• Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          28 days ago

          While Elo (and side note: it’s a person’s name, not an acronym) isn’t perfect and systems like Glicko-2 are better even for 1v1s, is there a better system than Elo that could be used to rate players in team games? Especially if there’s a mix of pre-made teams and random teams thrown together by matchmaking?

          Edit: extra bonus if it can be applicable in games that have both 1v1 and team game components where there might be a desire for some form of bleed between the two. (e.g. AoE2 where your starting Elo in one of them is based on your Elo in the other, if you’ve played a lot of one type of game before trying the other.)

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            28 days ago

            I suspect games tinker with the formula behind the scenes, to accurately place people faster if nothing else. The more players the longer it could take for the skill of any one to show up in the numbers, so I bet they factor in other game specific metrics at least at first. There would be some risk of this being abused, but that’s less if they keep it a secret and maybe the progress numbers shown to players aren’t quite the same as the real numbers used to decide who to match them against.

            • Plenty of developers of competitive games with SBMM have said they actually make it more about keeping the player playing than actually giving a shit about their skill. They don’t use straight up elo, but everything they do does derive from it. They also don’t really disclose how they come to the numbers it assigns you; probably because they don’t want to expose exactly how their skinner box works.

              • vithigar@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                28 days ago

                Street Fighter 6 uses two systems. League Points are a “keep them playing” type, and Master Rate is pretty much pure Elo.

                Everyone starts with LP only and initial placement matches put you into a league with progressively fewer guard rails as you live higher. Rookie league can’t lose LP at all, there’s a win streak bonus up to gold, and you can’t demote to a lower league until platinum. Throughout it all there’s very slight upward pressure on LP, you get slightly more more a win then you lose for a loss.

                Finally you reach the topmost league, Master, the final guard rails fall away and you’re given 1500MR to join in the net zero Elo ranking pool. You basically need to demonstrate that you have a willingness to keep playing before they will use that style of matchmaking. “Real” skill based ranking effectively begins there, with the lower ranks being made more to show dedication rather than just ability.

        • Psythik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          I thought it was common knowledge that the pickier you are on Tinder, the better your matches will be. Swipe right on everyone and you won’t have much luck on that app.

          • Anivia@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            It’s no longer determined by your swiping behavior, but rather who swipes left or right on your profile, and their elo.

            If you only get swiped right by people with a low elo, then your elo will drop and your profile will only be shown to people with a low elo.

            Vice versa, if a lot of people with high elo swipe right on your profile you will receive a higher elo and be show to profiles with a high elo

            If it was determined by who you swipe right on it would be too easy to game the system

      • atro_city@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        28 days ago

        How is that “dehumanizing” when human is literally in the explanation. Had it been “female apeoid” I’d have agreed, but humanoid… So “moid” for male humanoid is “dehumanizing” too?

        • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          How is that “dehumanizing” when human is literally in the explanation. Had it been “female apeoid” I’d have agreed, but humanoid… So “moid” for male humanoid is “dehumanizing” too?

          “A humanoid is a non-human entity with human form or characteristics.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanoid

          A humanoid is by definition not human, hence calling a human a humanoid is dehumanizing.

    • SPRUNTnsfw@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      I think it’s supposed to be some kind of derogatory label for women, but is really just an identifier that the person using it is a worthless being whose opinion is as relevant as a gnats thoughts on the economy.

  • Akasazh@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    I think this is an unrealized thought experiment by op. I don’t believe the Chad he imagines has any relation to the man most woman are looking for.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 days ago

      Op creates profile that makes him look rich and stupid.

      Gets targeted by bots using ai generated images of mildly attractive women.

      Thinks he’s actually attracting human beings.

      Anon still has never willingly gotten the attention of a human woman besides his mother

  • ryedaft@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    27 days ago

    Can women message people on Tinder they haven’t matched with?

    And if this was effective wouldn’t it lower all women’s Elo scores? Unless he only ignored one group and catfished everybody else. Sounds like a lot of work.

    • dai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      No, only tinder premium can do so IIRC.

      Bumble? From memory women can only message first, men must wait to be messaged before they can.

      It’s been a while since I used those platforms so my information could be incorrect.

        • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          As a man who would often get matches but rarely get so much as a “hi” to allow the conversation to start (i’d say only 1/8 of the matches would say anything in the 24h), I really wonder why. A number of women apparently never read that they were supposed to send a message first when using bumble (I did hear that more than once on the app), but others? Why?

    • stinky@redlemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      ELO is a term used in ranked competitive video games. Part of this author’s sense of humor is that tinder is a ranked game

      edit: see correction below

        • TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          The concept of “ranked competitive” systems, in general, evolved over time, but if we’re talking about ranked competitive structures in games or sports, we can trace it back to a few key milestones in history:

          Ancient and Medieval Competitions: Even in ancient civilizations, competitive games, including some forms of organized sports or games like wrestling, were often ranked in some way, though these rankings were informal.

          Modern Sports Rankings: The formal idea of ranking athletes based on performance in a competitive environment began to take shape in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, especially with the establishment of professional leagues. For example:

          Tennis established its first official ranking system in the 1910s. Golf created a ranking system (the “Official World Golf Ranking”) in 1986.

          All of this was way before chess was invented, around 2014 or so.