Being higher OS than 30 is just a punishment (8v8)

[iron pebble]

In my experience it's very similar to a mini emotional break. these are perfectly rational people, often also committed to trying. and they are simultaneously failing, being completely task saturated, and they look aside in desperation, see FUBAR and that player now becomes "enemy"

[coral idol]

it's so cringe lol

[coral idol]

brother - they are 0 OS - THEIR INCAPABILITY IS ACCOUNTED FOR. if you cant carry them it's on you

[oak surge]

So your of the school that losing cant be fun aye? Cause I ain't. Losing is fun, sometimes, if it's hardfought, or due to a glaring mistake that ends in a funny outcome, or ... .

So no I don't care about being the top dog. If I did my OS would probably be higher and I'd be tryharding and sweating to get there ... . What's with all the personal attacks anyway. There don't seem to be any good arguments.

[coral idol]

ok then play better players and you'll get to have more fun buddy

[fast meadow]

you stated how you have the "most fun" in a scenario currently impossible by the amount of players the game offers. then you go on how high OS players screw balance without any factual truth to it. the anecdote is there to provide the context you repeatedly ignore to justify arguments for high OS players being portaited as evil
"mid" players designing lobbies where they are the sharks and have monopoly on bullying lesser experienced players while being very flawed in their gameplay is not a healthy situation for overall balance and improvement for the community

[iron pebble]

There are different kinds of 0 OS. a 0 OS one cheve probably doesn't know how to play. A 0 OS 4+ cheve probably sucks, but can usually field an army. what a 0 OS is will also change with the average skill of the player base. as it is a rank defined by the average. The 0 OS of today (not the 1 cheves) are statistically better than the 0 OS of when Bar started.

[coral idol]

people who manipulate lobbies so they only play against players they can beat are warping the balancer

[coral idol]

weird how you control none of these factors when they're on your team. perhaps you should focus on energies on things you can control like your own plays and communication

[iron pebble]

huh?

[coral idol]

dude literally just put them air - air does not matter in low os lobbies. they WILL not impact the game outcome

[violet trail]

Air does not matter on low os lobbies?, that's such BS man

[iron pebble]

i'm not making a value statement here. OS is a system approximation, at the extremes, like 0 OS, it's often wrong. that's why cheves and uncertainty are also part of the system, but they take time to function.

it's also why an uber high OS will occasionally just fall over, either due to mis-play or bad luck. OS states both, it really shouldn't happen, but statistically, it will happen once in a blue moon.

[violet trail]

In low os lobbies air can often solo the entire enemy team or hard carry out of dozens of pushes with shuris

[oak surge]

What's impossible about it? I regularly play in these lobbies. The thing is, my opponent doesn't need to be my OS, just +-5 for it to be challenging. So some variance is fine.

I'm also not saying high OSes are evil. I've played in 25-40 lobbies. I just don't see any arguments beyond "being discriminated against" that justify either min or max rating not both. And maxrating is not discrimination. Being high OS is literally a justification.

[iron pebble]

very true, even more true if they manipulate the psychology of the other team. (i.e. get the enemy to constantly be spamming Figs! Figs! Figs!) contratz, you now have total freedom as that player will not attack.

[violet trail]

Yeah, mass figs, then go ground, works wayyyy too fucking often

[coral idol]

"I'm also not saying high OSes are evil. I've played in 25-40 lobbies."

high os cant join that lobby

[iron pebble]

by definition, a maxrating is discriminations. the Question is: is it ethical and justified and how can it be made fair.

[deft flume]

By removing the option to have both

[violet trail]

How does that make sense, if you want to play with a specific level of players, you need both limita

[clear fulcrum]

I don't think we should be forcing new players to play with high os when they don't want to.

They'll just leave the lobby if someone joins.

I think we should focus on making it easier for high os players to coordinate lobbies and concentrate the small group

Ie: Join queue based on os, option to rank lobbies by average os, filter out non-joinable lobbies.

The problems with these ^ is that chobby is planed to be scrapped, and no one wants to touch it

[fast meadow]

"...high OS players will skew balancing..." "...high OS players joins to balance it out. Thing is I don't want to play that one game." "Like imagine a lobby full of 15-25 and one 39 joins. It's gonna lead to alot of angry players in that game." i appreciate you for your understanding of my kind and the displayed care and support
AGAIN equal skill games are not possible with current player counts which is the very root reason of this thread

[iron pebble]

objectively bad for the game. mostly as it will hemorage new players.

[deft flume]

You should only be able to play with good people or bad people imo

[clear fulcrum]

New players can still have a max rating with this proposal

[deft flume]

Maxrating would still exist, you just couldn't use minrating aswell

[iron pebble]

and that is objectively bad for the game.

[deft flume]

And how?

[iron pebble]

I don't tend to agree with minrating, (my user is my bar user you can look up my match history) but I have to accept there is a massive population of players that will outright quit if they couldn't set min-rating

[oak surge]

So, I don't mean this insultingly, I just don't want to go off topic too far, look up the definition. Maxrating is not discriminating.

In the same way excluding workers due to their underqualification or over overqualification is not discrimination.

It's by definition fair. These are defining and relevant characteristics to the task at hand.

[peak atlas]

I'm just gunna say if you think being the highest OS in the lobby is an efficient way to increase your OS over time you are woefully misunderstanding how the system works.

[deft flume]

You can still set minrating with my proposal

[clear fulcrum]

Skill isn't binary. The question is if we should force middle skill players to play with the top .1% so that they have lobbies.

I say no.

Plus, how many lobbies actually use both max and min? I don't see many.
Additionally, I see max ratings much more than min ratings. So I don't think this will add many options

[iron pebble]

it's about experience, players want the assurance that everyone on the team understands a bar minimum. they dont' want 3 labs, solars on mex spots, etc. they want that hour of their time, probably their only hour that day, to be an ok game.

[fast meadow]

as far as i see it the approach was to not have max rating so 1 of the "mid lobbies" allows higher ranked players to be able to find a game at all. right now 40+ players have to join all welcome lobbies with lower average rating to be able to play at all. if max rating had a cap higher ranked players would automatically prefer to play in the lobby with the higher average rating and overall enjoyment would increase

[deft flume]

About 4 hours before I see you usually get on, almost all the lobbies are 5-30, 10-35 etc

[iron pebble]

I find the current system better than any proposal in this thread, we'll have to disagree.

[deft flume]

That means I dont get to play half the time

[clear fulcrum]

Max max rating sounds gtm.
35-40 seems like a good cutoff imo.

[peak atlas]

Why is this all being portrayed like its going to be a 40os guy playing in some lobby with the next highest person being 18os....rather than the 40osplayer being in with the generally more mid tier lobbies... like you think an 8os player views playing vs a 22 or 25os player any differently?

[iron pebble]

baffles me too as someone in this OS range. i's pretty easy to get a lobby where the two captains are about even, and there is an even spread down to the lowest 2-4 players. some understanding of meta and who's there and you can even set up pretty good 1v1 duals that filter down and match skills across the map

and that's as someone who self selects out of glitters and the OP lobby, which removes a good 30-40% of my supposed "limited options"

[fast meadow]

right now for rotato we have this "bubble" (that i dont necessarily want to be part of) prefering 4v4. in that case my best play would be to uninstall BAR right now 👍

[iron pebble]

are you trying to play only 4v4, or stating that the 4v4 bubble pushes out your desired play?

the issue there is going to be two fold: rotato is not as popular, and 4v4 is dramatically less popular than 8v8.

[clear fulcrum]

Think sk means: Higher os can't find 8v8 lobbies so they're playing 4v4.
Further deliting the 8v8 pool of skilled players

[fast meadow]

its because the 40 OS has to join the lobby without max rating instead of the one with the "most fitting"/highest average rating. its the discussed fault of the current system

[deft flume]

Back to the og problem, when I get on, 9/10 times there is only 2 lobbies that I can join, and both with super long queues. That is really bad for me because the problem is something I cant control

[clear fulcrum]

¥_¥

[oak surge]

One of my suggestions above would fix this. Instead of min and max a lobby gets a set variance from its mean. So a 40 should be able to join the highest average OS lobby which is exactly where they belong. I'm fine if it's 15-25 or 25-40. The higher one will be a bit weirder but at the higher end the tail gets smaller.

[peak atlas]

I would 100% be fine with a max max rating of 35. It's still extremely forgiving and would be a definitive target and good for the overall playerbase

[fast meadow]

pls try reading my statement again. keywords such as "right now.. ...prefering" should be clean indicators

[iron pebble]

I did, I don't know you, it can be interpreted multiple ways. Possibly i'm a bit baffled, as a rotato enjoyer, many of the lobbies are 8v8. like just right now there are 7-8 rotato lobbies, one is 4v4. two have max rating 25, two have max rating mid 30s, two have no limit.

honestly the issue here is that "rotato" is a niche format in a niche game. like once you remove the AI lobbies, the meme lobbies, the lobbies of the wrong size, most players, realistically, have 2-3 options most of the time. and maybe 2-3 more active games they'll que for. That's just tyranny of statistics.

[fast meadow]

for this very reason i asked to filter for "non max rating lobbies" (basically filter for "max" and reverse the filter) and they said smth about information send to the sever (which makes 0 sense btw)
with minimal research non of those lobbies have a 40 OS player. earlier today i joined the only rotato lobby without max rating at that time. it had a boss and upon my arrival max rating was declared. even if lobbies currently allow me to join doesnt mean it that it stays that way before game start and it doesnt mean its the best fit for me (id be better suited in a different lobby but settings disallow it)

[oak surge]

Also, as a weak counterpoint to this. I frequently see higher OS (than the limit) asking for the limit to be raised, and it sometimes is, while I have never seen the reverse (low OS causing lowering). So the limits trend upwards until a lobby dies. How would this work for a lobby with maxrating 35 or 34 depending on how you mean the cutoff? Will the lobby deliberate either keeping or dissolving the maxrating? I don't think this will ever go down well.

Also many above have pointed out even in all welcome lobbies they get forcespecced or even kicked. Changing the maximum max won't resolve that and might even promote this more in these cases.

[fast meadow]

hey look what i wrote 1 minute before you did. a concrete scenario of max rating being lowered because someone joined 🤣

[oak surge]

With reverse I meant that a low OS asks for a lowering.

[iron pebble]

i'm sure the two no limit lobbies, both which have a 39 in them, would totally cap to 40 the moment you joined.

[solemn lintel]

Discrimination with justification is discrimination. You cant claim its not. Whether or not its acceptable discrimination is the point.

[solemn lintel]

This man said it for me my bad.

[iron pebble]

like i get it, I really do. but the real issue here, for anyone near the top or bottom % of the game is this:

[solemn lintel]

No one is taking away the leave lobby button. Can we stop with the "its bad to force new players to play with high os".

[solemn lintel]

This is the cutoff already used. And it blocks like 200 players. A fraction are active.

[fast meadow]

the other one has the highest rating being 31. Che (cool guy btw) is in spec. the flats game gonna last for some time. also im literally hitting the bed right now and cant play while i told you about an example at the time i was able to play. result i cant play aditionally it has legion which is highly questionable in regards to having a meaningful/competitive game

[iron pebble]

bro if you self-select out of your options it's a you issue.

[fast meadow]

we can obviously cherry pick here and there to make points for either side. however the experiences people have are there

[peak atlas]

I would just say you don't play high OS lobbies if you claim it never goes the other way. There's really not that much complexity, you would be able to set max whatever ytou want until 35, at which point anyone over 35 would also be able to join.

[iron pebble]

of course! But we also gotta be realistic. RN rotato is 10% of the lobbies period. throw out all the limits, if 11% of players wanna play rotato that 1% is screwed and the issue is population.

[oak surge]

#1481281403269157024 message

Look up a couple definitions, they involve unfairly, prejudice, based on false equivalencies. Max OS excludes based on OS, an actual measure and cannot be discrimination. It is by definition fair. Fair here means that the decision is based on a related fact. Unfair would be to exclude idk Asians because their better at RTS or smth. That a false equivalency and would be discrimination.

[clear fulcrum]

How about I rephrase.
Removing the tools that allows mid skill players from creating lobbies that don't include high os players, prevents them from creating lobbies that they wish to make
Hence, middle skill players to lobby with the top .1%

Is it worth it? Could be

[fast meadow]

ok ima sacrifice my financial situation and mental health to play whenever the BAR universe presents me with a lobby i like. my bad for being inconsiderate

[peak atlas]

Bascialy we would just create an enforce mid tier lobby range of Max 35 os, similar to how max 25 has sort of self established.

[iron pebble]

brother this is a free game. if its' impacting your finances or mental health. I'ma level with you. let's jump into a call and that includes an open invite to join our little game server. with 8-9 bros in a lobby we can have whatever settings we want and probably pull 7 other players. we play with hummel semi-reg, i'm 35 OS, a 40 will fit in and we've got bros from austrailia to europe. there's like 10 of us, but we ball.

[clear fulcrum]

I see a decent about of max 40 - 45 lobbies

[hot igloo]

i don't really mind max 40-45 lobby it's a mild nuisance
but i can see it being sad for people who really want to play even if it's mixed lobby

[iron pebble]

and then we get the next thread: being 45+ is a punishment. with the same issue.

[clear fulcrum]

Ok?

[clear fulcrum]

But if it alleviates the issue for some players it's worth it.

[fast meadow]

it would impacte my finance and mental health if i had to wait to 2am to play because you told me there is 1 lobby right now. dont you see my point???

[peak atlas]

I dont see where the panic coming form people who are going to be playing in max 20/25os lobbies anyway is even coming from.

[deft flume]

All I want to do is play the single game I have time for, but almost everybody in this thread wants me to quit the game 😭 (minor exaggeration)

[iron pebble]

I do, but the re is 1 lobby for most players regardless of OS. like there are 0 quing rotatos at this moment. and the total count is down to 5 active. it's a tiny game, with tiny game issues. we, unfortunately feel them more acutely and you probably feel them more than me. Invite's open, I just like to play.

[peak atlas]

It's not really... they literally have the opinion of go pound sand even if it doesn't effect them

[hot igloo]

what os are you and what lobby do you want to join?
no op rotato or op small teams time to log off xD

[oak surge]

We do not want that. I want you to have fun. I want you to have a good time. But not at the cost of me having it myself. I'm selfish that way. I do expect you to sacrifice a bit. Play gamemodes you don't usually play. Play in smaller team sizes. Play any lobby that will accept you and that you know isn't toxic af (assuming you dislike that).

[deft flume]

I am 41os and I want to join any lobby

[hot igloo]

i can play mixed lobby rotato if there's at least 3-4 other players above 35 os (otherwise it feels like nothing happens in the game)

[deft flume]

Yeah I feel for you, your situation is worse than mine

[fast meadow]

pls tell him to play a completely different gamemode like 1v1 or release the game on steam

[hot igloo]

like i played a mixed lobby vs lorddot the other day, he was techer i was front
and it literally boiled down to, can I kill him in 6 minutes, or kill two of his allies in 6 minutes, or I die

basically the strategy revolves around giving the enemy high os as little interaction as possible. basically speedrun seal clubbing

[peak atlas]

anything over 30 is a bit of nightmare already...much less over like 36 or 37.. you can play like peak Euro hours and that's it

[iron pebble]

Is it really any different at the highest level though? i'm not "in the know" but tracking with the regular groups and curated avoids lists in the OP lobby that starts before the game even begins.

[fast meadow]

part of the issue is 30 OS being more like 20 OS if they only play in max rating lobbies. you cant be well rounded within your bonds if you exclude the powers testing it

[coral idol]

completely false. easiest way to farm os - make lobby, coop geo on supreme with 3 bases and make any unit with min rating 5 to your OS plus 5 and just kick anyone better than you. this is common practice actually and why people love the boss system

[hot igloo]

there's a lot of ways to game the os system
play 1 map, play an op position, only play 1 position, only play 1 unit composition
party, dodge, commie, etc

[deft flume]

Theres only 1 position i can play to lose os, and that's front on supreme. Other than that I keep winning so my available lobbies shrink):

[iron pebble]

I would argue a lot of that is also "folks play what they like" Like I like my boats, I play boats, I go OP lobby, hilariously I play boats at the same level as the mixed lobbies because it's an unimportant position, but front dies at 10 min and it's like 2 30+ playing while the 40-50 on front are the actual game.

[hot igloo]

that's map issue xD
supreme front really stinking busted with front boost

[iron pebble]

it is, but rotato shivers when water get's chosen

[hot igloo]

yeah

[peak atlas]

Kick anyone better than as in anyone higher OS than you or kick anyone that is better at the game... my point is that when you are the highest OS in a lobby and especialy if you are in a skewed lobby like say a 35 OS player, playing in a lobby with the next highest guys in the 20-24 range, winning that game will get you a very small amount of OS, while losing it will be a very large loss. If you move the entire lobby into the same 5os range then you eliminate all varriance for MM to score with and it's going to be mostly flat for wins and losses.

[coral idol]

i mean supreme does legit cause issues with the os system. it emphasizes skills that dont translate to the other maps. players who play supreme usually have horrible micro (relative to players who play other maps at their os)

[oak surge]

Well, while that is correct, if you stay in the bubble it's fine. Once you exit it you get a reality check. Issue being it's not easy to find good 25-40 lobbies. I tried it once and I picked the wrong one, or maybe it was the only one. OP Isthmus, was toxic af.

[iron pebble]

honestly, front boost hurts, but geo players have gotten much, much better vs when the map was redon, folks are getting stars at 9min or less, even eco players are starting to hit t3 like 4-5min earlier, all of that leads to front collapse

[solemn lintel]

Yes spc threshold for ready players should he raised. It should be treated the same as a kick, which takes 75%

[oak surge]

Does a kick take 75%? I thought it was 9 in an 8v8, which is just above 50...

[coral idol]

you kick players who you dont want to play against because their real skill is above their os. if it's below * their os you would keep them in

[peak atlas]

OK yeah mb, I was taking all that to literally within the context of how the MM actualy calculates win/loss values.

[solemn lintel]

I cant play max 40. Max 40 is wild to me. Its like "fuck you 5 people in particular". 45 even dumber. I rarely see max over 40 but will concede it does happen.

[coral idol]

youre just wrong though being the highest os in a lobby is a reliable way to gain os depending on your approach

[fast meadow]

generally agree but depends on map and your aproach to the game. i personally find the limit to available strategies in order to win quite boring that are a result of said lobbies (t1 allin before team dies or tempot play from tech spot most of the time)

[solemn lintel]

I just dont buy this though. We frame these as tools to save them from high os players, but I think they are often used by bosses to create games that favor them.

Regardless, leave lobby and clicking a different one is a tool to have a lobby without high os. There arent many of us, and we wont even spread out. We will cluster.

Why do we need to give two tools to curate their experience? This tool makes life very convenient for mid players but is a huge issue for big players. Can I not push the inconvenience back onto those who dont like me so I can play?

[peak atlas]

You're artificially controlling your variance in a boss lobby and cherry picking your team. That is a little out of scope of just playing in general lobbies... thank god I stopped playing Supreme long ago lol

If I look right now it would effect 0 lobbies

[violet trail]

I think a solution could be to make a map dependant position OS system that takes a median of all your victories on all maps on a certain position (air/tech) and also a map exclusive one, to give you a "position OS", that way players are judged on specific positions, maybe those 30 OS players are only good at tech and sucks at sea, so you put them on the same lane they have near-ish skill, so they can fight it out between themselves instead of fucking up someone's else game

[peak atlas]

A group of brave souls aparently

I bet they are all upset that the 27os is ruining that lobby

[iron pebble]

maybe if the game was 50-100 times larger. as is, with the number of maps and the number of players the balancer just wouldn't fuction from lack of data.

[iron pebble]

im just here wondering "how he made lobby box bigger"

[violet trail]

I do wonder about that, not really an expert on data based algorithms but I think some maps like isthmus/glitters have a regular enough playerbase that reliable data could be obtained

[solemn lintel]

Lol my proposal of limit max rating to 25 impacts 2 lobbies. The noobs are safe guys.

[iron pebble]

it would really only be glitters and isthmus, and only on the specific map version, as both have changed pretty significantly over the years.

[violet trail]

Mmm, yeah may be too much effort for so little gain

[iron pebble]

I would disagree, what i've noticed as i've climbed is that even 20+ OS are still basically noobs. the skill variance in this game is massive, and given a 20 is in the top 20% of players, and will still be dumpstered by a 30, on average, tells a story. the hard limits have a hard time coping with the, essentially, exponential skill increase. players don't really understand it, so they just go "30+ scarry, ban" and on average they're right.

[peak atlas]

Click the first image, the second is what the lobby viewer looks like

[iron pebble]

I have been sorting games manually with the drop down for 1200+ games XD

[peak atlas]

Yeah I lived that life for a long time too

Not many people seem to know this is a thing, it comes with a minor downside when it comes to the chat window and lobby window but its w.e

at least you can actualy read the lobby title

[iron pebble]

nostalgia for the first couple games where I was top OS and realized I had not done my duty of learning the lobby commands, so the whole lobby couldn't force start, or resign.

[violet trail]

I was 4 chevs before I learned how to resign...

[coral idol]

100%

[coral idol]

i dont mind that personally cuz thats how i like to play the game but i also dont find it fun to do that stuff to people who are trying to figure out the controls

[violet trail]

Because people want to play however they want, by what right do you take their freedom away for your own gain?

[solemn lintel]

I mean you cant disagree with this particular statement.

My proposal in its simplest form is set max rating to a cap of 25.

The general response is "but think of the noobs" and "you cant take away vital options from players".

And then when lobby stats are pulled on friday night literally only two lobbies have a max rating over 25.

My comment was noting that my most extreme proposal impacts 2 lobbies. This handwringing over ruining the noob experience is very overblown. You cant exactly disagree that only two lobbies are impacted by my proposal.

[violet trail]

"you cant have an opinion different from mine"

[solemn lintel]

You cant disagree that only two lobbies have a max rating over 25. This is a fact proven by the actual screenshot. That is what I am saying. Please read slower

[violet trail]

In one specific point in time, wich you cherry picked

[solemn lintel]

Oh my god. You just always have to be right dont you.

[violet trail]

No, I just heavily dislike the way you frame things

[solemn lintel]

Sorry, will make up a new number system next time. My bad.

If you willfully misinterpret someone's point, you can find all sorts of reasons to disagree with it. Hard way to go through life though.

[violet trail]

No, i am not "willfully misinterpreting" your point or facts, chosing a single example of a phenomen is not enough data to derive a conclusion, if you had 20-30 SCs of different days and times that show a similar result, I wouldn't argue against you, and you would be right

[solemn lintel]

I made a joke buddy. Not a dissertation. Thats the whole point.

And then hotrod comes in with "i disagree with your joke". Which i found funny. And then you come in with "other people cant disagree with me". And at this point we arent even on earth anymore.

[violet trail]

You got that worked up from your own joke?

[coral idol]

it's pretty rare even in high pop games that intermediate players would be shielded from top players like max rating allows for. in cs im a mid player but im still routinely matched with faceit 9s and 10s. sure they destroy me but playing with people who actually understand the game is how you improve. all you're doing by avoiding that is robbing yourself of real competition (i understand a lot of yall chatting in the thread dont have much experience with competitive pvp games but this is typical)

[violet trail]

thats only true to a point, if someone is significantly more skilled than you, instead of learning anything the more likely scenario is getting flattened and dying early and just not getting to play

[coral idol]

that's way way more the case in an fps game than in bar 8v8 LOL. just shows how little pvp u do play

[fringe haven]

xd rts is fundementaly harder then any fps
if u dont know shit u dont know shit
while in fps u fire gun gg

[coral idol]

that has nothing to do with my point. in bar 8v8 (map dependent) some positions have very limited resources or impact on the game. you also rarely get 1 tapped in 8v8 bar especially if youre in one of the low impact spawns (even if you do, your team still wins). there's plenty of stuff a complete noob can do in any bar game and thats not a bad thing

[fringe haven]

ah ye im with you on this idea but the only thing i had to say was that skill diff between total noob and mid player is way worst in rts

[violet trail]

my entire replay list is pure pvp, not sure why you think that but thats quite a dumb assesment

[unborn phoenix]

Another suggestion that I haven't seen yet:
What if there was just a Maximum OS Rating?
Where you just couldn't gain OS after 30, or 40, etc.?
Wherever that 'drop-off' point is of being effective/mattering?

[clear fulcrum]

Uhhh, say goodbye to balance
Unless you mean a match rating outside of balance, but I don't see much point

[unborn phoenix]

Would it have that effect?
Is 60 OS legitimately 20 OS better than 40 OS?
Is 70, etc.?

[clear fulcrum]

Yes
There's a lot of math that goes into it.

Higher os = worse teammates.
So, higher os players can win with worse teammates and are therefore better

[unborn phoenix]

I see 🤔

Why do a lot of (I assume learned) folks describe higher OS as less of a difference? Do they just not understand it?

[clear fulcrum]

The difference between 20-40 is bigger than 40-60 in terms of "skill"
But it still exists.

Why this happens? Idk.
-# Could be that as you get better what wins and loses games develops smaller and smaller margins

[fringe haven]

os isnt a representation of ur skilset its ur represenation to how much u can win a game thats why some 40os are better then other 40os in some case 🙂 making a max os would go against the point of OS which is to give u 50% wr

[cerulean shell]

I am not sure about the scaling in win percentage of OS but in chess and elo you can say a 400 elo gap makes for a 90% winchance. If OS scales similarly the 60 OS is statistically just as much better compared to the 40 OS as the 40 OS to the 20 OS.

And there is not much reason to doubt the math on that.

What does happen imo is that the perceived skill difference is much more obvious when comparing the lower skill players. Like the 40 OS chess player just kills the 20 OS in 20 moves with a 10 point difference in material.
Meanwhile the 60 OS chess player wins just as often against the 40 OS but in an intricate 60 move knights versus bishops endgame on even material. Much harder to point a finger at but statistically just as dominant.

[hot igloo]

depends on game mode

in 1v1 10 os difference is predicted as 87% expected wr

20os is about 99% expected wr

in 8v8 team 10 os team difference is 70%+ expected wr

os system doesn't care about your actual skill set but it demands you carry games and be consistent

difference between 45 and 60os is often consistency, macro, and decison making, as well as having a half-decent build for every map

[fringe haven]

i mean its just more winning however you do it

it translate by either cheese and out of meta player (trotski/ ryan23) or are rly good at one thing

[flint pecan]

You guys just keep going xD

[fast meadow]

to confidentally rate players in a 16 player game we easily need multiple hundred games even if all players had an even influence on game outcome
so even when everyones goal was to maximize OS (in my opinion the root problem of many issues, we need an incentive to have high OS) we still have rather weak correlation between skill and OS

given a fair fight @hot igloo's assesment ("difference between 45 and 60os is often consistency, macro, and decison making, as well as having a half-decent build for every map") is probably very close to the truth. some maps/lanes allow for finishing your opponent more than others but the better play will find ways.
thing is usually its the neighbour deciding if one can force the advantage. the "winner" (sometimes just because his opponents makes porc that cant flex) can rotate and stop the enemy from advancing or tip the balance in a tight fight in the other direction. this effect is amplified drastically if committal plays are done leaving both sides with low unit counts, perhaps without com, making them insanely vulnerable to even a few units from outside to turn the result around

all in all the skill diff as described is huge, doesnt mean the OS difference shows it. if you want to be high OS you are inclined to:
-T1 all in (attacking later often results getting stopped as your team isnt keeping their opponents busy because T2 eco looks shiny)
-play the most impactful spot every game
-coordinate your team by telling each what to do including shifting better players to stronger spots
-dodge games that you know will be rough (human evaluation is miles better than the current balancer)
-request units/trans/boost to collaps a lane quickly with unfair advantage

none of those things are an expression of skill, the last one is arguably the opposite making players worse at early decisions

[dawn trench]

attacking at good timings and coordinating your team (including on-point sharing requests) are skill

[fast meadow]

telling your air player "spam figs" is not skill. telling someone "go make units, your spot is not backline eco" is not skill.
convincing your team to do strategies they didnt want just to make your life easier is not skill

[dawn trench]

figuring out and convincing your team to do strategies that work for that team, is a skill.

as long as its a teamgame where you can communicate, it'll be very relevant

[fast meadow]

i wasnt talking about strategies. having actual coordination is desired gameplay that so far only exists with people playing with parties in voice chat "styling" on random players.

what i was repeatedly mention was telling players to fulfill the basic requirements of their spot or in the other case request stuff for you to have an unfair advantage. is your Boss good at coding (including using the mentioned programm) when he tells you to use a certain software for your project? he may be good at coordinating but his skills in regards to the subject itself are not even relevant

again if people had a desire to have high OS (which is the very topic of this thread) they would fulfill basic things and they would actually play together with allies showing proper coordination. my comment was on 7 levels below that.
lets to the extreme, am i showing skill if i tell my backline lowest OS to share me his entire base allowing me to crush the front at game start with 3x units? no, im simply abusing a system while reducing someone elses agency over the game

[oak surge]

I'd agree that communicating needs to your team is a skill. Too often will I have the blue or red player hardly communicate which causes issues. They could have higher OS if they communicated needs more clearly. Also noticing something others might have missed is a skill. Like pointing out that there is a beholder somewhere or to Juno this specific spot or that someone needs to go air to support because the enemy is outecoing air before the bombing run comes in are all skills and affect OS. I'd agree they are less impactful than baseline skill in BAR but ... it will surely affect OS.

[fast meadow]

if those needs are not agreed cases of coop (tidal boost and sharing trans on striats for example) and are deployed only on one team then those "needs" are the result of lack of skill. or in different words: you cant provide value to the team unless you receive help that your opponent doesnt get

i barely communicate either, if i did my OS would go up. sometimes at the expense of others who in fact didnt want to do what i told them. conflicting ideas result in tention and toxicity
at the same time all my allies that game get more OS too while not having the skills to win themselves (ergo their rating becomes less accurate)

you guys should take a look at the definition of skill:
"an ability to do an activity or job well, especially because you have practised it"
"a special ability to do something"
-cambridge dictionary

pls explain where the skill in both myself and my teammates is if i tell them to do things they should do without my interference?
if the players on my team that should make a juno/air whatever dont realise it there is a skill issue on my team and we should lose

[atomic slate]

The skill is that you recognize where your teammates are lacking and share your experience with them in the form of instructing them. That is a personal skill you can (and should) develop when playing team games

[violet trail]

Knowing when to stop pinging someone is also a skill, and by god people don't learn that one

[oak surge]

A team's OS will always depend on the interplay between personalities. So the effective team OS is more than just an aggregate of all individual players. If you always communicate then the increase in OS of your team goes to you, since without you it's not present. So yes your OS will go up if the advice is sound and meshes well, otherwise of course it can cause issues. It is a skill nevertheless.

I am not sure how you mean your question but you might mean it like this: in a team game it is inherently difficult to separate contributions. So without context your advice if beneficial will be attributed to all players. However, if without you the increase is not present in the other players, then they will lose that OS again. You won't, since you are the producer of this advantage.

[oak surge]

Yes, communication can be detrimental as well. In the most obvious case. If someone says build aa and the aa never gets tested it was pointless and detrimental, assuming the lack of attacks wasn't because the enemy scouted it.

[violet trail]

People really should try all roles, just to understand why a player is doing something

Getting pinged every fucking game on isthmus to "make more figs" despite knowing full well I have 3-4 more minutes to greed because I scouted the enemy air is so frustrating

[atomic slate]

Well, of course people should. And this is the most obvious example of communication in the team being a skill. This process that you being bad at communication can actively hinder the team

[violet trail]

sometimes even saying "i just scouted the enemy air, he is low on fig count so we are both greeding, if i make figs now they are going to get ahead on eco and i will lose the air war later" isnt enough for them to understand

how much more clear can you say it

[coral idol]

I mean in other games people don’t mind this sort of coordination. In bar they do cause if you take their early money they basically are out of the game lol. Theres no equivalent in other games. In cs u if let someone jump on your head to boost you still get to play after that

[hot igloo]

You can make your os go up by micromanaging your weak players (or convincing them to give their base to you) but none of that will increase your individual skill

Depends what you are looking for

[coral idol]

That’s false it doesn’t increase your traditional rts skills - it would be using your communication / igling skills

If u pay attention to the discord you’ll notice all the different people lobbying for their skill to be emphasized in the game. Whether that’s cooping, making a lobby and being the boss etc

[hot igloo]

Yeah but, while map awareness and ability to pay attention to allies is a skill

If you move outside the environment where there are noobs to micromanage, that action isn't there anymore

[coral idol]

That’s true. Makes it very frustrating to play with people who have skills that are no longer relevant. This is why people rage when you get an “overrated “ teammate where their only skill is like giving tidals or making boats and they have to use units