Who is this high ranked player doing alt runs

More than one high ranked player has done this. There are well known examples. I don't have any interest in naming anyone and don't have any info that isn't well known.

Usually a clue is when the alt takes the name of a costumed superhero.

Buns, you are truly a high level troll:)

Are you Squiggles' alt?

Buns, you are truly a high level troll:)
Are you Squiggles' alt?

Didn't Buns already admit that?:) Sorry, another bad joke. I'm not an alt, and Buns is not an alt as far as I know.

Edited 9/18/2017 22:54:55

Oh my god, this thread is a shitfest.

*Grabs popcorn*

Buns is dead piggy's alt.

Just ask Boston.

"So, can we go back to the issue of alts on RT ladder, or is this stupid witchhunt still going on?"

That issues been talked to death though. Only time alts are a major issue is when they're both being played at the same time like this:



Rank 6 and 10 look to be the same player. A Lynx player actually. What a coincidence.

Edited 9/18/2017 23:23:28

This is a no bully zone , could we kindly stop the rude comments or redirect then towards Quicksilver.

Isn't the issue of Alts going to be addressed when the ladder rules are tweaked in the future assuming that still going to happen. It's not a great thing to do currently but there have been lots of threads on it , it's an issue that the "light" has already been shined on.

I disagree. And honestly I don't understand how people can argue that alts don't hurt RT ladder. By definition your rating gets more accurate as you play more games. So if we want more accurate ratings, we are supposed to have many games on 1 account, not a few on 10.

When a top player enters RT ladder with a new alt, his trueskill mean is severly heavily underestimated. That sucks for his first opponents. Then, after a good streak of wins, his trueskill mean is in turn overestimated. That's good news for his next opponents who are in a good shape whether they win or lose. With time, his rating will get more and more accurate... unless he decides to make a new alt.

Someone please explain to me how is that fair or good for the ladder.

Oh look, it's another thread with topic being the only thing not discussed. And another thread dominated by ad hominem posts. And yet another thread in which Nauz is telling someone they are not good at this warlight lark.

If there was no drama or "stupid witch hunts" the forums and because of that the community forums would be a very boring and dry one.

So let them continue or we could have all forums being boring with threads like these usually ignored as Nauz says they are debated to "death".

I don't think you read the thread at all Cloud.

How good someone is never was a part of this threads discussion, other than stating that people can get advice from people much better than player12345 without having to surrender games to get it.

As for ratings becoming more accurate over time, yes, this is accurate, to a degree.

If someone plays 500 games on an account, and then makes an alt and plays 100 on the alt, the alt likely has the more accurate rating. It's not because 100 games is a superior sample size, but because their rating is less influenced by old games that likely took place when they were not as skilled as they currently are.

That's the main incentive to use an alt IMO long-term aside from people just trying tuns to try for rank 1 over and over.

Buns for example had to play at a 2000 rating level for a long-time before his rating actually was 2000 because he was nowhere near 2000 when he first started playing the RT ladder and those games will always affect his rating despite them not remotely being indicative of how good he is now.

I've personally entered a lot of alts in the RTL. I've always had an unhealthy problem for the ladders by entering alts. What I've been stopping on doing is doing it on the 1v1 2v2 3v3 ladder.. Letting the games expire since there's a decay mechanic. Though main reason is just trying to be more respectful to the rules or the potential new rules.

MDL there is no decay mechanic, Though in benefit we have a really nice system which makes the uphill climbing of the ladder in the sense of ratings very fair and fluid. You don't get hold back too much for losing and you don't jump up ridiculously high for winning. Good ladder all round.

On the RTL. It's unbelievably hard to climb the ladder. You could say "Your not grinding it enough" but when Kurdistan broke RTL most wins records and only got to 1950... When he was something like 1700? Are you telling me anybody wanting to go from 1700s even less? to dream of 1900s has to hit 33+ wins in a row? Real time games take 20-30 minutes on average? You see where the problem is?

Of course this doesn't warrant alt making but it does give reason regardless of it being a good or bad one morally speaking for why someone would do a alt run and who can blame them.

Edited 9/18/2017 23:56:31

MDL there is no decay mechanic, Though in benefit we have a really nice system which makes the uphill climbing of the ladder in the sense of ratings very fair and fluid. You don't get hold back too much for losing and you don't jump up ridiculously high for winning. Good ladder all round.

I haven't followed this thread much, so forgive me if I'm stepping on a few toes. I'd just like to point out that MDL does have two decay components :P

1. Your activity bonus decays every day.
2. If you are not active for a certain period of time, your Elo rating converges to the base rating of 1500 with a daily decay.

It's not a very significant decay tho to be fair, It's not like 1v1 2v2 3v3 ladder expiration where your rating can jump 100s of points sometimes. You know?

That's the context I meant but yeah I didn't remember that the elo activity decay. Sorry.

Edited 9/19/2017 00:07:16

Wow, I've never seen a thread with so many upvoted posts. Especially contrasted with so many downvotes.
Alt brigade on the rise. And yet I am the one without voting rights. Congratulations WL forums!

^
Same for me.

you can have some of mine

Wrong.

This is nonsense.

Rating fluctuation is based on trueskill mean, not actual rating, as such losing to an alt is typically less point loss than losing to their main would be, beating them is also typically more gain.

neal Not Ranked with a rating of 1947. neal's profile
TrueSkill Mean: 2420.43
TrueSkill Standard Deviation: 157.89

Ranked 1st with a rating of 2056. Timinator • apex's profile
Best rating ever achieved: 2214. Best rank ever achieved: 1st
TrueSkill Mean: 2223.0
TrueSkill Standard Deviation: 55.82

Losing to neal is much better for your rating than losing to Timinator right now. Beating neal will also give you a bigger boost.

As per my understanding, what you claim is not true. I downloaded the TrueSkill python library @ http://trueskill.org/ and tested with your numbers. I gain more from Timi than I do neal.

Also, your argument here isn't fair in my opinion. For neal to get up to a TS Mean of 2420, he has to beat a lot of players. When he beats these players his mean wasn't as high(as 2420) and so they all pay the penalty and lose points. I think the OP makes a valid argument.

I disagree. And honestly I don't understand how people can argue that alts don't hurt RT ladder. By definition your rating gets more accurate as you play more games. So if we want more accurate ratings, we are supposed to have many games on 1 account, not a few on 10.

When a top player enters RT ladder with a new alt, his trueskill mean is severly heavily underestimated. That sucks for his first opponents. Then, after a good streak of wins, his trueskill mean is in turn overestimated. That's good news for his next opponents who are in a good shape whether they win or lose. With time, his rating will get more and more accurate... unless he decides to make a new alt.

I completely agree, and I think this is what the OP was talking about.

p.s - It is really lame to down-vote all those posts which made some valid points.

Edited 9/19/2017 03:46:31

@op you talk like people play with alts specifically to harm others.

I have never bothered playing alts, at least they are better players and offer me a good game (Sometimes not even that). Why they are not playing on their main accounts? Unless they are specifically cheating the ladder and that can be proved with numbers i couldn't care less

They might have a negative impact if abused but honestly, there's this guy, maybe you heard of him, i think hes called boom or booms, his rating never gives a damn about these.

But that's just my point of view, which is, i don't think you have a point.

That said, i'm not a numbers guy, i wouldnt have a problem changing my mind and supporting your point if it has been proved that you have been harmed by these. But honestly a small difference isnt enough to call it harm imo

Edited 9/19/2017 15:14:20

Alts hurt ladders, period. There is no debate there. The degree to which they hurt can be mitigated, but that also requires the ability to know an account is an alt. In the past, we have had issues with that (JSA/Robin Hood/etc). Someone can just claim to have a sibling/roommate who's account that is...how do you know if they are lying or not. And only Fizzer has the ability to even check the first part of that anyway.

The only real way to eliminate this is for Fizzer to ban alts period. I am not sure he will ever take that step, but you never know. I thought he would have long ago, when he put the coin system in. I am not saying he should/should not...I just would not be shocked if he did so. There are certainly ways he could allow a person to not need an alt for the various legitimate uses (multiple communities, playing multiple slots in a ladder team, etc.).

Edited 9/21/2017 19:47:01