Of course they word it in this way to hide the obvious. The logical extension of this is if you are on a win streak you are more likely to get these players on your team. So losers queue is now a confirmed feature. The devs are so tone deaf and incompetent they have zero shame in revealing this.
27 Likes
In a way, yes. Theyâre directly making it so that players on loss streaks are more likely to win. Itâs not 50/50 but itâs very slight rigging. Iâm not against it either.
6 Likes
How can you not be? Are you against competitive integrity?
6 Likes
No, competitive integrity is very important. The thing is that every game you play has matches that have teams which are âstatistically calculated to have a lower chance of winningâ. This is counterbalanced by different amounts of SR gain, sometimes even specifically brought up by the silly tags like âReversalâ or âUphill Battleâ. Itâs not a perfect system, and I believe matchmaking should be better, but regardless youâre never going to find the perfectly balanced teams.
Whether or not youâve realized it, this has been something in OW and every other competitive game since day 1. For example if you were to queue a team that averaged 2700 SR and the enemy team averaged 2701 SR, you would be unfavored. I think itâs fair to lean players who have had a rough go at it to be on the team with slightly more SR to even out their luck. They can still lose.
3 Likes
Yeah, this actually is rigging. Although, you have to lose multiple games before the matchmaker becomes biased in your favour. And even then, it doesnât put you in unlosable games - just ones that will give you the âExpectedâ modifier if you win.
It also confirms that theyâve only just started to do this. If I had spent multiple years claiming there was a âforced 50% winrateâ, Iâd be feeling a little embarrassed right now.
11 Likes
Itâs not forced if youâre good
1 Like
Your legs must be hella strong with the way you jumped to that conclusion 
7 Likes
The 50% win rate rule only applies to QuickPlay, and it is absolutely fair for casual gaming
Competitive is free, but in time, anyone will eventually hit their average rank in which they wonât win more games than the ones they lose
Now putting up a lobby where you know the odds and who is more likely to win, is really a no brainer
Its pretty basic for any competitive game and sports
The issue is that the rank appreciation is too wide
You can literally go from Masters to Plat in one single game for the algorithm
And thatâs why you have lossing streaks
The problem is that you are not going to Plat after you went full dwerp the game before, the player is going to experience tons of loses until they finally reach that rank; so the player can also justify being now in Plat
In addition, it also incentives playing more to get back up.
Sounds pretty epic, but reality is that it only creates faster burn out for the competitors
Blizzard knows this, and many are still wondering why OW1 died
To be perfectly honest, its been ages since I donât care about comp anymore.
The model is trash, and not worth my time in particular. But when Devs see the numbers dropping and queue times skyrocketing, they just patch whatever is needed to bump whatâs lacking behind
Like changing specific heroes or an overall role. Even announcing Comp2.0
I donât even read ranked changed on any patch since⌠season 5? xD
Its all the same
They are just coming with made up words to explain little by little what everyone already knows
And funnily enough, reversal if you donât. So if youâre in a lose streak you might actually start to drop faster. Which is a good thing
2 Likes
I prefer this patch. The previous one is too dam hard to grind because they always put you into the same level as yours every game (real 50/50). There is no need to get an intense match every game. If this patch, you can climb back easily if you lost some game. Btw just need few more time to test it out. But last night I played it seems pretty good tho.
They wonât be, because they will just say it has been happening forever, and have no shame.
3 Likes
The problem is that the opposite of this is necessarily true. That if you win a bunch of games, you will have to be skewed towards the expected loss.
Because if you skew one side towards expected wins, the other side necessarily gets skewed towards expected loss. You canât have one without the other. And I think thatâs kind of problematic tbh.
1 Like
It actually isnât at all.
Technically everyone who isnât on a losing streak is more likely to get these players on their team. Being on a winning streak doesnât matter outside of that meaning you are not on a losing streak.
Still bad, though. Even if itâs just slightly, itâs EOMM by definition.
Edit: Wait, is that even true? You are more likely to get them in your games, but the chances to get them in your team is lower than getting them on the enemy team, isnât it? Because there are 5 people who could be on a losing streak on the enemy team but only 4 who could be on a losing streak on your team 
The chances are higher that youâre playing against them, which means youâre playing at a disadvantage.
Yes, it is.
Letâs say you have 100 players. Under the old system, statistically, 50% would be in preferred wins and 50% in preferred losses, regardless of any other factors. You have a 50% chance to be in one or the other.
Under the new system, letâs say 30 of them are on loss streaks. Those 30 now get preferred wins. This means thereâs only 20 preferred wins remaining, split among 70 players. So now, instead, if youâre NOT on a loss streak, your chance of getting a preferred win goes from 50% in the old system to just 28% in the new system.
No matter what the actual numbers are, thatâs how it works. You only have 50% of your games as preferred wins, so if you favor people who lose for preferred wins, you MUST favor people who win for preferred losses.
1 Like
Youâre exactly correct. Itâs the age old âif you never leave games, youâre 20% more likely to have a leaver on the enemy team than your own teamâ argument. Except flipped here, because if youâre not in a losing streak, youâre 20% more likely to see it on the enemy team. Also compounding with the issue that youâre being favored for losing matches.
1 Like
⌠they said long ago that matches start with a specific % based on all of the team memberâs current estimated chances of winning (which is already a HUGE âguessâ), so yeah, if the match is Team A (52%) vs Team B (48%), they will try to get the players on a loss streak in team B ⌠which would also affect the odds.
Conspiracy theories are running hardcore here lol. Pretty sure some people unironically think that they are starting matches with 80/20 or something 
3 Likes
They didnt confirm it, they implemented a new thing partially because of the âforce 50/50â crew were getting upset about loss streaks and coming up with conspiracies.
Ironically, this new feature actually does create enforced wins and losses.
Dude i been saying its been forced 50/50 for years now how anyone could not see this rigged crap match making is beyond me lol i could not believe people were so dumb and argued against it.
2 Likes
Itâs impossible to make every game totally balanced. There is often a team slightly more likely to win. Itâs obvious. They already made it public when they changed how competitive worked to give more SR when you win despite being in the less likely to win team.
But the thing is⌠Most people are very inconsistent. Iâve avoided players because I thought they were terrible and next game they did a decent job.