Rhasimir states If you can’t backup your position with data then baffle them with non-sensical BS!
Blizzard STATES - 4th to 1st place is a win. REALLY? Explain why I claimed 4th place ONLY (didn’t die at the same times as others) but LOST 21 points !?!?!?!?! Take the final scoring OUT of a BS algorithm and assign points such as this suggestion. If the game REALLY finds worthy opponents according to your rating or maybe it assigns scaling according to your MMR and who you play, BUT 4th place can never do worse than +0 and up to 1st place. But making the statement that 4th place is a win and people lose points is aggravating and pisses people off.
YOU made the rules, either pull back the covers and SHOW what a complex piece of crap you’ve built or add some positivity to your rules!!!
I doubt that they’ll ever show actual MMR. Hidden MMR gives the illusion of progress to bad and casual players. But the points gained or lost do have to do with you and your opponents’ hidden MMR. Out of curiosity, what’s your current visible rating?
Says who?
You misunderstood the terms. Blizz counts 1st-4th as “winning” in terms of quests and achievements. It has nothing to do with MMR. You can “win” and still lose MMR, as you found out. That doesn’t mean you didn’t win. That simply means you didn’t beat anyone of significant MMR, and the people who won WITH you - albeit 1st through 3rd - were people you should have beaten.
Hiding the real MMR is nasty. I recently heard the argument “because it would be exploited if you know how it works” but that only means “so if the devs spill the beans to their friends they can exploit the competition”.
If all know how it works nobody can exploit it.
It’s not about exploiting how it works. Or, rather, it’s only about Blizzard exploiting how it works, because hidden MMR makes bad and casual players (myself included) play more. They keep it secret for marketing and player retention purposes
You guys need to take it down a notch, it’s not that deep, nor require this much emotion.
MMR (mostly hidden MMR) is a fickle beast. MMR, in any game, is designed to keep you playing by providing a sense of accomplishment and progression. Problem is, a linear MMR scale doesn’t perform it’s intended goal - to keep you playing.
There’s a mathematical line where winning too much and losing too much has a negative outcome when it comes to player retention. Meaning, winning every game makes playing pointless at a point, where losing constantly has a negative impact on players to continue playing.
So, ‘hidden MMR’ is born. We don’t know the exact numbers, but think of it like this: You lose twice in a row, your MMR drops by 150… but since it’s twice, your hidden MMR drops by 500. That way your next opponent is ranked far below your standing and in theory, greater chance of winning - keeping you playing.
Same can be said about winning - multiple wins can sky rocket you into a situation where you’re playing MMR players that out match you by 3000-8000 points. There’s an addon that can prove this by showing opponents MMR.
Your actual MMR gain (and loss) are calculated by the MMR of your opponents to a cap. Meaning your actual MMR is so much higher than your hidden MMR you’re playing vs super low MMR players. So winning vs them will yield less gain to your real MMR, losing stays the same.
So 1-4 are technically winning - achievements and the game says so, 4th being the absolute floor of it. Even hitting that floor and winning, you’re opponents can be so low mathematically speaking you gain nothing. It’s not that big of a deal, que up again and get better than the floor.
Yeah I have very similar thoughts. Do you have any sources of that or just your personal opinion because I came to similar suspicions independently and I thought I was the only one posting about it.
I find it very disingenuous if there is that kind of “accelerated adjustment” based on very small streaks because it just artificially keeps players who could progress fast closer into a “50-50” situation.
my suspicion on that would be that if the average playerbase engages in less than 3 matches at a time in any given session, just as an example for this discussion, that the auto correction of the mmr maths would naturally be at a low threshold of consecutive wins and losses. This would make it to where the players dont encounter long long strings of stagnant results of always winning or always losing, both resulting in a “what the point?” expression being expressed in terms of continuing to play.
@Dim sh_t lhugion. YOUR opinion, the same as my opinion doesn’t count for a damn thing.
It was a question, not open to your opinion doofus.
I’m just genuinely concerned that you are SO full of hate even 22 days later, over one of the most innocuous, and frankly down-right informative, posts I’ve ever made in this entire place.
Seriously, like I’m actually unironically unsure what caused you to table flip:
Out of all the 734 posts I’ve made up till that point, THIS is the one that gets you?
2 minutes, 2 days, 2 weeks, 22 days. You open your mouth and stick your posterior in it and involve me and I’ll tell you to shut up.
Dude, it’s a forums, not your personal blog.
If you don’t want people commenting on your skid marks, don’t hang them out in public. But, since you’re only here to vent and disparage, I guess I’ll leave you to it then.
Hope you feel better soon.
You likely went out with two or more other players and were awarded the average of the positions, which is how it works.
If it was a lower ranked lobby than you, you lost more points after the average was calculated from your personal modifier. I find that if I queue with a lower ranked friend, I lose more points than normal if I fail to get in the top three.
I’ve had fifth place awared more than twenty points when I went out with two players ranked above me, too.
Is there a source for that? I assumed the biggest loser was whoever had the lowest HP on the hero including the negative health at lethal.