What’s the deal? play on NA servers, getting 30 a game, play on EU servers, getting upto 230 a game… what’s broken?
1 Like
On US you might be near your sweet spot, so wins provide small increases, but Eu is another server where you might not have climbed that much from the starting MMR, so the steps are bigger.
2 Likes
Also has to do with when he started on both start eg day 1 everyone was near same mmr but than playing another day may or may not be maby at his mmr so facing people higher up so get larger jumps.
Consistently finishing top 1-4, getting virtually no points in comparison to someone that was getting 200+ MMR on day 1, how are we supposed to climb? the most I’ve got since I started was about 28-40 per game… seen people maybe 1000 MMR higher getting 50-70 per game? the MMR system makes virtually no sense.
Usually with MMR’s you get less the higher you are, not more… thus every little matters/skill cap matters more, right now it’s the total opposite - people at lower MMR are getting less than people that are higher.
1 Like
NA is harder than Europe or Asia … at least, I feel it.
I was getting about 120 a win or so for first now I’m getting about 57. I’m at the 4500 rating area.
I did notice when I first started that I would lose about 150 if I got last place. After I learned the ropes, I started consistently winning and jumped up into the 4500 range. Just recently I finally had another last place finish after about 60 games due to trying a weird strategy that involved shifter zerus and I thought for sure I was going to lose like 200 points…only lost 47.
I have no idea how it works tbh.
1 Like
Update
Ignore this, Ixsar cleared a few things up via Twitter. Working as intended - it’s just confusing.
So how does it work? Link?
1 Like
It works like every other MMR system - i.e., it uses a variation of the ELO rating system developed for chess tournaments:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
Iskar’s tweets:
https://mobile.twitter.com/IksarHS
The wiki:
https://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Matchmaking
there are many more possible factors, though. If you have played 5000 games and are 4300, we know that you are probably a 4300 player and your rating is unlikely to sway too much back and forth game to game.
Well this is kinda flawed, imho of course. And promotes smurfing. Also explains why a lot of streamers now smurf. Basically it means every loss (non-first place in case of battlegrounds) you take inevitably imprints a permanent stain on your rating, making it harder to progress.
It also goes against elo as well. Elo is a neat system that gives you more if you win against stronger opponents, AND obviously, you lose more if you lose against weaker opponent, here it doesn’t work this way. After like a 200 games EVERYONE probably not gonna be moving anywhere at all. We’d all be getting like +8 for a win and -6 for 8th place…
Flawed system… doesnt consider people might actually get better at the game.
Also, doesn’t leave enough “mmr”-space for experimentation. With any game I like trying different strats, sacrificing my mmr, cause I usually know I can easily get back to where I belong later, but with bgs I would literally shoot myself in the elo by doing this… Smurfing is the way I guess.
1 Like
But that’s just how MMR works in Hearthstone, at least for Casual, Arena and Legend Ranks before they released Battlegrounds. Changing the system just for Battlegrounds seems unlikely.
BTW, after 200 games you should almost have reached equilibrium (kudos, bodhisattva, you’re getting there), so don’t expect big numbers anymore, since all the other patreons in your tavern are more or less on the same level.
But they already did change it. HS never had 8 players before no?
That’s not true, some people can progress, some can’t or don’t want to. Some people are good at some games right from the start, while for others it takes time to build up skill, but those might go really high, …again, if they want to.
And this system basically cuts down all those competitive people who care to progress and want to get better.
Here’s also another example from my current experience (I know its way too early, but the system is already hitting me):
I’ve been trying all heroes and all tribes + some experiments with greed and aggro, obviously I lost more games than I should have. Today I trihard it all day, have like 50% wins and ALL games are top 4, but I only earn like 50 points for my wins. At 5400 now.
Pretty sure if I smurf I can get much higher than that just by having no “bad”, “test” (or what ever you want to call those early loses) matches.
I was writing about the MMR system, chump.
AGAIN:
On higher MMR, and 5400 IS quite high(*), you won’t get giant steps anymore, the air is getting thin already.
(*)
Trump (5000ish), Alliestraza (5000ish), Toast (5400ish) and RegisKillbin (6100ish 
) are popular streamers currently playing Battlegrounds, numbers are from the most recent videos I found.
This is a bit flawed. People who have been playing and know the game will easily jump to 5000+ and then stay there where people who didn’t get to participate will be stuck at 4000ish.
If those people who are 4000ish get a grasp of the game at the level 6000 rating players are at, they will likely never see 6000 rating as their climb will be hellish due the the very small incremental points they earn whereas those 6000 rating players were gaining huge win bonuses early on for winning due to knowing the game.
That’s pretty crappy for new players.
2 Likes
I must admit, I do think its flawed myself.
Kripp just played on a Smurf account and got to rank 25 or so in about 2 hours, someone just starting out could never do that, they’d lose countless games getting used to cards, combinations and counters and ultimately their losses will permanently tarnish their account meaning they’d have to win SOOOOOO many games, finishing #1 back to back to start climbing at a speed that seems reasonable.
Definitely needs tweaking a bit, it punishes people that didn’t have prior knowledge. People that got to try it at BlizzCon for example had a clear advantage in the initial rankings.
A screenshot I posted for Ixsar to see was me finishing #1 at about 4300? or so and getting +30 points and someone at 5970 gaining +75 for finishing 2nd, something just seems really off to me in that.
1 Like
Yeah, I am talking about mmr too. They’ve already adapter their system for 8 players. It is completely different thing than matching 2 people together, don’t you agree?
I am watching amaz right now, he gets +100 at 5600 on his smurf, just because he didn’t have those lik 5-6 losses I had earlier (cause he got new acc, obviously with more knowledge he wins more). And I’m getting +50 at 5400. - That is pretty stupid, again imho of course.
EDIT:
And yeah, as others also pointed, like most streamers already smurfed, cause that’s how you climb higher fast.
In the long run (lets say a year) these ranks would just mean nothing. You might find best players at 4k and pretty mediocre players at top ranks (just cause they were prepared/or plain got lucky not losing too much at the start).
Nope. ELO works for all tournament-viable chess players, too. Each 1:1 match with MMR looks into the current pool of people for matches (or near-matches), choosing just 1 or choosing 6 is the same process. We’re talking MMR mechanics, right? Not the UI shell and Unity code below it.
As for Amaz vs. Tealquest: If he smurfed, his MMR should initially be below his capacity, so when he plays full throttle, of course he’ll make bigger steps. If you can “game” this system to actually gain ranks better than outright playing at your best, is beyond my knowledge, but try it out if you dare.
Have fun sailing upwind.
Elo yes, but this system is not elo, that’s why I am unhappy with how it is set up…
As for Amaz, he is “retiring” his acc, and starting another smurf, just cause he messed up some games again and thus he can’t reach the top.
And I am pretty sure this is what we gonna see with all streamers - try, fail, smurf, wreck noobs, repeat till top 10 (25-100) whatever…
It basically would kill the game, the fun to play (cause you stop progressing at some point) AND its gonna be boring to watch cause of aforementioned scenario.
Dota auto chess had 100 times better system (elo-based btw, and that was actually ELO) , and it was really fun to watch best players compete against each other, instead of smurfing all the time (like its already happening here. After 4 days wtf!)
2 Likes
I mean in fairness, it is still BETA, I would hope when it goes live they reset all standings and tweak it a little before hand.
2 Likes
I know this is beta, and they will hopefully change it, but I just want to add my voice to how terrible this MMR system is. You should not be taking amount of games played into account for how much someone’s score changes per match.
If you want to be competitive in this ranking system you need to know what you’re doing before playing at all, not experiment with the game at all and simply play the strongest meta, and/or play new accounts until you start on a big win streak. None of that is good for the game.
1 Like