Fix mm? working terribly

if you’re going to claim to want to ‘know’ something, then you’d want to stop deluding yourself with loaded questions. Yes, even if you don’t actually ‘mean’ the question and ask it as a rhetorical device, the ‘rhetoric’ your spouting is a bias set of fallacies that try to praise ignorance over otherwise.

Part of the issue of chronic complainers is that they’re too busy complaining to think through half the crap they’re complaining about. if you concern is that ‘luck’ is a ‘problem’ because “luck” is – as you claim it --: “Success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions." then you effectively make the whole of the game about ‘luck’.

Here’s the magic secret: if ‘luck’ is things outside of your control, and you don’t control the enemy team any more than you control your own team… then how much “skill” is there over any iota of luck? you can’t fault luck when things go bad and praise ‘skill’ when things magically go the way you wanted – which is pretty much the bottom line of your hot take – which is why loaded questions indicate slanted thinking.

What you posted in the first line of a google search for ‘luck’ as a definition. Since that suits the tl;dr complaint, that’s all you took in. there are two things i will note from that:

  1. “Luck is a skill”
  2. Wikipedia provides a much more thorough elaboration on “luck” and some of the faults, and fallacies pertaining to it.

You fixate on problems as you see them as ‘luck’, and then concern yourself with loses because of ‘cheating’. These are half-baked complaints posted by someone who doesn’t want to know more, do better, or look to actually use their ‘skill’ because they have something else to blame instead.

enemy dodged a skill-shot - luck factor; you can’t control them moving, or stopping, and acting contrary to your expectation. you can’t control the enemy showing up to contest and objective, challenge a merc camp, or what heroes they pick, what talents they take.
If the fixation is that ‘luck’ ruins your ability to ‘win’ at a game, then you’re pretty much undermined the entire point of playing any non-ai scripted based game because so much more is out of your control that ‘skill’ can’t apparently matter. So, we better drop multi-player games, and stick to speed running set games with fixed seeds so ‘skill’ will drive out more of the unwanted ‘luck’.

instead of fixating on same crap sense of what ‘luck’ is, you’d be better of trying to figure out what little else remains that would be considered ‘skill’ in your faulty definitions, and then looking to try to improve that instead of looking for crap to blame over and over again.

Esp given the sort of hero/balance rants you’ve made – and the replies people post as you time and again – getting a sense of self-realization on your luck-squabble would fix a hefty bit of what you see as ‘problematic’.

Different thinkers like Thomas Kuhn have discussed the role of chance in scientific discoveries. Richard Wiseman did a ten-year scientific study into the nature of luck that has revealed that, to a large extent, people make their own good and bad fortune. His research revealed that “Lucky people generate their own good fortune via four basic principles. They are skilled at creating and noticing chance opportunities, making lucky decisions by listening to their intuition, creating self-fulfilling prophecies via positive expectations, and adopting a resilient attitude that transforms bad luck into good.[14] Researchers have suggested that good luck and good mood often co-occur (Duong & Ohtsuka, 2000)[15] and that lucky people are happy and optimistic whereas unlucky people feel anxious and depressed

Yea, stuff affects mmr that is outside of their personal control. However, the same sort of players and demonstrated, time and again, how they influence “luck” in their play, and fix success despite that. MMR is appraised from winning and losing; one team is going to win, and one team is going to lose. As much as people fixate on the bads of ‘losing’ apparently it hasn’t ever occurred to them that the actual reality of outcomes of playing this game is going to involve losing.

should that even actual occur to them, then maybe they’d actually notice all the positive control they actually have instead of blaming superstitious contributions for holding them back. Whether anyone sees the actual extent of ‘making their own luck’ actually be completely true doesn’t really matter because particular players in the game have a particular tendency to have particular attitudes about the game relative to their skill level.

People that fall privy to ignorance, fixate on stuff to blame, and pretty much spend loads of time deluding themselves to decry any and whomever that doesn’t agree with them could have spent that effort/time investing it in making their “luck” better than they think it to be.

IF you actually want to know something, then have the sense of mind to actually learn it.
IF you’re not interested in that, than cyclical complaints tend to ‘make their own luck’ and never bother to notice why.


I was exaggerating to make a point, it was simply a reverse of the OP’s post which is also an exaggeration. I don’t think you will find many people defending the MM, for sure not me if you look at my post history.

My point was (which some have missed) that if you make complaint thread about the MM and just say “MM bad, I lose games, the report system great”, then there is nothing of any substance to reply to. The onus isn’t on those replying to articulate positions or arguments for the OP.

1 Like

Well… no and absolutely.
When i wrote the part with different scenarios, those are definately scenarios that happen AND is luck factored. You could say “i don’t believe in luck, i make my own luck” but what does that even mean when something you can’t control ruins your day? Or life even.

Luck the way i see it is something you have absolutely no control over. Like you can only experience it and react to it to try to work against it after it has already happened.

Call the dice numbers 1-6, Worse-Better.
throw the dice and you might get (2-2-1-4-6)
Do the same for the opponent team, maybe they get (4-4-3-6-6) which is a overall higher MMR with that team being favored.

I talk about the MM so much because it’s my biggest issue with the game. I don’t mind the OP heroes as much as i mind the MM because OP heroes can be dealt with. Easier to deal with OP heroes than it is to convince un-cooperative allies to be cooperative. You could do something single handedly but that’s not an easy task if you’re a healer or a tank in that match. There are limits to what you can do with a uncooperative team. Depending on the severity of the refusal to cooperate you will suffer the consequence even more.

I love the game but i passionately hate to lose not because opponents played better but because your own team refuses to “connect” and act like 5 best friends. I’m not trying to say that i’m always the best player in my team every match. No, i have my bad days aswell. I will always try to improve whenever i can.

These are some pieces of the reason i’m so stubbornly firm in beliving that the game is about luck more than it is skill.
When you get hit by luck too hard then your skill wont cut it. If you get hit by a little bit of luck factors you could possibly “catch-up” and turn the table. It’s the way i see it. Luck will be there affecting everything.

And that won’t happen because Activision doesn’t care about HotS so no resources get dedicated…it’s just a vicious circle. Basically Activision killed their own game via terrible mismanagement.

1 Like

They cannot fix it because they have created a tiered hero system. So long as gods and ploebes are able to be together, the games will always suck.

What a person can control is their reaction and their preparation; if they can’t control their reactions, then they don’t have sufficient preparation. But people ‘make their own luck’ through preparation. Some people are prepared to accept consequences come what may, some prepare for ‘worse case scenarios’ and act accordingly, some are prepared to look for opportunities others do not; the list goes on.

If something ‘ruined their day’ then they likely weren’t prepared for it, and weren’t prepared to watch out for it. Yea, people can’t account for everything, but a big factor on the fixations people stress on luck tend to come from those that don’t know how to consider otherwise, so they feel mired in bad luck because they simply don’t consider otherwise.

That is part of the basic gist of the quote i pulled: people do ‘make’ ‘luck’ frequently, but that can seem farfetched to an increasingly insular people just fixing from one distraction to the next. That’s part of why i point out that people looking for something to blame generally don’t improve: their fixation is set, and they don’t have the interest to look and prepare otherwise. Forgone conclusions (fulfilling prophesies) stand out because that is the opportunity people are looking to have happen, so it does.


Mmh I knew i should’ve added something that closed this gap. Text is getting too long alot of the times.
Saying you were not prepared enough is too theoretical, “theoretically” if you’re prepared you could somehow with the best of your ability equally meet the obstacle placed in your path. “Theoretically” you can over-come it. It’s easier to over come it if this game was 1v1 rather than 5v5 which could potentially add 9 more obstacles you need to be prepared for. It’s too speculative and too “what if” and “you might/could” like.

You can’t be prepared for everything because different factors have different degree of impact. Some can be within your preparation, others can’t be and some could even never be within your preparation because certain factors can’t even be predicted to even place a single thought of preparation for.

Saying “you could be prepared” is too simplified of the various scenarios you’re placed in. I don’t see it representing all matches, it represents “turnable” matches more than it represents stomp loss matches for instance. There’s alot more factors playing around than 1 out of 5 players preparation for all the factors. It will have to include how well the other 4 are prepared for the scenarios they’re put in too.

It’s your problem + 4 other players problems combined AND the 5 opponents. Too many variables to exclude luck factors.

Anyway this is just circular, You don’t see it luck based so your stance will make you reply in defence of it totally excluding luck, mine is the reverse.
I say this game is luck first, skill second
You say this game is skill and there are no luck factors.

i include both, you exclude one.
I say this game is skill based but luck factors will affect your MMR
You say this game is skill based and there are no luck factors, only your own failiure to prepare.

What i say is true (Imo) the fewer matches you play
What you say is true when you pass 500+ played matches.

I play around 5 matches a day and experience luck factors 3 out of 5 matches. And i do so because i see failiure of allies or better matched opponent team as luck factors.
It’s a luck factor if you get stomped by them, but it’s NOT a luck factor if the 2 teams are even and you still lose.

Lol, many metrics? Name a few?

Honestly, to draw this conclusion it would be nice to see blizzard making any data available once. All they used to do is throw in a few highly processed numbers which always float around the same idea - 50% winrate.

While I haven’t made any directly in this topic, if your previous claims to me even remotely hold up (doubt ofc,) then you should already know of them. However, you prefer to fixate your fault finding, generally refuse to see otherwise, and have little issue with telling lies that you were already called out on before making them, and don’t have the sense to notice you played yourself.

Your perspective is to blame matchmaking instead of players where one is an automated process, while the other has ‘freewill’ and can adjust what it does accordingly. You have a take of being so far removed from what you yourself write, that you ironically try to reply with smarmy ignorance and don’t notice.

You see posts as “highly processed numbers” because the fit the ‘idea’ that doesn’t agree with you, but that would indicate you know of them. Whether it’s the reddit post on team matching, or % compositions, or the topics showing the match on role metrics or so on.

When you decide to actually be more honest, especially with yourself, then you’ll magically find the categorical answer and not waste other people’s integrity with your lazy bunk.

Your take to Hoku is pretty much demonstrating you’re in the loop of what she already claimed: people will just call blizz liars. Maybe you aren’t aware, but there’s already a history of that, and people keep demonstrating the same attitudes that lead to that conclusion.

Even if you don’t agree with the outcome there’s two key takeaways I’m going to point out from it:

  1. If blizz is convinced that the numbers demonstrate something is ‘working’ (to an expected degree) then they aren’t going to make the changes people demand. Esp when their topics demonstrate ignorance and/or falsehoods to their claim.
  1. There is a lack examples for other/better games/competitors that don’t have a vocal presentation on the same ‘problems’ despite having higher populations, long game-life, etc etc. Some of that has had a falling out as some games have dropped forum support, so some of the outlets people use for complaining don’t exist anymore. But the ‘problem’ wasn’t magically fixed from that.

You’re doing that thing we’re you’re assuming replies and wanting to cast stuff as polarized opposites to suit a false dilemma.

My take is that you’re fixated on interpretation/observation and using that to suit a forgone conclusion and you’re… offering a fixed observation to suit a forgone conclusion at the neglect of other details you don’t want to consider.

Pointing out where people do have control is not the same thing as saying “there is no luck”. However, when people think it’s *only luck" or predominantly so, then they undermine their position with faulty reasoning that go into the half-baked stuff I wrote about earlier: there’s errant inconsistency but people see a “truth” they want, so the cast out the parts they don’t, and then fill it with presumption for another tl;dr

1 Like

Lol, I “should know of them”? Instead of typing a couple of metrics (one sentence) you just wrote several paragraphs avoiding the actual answer because you don’t have one. There is a single metric that blizzard uses for everything - winrate, that’s their holy grail for everything. And as far as “processed numbers” go, it has nothing to do whether I agree with it or not, I actually do most of the time. But it’s not “data”, it’s just a condensed summary created to make a point, they never made any data available that could be analyzed.

You are assuming how i observe things. I don’t cast out stuff, i simply reply to what’s being said… You said this:

You rephrased the word “luck factor” to “faulty preparation”
I understand exactly what you mean by it but maybe you didn’t seem to notice that luck factor is entierly non existent in that statement. There off my reply:

This is how i interpreted and replied to it.

You are excluding the posibility and the existance of luck factors indirectly or directly.
You’re waving it away calling it “false dilemmas” and “forgone conclusions”.
While all i’m saying is that Luck factors are objectively there… literally…
I can’t sugar coat it… I know it’s there but i still love/play the game everyday.

I don’t get how i’m being unreasonble… What am i failing to observe/interprit that i’ve already not accounted for in detail?

Regardless of what i wrote, you werent’ going to accept it. However, since you want to hide behind a bad-faith claim that’s mired with a loaded question, then i’m not going to “avoid answering the question” but i’m going to instead call you out on your crapping perspective.

Btw, thank you for demonstrating that you have a crappy perspective with this bad reply and terrible assumption. ‘oh you don’t have an answer’. It is as i wrote: you should already know of it, but you’d denounce it either way because it doensn’t suit the take you want to make. But instead of reading what i actually wrote (which, again, you’d fault either way) you mass quote it, and then disregard it acutally answering what ‘you meant’ rather than what you wrote. Your welcome btw for noticing the difference in that for you ;p

well, a key example here i that when i pointed out where your interpretation was narrow, you rejected what I wrote in favor of repeating yourself. You are literally trying to cast what i wrote as a polar opposite of what you wrote and you take it as “[i am] waving it away”.

what i wrote before describes perspective; people that want to fixate on ‘luck’ influences overpowering other factors tend to fall into ruts because they ‘make the luck’ that they holds them down. what i wrote doesn’t ‘way away luck’ but points out that people not in that rut tend to have ‘made their luck’ by having a different perspective despite similar opportunities to other players.

if people feel overwhelmed by ‘luck’ then, chances are, they are exhibiting behavior closer described by superstition than ‘skill’ and don’t take advantage of similar ‘bad luck’ their opponents may have, but they don’t notice because the other player wasn’t bogged down by it.

While it is outside of a player’s control when an ally leaves (intentional or no) and that can be “bad luck” some players still choose to then see their outcome an an inevitable loss and they probably won’t turn around their ‘bad luck’ with the opportunity there. Other players don’t give up at a leaver, and because they keep trying, they then learn extra tips to play around ‘bad luck’ and still that into a positive situation.

People that forgo opportunities because of "bad luck’ are then caught in a situation of the ‘bad luck’ where other optimitistic/opportunistic takes take a different set of actions, build up familiarity – or preparation – for those circumstances, and then before better than alternatives. They then apply ‘skill’ to compensate for the ‘bad luck’ to the point an opponent might not notice said player then having had ‘bad luck’

The wiki i linked on luck also pointed out that analyzers agree that ‘luck’ is a big part of professional sports; i could similarly point out that as players get ‘better’ at something, they then tend to be more ritualistic and superstitious about their peak performance. What i wrote doesn’t discount ‘luck’ being that there is stuff outside of a players control, but rather, that people that have a perspective that looks to find opportunity despite “bad luck” tend to flip the circumstances into ‘not bad luck’.

Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.

That quote is attributed to Archimedes. Stuff like simple machines, boat rudders, train switches, airplane wings, etc etc can make a large deviation from a small change. Part of the point of my perspective is that ‘bad luck’ or ‘stuff outside player control’ can be manipulated by small shifts, and those small shifts, these almost imperceivable moments tend to arise for people that are looking to find them, esp when compared to players that are convinced such things simply can’t happen.

The perspective a person puts into their perception – what they’re willing to consider – makes it such that they’re “right” regardless of what they don’t want to accept. So if they 're “right” then they only consider anything else to be the other option, and thus only consider two possibilities, instead of looking for other potential takes.

I could point back to my spat with fuzz as an example of that same thing; they have a specific set of expectations on replies, and things either have to agree with that, or it’s categorically ignorable for them, and they won’t consider otherwise, so they won’t see other possibilities that don’t suit that perspective.

1 Like

I tried reading this slowly and i get the notion that you’re assuming i’m a player that have a tendency to give up as soon as i experience something that i interpret as “bad luck”. You seem to think that because of it i fail to apply the needed skill or preparation to overcome a situation of bad luck.

ME… I’M the player in the team who tells other team mates to not give up when they start saying “GG” when an ally dies in a nooby way for instance like them not noticing that the opponents is on the way to him while the rest of the team sees it.
They’re some of my most commonly used words…
“It’s not over yet”
“Chill chill”
“It’s fine we can still turn it”
“Focus on now pls, it’s not over yet”
“They could still make misstakes, focus pls”

Like this… i always probe for misstakes that the opponents might do. Something that enables me and my team to react, which also demands that we react fast because sometimes if we dont react fast enough TOGETHER, that opportunity might slip.
Which happens soooooooooooooooooo many times. I notice a dude out of position, mount up right away but allies don’t see it. Sometimes allies mount up and i could be the one missing it.

These are all “normal” circumstances in a match.

I already mentioned that i understand the “preparation” argument. I truly do…
My previous reply already replied to it.

You said that you’re not waving away “luck factors” but then you’re still waving it away OR you limit it to a player that has left the match argument alone.
I say that they’re there, you say they’re not… i’m not even assuming it… it’s what you’re saying. You’re excluding the posibilty, i’m not.
I consider both as i mentioned and you’re excluding one from the equation.

  • your team fails preparation
  • opponent team fails preparation
  • Luck throu gap (throu OTHER factors) in teams cuz of MM.

The preparation argument doesn’t always fit in so we can’t use that argument as a main model to describe every match accurately and/or to do every match justice.
Why? Because there are factors that CAN influence it outside of it’s parameters.

I.E the GAP throu MM… a Lupe hole… faulty matching… random allies…

  • Emotional state (frustrated, angry, salty, tired, sad, etc.)
  • Player mind-sets that doesn’t align with the rest of the team…
  • Smurfs…
  • Premades…
  • Bad connections… (This is the one YOU limit it to)
  • Someone else other than the owner playing the account…
  • Distracted allies who have people in their rooms…
  • Forced to pick a hero they cant play…
  • Intentionally picks a hero they’ve never tried…
  • Intentionally sabotages draft to “get back” to some other ally in team from previous match that you wasn’t in but have to pay for equally.
  • Ally gets angry cuz of teammates ban on other Allies pre-pick and troll picks.

Like there’s alot of scenarios like this that can affect the match and cause a loss.
Some can be prepared for, others could be too severe to even begin to prepare.
But they all equally affect your MMR because it’s a team based game.


ohh NOT… You play with AFK report him and next game in your team again same reported afk man…