The spread out includes not just the bad players but the good players. Better players will win more than worse players on average, even when paired with bad players. It’s really not that difficult to comprehend, and trying to be reductive that you can win every game as a hard carry is both a straw man and beneath you.
1 Like
Yeah, no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
im confused. are you trying to say that all players are actually the same skill level and the ranking system just puts people in random ranks?
Clearly.
I’m saying that SL ranking is nothing but a Skinner Box mechanic which was designed specifically to drive engagement.
I think this is not possible under the current ruleset.
Unless you view it differently and it perfectly is.
Your goal is to try and complement your team the most during draft, and execute it.
I personally refuse because it’s night impossible to draft in a way that satisfies everyone.
And the irony, when I get my pick, it often doesn’t work, because someone else compromised.
The current system favors flex players with tank and bruiser preference, who have very good micro (bullying) skills and have a fair understanding of macro (which you can probably watch a video about per map and have a todo list on a second screen - camp timings, strategy, objective criticality, map priorities, etc.).
In my experience it hardly applies to anyone at low ranks. Virtually everyone has a better winrate and more matches on assassins.
Xul could be nice but just like Sylvanas or Azmodan, if played with obvious focus, can be countered. (You know how I had 60% winrate as Li-Ming? Shooting at Zagara minions.) I like him but I find he doesn’t scale well into late game teamfights. (For me!)
Chromie is really cool but I don’t see any success with her. She is super fun, blonde cannon, but! Her time trap is actually her #1 ability and her entire winrate balance hinges on that. So I’m basically QW only (with the odd self-save and bits of scouting) and it shows. You’d think as a Ming main I’d succeed more, but I think I have like 25% with Chromie?
Well, and girls being pretty and boys being strong are just mechanics to drive engagement.
It’s really about the mindset. Currently you feel quite negative about it.
But we’re not vibing along so we don’t understand. “Pretty girls / boys are bad!” Yes. They are selective, have expectations, inflated egos, and often come with a bad personality thinking they won life by genetics and deserve everything. (The husband of a friend, textbook.)
And yet, it’s actually not how it is. That’s just the dark side.
2 Likes
You want more competitive ladder experience? Get out of low elo asap. This is an advice I give to people who complain about trolls, feeders, afkers also. Low elo rank tends to have more of them, higher the rank, less so. This was voiced out by other players as well, not just me. Problem seems like, you’re unable to. Moreover, you even dropped to that level, signs indicating that’s where your skill level belongs.
If you really think your account MMR is cursed or whatnot (not how it works anyhow. MMR is just numbers and there seems to be little wrong with it when computing), get a newer account and try Ranked. You should either maintain or even climb rank if you really are not in their level.
3 Likes
I would say so. It takes a while to climb with 60% win ratio though. To be significantly better than people at your rank, I’d say you need a win rate of 70-80%. That will quickly propel you to your actual rank.
So in effect that is equivalent to a Diamond playing in Silver or a Master in Gold. It’s impossible to reach a solo win ratio of such high numbers otherwise.
I’m currently 54% in my rank, meaning I will climb very very slowly, and I don’t deserve a faster progress.
1 Like
He’s “claiming” to have such winrates for more than a year now with him claiming he plays 4-5 SL/week while still being in Bronze.
It’s clearly a lie.
2 Likes
Dude, I’m not claiming anything. I’m simply presenting a scenario.
Are you absolutely incapable of having a conversation without making if personal?
I’m not complaining about the quality of the individual games (those issues are present in all games from bronze all the way up into Diamond). Rather my critique is at the system itself, how it reports your rank, the mechanics of the rankings, the focus on solo queue and individual rankings, and most of all the dopamine progress-bar BS. It’s all garbage.
How is it that the NFL, MLB, MBA, and NHL can all have a competitive season that doesn’t require teams to play 100s of games in a competitive environement? How is it that sports leagues can provide competition without BS progress bars (where the only design priority is the driving of player engagement to absurd levels)?
I shouldn’t have to play 1000 games to feel like i’m engaging with a competitive ladder.
On a related note, I just faced a very well performing legit bronze team…
… and Grubby is struggling in Plat …
… maybe there is something up, there used to be posts about automatically distributing people by artificially moving ranks.
Sure, my team was inting like everyone should, but still.
As for the engagement trick, oh yeah, my next step is the 50 wins, currently 27, and for the last month I’m maintaining a 25% winrate. Not saying it’s artificial but can’t say it isn’t. Guess I won’t make it, did the math, 23 wins 16 losses (15 now), but if it’s not 39 matches but 96 I better disengage.
(Is Li Li something like a Gold-Plat exclusive hero now? She doesn’t have the coordination for Dia+ and she doesn’t have the numbers for Bronze-Silver.)
LoL, because those players have played hundreds, if not thousands of games before they got in that competitive environment. And recruiters actually look at that kind of stuff too.
It’s also a rather silly argument because even when HGC was a thing, there weren’t game requirements. You’re sort of describing the top of the top versus a broader ranking system.
You don’t have to. That’s why it’s a ladder. After playing about a hundred games, the system has a pretty darn good assessment of your skills. You can engage at any part of the ladder. Every game gives you a more accurate picture of an approximation of your skill.
My friend is pretty good at the game, but he’s never really done anything more than ARAM and QM. I know if he tried he’d probably be around diamond level, but he doesn’t really care for rank. What he doesn’t do is make up excuses about why the whole ranking system is BS.
5 Likes
Irrelevant data.
The softball league down at the park, the Volleyball league down at the school, the Darts league at the local bar, and the Bowling League down at the Playdrome can all get away with only playing 15 games, one per week, in a season. They are ALL still capable of enjoying a competitive experience.
Not HotS though. We are forced to watch endless dopamine progress bars for 100s of games.
I couldn’t care less about a skill assessment. I want a competitive game experience.
Just as much as ppl on the ladder.
then go play a game with a naturally competitive fanbase and watch as the bloated toxicity of the competitive player erode any sense of shred sanity you have left
Tell me you never played team sports without telling me you never played team sports.
Here is the core game loop for competitive sports:
- Practice and Training
- Practice and Training
- Scrimmage (Practice and Training)
- Practice and Training
- Practice and Training
- Practice and Training
- Play a game vs opponent
- Record Results
- Repeat 1-8 until end of season (maybe 15 games, unless you’re NHL)
- Compare Season Record vs Opponents
- Top teams compete in playoffs and championship games
- Winner gets Trophy.
HotS Ladder Game Play Loop
- Play a game vs opponent
- Record result
- Observe progress bar going up and down
- Repeat 1-3 ad nauseam
- At some point the “season” ends
- A bunch of players get a mount for continuing to play the game
- Nothing else changes
- Go back to 1.
You guessed wrong 
- You listed 12 steps to sports and 8 to HotS.
- On sports, your first 6 steps are all the same, so actually that’s just 1 step with fluff. So it’s 7 vs 8.
- But you actually forgot it from HotS, where ppl also need to, and do, practice. So 7 vs 9.
- You also list a step of “compare your records with others”, which is your rank in HotS. So the “progress bar”.
- The “nothing changes” is a fallacy. So it’s 7 vs 8.
- Go back to 1 is not a step, so 7 vs 7.
- Top teams don’t do playoffs and championships in the “park”. And HotS esports (hgc, ccl) do the same. So either 6 vs 7 or 7 vs 8.
Making fake steps or belittling either side is just dishonest or ignorant.
But it fits your prev “proof” patterns.
If you cannot outplay your peers and enemies, then you are in the rank you belong. Thats the whole point of match making buddy.
Don’t you think the match making system that just happens to be broken and justifying you not climbing (while many are) is just too convenient of an excuse for your lack of progression and ability to self-criticize and improve? Could it be that you’re just giving yourself excuses instead of taking a good hard look at your own gameplay and not improving?
I just dont understand people who think like this. Like, if you improve a part of your gameplay, you will win more and therefor climb in rank. There is absolutely no reason for blizzard to make a more complex match making system trying to keep people into their current rank for no reason. Its completely insane. Anyone who’s ever worked in game developpement will tell you this kind of thing is pure non-sense.
Anyway, if you’re here posting about it on the forums instead of just watching your own replays / streams and trying to improve your gameplay, the chances that you will accept your own lack of skill is what is stopping you from climbing are astronomically low. 99 against 1 says you’re just gonna type some “witty” answer and try to win the argument instead of just improving. Its kind of a problem that people complain instead of solving their problems (asking for help to improve, watching streams, etc.) just to protect their ego…
But just in case, i’d be happy to give you tips and help you improve. I’m a master player on EU and NA.
Not at all, it is possible that you have already reached the rank your skill matches with. For example: You may already just win 50% of your games nowadays and dropped from 60% to 54% by “only” winning 50% of your games lately.
Getting into the NFL, MBA, MLB, NHL, or signing up for your local dart league isn’t the competitive experience I’m talking about.
Obsessing over your “skill” rating compared to some other random player is isn’t competition.
I couldn’t care less that a Professional bowler is in the professional league in the context of enjoying the competitive experience in an amateur league.
Nobody signs up or gets drafted into a park game based on their skill and experience and then ranks everyone individually according to the outcome of their games.
Tell me you’ve never played in an organized team sports league without telling me you’ve never played in an organized team sports league again.
What is the competitive experience you’re talking about? You never mentioned what you really want other than that word (competitive) so, I want to make it clear.
You’re right, it’s not. But problem seems to be, you want a ‘competitive’ experience when you’re playing kid’s street hockey or something, as in, very casual setting.
Bronze isn’t amateur league equivalent though, in the context. Higher rank SL is.