To me, it doesn't come down to whether QM is a competition or not. It comes down to the fact that an accusation without any proof is as poor as anything can be, no matter the context.

It's, as krinid already indicated, among the most fundamental principles of logic that it's widely impossible to prove something has NOT been done. Accusing someone of wrongdoing and asking them to prove otherwise leaves them in an impossible situation. I have no chance to prove I never shared a bed with your mother or never killed a person. That's the reason why an accusation on a no-proof basis is a strong indication that the speaker might be stupid. It's nothing personal and not to defend Ozijs because he is something special or what at all.

Edited 10/1/2021 03:38:51

Hi guys im back. Lets keep it G-Rated

Ercole you are very unintelligent individual.

Rest of you, why are u argueing, just insult him?

Theoretically (although not practically) Ercole is right (for the wrong reasons).

Having many alts with a high winrate on a specific template means you drain rating from the total pool, putting it in your own alts. These rating points in your alts can be seen as a sort of bank. You control whether those points get added back to the system or remain in your other accounts.

Let's say you have infinite time on your hands and create 1,000 accounts to play one specific template and you win 91% of games. Your main account is already rated very very high in this case. Most of the rating for that template is now in your accounts, as your accounts get 1 rating point per won game and your opponents gain 10 per won game. Having over 91% winrate ensures you deflate the system with your alts. Of course you cannot play yourself, so your 'main' account which already had that high rating remains unaffected. Therefore you benefit even from not playing yourself but playing with multiple accounts.

Of course this is highly impractical and Rene hasn't done anything of the sort, but there is some effect to it.

o
k

t
h
a
n
k
s

f
o
r

l
e
t
t
i
n
g

u
s

k
n
o
w

means you drain rating from the total pool

Ratings aren't zero-sum. In QM, due to the modifications to TrueSkill (halved rating decline below QM500), virtually everyone is a rating donor to the overall pool (yes, a high-rated player is going to have asymmetric outcomes because of matchmaking, but 1) that's how any skill-rating system works- the win/loss outcomes aren't symmetric, but both exchanges are and the expected outcome is 0- and 2) over a large number of games everyone's rating trends upwards).

In a normal Elo ladder, everyone just adds the average rating to the total pool. If you're worse than the average player (from before you joined), you inflate everyone else's ratings by donating the gap between your true/equilibrium rating and the average rating. If you're better than the average player (from before you joined), you deflate everyone else's ratings by withdrawing the gap between your true/equilibrium rating and the average rating. E.g., if a "true" 1926-rated player joins the 1v1 ladder today with 426 players, their impact at Elo equilibrium will be to deflate everyone else's ratings by 1 point; if a "true" 1074-rated player joins, 1501 becomes the new 1500 (in the long run).

In QM, you grow the pool (including your account) because of the safeguards around rating loss resulting in asymmetric rating exchanges (ignoring mu/sigma, which makes truly symmetric rating exchanges less common). Every <QM500 loss of yours grows the pool by half the stakes, by growing your opponent's rating more than it shrinks yours.

So this thousand-account cheater would wind up donating to the QM rating pool. If they're able to aggregate most of the QM rating themselves, that would require them to have a high stable rating themselves.

Beneath the modifications, QM is a valid skill-rating system (if everyone keeps playing forever). The rating at which you reach a 90.9% (10/11) win rate (10 +1's, 1 -10) is your "true"/equilibrium rating. It's just that once you get close-ish to your rating (when you break QM matchmaking), it takes forever to reach your true rating since you'll hardly even notice if your real win rate is 95% and not 91%. So to execute the rating-aggregation attack you described, you'd have to deserve that high a rating in the first place anyway.

Functionally all you're describing is being very good at QM and having a bunch of accounts all converge to your true rating (while all inflate QM ratings in the process). You're eating up a large percentage share, sure, just like what would happen if Rufus played the MTL with 10 accounts, and you're generating the usual rating deflation that happens when a higher-than-average-skill player joins a ladder (10 Rufuses on the MTL would make 1440 the new 1500), but even that is significantly offset by the rating inflation from QM's safeguards. This isn't rating manipulation; it's just being good, at scale.

Edited 10/1/2021 23:44:11

please dont flame me

when ercole first mentioned his theory that ozijs boosted his QM rating by playing is alts in our clan chat, i immediately shot it down. ozijs is clearly the SE goat. he has delivered me some of my most shameful losses, where he predicted all of my moves multiple turns in a row.

i remember when i first ran into his most recent alt Ulquiorra Cifer (now gone). after 1 game i was shook. i had looked up his rating before our match and expected certain things. i could immediately tell he was a master playing on an alt. by our third game, i already was asking him postmatch, who is your main? part of me already knew. i was grinding some QM points and tbh, i was a bit upset at the time. it does suck losing 10 points to someone who is better than you, and playing with a low rating. so basically, i understand where ercole could be coming from about others gaming the system for whatever reasons.

looking it up now, i am lifetime 8-28 vs ozijs. im no means one of the best SE players, but i almost know what im doing at this point. alot of those games were when i first started playing, back when he was still active on ozijs.

i say all this just to point out out impressive his QM rating really is. not all of our games were played in QM, but if they had been he would be down a ton of points -80~ for +30~. so yeah, being a good 500 points ahead of the #10 player is really freaking impressive. i wonder myself how he did it. sure, he has the skill to grind all of those points, no one would dispute that. but SE1W is a silly template sometimes, where even the best players can be tricked, or make 1 mistake which can lead to defeat. its the nature of the template.

anyways, there is clearly no proof for these accusations. but how could there be? no one knows your match history unless you share game links, even mods from what some of the mods posted in this thread. i think the only shred of speculative evidence is that ozijs did hide his win% on all of his alts, so maybe he did that because after feeding his main a few times, he could only boast a 89% winrate.

just my thoughts, not accusing anyone, just what i thought after reading through yalls discussions. flame away

also heres a fun game where he destroyed my life and made me quit warzone for a whole day https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=26131878

anyways, there is clearly no proof for these accusations. but how could there be? no one knows your match history unless you share game links, even mods from what some of the mods posted in this thread. i think the only shred of speculative evidence is that ozijs did hide his win% on all of his alts, so maybe he did that because after feeding his main a few times, he could only boast a 89% winrate.

Can someone link all of Ozijs' known accounts?

Ozijs' join date is only 2020/01/08, so there have been only about 8M games since he joined. A Member (e.g., me) could query those games (at 1 request/second, that would take 3 months; at 10 requests/second, it would take just over a week*), find which ones are QM, and then dig up the whole QM history of all of Ozijs' accounts to see if he played himself on alts.

Then we can let this rest.

* Farah sticks to 1 request/second after an unpleasant experience with a multi-threaded script. We could maybe get more ambitious than this with exponential backoff logic if something goes wrong.

Edited 10/2/2021 00:42:30

uh, not really suggesting an investigation, lol. just sharing my thoughts. not everything is pitchforks and legal proceedings.

I dunno entirely what this is all about but what I'm getting here is that a guy's rating is so good that people are saying he's cheating by playing against his alts

kinda rooting that he isn't a cheater now, that'd be pretty damn alpha

Someone just list the accounts. This thread has already gotten one person suspended for 24 hours. The sooner we end this thread, the more l̶i̶v̶e̶s̶ accounts we will save.

Here's the ones I know of:
Ozijs - https://www.warzone.com/Profile?p=20114369969
Inside Quest - https://www.warzone.com/Profile?p=46101911767
Never Truly Dead - https://www.warzone.com/Profile?p=66109403560
Ulquorria Cifer - ???

I've wanted to aggregate QM data for some time now, this is just a good excuse.

Edited 10/2/2021 00:51:45

Functionally all you're describing is being very good at QM and having a bunch of accounts all converge to your true rating (while all inflate QM ratings in the process). You're eating up a large percentage share, sure, just like what would happen if Rufus played the MTL with 10 accounts, and you're generating the usual rating deflation that happens when a higher-than-average-skill player joins a ladder (10 Rufuses on the MTL would make 1440 the new 1500), but even that is significantly offset by the rating inflation from QM's safeguards. This isn't rating manipulation; it's just being good, at scale.

That makes sense. I didn't know the halved rating decline below a rating of 500 was a thing. That's a really good measure against deflation. Thanks for the correction!

* Farah sticks to 1 request/second after an unpleasant experience with a multi-threaded script.

:)

Lol he got kicked out of MH for this forum i suppose

This thread has already gotten one person suspended for 24 hours.

Who got suspended? I see Ercole is no longer with MH ... did he actually get booted for this thread? I feel bad for him ... but still he never answered the questions I asked, so I honestly have no clue what he's really gunning for on this thread. He admits that there are no rules being broken but still proclaims wrongdoing, yet not asking for a particular result. So it ends up just being defamation which is what I guess got him kicked/suspended (if he was the one that got suspended & in fact kicked from MH due to this). Morale of the story ... don't defame. Raise points, ask questions, and maybe others will provide supporting points/facts/evidence, but if you don't have the required info to support your theory, let it go.

As for Ozi's accounts, Jacob listed one more that he was aware of, which fits as it has an avatar of
Ulquiorra which everyone seems to agree is one of his known alts:
https://www.warzone.com/Profile?p=87136121770

Now here's a novel idea. Anyone tried just asking Ozi about all this? In a "hey we're not accusing you of anything but interested on your thoughts on this topic" type of way?

Though the stats that Letters & Numbers refers to would be interesting to peruse in general, not specifically just for anti-cheating purposes. The anti-cheating thing pretty much requires that you know & correlate everyone's alts.

Who got suspended?

Bechaa got a 1 day ban for saying something offensive i dont remember.

american moment, banning people for free speech. rest of the world, the people just stop posting :)

Who got suspended? I see Ercole is no longer with MH ... did he actually get booted for this thread?

No, that's not how we roll.

Bechaa got a 1 day ban for saying something offensive i dont remember.

He saw the opportunity for a quick shot at the Miezekatze Hunters Clan and, for whatever reason, at myself.

Edited 10/3/2021 17:53:32

mh mafia