Yeah, I realized after I wrote it I got it backwards. Statistics on a weekend is definitely not my strong suit. It was meant to be that there is a better chance for the enemy team to get one or more Yukon Golds, while your team has one fewer spud spots available.
1 Like
This doesn’t make any sense. It’s hard to tell when someone is throwing? What??? IT’S OBVIOUS
it was just someone’s bad game
1 in 50 matches do I have a bad game where I have the most deaths where they are multiple more, and I’d be hard pressed to believe that’s not a match where everybody has already given up, and it’s just a wait for the finish.
Both Blizzard and Riot confirmed the existence of 50% winrate, because its the very basis of MMR/ELO system(s).
The question is how hard the system is trying to make you win 50% of your games, make it because of too big MMR spread, smurfing, joke placements or playerbase size issues. Or all of it cough
1 Like
yeah i believe in the forced 50%, sometimes i win several games in a row, because i got a decent team, but then the game puts me with heavy noobs and heavy trolls, that doesnt know where they are, and ofc i lose the same games i won
And such disregard for the system as a whole is just bad statistical methodology.
I am sorry, but this is incorrect (surprisingly, as your posts are well thought out usually).
You are basing your statement on the assumption that opponents and teammates are randomly assigned. They are not randomly assigned. Therefore your chance of having 1 or more potato is not dependent on the number of spots in the team not taken by your team (unless you have a 5-man).
Further, potatoes are not homogeneous, one very bad can be worse than 2 slighly spuddy ones.
Are you suggesting Blizzard actively puts potatoes on your team? If so, this is again going into conspiracy territory. They have no financial or business motive to do tihs.
I also don’t see how he is wrong in saying you represent 20% of your team. If you are not that “potato”, your chances of having one on your team decreased by 20%.
Maybe not in one game, maybe not in the next 3 games, but over a large sample like 100-500 games.
I didn’t say that. I said the assertion was incorrect. The ELO type system does not randomly assign players. That alone is enough for the assertion to be incorrect. This is not conspiracy theory.
My view is this: the system will try to balance the teams. So if you let’s say it pulls 10 people from within a given mmr range it will try to assign them so the game is even. So if you high within that range it will likely put someone else high on the other team, then a low person on your team then a low person on their team, and so on.
In my experience (and from wasting my time putting 100 ranked games into a spreadsheet) both teams get between 1-2 players who die significantly more than the rest of the players on their side. This was true for both teams. I am not suggesting this is rigorously proven but rather my personal viewpoint with some very limited analysis with a tiny sample size and my own bias on the choice of what constitutes a potato.
You do represent 20% of your team. I stated that does not mean the chances of having a potato are less for your team than other. The axiom underlying such a statement is incorrect.
How many people in your MMR range are potatoes? 10%, 15%, 20%?
It is pure luck whether you draw one such potato from that pool of 15 or 20% players or don’t.
The more people in your premade party (assuming you or nobody else is a potato), the lower the mathematical chance of you pulling a random potato on your side.
If you personally aren’t a “potato”, your odds of getting one from that pool of potatoes just decreased by 20%. If you play duo with a good player, it is already 40% less.
The idea is, that you can make sure that 20% of your team knows how to play their Heroes, map, and won’t disconnect.
While the enemy in your perspective is as random as your allies.
So your team has a higher chance to be “potatoless” if you do well.
This statement isn’t correct.
With computers, nothing is “random”; that’s the whole point of being able to explain the mmr system. However, the system doesn’t control who is actually logging in and playing the game at any given time, so there are elements out of its control people may call ‘random’.
However, the real reason is that while the system may have calculated the mmr it uses to make matches, there isn’t any guarantee that any player will actually play according to the weight of their mmr; the value itself is dynamic and any player can be in a position of flux outside of the predicted average for that game.
Players have varying reliability in their play; vastly different hero pool options that don’t necessarily match the estimated average for their “skill”, and people in the game may not cooperate with each other; there’s simply too many variables that can influence the outcome of the match that an averaging of mmr between 5 people doesn’t mean that any of those predictions are correct.
As you said, some tubers are worse than others; the game isn’t going to know that, even if it can associate similar qualities on either side it won’t know if someone happened to be tilted this one, compared to any other one.
However, from the player’s perspective, if they are doing the best they are going to do, then they could be the controllable factor to play above their weight of mmr, esp if they inspire cooperation from players that otherwise would do their own thing in a typical match.
My statement is based on the observation that lacking some sort of quantifiable metric to associate specific mechanical capability at certain thresholds of mmr means that values given in a match don’t mean very much.
In other words everyone can have a bad day make mistake even if they are high ranks just like top 5 football clubs can lose to a divison 1 team.
the reverse holds true too in that a person could have a super-good day uncharacteristic of their play history.
yet another skeptic silenced by the forum commune
The OP is just as capable of posting today as they are the day they wanted to spam the forum with demonstrably errant opinion and incorrect accusation.
Having a fixated opinion that is resistant to understanding or interest generally doesn’t go well for anyone that doesn’t have the charisma to back it. They “knew” what they “feel” despite the reality that “feelings” are only symptomatic, and tend to not distinguish between causes and correlations. That’s why people need more information and experience to help diagnosis the actual problem.
People can ‘feel’ inertial forces (such as centrifugal) but that isn’t what is ‘actually happening’. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean they didn’t experience a ‘sensation’ but it does mean that their conclusions, understanding, and expectations aren’t correct. Life is full of examples and simplified explanations where what is ‘felt’ is not the explanation for what happened, and may even be opposite of the claim.
Dry Ice doesn’t ‘burn’, gravity is not an attraction between two bodies, and operations with zero as a divisor are definable in math systems beyond algebra. The capacity to ‘feel’ something does not mean conclusions drawn from that sensation is correct. That’s why more information, cooraborative sources, and a willingness to learn are essential for improving understanding and communication.
However, too many people get the impression that they “know” something, and then it magically makes them infallible. They make others out to be liars and drive themselves to a misery effectively of their own making. And they will persist in that until they’re willing to learn to do otherwise because life is all about learning how to learn.
1 Like
I have a 44% win rate this season. Fingers crossed it’s as OP described, because if that is the case, I’m in for one hell of a ride this week!
3 Likes
Forced <45% win rate?
1 Like
Nevermind the necro but I find OP’s claims pretty hilarious. But imagine if, instead of a spectrum, MMR is really circular. Fall deep enough and you emerge from the other end. Pretty wild stuff. Or maybe B5 and GM similar in the same sense as the horseshoe model is used to compare far left and right?
No no it’s only forced 50% if your current winrate is above 50%! If you’re below then the “forced winrate” claims suddenly do not exist.
2 Likes
Funnily enough, it turns out neither does Blizzard.
2 Likes