Question A way .5 matchups exist?

[Mikemetroid]

Now I am normally one of those guys who dislike matchup charts with .5s. I generally sit there and go "wtf this doesn't make any sense, can't win half a round."

Then something in my mind clicked and I wondered if this is valid reason on why we should start using .5s in matchups.

The reason I had in mind was that in MK9 at least every round you don't start in the same exact position. Position plays a huge part in some matchups (ala Sub-Zero vs Cage).

So with position at the start of rounds taken in to consideration, would it be possible for .5s?

MITDJT GGA 16 Bit REO Pig Of The Hut

 

[crosstalk]

0.5 is just a method to classify MUs more accurately, by saying a character has a slightly smaller advantage in some form. It just seems that the community would rather not use this method. Many MUs in this game would be better suited using 0.5, such as Sub-Cage, which is probably more a long the lines of 5.5-4.5. Better positioning could be one reason for this classification.

 

[Somnuse]

What cross said. There needs to be a way to represent slight advantage. Also, saying something like smoke vs Lao is 4-6 but I personally have a much harder time vs sonya so I couldn't say 6-4 Sonya, I might have to go with 6.5-3.5 Sonya because I don't think it's quite 7-3.

 

[Mikemetroid]

What cross said. There needs to be a way to represent slight advantage. Also, saying something like smoke vs Lao is 4-6 but I personally have a much harder time vs sonya so I couldn't say 6-4 Sonya, I might have to go with 6.5-3.5 Sonya because I don't think it's quite 7-3.

That just doesn't make any sense though. The use of matchups is the amount wins in 10 rounds, you can't win half a match, UNLESS something like position really effects the matchup in a 2nd round...

 

[THTB]

There's not really a need for .5s. Only 5.5s are useful .5s, but even then it's just reaching for an advantage. Past that, they really are pointless.

 

[OutworldKeith]

What cross said. There needs to be a way to represent slight advantage. Also, saying something like smoke vs Lao is 4-6 but I personally have a much harder time vs sonya so I couldn't say 6-4 Sonya, I might have to go with 6.5-3.5 Sonya because I don't think it's quite 7-3.

6-4 is slight advantage...

 

[Visceral Vain]

I don't think position matters in the overall match up because I think by default it is already been taken into consideration and you just look at who won the entire match. And I don't think match ups should be based on a round by round bases it should based on who won the overall match.

But I don't see why you can't use decimals anyway. Isn't a 5.5-4.5 match up the same as an 11-9 match up. Its just that 11-9 match up makes sense in the world we live in. But why can't we just call it a 5.5-4.5. Theoretically you could do 6.5 - 10.5 which would be 13-21 match up which best of 10 would approximately 3.82 -6.18. The only problem with this is that it suggests that we can be accurate enough to use decimals. A 5-5 is different then a 5.0-5.0. So if we can use .5s then we can use 4.8-5.2 and 3.4-6.6. But that suggest we played at least 100 games. But if you only use .5s then there is the possibility that only 20 games were played. Which is more reasonable. So you might have to clarify only 20 games were. But in conclusion I don't know.

 

[Pikachu]

LBSH 6.5 - 3.5 Kabal sounds dumb.

 

[Somnuse]

Well, it's like saying there's 3 matchups. Where X is 6-4 Z is 5-5, where does Y fall if it's in between the two?

Since MU's are theoretical, or basically, opinion based, if in Y match up I had a harder time than Z match up but not as hard as X, where would Y be classified? Because you couldn't say that Y is theoretically the same as X OR Z.

This is kind of a long winded explanation but I'm a math guy, there's nothing wrong with extra data. It's basically like saying a match up could be out of 20 games and then simplified so that a 6-4 is 12-8 and a 5.5-4.5 would be 11-9. With a large a roster as MK has, I feel like .5's are necessary and matchups should be out of a larger pool of data, not just 10 games.

Just my 2cents.

 

[Under_The_Mayo]

The whole idea of the .5 rating is that it means there's slightly more advantage. Well, if that's the case, just raise the number by one. The numbers don't equal your "chances" of winning. It's a theoretical system, saying that on the highest level two players of equal skill, playing 10 games. 6 - 4 means just that. One person wins 6. The other wins 4. Upping it by a whole number into 7 3 doesn't mean THAT much to warrant a .5 in there.

 

[Somnuse]

I see what you mean. I was looking at it like a continuous number line.