It’s called TrueSkill and it has actual science and numerous academic papers that back it up instead of the literally random Elo frankenstein kluge that OW created. (proven in numerous scientific papers to be close-to or worse-than random)
Now that Microsoft owns Overwatch, they can yank the plumbing and give us a scientifically realistic rank system.
Chant it with me. Flood the forums with it. Put it at the end of every post subject. Accept nothing less.
TrueSkill
TrueSkill
TrueSkill
trueskill doesn’t work when players throw the games because they’re pissed off. you need proper performance adjustments or you get wild swings in rating caused by throwers, which then throw off future games. you can have a super close game and just lose instantly cause one guy got mad and throws, so it takes a billion games to adjust.
huge disparity between highest skill and lowest skill player in the game combined with lack of performance incentives results in lots of throwing, which is the current state of OW
Yes, it does. It does regression analysis and includes long term examination of players. It links them together over time, not just their interaction with each other. It finds how all players relate to other players accross not just the current game but future and past games and future and past interactions.
It does background computing to repeatedly analyse long term trends of play to integrate various players.
For instance if you played against a new smurf account in silver and then that account ends up GM later, the points you lost by losing to them will be somewhat regained later over time since it wasn’t apples-apples in the first place.
If you got lucky and destroyed a bunch of noobs who were on boosted accounts or dragged up to high rank, your ranking will take somewhat of a loss over time because it wasn’t apples-apples.
It wasn’t real and Trueskill can detect that over time.
TrueSkill is a microsoft owned system. OW doesn’t use it currently.
TrueSkill will take fewer games to adjust and smoothe out anomalies because it can actually compute data from a more average performance over time that’s balanced by other player’s performance over time. All players are integrated together in a network instead of a simplistic win-loss calculation.
It’s totally different from Elo. It’s miles way from just win/loss.
after reading through the “Trueskill” system; I would agree that for matchmaking "trueskill’ would help but it wouldn’t help for comp rank climbing in team based games like overwatch. using a scale of 0 to 50 for perceived and or potential skill for matchmaking would be great to weed out rage quitters and suicide players. Great replacement for there current “mmr” crap.
ELO was designed for chess (1 v 1) and every other league was like “good enough lets use it!”. it has never been an accurate depicting of single player skill in a team based competition.
As for competitive ranking, the win/loss cant be ignored completely. games have winners and losers, so I put together a ranking system using the in-game scoreboard from matches that I think would be more accurate even if the current matchmaking isn’t fixed.
I would love to have a new system! Here’s to hoping 
Smells more like TrueShill in here
Then the system is no good. Win/loss should be the most important by far. Unfortunately it is not the case with Blizzard either, no matter how much they say it is.
i would much rather they just axe the clause in their tos that bans third party matchmakers
let faceit do their thing
they’ll handle the trolls/cheaters for free 
I think you must have read an overview because it would certainly go to great lengths to fix both. Is it perfect? Well, no but it’s about as good as you’re going to get using win-loss metrics.
They could use personal performance metrics in tandem with TrueSkill and it would be even better, but I’ve given up on them ever using all the data available.
I just want to focus on getting them to use something that is actually functional.
Yeah, it’s literally random for teams with varying players.
That’s the thing, it actually is the most important in this system. It just uses more data and requires more post-processing. The updates to every profile would propagate nightly.
There’s just special procedures of parsing data required to suss out the actual individual contribution, so you have short term adjustments and long term adjustments working in tandem.
I think we all need to focus on a change they might possibly actually do. This is not my optimal solution either, but I think it’s the easiest and most likely one they would agree to, so it’s our best hope.
It’s a middle ground we might actually be able to accomplish. An actual step in the right direction they really might take!
Man, I just watched a video on Trueskill and was equal parts mind blown and scared for the soon to be AI apocalypses. The fact that the algorithm can almost near perfectly predict even when a player is going to decide to throw a game scares the bejezzus out of me.
Man, that’s nothing compared to all that’s going on in advertising, Big Data, and the unholy alliance with the military industrial complex. We already live in the matrix and Lockheed, Northrup, Ratheon and others are the bots feeding on us.
But I think I’ll just focus on getting a functional game to distract me, lol.
Trueskill2 is wicked, though. Pretty effin incredible what they can figure out with advanced methods. the days of old Kluge systems from Elo should have been over a decade ago, but most people don’t know how backwards and dysfunction that old method is.
Instead you have the lottery winners protecting the lottery mechanics where the ones rigging the game and pitting us against each other are the only ones who win… wait…
Erm I mean the developers are the only ones that win from a dysfunctional ranked system… yeah I wasn’t talking about how capitalism and the military industrial complex are a cage built by the elite for the new slavery… nope, just talkin bout the game.
yeahhh…
There is even a better Ranking system than TrueSkill 2. But all share some deriviations of the Elo system and modified it to their in perspective truthfully benefit way in finding out how to engage their players long enough, call it parasitism or vampirism, some system do it great like TrueSkill 2, may some do it even better like i mentioned shortly, the RR system or Rankade Rating system is even capable to rank asymmetrical team sized team/players samples very accurately and also takes points of interest you mentioned into account too. Due to increasing computing powers over the years accelerated with AI models, gave us really bunkers in that kind of field. In both good and bad manners, yes we live in a matrix, no one tries to break us free, never will someone, never has someone even actually tried, only we have the choice and take responsibility in our hands to may break free. Enjoy other competitive games, or join custom OW scrim events with fellows, do not expect Blizzard to change anything to improve something here.
I dunno.
They had the same handicapping nonsense in Halo Infinite.
So, I don’t really have high hopes.
Where in the heck did you get win/loss not being the most important for Blizzard MMR? That’s essentially all that they consider, champ. You can gap the lobby every game. If you lose, you de-rank.
Got any links to papers etc? I read through some of the white paper on TrueSkill a couple years ago now I think, but if there are other systems out there that are supposedly better, I’m kinda interested in the methodology.
Regression analysis is always a difficult thing to implement because you sorta have to make a judgement call on depth to make sure it doesn’t become a degenerate infinite loop.
These games should have been implementing neural networks for play analysis a decade ago, but I don’t know if they’re even doing it yet.
That’s capitalism… always beautiful trash. Only the surface appearance matters. The market can’t detect the difference between internal quality and the illusion thereof. Both earn equally, but hidden internal shortcuts have higher profit margins.
Real internal lasting value always falls to marketing and appearance. Form over function every time.
Add up info, the actual rating is called Ree and is a specific created rating and ranking system in use on it’s maker’s site
rankade.c o m
, though not used in MMOGs(Massive Multiplayer Online Games, genre, like shooter or arena battler, independent) i know of, allows any collaborative, clubs, leagues, group of friends and any kind of factions to use their site and therefore inherently their Ree system for competetive enviroment. It’s a static enviroment but i think can be used dynamic in any video game with competitive nuances, if you would go into business with them of course, they provide an API interface or framework to natively interact with their site, also customazations of how you would present the data later, but their source code is not open and some would need to go into special contact with them to gather information like their methodolgy and implementation, so i assume they will use a form of regression analyses (ANOVA tests) if they really want to be a UIP and challange as their website proclaims systems like Elo, Glicko and TrueSkill 1 ? 2. Sorry for any confusion from my quite little rant on Blizzard. Unfortunately their are no open papers and studies of Ree therefore 
.
This is what i got from Ree and rankade:
[Ree - rankade - Free ranking system for sports, games, and more](h t t p s://rankade.com/ree/)
[API - rankade - Free ranking system for sports, games, and more](h t t p s://rankade.com/api/)
[What is rankade? - F.A.Q. - rankade - Free ranking system for sports, games, and more](h t t p s://rankade.com/frequently-asked-question)
A link to a reddit post, not very much of implementation details, though one of a worker from rankade might tried to explain it but i couldn’t extract any useful points where it actually shines above TrueSkill 1 in this case the old version cause the reddit post is 6 years old, and i forgot when Microsoft published their second improved version of it:
[rankade_staff (u/rankade_staff) - Reddit](h t t p s://www.reddit.com/user/rankade_staff/)
There might be more posts of that guy, maybe you’ll check it out.
And here is a free alternative to TrueSkill called OpenSkill, OpenSkill was also wrapped as part of a competitive gaming subsystem for Unreal Engine made games as a plugin on well UE’s marketplace. Unfortunately on that i can’t tell if it is similiar or better as TrueSkill, but it’s source code is openly available on github and show an implementation in code:
[GitHub - OpenDebates/openskill.py: Multiplayer Rating System. No Friction.](h t t p s://github.com/OpenDebates/openskill.py)
I hope you can extract something useful for you and maybe Blizzard/Microsoft, who will know , have a nice day you all.
Ps: Be aware of the spaces in the links
Overwatch didn’t have an Elo Frankenstein kludge. You could you know, talk to the person who created it ( Josh Menke). Who also had a hand in MS’s Trueskill successor.
You know they are not using Trueskill 1 any more right?
I can throw you stuff about Trueskill 2.
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/trueskill-2-improved-bayesian-skill-rating-system/ (had some info which should help you get on your way).
There are online courses you can take which take you though the maths on it, along with the research behind it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pglxege-gU is useful, again… Josh Menke so…
You know, run by one of the people who helped make it… the person who made Overwatch’s matchmaker, which you spend your time calling an Elo Frankenstein kludge without knowing the maths behind it.
The industry is real small, and the same names keep popping up again and again. I wouldn’t be piling the hate on overwatches matchmaker when you don’t understand what it is actually doing, and how.
Citation needed…
You know a large section of people just say “Overwatch” instead of “Overwatch 2” right? There’s a standard we all understand that when a new version comes out of something and the old version is deprecated, always mentioning the version number is mostly a pedant’s choice, and not useful to a more general audience.
Thanks for the link.
I do know it doesn’t use personal skill based on the only available information. That’s a gigantic failure period.
I know it’s horrifically dysfunctional by testing it with multiple accounts and playing with different people over many years and having wildly varying, inconsistent results. (demonstrable failure)
So if I was allowed to know more detail, I’d comment much more specifically but they are hiding their shame because, almost certainly like every other development project, the problem is executive decisions and funding limiting the approach procedurally as well as reducing the time spent.
Executives will make unwavering decisions about things they cannot ever understand.
If you have additional information then spill it. Until then, yeah, it’s an Elo frankenstein kluge just like I said. It uses win loss and then, because of it’s horrendous failure demonstrates that whatever attempts they made beyond that were insufficient.
Thanks for the video by this guy but by the 10 minute mark in he’s already making the mistake of ignoring that it’s a non-ergodic system and instead of calibration being per player it’s over the whole group.
He failed my test of comprehending complexity in just 10 minutes. This is not just a small mistake, it’s a gargantuan one that is super common during the last century, so he’s not alone in making this giant mistake, but it’s still GIGANTIC.
(https://youtu.be/_FuuYSM7yOo?si=SW7Jp1PBu9M2YcRF)
So now I know from his own statements between the 9 minute and 10 minute marks that he’s doing it wrong.
His heads in the right space when it comes to goals but his method presumes ergodicity and is therefore fundamentally and irretrievably flawed.
…but again, I need some proof he’s actually the guy doing it.
ok, lets go though all the stuff here.
If you want to go do the course on stuff, so you can learn all about the various systems, and the like, here is his course.
https://gdconf.com/masterclass/matchmaking-ranking-competitive-multiplayer
Thanks for the video by this guy but by the 10 minute mark in he’s already making the mistake of ignoring that it’s a non-ergodic system and instead of calibration being per player it’s over the whole group.
You missed the part where they test to see if the system is putting out accurate estimates. Given it does, it shows that the method to get there works, and the matchmaker is working.
So it is a non issue.
Except, that it is close enough to give accurate estimates when tested.
If you have additional information then spill it. Until then, yeah, it’s an Elo frankenstein kluge just like I said.
Let me swing that ol mirror to face back to you. You are giving strictly anecdotal evidence about this. Where is your proof?
True skill works in the same base way that the system OW does.
It wouldn’t be any different.
Also ranked in Halo is infinitely worse than OW.