Algorithmic Handicapping (MMR) is Wrong for Online Games

You should try using the <details> HTML tag to more easily segment your paragraphs… walls of text aren’t particularly alluring for readers.

Here’s an example:

Example (Click to Open.)

Makes it much easier to organize and compress your post. It’s less intimidating, increasing the chances of people more thoroughly looking through it.


How to Utilize the “Spoiler” Function
<details><summary>(Name of Section)</summary>
(Contents of Section)
</details>

There you go, hopefully that’ll help you with your future posts. It’s a very useful feature. :slight_smile:

No it doesn’t. It makes teams consisting of averages of up to 1000 SR difference than me; In either direction, depending on the handicap for that match. Sometimes I’m the obvious carry. Sometimes I’m the obvious potato. It usually depends on how well I did the match before. It’s a very deliberate and consistent pendulum swing.

1 Like

That’s not because of MMR, that’s in spite of it. It means MMR is failing to find accurate matches, which is its point. Doesn’t help that MMR and SR seem to be separate. Meaning in the lower ranks you can have crappy plats and decent silvers in your matches. Again it’s imperfect. But that issue isn’t due to MMR, it’s in spite of it. If you remove MMR then you would see even wider gaps. You want a bronze and a grandmaster in the same match?

Well you think I’m delusional and I think you are, so the only way to settle it is to release the algorithm to the public.

Ironically more fair than the current matchmaker, imo, because at least it’s random and not insidious.

It is literally less fair to be random. You described an issue of too much randomness. Ergo further randomness is less fair. It’s like you’re treating MMR like some kind of holier than thou judge you must break humanity away from like a false god. So yeah admittedly you seem pretty delusional.

If you want to complain about a game with actual rigging in the matchmaking, go complain about Hearthstone. At least there they’re able to actually see what cards you’re playing and match you poorly deliberately. I don’t know if I am completely 100% sure Hearthstone does this, but it’s infinitely more feasible than with Overwatch.

And as someone said earlier with Overwatch; there would be no need to force 50/50. As it would be naturally achieved once a player reaches where they currently belong. You don’t need to artificially force a winrate that would be naturally occurring when you’re playing in your correct rank.

No it’s not. If you know it’s random, you can expect it to be random. That’s fair. If you expect to get a fair match with the matchmaker and you get stomp after stomp, then it becomes difficult to trust the algorithm, imo. This isn’t some isolated incident. It happens over and over again.

Do well in one match, the next match you get stomped. It’s calculated. Predictable. Unfair. The only reason you win is largely because the matchmaker lets you. It wants you to win sometimes so that you feel good and keep playing no matter how bad you are. It wants players to lose sometimes to get a sense of challenge, no matter how good they are.

1 Like

I couldn’t be bothered to read much further, but I think it doesn’t matter much, because all I want to ask is:
What would you replace the matchmaker with?

Just randomly throw players together? Because spoilers: those matches will also have you feeling “handicapped” and be frustrating, perhaps even more frequently.
Or come up with some hallowed, amazing and perfect new system? Because that doesn’t exist. There is always uncertainty in any match, and any system will make mistakes. What’s more, people don’t like spending too long in queue, waiting for some perfectly curated match.

Yes, I do miss the the free-for-all serverbrowser days of TF2 etc, but ideally that’s optional, and definitely not ranked, because actual ladder games shouldn’t be determined by literal RNG as to who gets newbie opponents.

You are objectively wrong. Matchmaking is far closer to a 50/50 coin flip which is still random. It sucks that sometimes the enemy team happens to pick the right heroes and move in the right way that the enemy never managed to counter, but it would be so much worse with no matchmaking. Nearly every single game would be a stomp one way or the other.

Matches would be determined by what side got better players before the match even started. It’s not even a game anymore.

1 Like

Whyyyy? Just why would you necro this 4 years later?? :sob::sob:

2 Likes

How the system should work;

Beat most on the way, till you hit upper tier, where skill decides continued climb.

How it actually works;

2 super skilled players always oppose each other in low ranks, creating a low Elo deadlock.

1 Like

It’s literally the opposite of that. SR is more accurate and better for ladder conditions. And SRD isn’t like MMR at all because of the rank fidelity, mixing, progression, and noise effects.

SRD self-constructs it’s own performance. SR maps everyone’s ability to win in every sense (mean, variance, others). The skillgap between players in a random-around-SR match is just as variable initially as something with MMR rigging, only it feels less rigged and over type doesn’t breakdown to the same noise/corruption effecits. So it actually feels better psychologically and actually maps you to something measurable who’s meaning remains correct.

Already explained why this is wrong. Random is provably the most fair. It cancels out biases and maps your skill directly to an ability to win. Your agency is always held accountable on a per match basis, on demand, against an average datum for the rank. Unlike the data-invasive rigging which designs away your determinism and affectance.

Randomness is provably the most fair.
You don’t “random” around half the ladder. That’s where you get into different weight classes or leagues. This would be “fair” to the contestants in the sense that the strongest would stomp and the weakest would lose - the natural essence of competition. But we know that becomes uninteresting and unsporting, so you ship random but ship it around a small interval. This interval can be adaptive (wider or tighter depending were you are on the ladder or where the population/queuetimes are).
The biggest difference here is the lobby formation is random, not rigged.

The in-game mmr-rigging doesn’t (directly) force a winrate. It forces an odds ratio on the outcomes. When people get this confused I usually stop listening to them, as they haven’t passed the necessary comprehension checks.

This will converge to 50% winrate through various effects, some of them being anchor stats (sr vs. mmr mismatch) and non-transitive ones (wintrading the same trolls back/forth around sr labels that have nothing to do with their ability).

We have shown SRD to be the superious replacement. This implies matchmaking randomly around a small SR range. Instead of rigging around a small MMR range. Except with random, it’s fair and not rigged and better in a statistical sense.

2 Likes

Ironic that is what the matchmaker is doing, in essence. It sets one team up to win and one team to lose. A good team can still lose if they flub, and a poor team can overcome the odds, but those are less likely. Most matches are determined at the beginning. Open profile stats make it quite evident, as do stacks, level, and endorsement to a lesser degree.

If they ever release the algorithm, and I, and the others whom believe the MM is rigged are proven wrong, I would be very happy. But imagine if we are right. I dont think you all would be very happy that it was actually rigged (or nefariously manipulated) the entire time.

If a system is easy to manipulate, it’s because the system is trying to manipulate things in the first place, imo.

No, it doesn’t.
It tries to find 12 people who are as close as possible to each other in MMR (and this usually also reflects in the very narrow SR difference you get in competitive).

1 Like

It’s trying to do the exact opposite.

1 Like

It’s trying to make money. That’s all. It doesn’t care how fair the matches are. That’s not it’s intended purpose. It’s intended purpose is to keep players playing for shareholder metrics by stroking their ego every third or fourth match, and to make money from alt accounts.

That makes no sense.

Why not? You think Acti cares more about integrity and fairness over money? Lol.

Take off your tinfoil hat. The best way for them to make money is to make the best possible match maker. It doesn’t help that everyone is making 10+ accounts in order to ruin matchmaking as much as possible, but it isn’t the algorithms fault that not every match is perfect.

There is also barely anyone playing anymore.

1 Like

Lol, ok you win. Matchmaker is fine and everyone loves it and can tell how fair it is.

It really is fine. I have amazingly close to 50% wins over 20,000+ matches. People don’t hate the match maker. They hate losing and they are looking for things to blame. You just can’t win every match.

1 Like