No. You don’t understand. The matchmaking algorithm does not use SR as a variable.
LOL Bro… the SR is a output of the Matchmaking system, its a virtual representation. Its also known at one time there was a 1000SR spread enforced.
1 Like
Don’t remove the handicap tho, i don’t want unbalanced matches 
1 Like
You have it reversed. The SR equation has input variables from the matchmaking algorithm. E.G. you gain more SR if you win when the matchmaker thought you had less than a 50% chance.
1 Like
SR is a final number, derived from the variables in the MMR, I already said this earlier. Stop trying to just flat out disagree with me, I know I am right on how it uses these values to group on. It was at one time 1000 SR, this was well known, now its expanded with RQ, and in fact seems to “flex” a bit based on number of players, etc.
I’d like a link to the exact information you are quoting btw.
I just want to comment that I am expanding the original post with more references to source material that has been raised since the thread’s inception, all the way back in 2017 on the Battlenet forums. The pandemic has had me heavily distracted, but it is time to add more of the troubling information that has come to light in 2020 and 2021.
I appreciate the recent discussion this thread has received, even the criticism, and I am always trying to improve my writing about this topic which is of great personal importance to me…that I believe is important to all gamers. Please check back in about a week for a more substantial, expanded original post that I believe will get more of us on the same page.
1 Like
Nothing new came out, stop manipulating the community with fake news, you have absolutely any proof anything you’ve said is true, you have no backing from any of the staff members here, stop spreading lies.
And don’t give me “Scott’s post/interview/whatever,” you’ve clearly twisted his words to makes yours look better, or even half true. At this point in time, you are 100% trashing Blizzard and the system they’ve developed for us as players (players who have no say in how the company is run), you’ve degraded the staff, and slandered the game itself.
1 Like
Your matches would be balanced by SR, which is assuredly more fair. It’s the correct thing to do, since the ladder ranks, scores, and pays out by SR. Shipping with anything but SR is anti-competitive.
If SR is fit-for-purpose as a skill metric, then randomly pulling 12 accounts by narrow SR band is more than enough to “balance matches”.
1 Like
Stop with the trollish damage-control and schilling. It’s over. The community has learned about the rigging, and it needs to be exposed in greater detail so new players don’t enter the gambling house.
You discredit a community trying to become woke and take a stand against rigging in esports. Nothing your closed mind can say will change the fact that Overwatch is literally mentioned word-for-word in the patents (there is a literal picture of OW several times).
1 Like
For one, it’s not damage control, I’m just sick of reading the lies and slander, and second, the way this game is run is none of our business, we aren’t privy to their internal works, if you really want to know, as I’ve said before, Blizzard is hiring devs.
I couldn’t care less about Esports or anything to do with them. This community on the other hand, doesn’t deserve the lying dibble in this thread, no facts, no proof, and only twisted words that fit the needs, might as well rename this thread CNN:Overwatch.
Once again, those patents you’ve linked over and over and over, never mention the Overwatch title, stop making things up, go do some math homework or something while the adults are discussing things. ‘Literal picture’ also includes NPCs and in-game purchases enhancing aspects in game, yep, thats Overwatch for sure.
1 Like
A mention of Overwatch by name in a patent for rigged matchmaking isn’t lies and slander, it’s legal fact. The patent is in active use with the bureau.
The oppressed party here is the consumer, not the corporate entity. They are misrepresenting their product as a fairplay integrity esport. I suggest seeking help, since you offer nothing to the thread but denial and can’t come to terms with reality.
1 Like
Prove it. You can’t, thus lies, and slander.
Wrong, we agreed to the ToS, the CoC, and so on, we aren’t oppressed, we literally agreed to it.
How so? Nothing in this thread proves one way or the other. And once again, I don’t give a… about Esports.
I’m asking for actual proof instead of theories and twisted words, can I not be provided with solid evidence here? I will deny everything until solid proof is provided.
Thanks for the personal attack, I don’t need help however.
1 Like
It has been proven in several threads.
Refusal to self-inform = personal denial. You’re not fact checking, you’re just blindly denying. That is offtopic and inapropriate for this thread.
Gambling goes against the BBB and rigging goes against esports. So they are exposing themselves to a class-action for misrep and damages. Not to mention a lot of bad press when the case forces an inspection of the algs 
A dev statement on record, an active patent which mentions OW, statements from the original authors on file, a screenshot that shows the game.
That’s enough for most reasonable people, so we’ll go ahead with the discussion. You are in active denial if you don’t adjust your belief function. No amount of evidence will sway your blind devotion to the corporation.
Neither could they. Case in point: the layoffs, 0 ladder maintenance, fairplay integrity under the bus, etc. It’s entertainment, they favour rigging over engagement and sales.
Stop damage controlling for the company. It’s offensive to customers. The community deserves consumer protection and awareness. “I don’t believe you” isn’t enough anymore - you’ll have to show evidence that the patents aren’t in use, that devs have said they don’t mmr for 50/50, etc.
Pro tip: Stop denying, start fact-checking.
I’d like to take a moment to thank the actual contributors to this thread for their hard-work in exposing the issues. Whether or not you believe them, whether or not 100% true. It’s highly sus, and it’s a great technical debate about the workings of rigging and why/not to ever have it in esports.
1 Like
I really don’t like a competitive ladder that only takes winrate into account.
You either win or lose, those are simple rules… games have grown more complex, though for a good reason of course.
2 Likes
Then tell us what we’re being scored, rigged, and paid out on?
I really don’t like a team that backs a hidden rigged competition mode and labels it an esport. No place for that kind of misrepresentation.
1 Like
Well, I love it when a system is made to evaluate my performance and puts me in a matchmaker that knows what I’m capable of.
This way I’m put in a fair match because the performance is tracked of every player in the lobby, this way everyone has equal performance… at least somewhat close.
I think this is way more stable than winrate, there are many factors that can result in players being boosted unintentionally and this way the ladder keeps its integrity.
2 Likes
Incorrect. Because forcing the matchmaking unforces the ranks. You can’t have it both ways. Either you get proper labels or you get fake rigged “close” matches (which aren’t actually fair).
In real competition and real ladders your rank is all the assurance you need for “fairness”. It’s a hands-off approach, which means you can stomp, be stomped, streak, etc. But if SR labels/classifications are remotely fit-for-purpose, than that’s all you ever need to ship a match AND have fair rewards.
Don’t you want to know what is being tracked? Don’t you value your data trail and question what the performance criteria might actually be?
As long as this is not done through rigging and handicapping - and is publically auditable (every sport needs to know the rules and evaluation criteria). Otherwise the ladder is of flawed design, or intentionally an anti-competitive scam.
1 Like
Oh but they are fair, my experience indicates so.
I think it’s still fair though, all they do is track correct performance and i’m happy with it.
People who don’t agree with this, are in my eyes just blaming something so they don’t have to take the blame.
Not really, i’m not playing to satisfy the exact things it’s tracking… i’m trying to play a game here. Though if it were only based on winrate then it wouldn’t be much fair to me. This would also heavily affect the MM.
I think these threads give me enough information to work with: How Competitive Matchmaking and Rating Works (Season 27)
1 Like
I have updated the information on my polls, and appended my original post with analysis of Activision’s 2015 patent for a matchmaking system. I hope that fans and critics of the original post will re-read it, to familiarize themselves with relevant details of the patent. Activision’s Matchmaker description aligns with what we have heard from Scott Mercer and other Blizzard reps about the function of Overwatch’s Matchmaker.
Overwatch players, and gamers in general, deserve to know their terms of use in ranked competitive play. Activision’s Matchmaker patent reveals those terms to include skill measurement for handicapping. Concerningly, it also includes forms of user discrimination based on demographic information, specifically including and not limited to gender, income, and residence.
Yeah that’s not going to cut it. We have objective, well-defined measures of fairness that abstract away from people’s subjective interpretation of “fair”. You can’t patent naive, unadulterated fair. You can patent rigged mechanisms like slot machines and all the sleeze in the casino/gambling business.
The system doesn’t let you properly compete. It doesn’t tell you how you’re scored or show you that score. It rigs. They’re blaming a rigged design that takes away their rightful ownership of their data and results, a rigged sham that takes away their control and influence on a match.
It’s puke-worthy. And I hope they have to close it down.
1 Like