I do not claim to understand this system, but if I had to put reasoning to it, I would say MMR is a personal rating and looks for other players with similar stats, while SR is a visible display in a fancy way, matches will always have some discrepancy when put together. The SR number (from what was said in the interview with Jeff and Seagull) doesn’t actually have any bearing on the match, since it’s just a visual representation of current mmr.
If mmr was to be deleted, and the ladder reset, we would end up with more topics like this current one, with the same arguments under different names.
As said above, SR is only a visual representation.
Yes I agree, but at the same time, it’s still people within the same mmr/sr range, like I currently have a negative winrate for my dps role, but I’m still up roughly 100sr (not sure how mmr ties into this).
The part you touch on about smurfing, if I was to be dropped into a match 1000sr below where I am currently, even I could hard carry (providing no other smurfs). One of the major issues with the current system (IMO) is the usage of alts, smurfs, cheaters, as the system doesn’t account for it, say you hopped on my account, does the game know it’s not me playing?
I suppose that ‘low ELO’ would mean low-performing/low-skilled, relative to others in my rank? And ‘high ELO’ would mean high-performing/highly-skilled? I’m not super familiar with how the term ELO is used colloquially, and I have avoided using it in this discussion because I’m not sure how much it really resembles what we have in Overwatch.
SR and MMR pose a constantly changing double standard. Meanwhile, according to Wikipedia, “An Elo rating is a comparative rating only, and is valid only within the rating pool where it was established.” Let’s agree to think of this in terms of ‘relative skill’ (the same way that Activision does, according to their patent descriptions). Relative skill can be high or low, compared with others near the same rank.
Back in the day, and when I recently played Overwatch just to get some footage for my video, I qualified for middling ranks and consistently found myself to be one of the most, if not the most, skilled player in every match. But as soon as I come into a fresh season and handily carry a few teams to victory, simply by playing the objective and using the meta, the MMR system kicks into gear and then every match is a slog.
I still observe myself to be one of the best if not the best player in each match (observable via medals, post-match cards, commendations, etc.) But typically there are a handful of other worthy players ranged against me on every opposing team, and every team I get is full of potatoes. Even in a match like this, I will do my best to carry, but that quickly becomes frustrating and when you understand how MMR/SR works like I do, it is unconscionable.
A player who deserves the highest respect, in my opinion, is someone who is currently high in the ranking system but still agrees that the MMR system has be scuttled. A true competitive player is one who knows the rules of the game they are playing. I have zero respect for the players currently in the top tiers. They are lucky incumbents, not champions.
Well the thing is that in the current system I think that its impossible that like a 1500 sr player is rigged by MM so hard that he should belong into masters, Gm or even diamond. (Not that you said that)
But I do think that 1000 SR is absolutely possible. I saw low diamond hardstuck players that played consistent above their elo.
But they needed way too many games to reach master.
The thing is that its a HUGE different if you are able to get a fresh lvl 25 account to GM at like level 33 or if you are a gold boarder player that was hardstuck 10+ seasons on plat/dia and then very slowly climbed after 1000 matches with 52% winrate.
The problem is that you get free wins and free losses in this system. And I dont want both.
I tend to think of the matchmaker as a college professor, and while you might have the skill to do well in higher elos, it however decides you are not ready to pass and therefore puts potatoes on your team until you can prove you can carry them.
It’s like you have to pass the “final exam” with flying colors before it more or less decides to let you play at any level higher than you currently are. If you fail the exam, it’s a nice long 7-game losing streak for you. So, enjoy your 50% winrate and try taking the “final exam” again after your next winstreak.
You are 100% right. I think this is discussed enough. Anyone who cant understand it now is either braindead and has 0 understanding for fairness and competitive gameplay OR: players that know how the system works and they want it like that because it helps them.
Its disgusting like SBMM in CoD.
Good players suffer from it. Bad players get help from it.
ok, ill break this down…
players who play the game and are better than you so long as they arent using cheats belong where they should be
you claim to have no respect for top tier players, thats fine, but then how are they constantly able to get accounts into t500 and GM? based on the quote im using, these guys must either be the MOST LUCKIEST players in the world, or have the actual skills required to play this game at a top level.
This is something I have to disagree.
It has nothing to do with luck climbing to Gm And higher.
I agree with you on all points about the MM system and that it is rigged to „protect“ bad players and to „handle“ too good players.
Its not in Blizzard intention that good players simply destroy bad players on a long way.
IF you are a GM player you will ALWAYS climb to gm If You play enough. The thing is that you cant climb fast anymore because you lose too many matches because of the MM system that is against you if your winrate is too high. (Punishing system against good players).
Only players that are still able to climb really fast are OWL level players (4500SR+)
Bronze to mid plat? Holy moly dude. Teach us.
In season 19 I made an bronze to GM and started at 1000SR. On 3922 I had 72% winrate on Ashe. Overall winrate was like 60%.
But should I tell you a secret?
You didnt even hit the MMR WALLS from bronze to mid plat.
Have fun reaching 3300-3600 THATS where the Matchmaking clownfiesta starts.
Like others have said, this is where I disagree as well.
Skill is the only consistent factor here, which works in favor of your argument (and in pretty much any other general case, including those who disagree with the chief argument).
The problem becomes apparent for players trying to climb who are being held back, either due to the system punishing them for overperforming (allegedly), or floating bad players and getting bad teammates.
I think there is actually a much deeper logistics issue where fairly new players with Bronze skills get placed in Gold, end up playing with the general Gold/Silver population and dragging those games down, before rolling all the way down to the rank they deserve.
This issue is only one-way, as, likewise, new players with above-Gold skills get placed into Gold and rapidly climb/carry their games until “rolling” uphill to the elo they belong in. You won’t get nearly as many players in above-Gold elos who drag games down. I would actually expect there to be more smurfs there than throwers.
The bigger problem are new/unskilled players that slide downhill from mid-elo, and ruin games.
He didnt got lucky. He didnt hit any MMR wall on that range.
2900,3400 and 3900 are MMR walls and IF ANYONE is saying that this is not true I have to play the SR card and say that I give nothing on platchat.
I boosted enough accounts to masters and it was always the same. Winrates were insane but after I hit 3400 = lose, win, lose, win, lose, lose, win, win.
I even had a account that was 3499 peak and after that I DRAW the match to master on Anubis (was lucky we should have lost).
The MM tries EVERYTHING on that MMR walls to keep you at your current rank.
They dont want you to climb. They want you to PLAY.
oh i know we agree there. i call it their bell curve but same explanation different naming. I still can get any account i touch to masters or so but it’s so darn slow on some of them at this point that i just wonder about some of the games it throws me like I loveeee close games LOVE them but on every account i do placements whether they are plat or masters the games just feel weird where almost all of them i win but then 2 are basically stuck in the darn spawn which don’t get me wrong i got my butt handed to me just like my teammates did but even you can say maybe its the human condition or something but when its a pub stomp and you have done nothing but wreck the entire time and the account is placed lower than your normal SR you kinda laugh and wonder what their little match maker does to encourage that much of a different in game quality I’m not saying a 50/50 is even real i just think their systems are designed for everyone and their momma to que up which means you get paired with people even in higher ranks that just are very very questionable and you can kinda tell the people who usually play in a group vs a solo que because of how poorly they play. Again don’t get me wrong i play poorly sometimes too im no excuse but after awhile of sitting there watching some of the vod’s back to back and you watch from other peoples point of view you can almost immediately within the first pushes tell who your people that you’re carrying are.
My fastest account to hit masters was at level 27/28. won 5 placements on dps placed 3241. after that I won my next 3 rounds and got masters because after placements you get that SR boost (which is a braindead system).
The boost also works on the other side. If you lose you get like 100 SR MINUS. Which is braindead.
Lets say you win 5 out of 5 and then you get a leaver and simply cant carry the match anymore. You get -100 sr because of the boost AND your winstreak is gone.
This new system is also made against good players to not rise too fast.
BEFORE that boost system was implemented you were able to get placed on GM or at least 3600-3800 if you won 10/10 or 9/10 with high performance.
But now its just another way for blizzard to keep you playing more and more.
Where are you getting that number from? My poll results are at the top of the original post. They have had about 2,000 participants across 5 instances. I do not tally votes by counting comments, that is based on upvotes/downvotes (old Battlenet forum) and likes for my post vs. likes for the most liked opposing post. Polls are generally not expected to have 100% participation, and it is best to accept the result when it keeps coming out the same.
Even with 2000 participants, it’s still only a fraction of the amount of active players, even more so at the time they we’re made, I agree polls aren’t expected to have 100% participation, but you got less than 2% of active players, and if that’s the case, I find the results irrelevant, as do many other people who frequent these forums.
Yes, for matters such as this one, it should be discredited due to lack of player input, the cherry picked questions and quotes, lack of actual understanding of the system.