“For example, we have data showing that matches become less predictable the lower the average rating of a match.”
Folks… dont let this slide.
2 factors, both PROVEN.
- The more you play, the more you favored to have a newer player on your team. Part 1, the devs saw how newer players tend to lose more games.
- If your team is favored to win and you lose, you lose more MMR than if you were not favored to win.
So how often does a player who plays alot, gets a newer player, and their team is favored to win, but ends up losing?
EDIT: and before anyone ranks shames me, I am at my PEAK SR - P4… so no hard stuck gold anymore baby!
7 Likes
??? I don’t understand the proof there. If you have high MMR, your match gets more predictable. And supposedly, the more you play, the better you become, the more you win, the higher your MMR will be.
Same here. I don’t see where devs mention the value of MMR points won/lost after a game.
What they meant is that if the rating of a match is low, the prediction could be wrong and you could be in a losestreak despite matchmaking trying to give you some “easier” games.
SR and MMR are 2 differents values. Your MMR changes depending on winrate, SR doesn’t change depending on winrate.
Its not about how HIGH you play, its about how LONG you play. The LONGER you play, the more time you put into this game, the more certain the game things you are. The more certain the game thinks you are, it uses you as a control point to test other UNCERTAIN individuals.
This is a known fact. If you are favored to win, and you lose, you lose more MMR/SR than normal.
Yes… if you are favored to win, and still lose… and it doesnt look at WHY you lost… then yes that is elo hell. Combine that they admitted new players tend to lose (remember part 1).
So this WHOLE time, they found out newer players tend to lose, and the prediction at the lower end of the spectrum was off. For YEARS folks have been saying this (or atleast I have).
Higher uncertainty in the matchmaker’s predictions can go either way. If you have a new player who is far more skilled than their peers, this will make the matchmaker’s prediction of the match outcome less accurate. But it will also mean that player ranks up quicker.
Not everything that disproportionally impacts lower Elo players makes it harder for them to rank up. In fact, if you don’t go into reading that dev statement with that pre-made conclusion, you will see that they aren’t talking about Elo hell; they are merely stating that the lower elo players are more volatile in terms of the skill they contribute to their matches. That’s it.
Better players will still rank up. Significantly better players will still rank up quickly.
6 Likes
Spoken like a true politician. Not addressing the issue head on or even denying those events could even happen.
Fact of the matter is, if those two windows line up, it kills the psyche of the long term player.
Edit:
This almost got me. Well it did get me cause I had a whole night of sleep.
Truth of the matter I didn’t go into the dev comments thinking elo hell. The idea came out after sharing some thoughts about other topics.
The opposite also exists : there are games you should have lost but you still won.
Imo, its really hard for a programm to know why a team lose.
We really need to separate what “rank” is and what “MMR” is. In both of their articles, they tell MMR can vary and Rank can stay the same and vice versa.
So “MMR hell” does exist if you aren’t lucky and have low MMR (again, they say the prediction is harder the lower rate of the match). But it doesn’t mean, or they haven’t explained how it could mean, that “Rank Hell” exists.
The problem with their system is that MMR and SR don’t focus on the same definition of “skill”. Therefore, it depends on each player to consider how fair MMR or SR are.
But basically, the devs admitted your rank can increase even if your MMr stays the same (aka 50%winrate) or your rank can stay the same even with a 40% or 60% winrate.
If people are focusing on the displayed SR value, they shouldn’t use “MMR hell” as an excuse as it can increase even in a 50% winrate situation.
1 Like
I was worried about your logical conclusions, but your 100% on this.
MMR is not skill, and SR is not skill either LOL…
And yes, I feel elo hell exists, but no1 has asked me how STRONG the hold is. To answer my own question, I think its stronger in certain ranks than others. Its stronger at certain times of day… its stronger or weaker at certain “metas”. Ultimately does it exist, yes and I hope they can do some analytics to see if there are “clumps” of players vs a very very smooth curve.
1 Like
Meh.
No one can agree on what rank elo hell exists at. Depending on who you ask elo hell exists in almost every rank.
Many low ranked players believe that Elo hell is somewhere between bronze and silver. Your average player believes that Elo hell is gold/plat and most high ranked players agree that Elo hell is diamond.
4 Likes
Right. It’s somewhere close to your ability level. If you play at a level that corresponds to diamond, then it will start to feel rough somewhere in high plat, but if you play at a level that corresponds to silver, it starts to feel rough somewhere in bronze. Whereas, for a top 500 player pushing through the lower ranks is a breeze until you get somewhere in Masters or GM (again, depending on the skill of the player).
Elo hell depends on the skill of the player, and this is an expected occurrence for any competitive ladder.
1 Like
Except that this isn’t the case, always.
My GF was a consistent high silver/mid gold player. She went on a losing streak and ended up stuck at sub 1000 bronze for ages. Nothing significant changed during that time to cause this. She eventually got back to high gold after almost a year. So her Elo hell was almost 2 full ranks below where she usually plays.
Many GM Top500 players have openly said that Diamond is Elo hell. Jayne had some or other discussion on this as well.
It isn’t necessarily near your skill level and is often round about where there is a significant jump required skill level. For example the skill difference between gold and plat is pretty marginal and I often can’t tell the difference in play between the 2 ranks. Many high plat games feel like gold games and plenty gold games feel like they should be Plat games. However the jump from Plat to Diamond is really significant in terms of difficulty compared to the previous example.
I guess you could say some Elo hells “slap” harder than others.
My take as someone who has spent a lot of time bouncing between gold-diamond over the years:
Gold is like a more deathmatchy version of plat and can be really frustrating if you are stuck there. Also there are more potatoes thrown into the mix.
In diamond the thing that impressed me most was the supports are really good at keeping you alive. Other than that it just feels like plat except they don’t make as many dumb mistakes and are a bit more sweaty than your average plat.
Fun-wise I think low-mid plat is the most chill rank for me.
That reminds me of when I switched over to PC from console with no PC FPS experience. My DPS got placed in silver, and I had no idea how to deal with all these people who played so backwards and thought what I was doing and saying was crazy. I got out by working on mechanics, lowering my DPI/eDPI significantly, and unintentionally recreating some of the Moscow Rules to live and play by.
But, looking at my total experience and the performance of those above and below me, only elo purgatory exists, not elo hell. You can’t get out of hell, but purgatory is a place where you’re temporarily stuck until you figure things out and move up… or down. Some will think they’re in elo hell because they don’t self-reflect/think/know what to do or improve upon and stay there for a long time.
Any chance you have a link for Jayne’s discussion? I always enjoyed his material but am not sure what to search for in this instance.
Ehem…I seem to remember a patent issued to activision blizzard about this that the deluded shills and get guders didn’t believe was in the game at all…
Using experienced players, sacrificing their game quality to sell skins.
Guys: Default skins only from now on. and “heroic” emote.
See I don’t understand how if MMR is W/L only and doesn’t look at stats, how can one team be favoured to win over another and for it to make enough of a difference that they’re willing to hand out more or less MMR because of it. If you have a slightly higher MMR then all it means is you’ve won slightly more matches, and with the state of the game as it is, that’s more likely to be through leavers, throwers or new players than any effect your individual skill will have on the outcome.
As a support I feel like I win or lose on the skill of my tank and DPS. Yes, I can help a good player be better. But if they’re awful and their mirror is better, or they just don’t know how to play the game, then it’s a loss. That isn’t reflective of my skill as a player. I did hope in those situations that good stats might counter any MMR decay from the loss. But if that’s not true then I might as well just chill in spawn or literally throw myself off the map in protest of the terrible player I’ve been matched with?
I actually got this from TrueSkill which I think is thrown in the mix of the Match Maker. Its the same single point value with a bell curve of uncertainty. The sigma is how wide that bell curve is. The more you play, the less the sigma is. The less the sigma is, the more you get match with wider sigma plays a.k.a the uncertain new players (or folks who havent played in awhile).
Simply the math behind mmr, and the average mmr between the two teams. It can never be exactly the same, and who ever ends up with a higher mmr is “favored” to win.
1 Like
Diamond is the level at which top 500 players will start to lose matches, but they won’t lose very many and they’ll still push through it fairly quickly, so I don’t think it makes much sense to say that diamond is Elo hell for top 500 players.
In order for it to be Elo hell it would have to be difficult to push through, and I’ve never seen a top 500 player struggle to push through diamond on their main role. Maybe someone could languish in diamond on an off role, but that would only happen if they weren’t as skilled on that off role.
Top 500 players can rank through diamond in a handful of matches or so. If the term Elo hell has any meaning whatsoever it cannot describe a rank that one could rank through in a handful of matches.
1 Like
My take is that, basically, low rank matches can be inconsistent because they don’t have enough data for the players there. Which means that any given match might have large skill discrepancies, presumably leading to more one sided matches. So the subjective experience of the players in a single match might be suboptimal, but if they play enough games, there’s no reason to think they will not rank up or down accordingly. Any individual match might be low quality, though.
My guess here is that if your personal MMR is higher than the average MMR of the opposing team you gain less on a win, lose more on a loss. Reverse that if your personal MMR is lower than the average MMR.
in 1v1 games thats how MMR/ELO is gained/lost.
if this is true then its not elo hell. its just where you belong.
1 Like
Yes. That’s really the point I am making. What people call Elo hell is the reality of a well ranked competitive ladder: it’s harder to win games around your current skill level than it is games below your current skill level.
1 Like