I’m not sure if y’all can see my stats. I usually lose 2-3 games during division placements with 5 being the most I lost last night. I think I do consistently well, and I did two division placements twice yesterday and still placed Bronze 5. I thought the bug was fixed. Do I just suck lol? I’ve usually carried games by contesting point and doing more damage than DPS often.
Ok, so I have my stats but do not know if you can include photos here or how to…
It’s going to take all season to leave bronze 5 unless you mega stat pad. Win’s mean nothing. People are ranking to Plat with 40% winrates.
Can you please explain stat padding?
Since Blizz doesn’t give out details, we don’t really know to what extent the bug affected people
We also don’t know what the structure of bronze looks like (is bronze 0-1500 in 5 equal tiers of 300sr, or is it 0-1100sr, 1200sr, 1300sr, 1400sr, or something else? is bronze 5 representative of <500sr?)
If bronze 5 is “thicker” than 1-4, and if you were silver or low gold before ow2, there is a chance it will just require a bit of grind to get to the more “normal” sized tiers that only represent 100sr. It would also mean once you get out of bronze 5 you will probably jump through tiers quicker, which is something ive seen some people say happened to them
One thing you can do to tell if youre really stuck in bronze or if you are just artificially being shown as bronze is to look at ranks of ppl in your games, try to see what the avg is. You arent matchmade based on skill tier, but hidden MMR. It seems unlikely to me that your skill tier will stay b5 forever if you’re still getting silver/gold matches frequently (ofc this also relies on those players having raised their visible SR too… what a mess)
with queues leavers trolls alts smurfs and forced mmr rigging - that’s a heck of a lot of sweat + wait time + already gotgud → to finally reach your true rank.
boring proposition in a game that has no content except fake ranks forced grinds and predatory monetization.
This seems more like a flaw in how they visually represent bronze if it really is the case that b5 is 1100sr and the rest are 100. Because you could have the exact same issue if for example in chess you decided to generalize the elo you present in terms of tiers and gate how often people could view it, changing nothing else about it’s rating system.
But aside from bronze 5 issues, if they keep underplacing people, then it’s mostly equivalent to how people in gm get underplaced to 3.9 or how people above 3k used to get decayed to 3k, except now it seems to just be global and uniform. To me it seemed like they roughly decayed people’s visual ratings by roughly 1k aside from the people who were “bugged”. I don’t think it’ll rly be certain if that’s the case until next season though unless they say it right
Meaning you’re not really grinding back to “where you belong”, you’re just grinding for a vanity metric, treating the skill tiers as nothing more than badges (tho they are tied to certain end of season challenges). Which was sort of already the case in the past. You could have the same grind if you bought an account and tried boosting it. You get where you belong pretty quick, you just don’t get the shiny badge to prove it until you go through the grind.
which, btw, if the vanity metric is the end goal I’ve never felt OW was “worth the grind.”
Issue is while I don’t think players from Gold - Bronze are much different overall. Bronze does have players that underperform repeatedly. IF your in a Gold/High Silver lobby you have an easier chance to rank vs low bronze.
I’ve seen that when my tank when from 600sr to High Gold. I stopped trying to support and assist the low bronze players and just played Off tank wrecking ball as a Tracer.
You would expect the games to get harder but the opposite happened. The more I ranked the more my team used what I did and I created value to the Gold players.
I was close to ranking up when I got Report banned because Wrecking Ball gets report banned by idiots who didn’t have access to a scoreboard like now.
If they underplace GM they should overplace bronze. The compression should be from both extremes and towards the middle. Not a flat squash from the top down. So they didn’t even get that part right. Matters not, because the rest of the system isn’t proper ELO/glinko - it’s SBMM/EOMM/DDA. So they score you with a bunch of hidden params and push you up down that way. It’s never fun to be told to “do your best” and just not know why some people stay poor while others are afk rich.
That’s what’s really frustrating. It’s not that your doing your best to rank. It’s that the goalpost moves after every game and you need to keep increasing your best.
This is no different than High Pressure sales jobs. Reach top salesman month 1 get a new Quota. Eventually your going to reach a limit after a few months and lose commission as you can no longer find enough sales to grow.
No they shouldn’t. Don’t forget you’re talking about a rating that’s not used for matchmaking. It’s nothing but an incentive digit. If they’re going to apply rank decay to encourage people to grind, then it should be applied uniformly, not arbitrarily inverted for low ranks because you want them to feel like playing games is just going to lower their rating because the system boosted their initial skill tier.
Not always true. I know quite a few legitimately bronze and silver who get frustrated because they can’t keep up in gold lobbies. You might be an outlier, who performs very well with support from their team. You might not be. I don’t know you enough to judge. But I know friends in those ranks well enough to say it is not automatically easier to rank up in higher rated lobbies.
Yes it is. It’s not a job you rely on and the commission isn’t something of real worth. It’s only there to give you an idea of where you are in regards to everyone else.
Which is also why it’s really lame to me that they’re underplacing people at all. I liked being able to be reasonably certain of the lobbies skills by looking at rank, even if it was already pretty dicey.
But you are right, in games where you are rated vs other players (OW, Valorant, League, Chess…) in order to keep progressing upwards, you must meet higher quotas. Otherwise you will fall behind relative to everyone else. A gm in any rating system inherently risks far more than they stand to gain when joining a match, because they are likely to win (or not lose and draw instead, in some games).
Yes they should. SR is supposed to be equally distributed along a normal curve. You can’t have SR where it doesn’t belong. If you squish most players down (1-contraction), you don’t get that SR curve. You get more of a pyramid shape which isn’t how ranks are supposed to work (using elo as an example). The labelled rewards will be wrong and the “thickness” of players in a rank will be wrong.
No they shouldn’t. Expecting everyone below the midpoint to place knowing they’re gonna derank the rest of the season is a worse idea than expecting people to go through grind to feel “progression”. If you were talking about mmr, you would have a reasonable take because it being properly distributed along that curve matters more. Skill tiers can lag ahead or behind as much as it wants as long as your players stay content, since it’s not used for creating matches or adjusting MMR after matches (I hope).
Yes it should. Midpoint placements minimize the trajectory times for the most number of people. You want to minimize disruption not maximize the “grind/progression”. Rank labels are supposed to be correct, not made up. A reset to the middle is promised to be best-possible using Virial Theorem. A reset that squishes what is suppose to be a bell curve down towards one of the boundaries but not the other will obviously favour the free boundary end (the high ranks climb out and expand into free unclaimed SR territory while the lower ranks are crushed until it expands sufficiently).
We are supposed to be talking about the same thing offset only by scale. SR should follow MMR shape. Both as normal pdf. You want mmr to expand (from middle) out into it’s fully developed SR curve. You don’t want one of the bounds clamped (the bronze) and have the upper bounds a free boundary (an 0,1 curve expanding out upwards only). The left-right or bottom-up expansion will always create more disruption then middle out. Not only that, but the locked boundary effects of one side will ruin MMR calculations because of the additional collisions.
What do you play? Dps? Tank? etc.
I’d be happy to look at some replays for you 
I’m so confused now because idk if stat padding does anything to ranking up. Ive gone from B4 > B3 > B1 > S5 > S5. This was with really decent stats, alot for 40+ kill games 15k + dmg.
But when my brother said he was doing his first 7 placement matches I told him to keep track of his stats. He placed S4 and told me he averaged around 7k dmg and 15-20 kills. So im not sure whats being taken into consideration lol.
Also have console mates both at S1 that both say their stats are pretty bad but theyre still going up. This is frustrating lol.
No it shouldn’t. You’re saying this from the assumption that sr is being distributed relative to the sr of players around you, and not as something that chases MMR which is meant to closely match the expected curve. SR can start as far away from that curve as it wants, as long as the system responsible for chasing sr → mmr is aware of the size of the difference.
Your idea is bad. So is global rank decay which makes it hard to tell who’s in what rank, but yours is just worse and you’re trying to use a worse example to demonstrate why a better one is still bad.
No we aren’t. No it shouldn’t. SR should follow MMR delayed by however much time you feel you want to introduce to encourage people to keep working for it. I don’t like adding grind but companies love it. 
In systems constant with rank decay, thatll be a global shift to the left, in systems with asymmetric decay (like ow1) it’s the top end looking squished. But you still ship the same matches and the same mmr adjustments regardless.
You’re still confusing the two.
If my MMR is sky high but my sr is low, my win/loss can affect my mmr by a net of zero but my rank can still rocket upwards because the target sr is still very far from what it should be. Similarly people who net win against me can also go up in rank since their target mmr is rising and their sr follows suit. It is not a bidirectional thing. Similarly if the entire ladder has deflated sr using their old target sr as a goal, they can still all chase at the same time.
This team even got stat-padding wrong. If I’m in a troll lobby of troll accounts hosted by yours truly in the basement5 - my tanks don’t tank my healers don’t heal - then obviously my damage will be low and/or outcompeted by afk moiras and the like.
The only real metric that is almost universally true no matter the situation - k/d per dmg per healing received. So if you rack up high k/d for low dmg (efficient picks) and never got team resources to help you do so (like heals or other defensive cds), you’re way, way better than someone who pads their dmg on junkrat but goes 8-11.
All reasons why data should not be used to classify people’s ranks in a game that is about winning against others who win.
Data-free is how every fair ladder works when the point of the game is to win.
My idea isn’t bad, it’s provably best-possible. You’re welcome to math it out.
MMR is a normal. SR is a normal. SR is scaled on [0,5000]. MMR is scaled on [0,1].
MMR “maps onto” SR. Now, do you want that to be arrested at one of the edges (in this case, lower bound at zero), or do you want that pinned in the middle? The answer is middle everytime, because it avoids the most “collisions at the boundary” and offers a more efficient kinetic expansion of the players from starting location to final deserved destination. If they’re offered a free bounday + 1 pinned, then they get all these extra collisions at the pinned boundary and the MMR interactions are thrown way, way off. The “gas” (in this case large N players) doesn’t expand outwards from all sides covering the most region as quickly and with as little resistance as it should.
Middle is just better, because math says so.
this ranking system is just trash af got 2 times bronze 5 then bronze 4 now bronze 3 wtf and i got a winrate of 60%