- WIIZZZAARD2
- |
- Noble Legendary Member
Posted by: Penguin Egg
Posted by: WIIZZZAARD2
Posted by: Penguin Egg
LOL? Because you made a formula that made sense, I understood it, but this guy doesn't?? How does that make me the idiot? My bpr is 53 ONLY because of the betrayals. I am not a bad player and I am not the idiot here.
You're saying you would have a BPR of 100 without the betrayals?
I highly doubt betrayals are that important. You seem to think that one betrayal can bring down BPR like 20 points.
Here are my stats: K/d 1.23, Win/loss 1.04, Assists 6882. Tell me smart one, what do you calc my BPR to be?
Not very high. 53 seems about right.
Posted by: P3P5I
Posted by: WIIZZZAARD2
No, it just means that there is a separation of skill even amongst 100s. Which is, you know... bad for a ranking system. If someone has a 50 or 100 or whatever the top rank is, you should know without a doubt that that person is "good". That's kind of the point of a functioning ranking system.
Are you saying it's good when the elite ranks are diluted with the presence of the unwashed masses?
Let's take pro players for an example. They're all obviously really good. But, even at the top tiers, there are bad and good levels. Like, Walshy may call Ninja bad. In that case, Ninja would be a "bad" pro and walshy would be a "good" pro. Same with BPR 100s.
(The "pro" analogy was made up btw, walshy never actually called ninja bad. Just clarifying so people aren't on my case.)