Algorithmic Handicapping is Wrong for Online Games

[Cuthbert-11649]

If you really didn’t mean to misconstrue the events of my match and you really weren’t trying to cover your tracks, then I’ll apologize for calling you a pathological liar.

[Moira-21906]

I genuinely wasn’t and thanks for apologising, I also apologise for overreacting.

[Cuthbert-11649]

Cool. Anyway, whether I’m a good Rheinhardt player is not the discussion. Do you think it’s right for ranked, competitive play to be algorithmically handicapped?

[Moira-21906]

Yes I do in lower ranks as I stated before due to the high amount of skill differences in ranks such as gold and platinum

otherwise there would be a tons of 1 sided games cause of the skill differences

in higher ranks diamond+ I don’t see an issue with it being removed

I genuinely feel if it was removed for lower ranks we’d see competitive games acting more like quickplay games and that would be horrifying.

[Yvaelle-1484]

@Cuthbert-11649

Case in point
In every match, MMR tells matchmaking which players are relatively strong and which players are relatively weak. The MMR/handicapping system does not put all of the strongest or weakest players on either team (6 v 6) because it predicts that as a one-sided match.

Instead, matchmaking ensures that both teams have a balanced number of strong players and weak players. If one or two players from either team are real standouts (for good or ill), the ratio of strong and weak players might be closer to 2:4 or even 1:5, on either team. MMR is free to place the next-best 6 players in the match to oppose the best individual player, and it often does.

The degree of difference in skill between players is different in every match. But MMR picks up on every discernible difference between players. According to those differences in player skill, matchmaking arranges the teams and effectively handicaps matches, with no regard for individual players’ SR, outside of the 1,000 unit range.

So what’s the problem?
These kinds of matches are unproductive by design; they consistently prove as little as possible about the relative skill of the players participating. When matchmaking uses MMR to mix strong players with weak players, it guarantees in every match that some strong players will move down in rank, and some weak players will move up.

Hypothetically speaking, the most productive match is one where all 6 of the strongest players are on one team and all 6 of the weakest players are on the other. Because in the win/lose result, the strongest players all gain rank and the weakest players all lose rank. Even an impartial matchmaking system would not produce this type of match all of the time. But MMR/handicapping turns it into a unicorn.

MMR circumvents the natural selection process that is supposed to be taking place in Competitive Play. It makes the ranking system inefficient, stagnant, and keeps the ranking system from sorting players according to their merit.

Evidence of handicapping
Here are three simple things you can observe for yourself, which show how matchmaking and MMR handicap your matches:

Group and queue for matches with other players who you know are good at Overwatch. You will see that your wait times for matches scale up in direct proportion to how good you are, and how many of you are in the group. While there are other groups available to play at your collective SR level, matchmaking takes time to seek a group with an equal MMR profile.

Win matches as a group, and you will see your wait times increase from match to match. Matchmaking delays your games in order to handicap them, based on your group’s record. Again, there are other groups available to play at your collective SR level, but matchmaking takes time to seek a group with an equal MMR profile.

Note the spread of player experience (portrait color, stars) across teams, when you join matches in small groups or solo queue. You will see the teams in each game have roughly the same number of experienced and inexperienced players. The matchmaking system arranges teams this way to handicap matches.

It’s relative
Whether or not you sense the skewing of your matches depends on how good you are, as a team player, and where you find your SR rank to be. But if you are a relatively skilled player for your SR, then handicapping/MMR is designed to make every match difficult for you, specifically. It sounds like a persecution fantasy, but it’s patently real.

Fighting your own shadow
Every player has to ‘fight at their weight’ under MMR, even if that is the combined weight of the next five most-skilled players in the match. Handicapping/MMR ensures that every standout player finds a doppelganger or a set of players on the enemy team who are able to counteract them.

Suppose your SR is low for your skill level, and you are the best one of twelve players in a match. In that case, handicapping/MMR singles you out by placing all of the next-best players in the match on the enemy team. Hence you must counteract multiple opponents, like a baited bear.

That becomes a self-perpetuating cycle. The harder you try — the more you kill, heal, and play the objective — the more skilled opponents you will be faced with in your next match…the more skilled teammates you will be separated from. The challenge of the game is literally guaranteed to ramp up, whether or not you win your present match; whether you climb or fall in the SR system; as long as you try your hardest.

It is not enough to be good, to climb in SR. MMR follows you from match to match, figuring out how good you are. Then it informs matchmaking, which forces you to be better than yourself if you want to advance.

In this way, you can experience the same difficulty playing at most competitive ranks, regardless of how good you are. From a game design perspective, this seems like a magic formula, a dream. But from a player’s perspective, it is a nightmare.

Handicap favors inexperienced players
If you are an experienced player (with one or more stars of experience), you have a strong interest in MMR’s removal from matchmaking. MMR ensures that players of similar experience will be distributed evenly across teams. Again, this might sound fair-handed but let me explain why it’s not.

If you are the most experienced player in a match, handicapping/MMR teams you with the most inexperienced player in the match while placing the second, third, and even fourth-most experienced players to oppose you on the enemy team. It is inexperienced players who benefit from that arrangement, and experienced players who suffer.

You may deny the correlation of experience and skill. Why then, does matchmaking never place a slew of experienced players against a slew of inexperienced players? Is it interesting to see the outcome of such a match, or is it no contest? Why doesn’t handicapping/MMR allow those matches to take place?

Devalued experience
Inexperienced/unskilled players think they are being tested by placement matches and regular competitive matches in the same way that more experienced/skilled players are being tested. So a player with less than one star of experience assumes that they are equal to all players at their SR level, regardless of experience.

It does not occur to inexperienced players that they have arrived at their SR standing through the assistance of a handicap. And who can blame them? The handicapping/MMR system is hidden, after all. But it is not fair to experienced players that they should be forced to contribute to the success of less experienced players.

New players have a right to prove themselves in Competitive Play. But they do not have a right to be braced by veterans in every match, and escorted to victory.

Handicapping has caused millions (billions?) of pointless arguments between experienced players and newbies who will not accept their advice or command. New players deride experienced players for not being ranked higher, for all their hours of practice. And since newbies and vets alike are unaware of the handicapping system, the situation suggests to everyone that experience counts for nothing.

This whole section bothers the hell out of me and comes across as very elitist. It completely complains about better players being handicapped with lower tier players without even considering the fact that the other team has the same restrictions. Its a fair and balanced match because everyone has the same restrictions. That best player has an opposing best player to outcompete against on the other team and like 4-5 other worse players to abuse. The worst player is having to compete with their worst player on the other team. By everyone pulling their weight equally to rival their competitor on the opposite team you come to victory.

How many times have many of us experienced that one ‘good’ player who decides to screw everyone else over by saying, I’m not playing, Rein, I’m picking Roadhog and doing my own thing. It goes from playing as a team to playing by myself screwing everyone else over and requiring everyone else to pick up that person’s slack.

I bet the notion that the other 5 players playing as a team are really carrying the selfish ‘best’ player to victory. In my opinion, its unfair I have to put up with such a selfish person screwing things up when I see them doing the same stupid things as everyone else.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Cuthbert-11649

I appreciate that you are taking me up on the semantics, this is really important to the discussion. The key part of the definition is the “applied” part.

In server browser-based games like Team Fortress 2, highly skilled players will often split themselves between teams voluntarily, so that the match is not one-sided. In that case the players apply their own handicap, and it is each player’s prerogative to do so. In the case of Overwatch’s Competitive Play, the handicap is applied automatically by the Matchmaker, as it refers to each players Match Making Rating and arranges teams accordingly.

Team Fortress 2 players know each other from playing together on the same servers, and from a scoreboard which features full stats on each player. The handicapping of the match necessarily and completely depends on players’ knowledge of their skill relative to their peers. Overwatch players are always complete strangers to each other and never know any of their teammates’ and opponents’ performance stats (kills/deaths/assists), because the system is making the decision for them and segregating skilled/unskilled players based on the hidden performance stats.

But the biggest difference between Team Fortress 2 and Overwatch though, is that Team Fortress 2 does not purport to rank players based on their skill. Players would not voluntarily accept a disadvantage if they were being judged on their record of win/loss and performance.

Yea applied being something can be applied randomly.

TF Server-based human handicapping. You can do this in custom matchmaking and use discords just to put it in terms of a solution to your problem because it’s there all you need to do is get more support and encourage more to use it.

As far as human handicapping vs algorithmic handicapping when given the options players choose the second because while algorithms have problems they still will produce less error than humans.

The difference in TF2 and OW. There is none they have skill-based matchmaking now and server-based matchmaking. A player can choose to play the game either way.

@Cuthbert-11649

If matchmaking in Overwatch was SR-based and truly random, it would not constitute handicapping and would be analogous to the wind on a golf course. However, Overwatch’s matchmaking is not SR-based, it is MMR-based and not random at all.

I have already explained even random matches will handicap players. If you are randomly matched against a better team of the same SR it’s a handicap by the definition and is algorithmic.

Just like matching people based on ping and I doubt you have a problem with that.

Comp matchmaking is based on SR first then balanced with MMR.

The purpose of MMR is to give a better quality match and mitigate the impact of smurfs, boosters, and throwers.

If you play an infinite (or say 10000 matches) set of matches the only difference between MMR being there or not is the quality of matches. You will still win the same % and be at the same SR (if you ignore the better experience giving more chances to improve your skills)

I guess your issue with MMR is it holds you back or rigs your matches. The evidence that exists for it shows it does not do that and it’s not its intent.

This is why my argument, is you need to prove it’s doing something outside its intent or what it’s designed for and to prove that it’s detrimentally affecting the game more than random games would.

Or provide a system that is better. You did say a kid could do. Then do it and prove me wrong.

But to my point, your use of algorithmic handicapping is wrong and is another example of you using something that sounds good instead of building a solid argument. Like the patents, I explained in detail why it doesn’t prove anything and the existence of them doesn’t prove anything either way but you took them out of context and called them proof because like I said you care more about how your argument sounds than being fair and honest.

@Moira-21906

just watch the gameplay

A bad player can be right and to use gameplay that he is using for filler to won’t prove anything as that would be taking something out of context. Unless he claimed he was a better player than he was which would discredit the value of his opinion…

@Cuthbert-11649

I am vastly better than the majority of players I get on my teams, in every class and character. I want a random match and a fair chance prove my merit. And then mark my words, I will drag Blizzard’s precious “E-Sports professionals” down from their pedestals, together with other true competitors who are being suppressed by MMR.

There ya go.

[Cuthbert-11649]

@Rezeak-2251

TF Server-based human handicapping. You can do this in custom matchmaking and use discords just to put it in terms of a solution to your problem because it’s there all you need to do is get more support and encourage more to use it.

The difference in TF2 and OW. There is none they have skill-based matchmaking now and server-based matchmaking. A player can choose to play the game either way.

That may be so, but it was not the case when I was playing Team Fortress 2. Having played Overwatch more recently, it appears that most players are not forming matches the way you describe but simply jumping in queue. Am I wrong? I think we should focus on the historical mode of matchmaking that is still used by the largest segment of players.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Cuthbert-11649

Overwatch more recently, it appears that most players are not forming matches the way you describe but simply jumping in queue. Am I wrong? I think we should focus on the historical mode of matchmaking that is still used by the largest segment of players.

Point is you can play the game in a MMR free and algorithmic hanicapping free way. You could even build tournaments if you want it to be competitive but that is an algorithm and would be algorithmic hanicapping.

If you don’t want or don’t do this you don’t really have an issue with algorithmic hanicapping simple as. You just want to force people to play the game the way you want and that isn’t democratic which is a core value of yours. it’s just entitlement.

If your solution is comp without mmr. First you’ve be wrong for years about algorithmic hanicapping. Then on that issue the only substance you’ve brought to that is pure speculation. You haven’t shown in any real way how it would be any better unless it wasn’t doing what it was made for. Basically you need to prove that simple as.

The reason I got to this point.

If you have an issue with algorithmic hanicapping you have a solution case closed.

If your issue is MMR then keep at it but even at this point you’ve made 0 progress (well negative progress as you’ve been wrong for so long) or gathered any evidence. Then to add to this you have been misleading and manipulating people for years and even if not intentional you are responsible for your own actions.

[Veeshkav-1478]

I would think more fair matches would be more fun, but the company seems more interested in making money in whatever shady ways they can. They have probably hired psychologists to help market and retain sales and participation.

Having said that, if it’s not a tournament for a cash prize, who cares? Most players are not that good, and the ones that are get drafted to play in tournaments for cash prizes. The matchmaker would probably be more accurate if teams had to play with the same players in every match, but we all know how likely that is outside of tournaments with a cash prize.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Veeshkav-1478

I would think more fair matches would be more fun, but the company seems more interested in making money in whatever shady ways they can. They have probably hired psychologists to help market and retain sales and participation.

Sure but this is speculation. My issue isn’t the opinion it’s the op’s use of logic and evidence that is flawed, one-sided, and taken out of context.

My opinion is it’s players that ruin the fairness of games just by their nature of not always being at their best and others that exploit matchmaking. I think the systems in place do reduce the impact of that and are overall positive. I do think Blizzard could do more but I’d consider the removal of MMR or ow being open source a step back.

@Veeshkav-1478

if it’s not a tournament for a cash prize, who cares?

Sure, that’s why people (and me) prefer skill-based matchmaking. I don’t think server-based matchmaking is good or tournaments in-game that have millions of players but it is possible to do and a solution for anyone that claims algorithmic handicapping is an issue.

[BiggieCheese-11371]

So really what youre actually saying is that you’re bad at the game and you blame the game for your own inability to climb and win, when in reality, it’s your own fault for being bad

[Cuthbert-11649]

@Rezeak-2251

My issue isn’t the opinion it’s the op’s use of logic and evidence that is flawed, one-sided, and taken out of context.

What do you feel is taken out of context, and what context is missing?

[Rezeak-2251]

@Cuthbert-11649

What do you feel is taken out of context, and what context is missing?

I have explained it before. The patents, Dev posts, algorithmic handicapping, use of polls, the farming of likes and using that to justify your point, MMR and lack of addressing the problems it’s used to fix.

[Cuthbert-11649]

@Rezeak-2251

MMR and lack of addressing the problems it’s used to fix.

Let’s talk about that. What problems do you think MMR is fixing?

[TiderLaw-2312]

Stop keeping this crap thread alive.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Cuthbert-11649

Let’s talk about that. What problems do you think MMR is fixing?

Already have. It’s even on this page of posts. Also months before.

I’m not gonna keep repeating myself.

I will point out, I provided a conclusion as to why you are wrong in the way you use the term algorithmic handicapping and it isn’t your issue. Then if MMR is your issue, how your confusion has only done damage to the issue cause you deflected the issue onto something that is a basic of all matchmaking. I’d rather you’d address that post and try to explain why it’s wrong. If not, there’s no point continuing.

[Cuthbert-11649]

@Rezeak-2251

I will point out, I provided a conclusion as to why you are wrong in the way you use the term algorithmic handicapping and it isn’t your issue.

Please excerpt the post for me, I can’t find it.

@Rezeak-2251

Then if MMR is your issue, how your confusion has only done damage to the issue cause you deflected the issue onto something that is a basic of all matchmaking.

MMR is not basic to all matchmaking. There are all kinds of matchmaking systems, MMR is Activision/Blizzard’s invention.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Rezeak-2251

Point is you can play the game in a MMR free and algorithmic hanicapping free way. You could even build tournaments if you want it to be competitive but that is an algorithm and would be algorithmic hanicapping.

If you don’t want or don’t do this you don’t really have an issue with algorithmic hanicapping simple as. You just want to force people to play the game the way you want and that isn’t democratic which is a core value of yours. it’s just entitlement.

If your solution is comp without mmr. First you’ve be wrong for years about algorithmic hanicapping. Then on that issue the only substance you’ve brought to that is pure speculation. You haven’t shown in any real way how it would be any better unless it wasn’t doing what it was made for. Basically you need to prove that simple as.

The reason I got to this point.

If you have an issue with algorithmic hanicapping you have a solution case closed.

If your issue is MMR then keep at it but even at this point you’ve made 0 progress (well negative progress as you’ve been wrong for so long) or gathered any evidence. Then to add to this you have been misleading and manipulating people for years and even if not intentional you are responsible for your own actions.

There you go.

Also, didn’t say MMR is a basic of skill-based matchmaking. You misunderstood that and took it out of context like you did dev posts and patents.

[Cuthbert-11649]

@Rezeak-2251

Also, didn’t say MMR is a basic of skill-based matchmaking.

Yes, but you have said that skill-based matchmaking is universal, which is not true.

[Rezeak-2251]

@Cuthbert-11649

Yes, but you have said that skill-based matchmaking is universal, which is not true.

Didn’t say that. Problem about making a point without evidence is it’s just pointless text.

Since you don’t want to address the post, I’ll take my leave. I do think I have made a point where you’d have conceded algorithmic handicapping isn’t your issue and that is too much for your ego to deal with because it would mean your impact has really been anything but negative. That said, I’m sure people enjoyed venting there bad games with you and I enjoyed pulling the argument apart.

I’ll end with this. A good argument is one that changes to the truths to makes it’s point rather than bury it’s head in false presumptions to make no point.