How many win's in QM before it forces a loss?

I upvoted you, not because I agree or disagree with what you say, but because you proved to be a meme connoisseur…

Or in other words: “Ah… I see you are a man of culture as well”

1 Like

To throw some data into your theory: I never move the slider from “Adept”
So according to your theory, I should always win. That’s not the case. Today I lost and I was almost winning in Dragon Shire, but the opposite team had a much better composition Xul, Ana, Ragnaros, Kael’thas, Johanna VS me as Cassia with Deckard, Garrosh, (can’t remember the other two, will edit this later but I think it was Qhira and Valeera or something)
(Seriously, Xul is already a lane killer Ragnaros has his lava wave, and even with all that tidal wave I was winning, it was insanely hard because of those two having insane synergy to push lanes, it was just a small mistake from me, they killed me at the end of the match and with that it was over, when I revived I couldn’t kill the dragon before it finished my core, they didn’t have anything but their last middle tower!) At Adept difficulty they don’t usually coordinate, but when this kind of situation happens, they do coordinate just like they did in this match.
Most of the times, this happens to me when I get the “Win 3 games” quest:

Oh and a meme about this kind of situations when the team heroes are one sided:

I think the algo takes in a few things. On my high winrate heroes that are 53%+ winrate over hundreds of games, it’s nearly impossible to get a Normal game.

Yeah I guess the “difficulty” is up but not in a good way. I had to stop playing my zeratul because I kept getting paired up with level 11 27% winrate players vs team of coordinated normals.

I massively improved my genji play took him from 30s to almost 50, and right then I started to get thrown into matches with players who do not even know what an objective is, players who go in 1v5 and stagger death so we are always at a disadvantage.

Proper mmr should throw you and the enemy team better players as your winrate and mmr goes higher not start throwing you borderline afk players, macro bots against premades.

was just in a game 14-2 with genji.

level 22 4 down 1 viking left 5 up, and guess what my team does while im heading to core…

they went backwards and start camping and we lost.

These game are unwinnable


Can you link a source for this?

no need to source, you don’t feel this in your game?

youre extremely lucky to have always have competent teammates yourlevel then

On the contrary, I get people on my team I believe can’t even breathe without conscious effort all the time. That does not mean everything is as it feels however. The simple explanation would be that they’re just that bad and statistically you’re bound to get those at some point. The slightly less simple one would be that HotS uses a very sophisticated matchmaker to give you unfair or unwinnable matches that still are between teams of similar MMR.

AZJackson here says it’s the former, but since he is part of Blizzard we could of course call him a dirty lying weasel. In that case however one should be able to provide some sort of compelling evidence to support their claim. And I’m afraid I must request something a bit more concrete than feelings.

1 Like

The point I am making is either people people can believe both of what blizzard says is a lie or truth. You cant have it both ways. Either forced losses are a thing and 5 stacks have some advantage or the forced losses don’t exist and 5 stacks have 0 advantages.

I get bored of this community just trying to have it both ways. I never said any were real or any where false just pointing out the communities flawed philosophy

1 Like

I think the why-why-why strategy might uncover that the core inner mantra is:

  • Your success depends on you.
  • You have to earn your rank.
  • Your rank is earned.

Individual judgement is based on whether it fits.
The system doesn’t challenge you because it’s on you, but the system challenges you to ensure that you did earn your rank.
You can and have to carry more than your peers, opponents.
50% chance means that you have 100% chance to win if you put in the effort.
And so on.

Problem is, it’s crucial for many to believe in said inner mantra, otherwise you may become the gamer version of a sociopath / depression combination. As in, you need a drive, motivation to put effort and try getting better.

Of course there is a middle ground (you have some influence, but so do others), but I’ve gotten feedback that I’m not a crusader enough, there is always comeback, etc. Spending your energy wisely means sparing them sometimes to one, but always putting all effort in the current basket to others.

Yes, I had a match recently which proves the comebacks.
Still a rarity.

That, and the consolation dimension. When someone comes along the salt mines it isn’t really helpful to respond “yes, I told you and everyone so, you have miniscule influence, learn to handle it”. Even if I actually think so. Being a motivational speaker is very much about bending the truth.

Then you haven’t seen the four player comp (with not getting an AI healer) VS AI elite comps with healer yet. Yes, this happens in 2021.

5-man stacks actually face higher rated people which means actually nothing when QM gives you a comp which takes your own team completely out.

I tried few times on elite level with AI teammates and I was so pissed how stupid AI is. So then I tried new tactic… Pinged 3 from team to follow my moves and left one to soak in lane. And it is easy win every time.

1 Like

This is no phenomenon, this is a conscient being ; for I can testify it bullies me a lot.

Before the displaying of stacks in ennemy team got infamously removed, I remember being very often in all-solo teams versus stacked or full-stacked teams and losing. The enemy team had coordination, knowing each other (and probably voice chat) whereas my team had none of that and no macro sense at all, making me wonder how these allies got to the same rank than me… probably while playing other games with friends of theirs who might be the same rank and carried them.

Long story short, the intent of said removal was to remove the self fulfilling prophecy bias.
Stacks are silly because some are random friends, exactly as coordinated as random teams, while others use voice chat, now each other’s style. The MM cannot know that, so it plasters an MMR adjustment on stacks.

It’s still easy to see that you’re against a party (due to rainbow ranks) but you don’t exactly know, so you only have to worry as much as you would in a quick match (knowing it’s rainbow as well): be mindful of the high and exploit the low. I guess there is a point where you go to level 2 and notice the team dynamics.

Anyway, without a bias, the devs can shoot for appropriate adjustments.

I’m regularly playing against stacks and I’m regularly winning those. Arguably my rank is about the middle so my enemies are unlikely to be coordinated. Maybe that adjustment should be rank specific. Maybe it is.

If 50/50 is real why am I 66% win rate in SL?

If 50/50 is real why I’m getting 60% win rate QM players.


1 Like

You’re right, it doesn’t force wins or losses. I’ve seen people with lifetime win rates of 70% and others with 30% in QM. There are too troll players I’ve seen who try to lose every game by sabotage. They may deliberately walk into to enemy towers and die as often as possible, but even they can get a win despite their efforts to lose. One of those trolls I saw had a 12% win rate over a couple of hundred games.

I have occasionally played too many games in a row and I think this is in part a perception issue. You may win more games while your mind is fresh, so after six games you might feel focused, but your brain is probably wandering to other matters. This is where you might start to lose and you will have a streak of them if you don’t quit for the day.

The number depends on the individual, but a forced win rate isn’t a thing.


nothing as sinister as this, it’s just your MMR increasing til you are playing against players far better then you.


The average player is average at the game.

The matching system tries to average mmr to create an average probability of ‘fair’ play between the teams. So the average average is averaged.

Player populace (mmr distribution) falls into certain peaks were some values are more common than others, which influences where an ‘average’ of the mmr is going to fall. If a team has an average of 2000 mmr, than that might be a composition of: 1800,1900,2000,2100,2200 rather than 1980,1990,2000,2010,2020.

Before players ramp up their ‘win streak’ they may be in the same averaged block, but they’re matched at the lower end of the mmr (1800 in this case) so there are ‘better’ allies in their group that can be more cooperative to play alongside. Player wins some games, mmr increases, but they’re still in the same relative average mmr block (2000 in this case)

After wins pile up, their personal deviance from the average has increased, but the matching average is still relatively the same. Their game is filled with “worse allies” relative to the previous few games they were playing.

Now they’re the 2200 in the spread of 1800,1900,2000,2100, but they are the one above the others in that match For the player experience this can feel like the “forced loss” scenario while just being the 'working as intended" model for the mmr averages.

Part of why some suggest taking a break, or queuing as a different hero is to then shake up the systems expected average it has for matching. If you’ve already played several game, the matching has an ‘average’ it’s looking to make, so its not uncommon for players to end up in the same queue as players they may have already played with/against because they’ll all still in the same relative average mmr block. So taking a break, or queueing as heroes that adjust the mmr averaging then shift the block a player is matched against.

So… basic math is pretty much why the system can seem ‘forced/broken’ and “working as intended” at the same time. However, instead of pointing out how averages can work (and realizing the extent of player populace in actual ‘skill’) people usually draw up boogie man stories and have to profess the universe/blizzard/activision/whatever is personally out to get them. It’s much easier to blame something as some anthropomorphic evil impossibility (that would lead to better matching if it were true) than to do some arithmetic.

Cuz afterall, once school is out, math is the greatest evil of them all!

edit note: I am referring to mean, median, and mode in this post. “Average” doesn’t just refer to one thing.


Idk ask the community. I don’t care to post my opinions on rather its real or not just point out the communities blind beliefs.

  1. Humans are not performing on a constant level.
  2. The MMR is not a static number, everyone falls and climbs all the time, after every single match.
  3. QM, SL and UD has their own MMR, so one’s performance in one mode means nothing to an other.
  4. ARAM and vsAI has no MMR.
  5. Teams form an average MMR and that’s what matched.
  6. Smurfs exist.
  7. The average player is not good at the game.
  8. You cannot statistically win for the end of time.
  9. If you play on your skill lvl (you’re average on your MMR) you probably win and lose the same amount since you can’t push the game in either direction since you’re not better to carry, nor worse to drag down.

Therefore, there’s no need for a System that forces losses, nor could one be made.
Which seems to be the case, since there are multiple ppl with high positive winrates (to not use the low winrate accounts cuz “losing is easy”).
After all, how can ppl climb if there’s a force that should stop them?
And if the skilled players can overcome a hypothetical “force” that want them to lose, why ppl think it exists in the first place?


there is no matchmaking in AI

this isnt the flat earth society, opinions dont have the same value as facts, people keep repeating “forced 50%” but it isnt real