In BC1 the lower it was the better. In BC1 i had a skill level of 2 most of the time. I played like a freak.
In BC2 it seems like the higher the better... Is this right?
In BC2 it seems like the higher the better... Is this right?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/847c7/847c70527dfed55a03a1eb43eb3ea11496d89b6c" alt="https://i43.tinypic.com/n6s0g0.jpg"
Last edited by Sydney (14 years, 10 months ago)
Quite a game on a losing team near the end of the match?Vilham wrote:
higher is better, at one point i had like 200 or so and then it dropped me to 0
Last edited by theDude5B (14 years, 10 months ago)
doesn't a cap kinda nullify the point of an elo rating system?Uzique wrote:
it's a bit more complicated than that... but yes, at its core it is just the ELO Ratings system with a few changed variables (source is bc2 dev, cant remember where i read it...)
back when it was actually working, pre-patch, i was world top500. now im just capped at 200 and it doesnt ever change. pretty redundant stat atm.
11 Bravo wrote:
Last edited by CammRobb (14 years, 10 months ago)
OH MAN. I'm so butthurt! You said nasty things to me on facebook. "MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUM, this boy called me-he-he names at sch-hoo-hool today"Uzique wrote:
aww look cammrobb is butthurt so he's lazily quoting a post from a guy that hates his fucking ass just so he can recycle a 'point' that has already been refuted.
cuuuuuuuuuuuute