Algorithmic Handicapping is Wrong for Online Games

This thread has been superseded.



I’m creating a new phrase for SR /MMR system.

It’s a humanitarian crisis if all of my assumptions are correct, because you will stay in your SR a bit longer than you would otherwise.

They should use 1 algorithmically defined value rather than 2 and the world would be saved.


Uh, I didn’t read everything, but yes


Yea, I get the feeling pretty much no one will read through that.


there’s no way I’m reading all that

good luck tho


I dunno.

My take is…
If you clicked on the Agree button, you effectively said that you will play/are ok with blizzard rules and regulations.

Regulation is onlyni needed i believe in the Competitive leagues like OWL where there are prize pools and things like that. Sorta like…the boxing regulatory body thing to santion fights and stuff. On a average player level, i dunno if this will be beneficial.

But what do i know.
I just like…saying things.


That’s how it works, though. MMR has nothing to do with how you’re matched in comp with 1 exception.

Presumably you don’t remember when Jeff posted about this issue and told us it uses nothing more than SR and ping, and that they’d have to make an exception when it came to GM players’ SR decaying to Diamond and being matched with… Diamonds.

Obviously they’ve sinced removed SR decay.


(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)



why would Blizzard devise a system where they can purposefully make you lose when they could just do nothing and let your team win when they deserve to win until they’re matched into games they deserve to lose?

to believe this you have to overlook all of the esoteric circumstances relating to the 100s of humans you’ll come across throughout your game session, prone to failure, variance and making mistakes as we are, and think all of those variables can be orchestrated as intended through Blizzard’s matchmaking system?


Didn’t OP post the same thing a while ago and it got ignored just as hard?


He has the same topic in the Comp section of the forums. Used to be a hot take when he first posted it, now almost everyone ignores it. I guess he is trying his luck now in the General section of the forums.

Too bad for him tho since the General section of the forum is way less cringy (and more self aware of their own gameplay) and more objective than the Comp section.


You may be interested to know that Activision Publishing Incorporated, the game holding company of Overwatch, has included gender, income, and residential location as possible discriminating factors for the purpose of matchmaking, in the description of invention for their 2015 Matchmaker patent. I have only given this a brief mention in my video, but it deserves more attention.

Thanks also for your kind words!


it’s flat earth levels of paranoia… people have been claiming this is happening since Bungie first put MMR in a video game (Halo2) back in what, 2004? I think I’m correct with that claim?

don’t you think it’s more fair to match based solely on SR, group size and ping as opposed to trying to predict how close to their potential players are going to perform on a match by match basis?
why even attempt to do that when, for example, players can throw games and completely ruin the work of art this code would need to be in order to have any positive effect?


Of course the forums overwhelmingly thinks things other than their own performance are the primary reason for losses in ranked games. No poll will ever say otherwise. Most players aren’t self-aware enough to realize that matchmaking isn’t a problem. It’s actually very good in this game.

Can’t we adjust examine our own performance and think “What could I have done better that match?”? Excluding games with throwers/leavers, anyone who says “nothing” to that isn’t paying enough attention in-game and thinks they’re better than they are.

No, they say. It must be algorithms that are the problem.

Also, OP is this you? I hope you didn’t create an alt account to praise yourself. The writing style seems the same and the first post ever is in this thread.


all you need do is ask yourself why, though. :joy:

competitive games already have amongst the higher levels of player engagement, it’s all of the human psychology it’s stimulating and simulating that makes it compelling to play, not some manipulative algorithm… it’s not necessary and would just be detrimental, and if it was as effective as you’re implying it can be, it alone can fix balance issues etc.

that patent is probably not even being used, and it’s way more likely it’s going to end up in some Activision version of raid: shadow legends where it matches you against players that are favoured to beat you and have heroes you don’t. these games are ‘computable’ you can calculate the outcomes before hand, you can’t do that in Overwatch, especially not Overwatch as it’s probably the least symmetrical competitive game on the market.


Honestly I always hated this part of OW. Seriously MMR makes you lose games on purpose if you are on a win streak, so you can have a " balanced " game .

It doesn’t help that season placements don’t do anything, but out you at the same rank you were already at, like imagine if the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were allowed to automatically make the Super Bowl again because they won it last year.

Make placements actually matter for once


This is where my critics always land with their bottomless skepticism: in bad faith, ad hominem attacks, against me and my supporters. Nobody ever stands up to my argument. Pure intellectual cowardice.

Ideal for whom?

To be fair, a game where you have a 50/50 chance of losing, is the ideal.

But given his lack of Tank players, it’s difficult to anticipate that.

Also Tanking is really difficult to measure, compared to damage and heals.

That’s one big benefit with 5v5 is that the MMR match for Tanks is going to be a lot more of a narrow range.

And a bad Tank player isn’t going to have their stats muddy’ed up by a Rein main that’s carrying them.


Lol, ok. That’s definitely you.

Firstly, I did respond to your topic on its merits. Secondly, it’s intellectual cowardice to make up false support for your arguments when there isn’t any elsewhere.


I didn’t even know that many words existed in the English language.