happy: :crybaby:

[Kangaxx]

Well, anyway, the new AMM sux.
It's all about the amount of games you play, there are lvl 50 players that can't hold on for 10 min against the genuine gosus (grubby, frog,deadman and all Sk clan members). If the Xp loss will be back,a different one, adjusted for the new Amm, the new Amm will make much more sense.
Anyway- the old Amm was good enough, it may cause smurfing and more time for high lvl players to find games, but it wasn't a real problem. Blizzard could have just make players above lvl 40 to get games against lvls that are 10 lvls below\above thier lvl.
And for smurfing- it wasn'tthat bad, for time you met a better player, but mostly you met players in a lvl equivelent to yours.

[Blind Fremen]

2. Is it possible for blizzard to discourage the new AMM abuse, by implementing a certain penalty to those who quit a game? Such penalty maybe: players who quit (including disconnects i guess) a game in less than a certain ammount of time (say 3 minutes), will have no effect on the ELL. I believe if this is possible this will decrease the amount of abuse that is already so abundant these days. There will be a few who might still do their quiting, but it wouldn't be so smart, for they will just waste a lot of time.

3 minutes is not usually considered a lot of time...i would simply time it until 3 min was up, quit, then send some angry e-mail to blizzard.... :censored:

[Blind Fremen]

new AMM is totaly retarded and flawed, while old system was perfect with no flaws.

no system is perfect... :cool2:

i still agree that old system was better than this new AMM shit! i beat a level 28 at level 4! WTF IS THAT SHIT, EH?! :censored: :censored: :censored:

[Blind Fremen]

Edit: After having read 5 pages of newb whining I'd like to add a little more.

The smurf problem was seriously not as bad as you RT whiners make it out to be. When I first started playing RoC solo I got called a smurf a lot, and again in TFT, even when my record was abysmal (like 45-15). Just because you get owned doesn't mean it was by a smurf. It is VERY possible (especially if you're RT filth) that you are just an awful player and you got beat by someone of the same level or lower than you.

Very few excellent players make smurf accounts. The majority of the "smurfs" that you complain about as having "lvl 30 skill" are in fact just AT whores who are more likely at about lvl 15 skill.

Another huge problem with the ladder is the RT system. The function of the RT system reminds me of Europeans colonizing the new world. You have this ecosystem (the RT system) occupied solely by savages (newbs) and they play only against each other and they win and lose accordingly. This gives them to thinking that they are as skilled as their level indicates. I have heard on many occasions from the mouths of rt newbs that RT lvl means as much as solo lvl. All I can do is laugh. Then when this ecosystem of pure newbs comes into contact with an agent of the opposing systems (solo or AT), where everyone is better, they quake at how they are cut to pieces without mercy, just as the native americans were wholly devastated by Spain's horseriding, guntoting, steel sword waving, disease carrying soldiers. They call these agents, few and far between though they are, "smurfs," and they might well call them conquistadors.

The problem, then, lies not with smurfs but with a pervasive RT culture that permits the absolute bottom of the barrel, by playing with and against each other all the time, to think that that is not where they are, and that when they are beaten soundly they are beaten by a lvl 30 solo player on a smurf account. The solution of which can be none other than the wholesale abolition of the RT system.

On a final note, about the Gosus leaving: win % in a particular game type should matter more in determining how much exp one gets than the disparity in skill levels between the opponents. For instance, a player at lvl 30 with an 85% solo who beats ANYONE THEY MEET should gain a lot of exp because, their % being what it is, they are obviously far below their ELL. Thats how it should be anyways.

"wholesale abolition of the RT system?! " What are you, a Nazi? You think destroying an entire game type (in this instance) will just SOLVE the problem? RT makes up a VERY large percentage of B.net games, and i quite frankly find it entertaining and mostly enjoyable. With that way of thinking, you would cut off your finger if you got a papercut!!!

[JackVance]

FAQ updated to answer more specific questions you guys brought up.

Some answers:
How does the new AMM affect AT matchups?

The thing is, your ELL is the same for all gametypes you play. So if you play some RT and solo and get a good ELL, if you start to play AT, you will be playing pretty decent players. (This might sometimes be awkward if you play with a new partner) If you are a very good player, you might even have to wait 2+ hours for a game, because the AMM can't find a team close to your ELL. Note that this is one of the implementation-problems that I mentionned the new AMM has. It is going to be fixed. When? "soon"

How does LOSING end up getting you more XP? Why does someone with a 90% record get less XP then someone playing with a 50%?
This is one of the implementation flaws at work. Expect this to be changed. Basically the reason is that if you lose games, your ELL drops, so you're an average player beating other average players, which is rewarded by more experience. If your ELL is high (which 90% will get you), you will be a gosu beating lesser players and you won't be rewarded much for that. In principe this idea works - so if a lesser player manages to defeat a gosu, he will be greatly rewarded in exp for the win. But in practice it fails horribly, because top players can't level at all.

This has also lead to the most prominent abuse at the moment. Lose all your games in RT, and win as much in solo as you can (or any other gametype). The RT losses will drop your ELL, so you get easy opponents in solo, and good experience because the AMM thinks you are a sucky player beating better people.

I'm level 23 ATM so I should get a lot of xp for wins vs high level, right? But... I win vs level 50 and I get like 130xp.. I win vs level 44, 46, 40, 41, 43 and I get like all between 20 and 60 xp... WHY? Shouldnt I get more than 100 xp? And then something really strange happened to me.. I won vs a level 21 (or something like that) and got 125xp (?!?!?!?), that's the 2nd most exp I've ever got. From a 21?!
Well, below level 25-28 you shouldn't be too concerned with experience because it is still inflated to get you to the average level. In fact, you shouldn't focus on exp too much at all, because it is buggy right now. But know that each win/loss *is* affecting your ELL. Beating a top player, regardless of the exp gained, is never in vain. Once the experience distribution gets straightened out, you should do fine for having gotten a good ELL.

[JokeRz.]

im a 70% lvl 19 rt player on uswest and i basically cant find any rt games at all, b4 i hit lvl 19, i was finding games decently fine but now it's near impossible, can u just expain why this is?

[Murr]

I think people need to chill out for a sec. This new system really is quite good, probably better. The thing is, its going to take some time for things to even out. This is a new system, so players that play a lot will skyrocket to level 30, even if they're just average, and that may leave great players that don't play as much in the low twenties. They just have to catch up, and should eventually get 40 or so.

If we reset everyones records and implemented the old ladder, crappy players could shoot up to the low teens faster than highly skilled players if they played enough. Same thing.

Levels WILL start to resemble skill more accurately. The ONLY issue I could have is that more total games played can increase your ELL. How exactly doesn't seem to be known to any of us.

Let Blizzard work out some kinks. Raise points, but damn, make sense out of it. If you have no understanding of math, you're comments are pretty useless. The fact that they can use player statistics to predict the outcome of a match with about 2% error is impressive.

[JackVance]

im a 70% lvl 19 rt player on uswest and i basically cant find any rt games at all, b4 i hit lvl 19, i was finding games decently fine but now it's near impossible, can u just expain why this is?
This is a common problem with people who have a good percentage. Your ELL is so high the AMM has a hard time finding enough equally skilled players for you to play against. Remember your ELL is a constant evaluation, so if you play (and win) more and more games, it gets a more accurate picture of your skill - in your case it probably went higher and higher. I don't have a solution for you, but this issue *will* be fixed.

(playing and losing some solo games on purpose might drop your ELL so you can find RT games again, but that is abuse so I didn't tell you this ;) )

[Ikari]

I really believe some people at Blizzard are fucked up in the head.
Q: So the "pretty decent" players will all end up at level 50?
A: Pretty much. Love it or hate it, it's what Blizzard intended.

This is one of the things... odd....
If this is the case, then why give people a lvl, if it doesnt matter what lvl u are?
The old AMM u knew if someone was good by his lvl, now it really doesnt matter.

[CaLLMeNooB]

The new AMM was just a way to get more people to play the game. With people like sorimachi try to "prove his point" he sure does. This is what blizz wants, people to stand up and say "hey mass games and win, noob or not".....IMO

[JackVance]

I really believe some people at Blizzard are fucked up in the head.
Q: So the "pretty decent" players will all end up at level 50?
A: Pretty much. Love it or hate it, it's what Blizzard intended.

This is one of the things... odd....
If this is the case, then why give people a lvl, if it doesnt matter what lvl u are?
The old AMM u knew if someone was good by his lvl, now it really doesnt matter.
Blizzard will probably raise the level-bar if enough people hit level 50, so don't worry. The reason they haven't done this before is that only the solo kalimdor ladder had a bunch of level 50s. (and apm70 on solo northrend but that's just one player) So that's 1/16 of all ladders where people reached top level, while Blizzard wanted all gametypes to have their level 50s.

i still agree that old system was better than this new AMM shit! i beat a level 28 at level 4! WTF IS THAT SHIT, EH?!
If you read the FAQ you'll know why this is possible. Level 28=the noob level after sufficient games played. :P

[Fear.me]

all us high players who worked very hard for our accounts and levels are now totaly screwed over... im now i higher level but so is everyone gayness runs our out of the new AMM. I really want either a ladder reset and change the AMM a bit or go back to old.

[Gendo]

I have a good Question...

In 1.14 i was level 20 RT.. I was decent but not that good. The level 25+ were completely 10x as good as me. but how in the new amm am i able to easily get level 45? I win more than i lose but its jus rediculous. I'm no where near as good as half the old pros

[nK.FraGuUL]

"The things that matter to rank on the ladder:
Old AMM: How good you are.
New AMM: How good you are *and* how much time you devote to the game."

This simply leads us to the fact that now this game's target audience are no-life kids who play 10 h/day. GOOD JOB BLIZZARD.

[nK.FraGuUL]

and just too add ppl defending new AMM are noobs who couldnt get past lvl 15 in 1.14. Once i was such a player too - so i played hard to get better - and so i am. Now there is no motivation for players, i mean the real players who like the competition and like to see their training brough some effects. Now u dont need training, u dont have to be good, u just mass games and u get lvl 50 - sooner or later. Thats seriously a gr8 "improvment" for this game.
To say it clear - w3 has evolved in to the other type of game. A game which u dont play to master it, get skillz, u just play and ur encouraged by getting mass levels. SO, HELLO NOOBS I HOPE U ENJOY THIS WRECK. Now its suited for u. Enjoy.

[Krucifix85]

omg nK.FraGuUL
plz u go show me a true noob (no anyone above lvl 20 wasn't a noob) who has got to lvl 50? NOT 49, because a lvl 19';s true lvl is 49-50. i'm talking about a lvl 15 'noob' (lol yer they were noobs) who has achieved the ladder level of lvl 50. until that occurs, i can safely say, the new system is working as close as intended as possible.

tL.Sorimachi was lvl 29ish, meaning he was top 1% of the ladder... hmmmm
top 1% = lvl 50? yer thats fair

players lvl 20+ pre 1.15 (that is top 0-2% of server population) WILL BE LEVEL 50 in this new system. if u can understand that, u will see that there isn't much wrong so far.

i have explained why ultra gosu's are having trouble, go look at my previous posts, if u want to find out!

and JackVance, I wholeheartedly agree with u on Blizz thinking of opening up the level cap, but this will only happen, when approximately all levels are filled with 2% of the server population.
this way, we know a lvl 49 is a 49, and he won't increase due to the cap increase.
the only ppl to increase (on the whole) will be the players who are better than the new lvl 50 (i.e top 50-70 players on each server).

and finally, for the ppl thining mass games = mass levels (nK.FraGuUL + others) u r totally misinformed, and just because a guy got to his actual level quicker than u did, doesn't mean the system is flawed.

[Murr]

and just too add ppl defending new AMM are noobs who couldnt get past lvl 15 in 1.14. Once i was such a player too - so i played hard to get better - and so i am. Now there is no motivation for players, i mean the real players who like the competition and like to see their training brough some effects. Now u dont need training, u dont have to be good, u just mass games and u get lvl 50 - sooner or later. Thats seriously a gr8 "improvment" for this game.
To say it clear - w3 has evolved in to the other type of game. A game which u dont play to master it, get skillz, u just play and ur encouraged by getting mass levels. SO, HELLO NOOBS I HOPE U ENJOY THIS WRECK. Now its suited for u. Enjoy.

W0\/\/ k3wl. h0w d0 i g3t s0 n3rdE?

Just chill out, there are some things they said they're gonna alter. If they can make it so the average player is 30, great is 50, etc, it seems a lot better to me. Maybe they'll extend it past 50.

[randomtool]

Lovely -_-

[KooL]

im really not on ne side... but how would the perfect matching system work? would they match by score or sumthin?

[flipstar]

GJ blizz, no one takes the ladder seriously anymore.

[VaLoR]

"Yeah, they're less likely to be good at solo, but good soloers often do bad in team. And IMO, great communication is a more impressive skill than how fast you can click. Lets not get cranky because we're only good in one." -Murr

I reject as ridiculous your claims that RT is about communication. I have heard many RT players comment that they do better when their "allies" leave the game and they get to control their armies. Sounds like fast clicking to me, but that's just the PRECIOUS FEW Rt players who aren't fucking terrible. Most RT players are in point of fact just shitty players who are relying on other people to dillute their lack of skill on the overall team. Why is it that the biggest newbs in RT are in 3v3 and 4v4? Because they have more other people to make up for their lack of skill, and to blame for their many, many losses.

AT is where communication matters, not RT. In AT one must communicate with his teammates in order to defeat another squad of competant players and a true test of which team has more cohesion is the result.

And finally, to your comments insinuating that I'm not good at team I should like first to direct your attention to the fact that I have held rank 1 in 2v2 AT in TFT (c4c)VaLoR and Reich-Rommel), and I should like second to tell you to stfu.

[huggles]

This has also lead to the most prominent abuse at the moment. Lose all your games in RT, and win as much in solo as you can (or any other gametype). The RT losses will drop your ELL, so you get easy opponents in solo, and good experience because the AMM thinks you are a sucky player beating better people.

Thanks.. I was wondering why there are suddenly so much more team killing and disconnects for RT. I mean.. it isnt so bad if the guy drops in a solo match to abuse, but in RT, he is screwing up the game for 4-8 people at the same time just for the sake of leveling his solo... :(

Also, the ordering of names in the team used to be sorted by level, but not anymore, so is it sorted by ELL instead?

[huggles]

I reject as ridiculous your claims that RT is about communication. I have heard many RT players comment that they do better when their "allies" leave the game and they get to control their armies. Sounds like fast clicking to me, but that's just the PRECIOUS FEW Rt players who aren't fucking terrible. Most RT players are in point of fact just shitty players who are relying on other people to dillute their lack of skill on the overall team. Why is it that the biggest newbs in RT are in 3v3 and 4v4? Because they have more other people to make up for their lack of skill, and to blame for their many, many losses.

AT is where communication matters, not RT. In AT one must communicate with his teammates in order to defeat another squad of competant players and a true test of which team has more cohesion is the result.

And finally, to your comments insinuating that I'm not good at team I should like first to direct your attention to the fact that I have held rank 1 in 2v2 AT in TFT (c4c)VaLoR and Reich-Rommel), and I should like second to tell you to stfu.

The only thing ridiculous I can see here is your noob argument. Are you suggesting that no communications is needed in RT and everyone should just play it like a solo matchup?

RT is where an average player with excellent leadership skills can coordinate his team to beat a gosu who doesnt respect his newly found teammates skills and limitations and thus is unable to organize them into an effective team.

[the_returner]

Ok, This new AMM is just dandy with the level stuff, considering it's just a mask, it doesmn't matter what lvl you are because your rarely will play people your level. In my last 10~20 game's I have been matched vs. players that are WAY better then me and WAY higher level. This really blows because I will spend like 2-3 hours losing vs players I shouldn't even be playing in the previous AMM. Blizz needs to make their pair making MORE even because it's not even close to equal matchups. Also, what is up with me being 7-5 on RT ladder then playing vs #1 RT player? I obviously can hardly handle player's near my lvl, so pair me vs high lvls, thx blizz. Get new patch b4 everyone retire's and changes to BattleField.

[MYM]Grubby]

heh, i think the new amm is a cool idea. too bad they cant really just reset the ladder without people crying about losing their levels.

heh, too bad they cant really change anything without people crying.

but hey, that's how it works in a democracy :)
~

[labu]

Agreed I can't get over it and I can't beleive that blizzard would do this to us. The New amm Sucks because of it's structure and EEL is gay. The best way to fix is to remove EEL or to make EEL your leval. If someone is leval15 and has 99% that means that he is a good player.
it doesn't make him a good player, it makes him an expert noob basher

[Vladiano]

Nice article. I think that the AMM wil inprove continously, with players soon actualy reaching that lvl 30 mark. The new sistem is better.

[Vladiano]

Blizzard will probably raise the level-bar if enough people hit level 50, so don't worry. The reason they haven't done this before is that only the solo kalimdor ladder had a bunch of level 50s. (and apm70 on solo northrend but that's just one player) So that's 1/16 of all ladders where people reached top level, while Blizzard wanted all gametypes to have their level 50s.


If you read the FAQ you'll know why this is possible. Level 28=the noob level after sufficient games played. :P


level 28 = the noob level?! That i must say will not happen, in my opinion. It would be too much! :censored: Blizzard

[iceemaker]

I don't know much about the situation before the new AMM, but I'm pretty sure people were matched up against "smurfs", IE good players making new accounts in order to play more games/get a good record/etc. This new system was supposed to ensure players were matched up against those of their skill instead of rank level. Well, I haven't really run into smurfs, I've just gotten matched up with people 10 or more levels higher than me (A level 4 VS a level 16?!? Wow, nice one...) My very first game I played, I was matched up against a level 8 Human player! Ironically enough, I beat him.

[Pegasus.A-Z]

Hi.

I dont get this thing.. In 1.14 I was going up lvl's pretty fast by 3v3 RT noobing, this does not work anymore, guess thats ok but I dont win ANY games now(Feels that way)... How do you think I feel when the match is loading and i have lvl 4 and 13 guys on my team VS lvl 23, 17 and 10.
We get totally outmircoed, and I end up with beating the crap ou of my monitor after 5 losses in a row :crybaby: Many times i feel that I have done my job perfectly, but we loose cuz one other guy with 2000 gold just stops producing berzerks when we despratly need AA... :censored:
This is how I experience 3v3 RT today.

yeah, I know, this is a whine-post. : P

Couldn’t say it better my self m8. Man I always say I’m going to start solo, but never do. I like team games a lot, but I cant take this s**t anymore!

[Squashbanana]

u can as a lvl 1 face a lvl 50... which i think is crazy... i did this and won... thats even crazier... before it was "stats says nothing" now it's the fucking opposite... lvl 50 is not that big a goal anymore since everyone basically can become it... i feel sorry for all gosugamers out there that have to suffer because of this.

[Pegasus.A-Z]

A question.. when playing RT, is the order where the nick appears based on ELL?

I haven’t seen any answers to this and I too wonder how the order works...
Nothings random when it comes to computers :D.
Maybe who connected to the game first or is it the ELL?! ;)

[PITagoRAS]

What i think vry terrible of amm and make it sux is that i =always get lvl 22-23 while im only lvl 5 -_-
if im 5-0 doesnt mean that my real vll is 23 >_<....and the ppl of lvl 20 have same skillz as b4, normally they have unitl higer % than me
B4 i could havge a nice %, play vs ppl of my SAME skillz, but now is totally out of control!
Is just like, win 1 game and lost 5......instead of play vs some smurfz in 2 of my 10 matches b4, i play vsppl better than smurfs in 7 of 10 matches!
they could just make the lvl difference that for me it would be k =/

[JackVance]

I've just gotten matched up with people 10 or more levels higher than me (A level 4 VS a level 16?!? Wow, nice one...) My very first game I played, I was matched up against a level 8 Human player! Ironically enough, I beat him.
You are still stuck on the old way of thinking. As explained in the FAQ, level 16 or level 8 doesn't mean anything about skill. Even if they put you against a level 25 player, he could be absolutely horrible. You can *not* look at the level and say that this is an unfair match-up anymore! If the AMM does one thing right, it finds you opponents of your skill level.

[VaLoR]

Another thing about the AMM I wonder is: does it take streaks into effect? In my opinion being on a winning or losing streak drastically affects the way you play, and to get a 2% margin of error they would need to take that into account. I'd really like to have ELL displayed in profiles.

[ThE-Pro]

HMmm.... Im very interested about this "amm" thingy eh? its kinda confusing ill get use to it =P

[Krucifix85]

What i think vry terrible of amm and make it sux is that i =always get lvl 22-23 while im only lvl 5 -_-
if im 5-0 doesnt mean that my real vll is 23 >_<....and the ppl of lvl 20 have same skillz as b4, normally they have unitl higer % than me
B4 i could havge a nice %, play vs ppl of my SAME skillz, but now is totally out of control!
Is just like, win 1 game and lost 5......instead of play vs some smurfz in 2 of my 10 matches b4, i play vsppl better than smurfs in 7 of 10 matches!
they could just make the lvl difference that for me it would be k =/

you must realise, that the system will play you, to give you 50% records. well not really, but it will play you against (on average) ppl the same skill level as you.

that means, because u played 5 ppl lower than ur skill level (hence why u got 5-0 rec) the system then realised that it matched u vs too low skilled ppl, and then it will play u vs intentionally higher skilled players, to see where u trully are at.

if ur claim of winning 1 losing 5 is true (that would mean if u were once 5-0, u would be now 5-25) then there is sumthn wrong with the system.
but if u r approximately 50% then the system is working perfect.

B4 i could havge a nice %, play vs ppl of my SAME skillz,
and that my friend is impossible. if u play ppl of ur same skillz, u will be EXACTLY 50%. if u have a good %age, that means u were playing ppl lower than ur skill level, thats simple. and thats the whole reasoning behind the new system, to partner you up with ppl (on average) of similar skill to you, and that means ur rec WILL be around 50%.

don't complain if ur %age is shit (~50%), because it will be in this new system.

Another thing about the AMM I wonder is: does it take streaks into effect?
yes i do believe it takes streaks in to consideration.
atleast i'm sure the exp system takes them in to consideration.

but i do believe, being as confusing as it is, i think the ELL system would take streaks into consideration.

much <3 guys :D

[alS.]

Well, playing against solo players at level 40 isnt that cool for me, I'm at level 13 and stopped playing solo after the new amm came, just like many other people on b.net.
So I started playing team for fun, which it was until i go at higher lvl, then I just got mass noob, "I fasttech to chim". >.< So plz, patch up a new one blizzard, you suck.
I have lost 5 % after 1.15 came out, Not that I care that much, but there's your proof.

[PITagoRAS]

you must realise, that the system will play you, to give you 50% records. well not really, but it will play you against (on average) ppl the same skill level as you.

that means, because u played 5 ppl lower than ur skill level (hence why u got 5-0 rec) the system then realised that it matched u vs too low skilled ppl, and then it will play u vs intentionally higher skilled players, to see where u trully are at.

if ur claim of winning 1 losing 5 is true (that would mean if u were once 5-0, u would be now 5-25) then there is sumthn wrong with the system.
but if u r approximately 50% then the system is working perfect.


and that my friend is impossible. if u play ppl of ur same skillz, u will be EXACTLY 50%. if u have a good %age, that means u were playing ppl lower than ur skill level, thats simple. and thats the whole reasoning behind the new system, to partner you up with ppl (on average) of similar skill to you, and that means ur rec WILL be around 50%.

don't complain if ur %age is shit (~50%), because it will be in this new system.


yes i do believe it takes streaks in to consideration.
atleast i'm sure the exp system takes them in to consideration.

but i do believe, being as confusing as it is, i think the ELL system would take streaks into consideration.

much <3 guys :D

let me explain better:
B4 the 1.14, i had my 70% pretty k in lvl 14.I was lways matched vs people of my same skillz, of my lvl, and normally they had 55-80%.....
Ive started make new aka now, in this new AMM times.....U know, doesnt mean coz im 5-0 that i play like a lvl 22 =/.....Doesnt mean that coz im 100% that im the new gosu, it was just only 5 matches.Need at least 100 games to see my "real" lvl....And in 1.14 it was like that:U win the games, until u will get in your real lvl and start to lose to better ppl.
Ive just exagerate saying win 1 game and lost 5,not that this is an fact......Anyway, if the system put all the ppl to have same %, so why the reason for that?????I think that have a nice % is always good, and only coz some people cant get in to it, doesnt mean that everybody so needs have the same % as this persons =/
Serious, i could get matched lot more with ppl of my same skillz, sometimes worse sometimes better, in the old patch.......now i just stay afraid in win:Coz i know that my next match will be vs lvl 30 =(

[Arch(A)ngel]

Fenril
that person should be draged out and shot in the head like 22 time while 4 men rap his ass hole if he is back stabing people like a *** i tell u wath tell me if u know him personly or maybe i can make friends with him fiend out where he lives the beat his head in for back stabing yes i would like that yes!!!!!!!!!!! t(o_ot) no joke but if i could touch the people that game with my they would see me they would manner up fast 315 bench

[ToRReN]

bah amm sux i waste 30 min 4 find a solo game >_<

[Raistlin]

Not ALL good players will reach 50 stupid...reason some "noobs" (as you call them, but would beat all your sorry asses most of the time) are 50 now, is cuz of abuse of the IMPLEMENTATION, not the DESIGN og the AMM system. What that means is that the AMM is buggy at the moment. They will patch it, and abouse won't work. ALSO : as was JackVance's point, ALL players WILL reach level 25, if enough games are played. If you tooootally suck, and lose every game, then the AMM system will put you against totally retarded people like yourself, and you will HAVE to win sometimes (and then reach level 25 ...of course much later than normal people).

The new AMM rules totally over the old system, for mediocre players. It sucks for really good players, because they have to play MORE games to get their ELL up where it should be. A poorer player will see the change sooner, and will be happy sooner.

One thing though. I think most of the whiners around here are either very good or very stupid...I've had ALOT more fun in 1.15, that b4. Simply because : No more f**** smurfs (I played smurf like 2 out of 5 games b4. Now maybe 0.). No more compleeeeete nooobs (I met them 1 out of 5 games).

But I am a mediocre player who struggled to get over level 10 in solo (much because of smurfs before (losing like 150 xp to smurfs every games sucks). :censored:

ROFL, u are such a newbie shit, let me explain u something for a start, i am a level 33 hu player in northrend BEFORE that patch, which obviously means i should reach 50 with ease right? but, the point in my writings is that LADDER RANKINGS LOST ITS MEANINGS U GOT THAT ? no wait... a noob that gets a "hard time passing level 10 due to smurf (rofl u noob dont bullshit level 10 is omgeasy) "can't really understand why ppl care about their rankings u know?
anyway, i win most of my games and i even won most of my shot at the big guys who are way supperior than me at levels and stats and yet i keep getting ppl from all around the level ranges (1-50) and the expirience gained is not something that great so what's the point in it? i played like over 75 i should a reasonable range on my ell that should allow me leveling.

"medicore player that can't pass level 10" TT u call u'rself medicore? are u pegged legged or something? level 10 is complete noob ok? i beat u one handed and u calling me a noob?

buttom line is. blizzard made a competitive ladder based on skills, this system fucked it up, what's it's point now if lesser skilled ppl cant just play more and outrank the real gosus? (aka fangs)

[Ddog10]

There is now way to judge skill, no one knows whos played who or anything, someone could be lvl 11 and be very good, no way to tell, thanks to the AMM

[MiX-]

please krucifix and murr show us your accnts your probably just lev 5 noobs getting cocky because they can now get past level 10 ANY LADDER SHOULD HAVE THE GOSUS ON TOP THE AVERAGE PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE AND THE NOOBS ON BOTTOM( right now the average people who can mass games are on top) raistlin you are so right...(btw are you raist aka nekokoneko on west) there are now lev 20s in the top 10 who get raped by gosus in 5 mins but lose no exp I was lev 25 before patch and please noone that wasnt lev 18 or above post about amm since your just biased ****** noobs

And im 95% sure that the "4k.grubby" on this forum isnt the real deal... since hes complaining about it nonstop on the bliz forums and it doesnt make sense for him to come to the wcreplays and endorse it.

[MiX-]

ok according to krucifix the reason for losing so little exp per loss is because people havent reached their ell then why do lev 50s who are consistently playing lev 15 noobs only lose 5-10 exp per loss?!?!?!?! if theyre playing people this low then they obviously have an ell lower than lev 50 which means they should lose tons of exp so they delevel but the system makes sure the people who deserve high lev dont get it and the noobs do get it(which makes no sense) the only "improvement" for the new amm is to trash it, revert to old one, and reset ladders( blizzard... it would be a good idea to do this before 90% of the players quit)

(Is this to hard to understand, dumbass?) owned.

[madboi]

the new AMM panders to enthusiasts with a lot of spare time, and completley alienates those who make this game their living. If Blizzard keeps this AMM, they are going to drive people like Showtime and Grubby off the ladder. The most enjoyable part of the old AMM for me was thinking that maybe, if one became good enough, one would get to go head to head with these fan-favorites, because we were all playing in the same pool. The new AMM will drive pro gamers to compete only in LAN events and other tournaments, which is something I don't think anyone really wants.

[madboi]

It will be just like what happend to starcraft's battle.net, which I think everyone agrees, sucks.

[MiX-]

its funny how 5 noobs whining on the bliz forum ruin the fun for all of bnet...

warcraft 3 is dead might as well play WoW( according to the ladder site, there was 69,000 games played yesterday, compared to 1,000,000 games played normally and this is during the summer!)

[JackVance]

ok according to krucifix the reason for losing so little exp per loss is because people havent reached their ell then why do lev 50s who are consistently playing lev 15 noobs only lose 5-10 exp per loss?!?!?!?! if theyre playing people this low then they obviously have an ell lower than lev 50 which means they should lose tons of exp so they delevel but the system makes sure the people who deserve high lev dont get it and the noobs do get it(which makes no sense)
You are very correct in this observation but you must realize this is b/c it was implemented wrong. (read the last items in my FAQ as to why) Once Blizz fixes this, you will see the level 50s that don't belong there to start dropping FAST as they will actually be pushed down towards their ELL instead of gaining an advantage because their ELL is so low. In the meantime the good players will start to level fast for a change to get to their high ELL. I agree it's a blur right now, but all we can do is wait for Blizz to fix it, which hopefully won't take too long.

the new AMM panders to enthusiasts with a lot of spare time
This was by design. Blizzard wants to encourage mass gaming, they hated the fact that Showtime could make a new account, play less than 200 games and be top of the ladder and stay there forever.

and completley alienates those who make this game their living. If Blizzard keeps this AMM, they are going to drive people like Showtime and Grubby off the ladder.
Well, if
a) the experience bugs are fixed
b) the insane wait-times for good players are fixed
c) enough time elapses after these fixes
then the true top players will be at the top again. I can't wait for this to happen personally..

[sCK]

a ladder is meant to RANK.

the NUMBER ONE player SHOULD be the best player on the realm. the top 50 should be the BEST players on that realm.

the middle of the level distribution should be the AVERAGE players. this was around 10-15 before 1.15.

the bottom of the ladder should be for newbies/bad players. those are the people who can't pass level 10.

with 1.15, now, with TIME, ANYONE can be level 50. literally. when you lose -5 XP for a loss and gain 100 XP for a win, it doesn't take much math to realize someone who has a ratio of 1:19 for wins/losses will STILL BE GAINING XP ON A WHOLE.

so the AMM matches up people of equal skill. a level 5 with a 50% record can play a level 50 with a 50% record. they should be of equal skill, with this new AMM. OK SO THEY ARE OF EQUAL SKILL. but WHY then, is the level 50, level 50 in the FIRST PLACE? if you didn't realize yet, the OLD AMM was PERFECT for matching up equal skill. someone who was level 10 played someone around level 10.

you may complain "smurf". smurfs WERE NOT A BIG PROBLEM. not everyone who beats you is a smurf. smurfs occurred 1/10th of the time, which is not a big problem AT ALL. you must realize, the old AMM/XP system DID THE SAME THING that this new "AMM/XP" system is SUPPOSED TO BE DOING! someone who goes 50-0 will level up much faster than someone going 50-50 in the old AMM, therefore, already PUSHING the smurf up the ladder, to higher levels! the old system worked perfectly in moving smurfs up the ladder!

edit:

this ELL thing is completely unecessary.

it used to be amazingly easy to determine someone's skill.

1 - look at their level
2 - look at their record

not that hard. no ELL needed. if their record is something crazy like 50-0, obviously, they shouldn't be at that level. so every win pushes them further up, to their level. not expected level - to the level that they will reach.

edit #2:

another point. the new AMM/XP system is MUCH MORE EASILY ABUSABLE than the old system. why?

it takes in losses to account for your ELL as well. guess what? it's MUCH EASIER to force a loss on yourself than a win. therefore, making the new AMM much easier to abuse in different ways. you can abuse losing, but not winning.

losing in the old AMM/XP system did nothing but hurt you. there was no point in mass losing, except, to look really really bad. which still did nothing to the matching at all.

[MiX-]

This was by design. Blizzard wants to encourage mass gaming, they hated the fact that Showtime could make a new account, play less than 200 games and be top of the ladder and stay there forever.

so youre telling me that its better to have a noob with tons of games at lev 50 then a gosu with a few games at lev 50? even the thought of that is ridiculus

btw, sck i agree with you 100% the old amm wasnt broken, so why fix it?

EDIT: for the record, there are OTHER ways to deal with smurfs ( which werent a big problem anyway as sck mentioned) say a limit on account making, like one accnt per week or 2

[ihateregisterin]

Well it's good that the real gosus dont take the game seriously anymore, right? I know alot of "pro gamers" on a slightly more personal basis, and many of them have already quit the scene.

But whatever, maybe I'll see all of you in broodwar again :)

[Krucifix85]

the old AMM was broken, just because you didn't experience it, doesn't mean it wasn't (btw i didn't experience it either, but by saying "it wasn't broken" shows ur ignorance)

(paraphrased from BWhittle)
"we are tweaking it, so that losing hurts alot more"

the amm is working almost as expected (for solo/AT its working well), but the exp system for all game types has to be tweaked, and blizz know this.

[MiX-]

the old AMM was broken, just because you didn't experience it, doesn't mean it wasn't (btw i didn't experience it either, but by saying "it wasn't broken" shows ur ignorance)

(paraphrased from BWhittle)
"we are tweaking it, so that losing hurts alot more"

the amm is working almost as expected (for solo/AT its working well), but the exp system for all game types has to be tweaked, and blizz know this.

krucifix SHUT THE HELL UP god your so annoying maybe if you werent so newbie you would understand why people hate it. how was the old amm broken? huh? explain. It did exactly what a ladder was supposed, ranked people from best to worse, not from most games played to fewest games played. BTW 20 levs gained in 5 days by a no name is NOT considered working. and ofr the at ladder, maya[star] holds the #1 and #2 spots because he loss bots the first 100 games then plays the rest( he got 3 levels from lev 30 to 33 in 10 games, now that's fair) so please do us all a favor and stop posting, your just some noob with biased opinions

[Pegasus.A-Z]

Still haven’t got this straightened out... perhaps no one knows. I know that no one knows how to calculate the ELL exactly, but doesn’t any one know what factors they calculate it with, or at least some of them!? Can’t be just wins...

[Krucifix85]

the amm is working almost as expected (for solo/AT its working well), but the exp system for all game types has to be tweaked, and blizz know this.
and ofr the at ladder, maya[star] holds the #1 and #2 spots because he loss bots the first 100 games then plays the rest( he got 3 levels from lev 30 to 33 in 10 games, now that's fair)

there is a difference b/w the amm and exp systems, but i guess when ur flaming, that wouldn't matter to u.

we agree exp system needs a little tweak here n there, but the amm system is fine.
my 'noob biased opinion' wants to hear ur 'gosu biased opinion' now.

oh and btw, the previous ladder didn't do as was INTENDED by Blizzard. It ranked purely on skill, without taking into consideration games played. Blizzard hated the fact that skillful ppl like Showtime could play minimal, ie 200 odd, games, and be on the top of the ladder for all eternity. That was the problem with the old ladder. And i know u will say 'a ladder is only meant to rank by skill', but its not the case here.
And the fact ppl were able to noob bash to recs of 70-5, and take pride in it, shows the rediculousness of the low levels amm. The amm is now FIXED (almost) and the exp will get fixed in the not so distant future.

(PS b4 replying, plz read the FAQ to see what levels, mean what)

[PITagoRAS]

i dont know some basic things of amm:

1-Wtf is going on....Why should i fight vs lvl 30?Example:new people that get ft in 1.15 now and start create an aka......he won one game, but his destiny is fight vs lvl 30 all the time only coz he win......

2-grubby wins 0.8xp, coz he win the games.......so WHY SHOULD I WIN IF LOSE MAKES ME GET MORE LVL?????

3-What the hell blizz changed to that??????Sure nobody liked smurf, but even with amm they are there, but with some + losts.......While A LOT of people hate it much more amm than the people hate smurfs.......why blizz changed?????Why blizz dont get to the old system since most of people wanna back(of course that few people wanna, like crucifix or jackvance)????Is the game to we play, or to blizz play?????

[corkill]

Awesome explanation.

[Murr]

"Yeah, they're less likely to be good at solo, but good soloers often do bad in team. And IMO, great communication is a more impressive skill than how fast you can click. Lets not get cranky because we're only good in one." -Murr

I reject as ridiculous your claims that RT is about communication. I have heard many RT players comment that they do better when their "allies" leave the game and they get to control their armies. Sounds like fast clicking to me, but that's just the PRECIOUS FEW Rt players who aren't fucking terrible. Most RT players are in point of fact just shitty players who are relying on other people to dillute their lack of skill on the overall team. Why is it that the biggest newbs in RT are in 3v3 and 4v4? Because they have more other people to make up for their lack of skill, and to blame for their many, many losses.

AT is where communication matters, not RT. In AT one must communicate with his teammates in order to defeat another squad of competant players and a true test of which team has more cohesion is the result.

And finally, to your comments insinuating that I'm not good at team I should like first to direct your attention to the fact that I have held rank 1 in 2v2 AT in TFT (c4c)VaLoR and Reich-Rommel), and I should like second to tell you to stfu.

I don't care what you hear. It is possible to win frequently in RT and you can't argue against that. Yes, there are a shit load of newbs in RT, but its still possible to be very good in RT. If I can get my team of newbs to beat you and your team of newbs every time, I'm better. Despite the fact that my micro is probably worse. I don't even know why I'm bothering. If you really don't think RT is about communication, you're a moron anyway.

[sCK]

someone great in solo is more likely to do equal if not better in RT than the other way around.

that's the fact. skill in solo is worth more than skill in RT. solo = 1 on 1, more micro required (less units), more of your own decisions, etc. etc.

[dez]

at what lvl does decay kick in now?

[Andy Wilson]

I too very much appreciate the changes Blizzard made to the AMM. Awesome job. Every game I play now is close enough for me to feel satisfied if I win and pissed if I lose . I mean EVERY game.

I can't see why anyone could argue with this system unless they're used to creating smurfs every time they reached a lvl where they regularly faced equally skilled players. Bout time those ppl grew up. Stiff upper lip and all that

I don't get it what's stoppign people form making smurfs I can keep on making mutiple accounts mybae I won't face you but I would some other noob.... there would just have to be alot more account making. "I'm not a smurf this is just hypothetical".

want to know why people argue is because now they have to play a lot like many more hours a day for their level to increase and for htem to play who they should be playing making them play noobs "like a constant mid level smurf" What if Iw as the best player in the world and I played 5 games since tft came out and never lost now someone can get a higher level then me just by playing alot good or not and that's just BS.

[JackVance]

A good read:
http://www.battle.net/forums/war3/thread.aspx?FN=war3x-general&T=1257632&P=1&ReplyCount=189#post1257632

A typical abuse-account:
http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/w3xp-player-profile.aspx?Gateway=Azeroth&PlayerName=Endless-Apoc

[PITagoRAS]

A good read:
http://www.battle.net/forums/war3/thread.aspx?FN=war3x-general&T=1257632&P=1&ReplyCount=189#post1257632

A typical abuse-account:
http://www.battle.net/war3/ladder/w3xp-player-profile.aspx?Gateway=Azeroth&PlayerName=Endless-Apoc

man.thk to this text.Made me now say that amm is better than old system.
But some things have to fix it like:
-grubby winning 0,8 xp, so win is worse than lost
-U cant say that a lvl 5 6/0 is the same as lvl 50.Grubby can get 6/0, so a ppl with my same skillz can.the difference bweteen me and him come with more matches...I think that would be good that have a "limit" to match/win relation of 0.Example:somebody 5/0 can fight until vs lvl 15, then if he is not losing this thing go increasing.....Until the max of 15 win/0 lost.If the guy reached at this point, he can fight wihout any lvl difference....

[Krucifix85]

PITagoRAS that's what is occuring now, it just took a while for everyone's ELL to be in the right spot.

oh and i seriously hope they fix the EXP problem sooner rather than later. :D

[Eternex]

New AMM means if you play a lot you can't have 75% win coz you will get opponents of greater skill that will lower your win % to ~55% :S

[PITagoRAS]

New AMM means if you play a lot you can't have 75% win coz you will get opponents of greater skill that will lower your win % to ~55% :S
the ideia is make that to u know the ppl ability is by the lvl, not the %....
The % is just to equilibrate the game vs opponents of your skillz =p(and ELL)

[Krucifix85]

the ideia is make that to u know the ppl ability is by the lvl, not the %....
The % is just to equilibrate the game vs opponents of your skillz =p(and ELL)
even by substituting a few words here n there to try to make sense, i couldnt...

but if ur saying %age is used to match up opponents, plz re-read the faq...
and also ELL has nothing to do with %age... hopefully u weren't actually saying anything about that... :p

[x-gekko-x]

it takes so long to find a game i always get paired with high levels and never with some1 of my level wtf! well i gotta live with it.

[doomflama]

"Q: Grubby and Showtime get 0 exp per win, while some noobs get tons of exp for beating crappy players.
A: The main problem is that the new AMM doesn't work well with high level people who got to keep their high level. The new AMM would have worked a lot better with a ladder reset, but Blizzard didn't want to take away people's hard work from the past. There is no easy fix to this, other than the top player playing hunderds of games vs lesser skilled opponents until his ELL matches up to his skill"

actualy this is false, it was made so that if u win alot of games and lose few u get alot more xp, so u lvl alot quicker, notice how some people have so few wins and high lvl? (but low loses)

[dN-Wake]

"Q: Grubby and Showtime get 0 exp per win, while some noobs get tons of exp for beating crappy players.
A: The main problem is that the new AMM doesn't work well with high level people who got to keep their high level. The new AMM would have worked a lot better with a ladder reset, but Blizzard didn't want to take away people's hard work from the past. There is no easy fix to this, other than the top player playing hunderds of games vs lesser skilled opponents until his ELL matches up to his skill"

actualy this is false, it was made so that if u win alot of games and lose few u get alot more xp, so u lvl alot quicker, notice how some people have so few wins and high lvl? (but low loses)

that isnt a question retard

[Freestyle)BluE]

I loved the old AMM. Smurfs galore, but many chances to improve. Nowadays I play only newbies+don't have the drive to hit my old level's equivalent in this ladder. Why get high leveld when the whole reason of getting high leveld is gone?

[PITagoRAS]

old system>amm
u need to be always fighting against korean gosus, and after 300 games getting massacrated by lvl 40 ppl, ell finds your lvl.....
not counting that just balance the %, not the game:im always losing 10 times and then i get only noobs and win 10 times, etc.....
And they just made the old feeling in pass lvl be a reason in make a party go down.Basically, they just ruined down everything that they made =[
but they wont change, so w/e

[Unrealthug]

amm is a good idea but still little to shifty and it is making me wait more for my games

[EvilWombat]

Cool so me always (like most of the time I get the lower level players in RT) getting noob allies means I'm good :D . I feel quite good now

[CHERRYZ]

It seems as if blizzard has good intentions, but its not flawless, and as long as the abuse is around, it will create a problem. :/

[T.M.]

lossboting 10 games in a row and being able to get 50-10 stats because of it is just not right

[Aldr[a]ku]

eh i am happy that i play warcraft just 2 - 3 months by now and i got level 50 in 2 weeks i love this amm

[Mr.Juice]

im level 24 solo player only like +11 in solo record and im constantly getting matched vs high level opponents and its not like im winning them all either it'd be nice if i could get a level 24 or 25 for once ;p

[intoxicatedcow]

i agree, i play vs somoen better than me and somone worse than me and it switches off. Therefore i stay 50%. Say somone half as good as me does the same at a much lower level. he will also have 50% even though he is not very good. same goes for somone very good.

I also have a question about the AT matchmaking system. How does that work?

[Fenril]

Time for some update:

Q: What about the abuse? Leaving games on purpose to get more experience?

Fixed

Q: Grubby and Showtime get 0 exp per win, while some noobs get tons of exp for beating crappy players.
A: The main problem is that the new AMM doesn't work well with high level people who got to keep their high level. The new AMM would have worked a lot better with a ladder reset, but Blizzard didn't want to take away people's hard work from the past. There is no easy fix to this, other than the top player playing hunderds of games vs lesser skilled opponents until his ELL matches up to his skill.

Fixed

Q: Is your ELL the same for all gametypes? And why don't they just use your ELL to rank you?

Fixed

[Equnax]

learned a few interesting things here. With the new AMM good and bad has come T_T.

[fuzzy.peach]

i realize im bringing up an old thread but i was just wondering if there is anyway to know ur ELL?

[Ashura]

No.

[prizem]

While the thread is bumped can we get an update on the new ELLS?

[Ethereal_GoSu]

You can give it a good estimate based on the amount of exp you gain/lose per game... If you gain/lose the same exp for win/loss, your ell probably equals your level... or some number equivalent to your level... meaning that you will not level unless you get better

[hirajo]

This might be a n00by question but.. ill ask anyways.. what the hell is "ELL" n "AMM" Oo..

[NethioX]

Estimated Ladder Level and Anonymous Match Making

[Frozgard]

ELL = Expected Ladder level
This is a hidden value that is calculated by battle.net according to the strength of your opponents. So two level 10 players may have very different ELLs.

AMM=Automated Match Making system
This is the algorithm Battle.net uses for determining your opponents on ladder.

[rack]

This ell is dumb simply cause the noobs out there think they are gosus now because they get level 35 i smurfed and went 10-0 beating level 30s like no tommrow.... they were horrible it totally devalues level most of the really good ppl i play are the lower level players ive played a couple of good high level players but its just dumb how they did this.....
Also this reall affects ppl that have a serious life outside of wc3 like sports school ect. wat happens when school starts agian ? no one will have time

[KhamBloodreign]

I consider myself as an medium player. Not horrible, not gosu and I`m freaking fascinated that you think lvl 35 players are shitty. These guys are the good stuff and pretty hard to beat. Would you mind posting your account?
I`d like to see it out of curiosity...

[Ownsyou]

There's tons of lvl 35 noobs. Just go 200-200 in 4v4 and poof, you're a lvl 35 noob.

[Dee3D]

if you have played 400 games you deserve to be lvl 35

[KhamBloodreign]

I want to see a profile of a 4v4 lvl 35 RT noob as it would probably take him 1 week to find a game...

[ChariiE]

This system sucks... my 2s RT search time has now exceeded 20 minutes on average, my solo is now getting around 15-20mins/game to find... at this rate I'm going to have to start losing games on purpose to reach the top of the ladder.