I’m not sure where you’re going with this. “Boosting” MMR typically means that a player with a low-ranked account hands their account off to a far better player, in which the far better player accumulates a lot of wins on that account. And then the account is handed back to the original owner.
1 Like
Sorry for the confusion.
I mean explicitly that a player plays a certain hero for a certain map and team composition and deceives the built-in “skill evaluation”. This player is not playing for objective. What is also common is that external circumstances are manipulated in such a way that “own” player teams play against each other. Very popular in all kinds of online team games.
People being jerks and trolling their teammates or refusing to play an objective is an issue with the player base, not the MMR system. You’d still find that behavior in a random system.
Legitimate proof? Or are you going off of people whining and claiming they are better
1 Like
the proof is the absence of detailed statistics. Thats my claim. i dont need real evidence. i am also fine with playing the game. this thread is not about me :]
I hate to break this to you, but if the absence of evidence constitutes a reason to believe in something without a care in the world about a burden of proof, you could believe in, quite literally, any made up stance in the world
Edit: More to the point of the actual thread:
To claim that MMR is conceptually unfair is to take the stance that having a system in place where you can reasonably expect to impact the outcome of most matches you play is somehow less fair than participating in a random system where you could have no reasonable expectation of how your personal performance will affect the outcome.
To argue that MMR in OW is flawed or needs improvement is one thing, but to argue the general idea that MMR is unfair is simply silly.
1 Like
MMR is fair because it’s based on you. If it were strictly SR, then your entire rating would be at the mercy of your teammates. And no one wants to be at the mercy of 4 silver players and that one bronze that somehow ended up here.
The only reason someone would think it’s “biased” or “rigged” is because they can’t accept that maybe they just aren’t as good as they think.
1 Like
-
make an absurd statement without proof
-
wait for someone to dispute it
-
ask for proof of their argument
-
“see I’m right you can’t prove me wrong”
The ‘mmr is evil’ crowd in a nutshell.
4 Likes
your sr is a direct representation of your mmr, it never strays far from your sr unless you decay, or you’re a smurf going 40-1 every game.
or youre playing an off-hero and winning games with it. The PBSR will drag your MMR down while your SR increases.
It shouldn’t take more than one number to summarize a person’s skill. There would have to be winstreaks enabled if they dropped MMR and that comes with its own problems.
No, that will affect your mmr in the same way.
So you have no actual evidence and yet ask for it?
^^^ Every player ever who can’t climb and doesn’t understand that THEY need to improve. Na it’s the games fault.
2 Likes
that’s simply made up, and completely untrue.
For 1 v 1 it would indicate merit and someone’s true rank could be determined in a short period of time.
For 6 v 6 it would take much much longer to determine what someone’s true rank would be, and it would be far more frustrating too.
I think MMR is more fluid then what Jeff is really letting on. I BET that the MMR veries alot more then SR does and thats how you
A)Get wildly different skill levels for the same SR
B)How they balance for a 50% winrate on such wild skill differences
C)Keeps players wanting to climb because bases on SR
D)If MMR was showed and instead of SR, people would have a cow at how wildly different the skill levels are being matched onto a team so this gets masked under SR and noone is the wiser.
Dont believe everything the Devs tell you especially when they dont provide proof and take there word as gospel.
If I had to guess I would bet MMR veries by at least 500SR ± over your real SR.
Nah, if they showed MMR instead of SR everything would be the same except there would be no decay and no leaving penalty.
Your conspiracy theory has no basis on reality.
Meanwhile the players whose mmr has decayed down continue to wreak havoc at low ranks because the system thinks they become worse.
The whole matchmaking system is a flawed mess and im sure many people here have already read this complete explanation on how the system is bad:
A competitive match can in no way become fair when the system avarages up player scores to make sure everybody is “even”. You can have a group of players with 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000, 3500 sr against a team of 2250 sr guys because in the eyes of the system thats the perfect avarage for this match to make and we cant even take into account the smurfs or boosters here because in this case it would be possible that the 3 low end players are just new accounts bought by other high ranking guys.
1 Like
Decay doesn’t affect MMR. A GM decaying to diamond will still be matched against GMs.
That entire thread is joke. I’m surprised Blizzard is letting that thread troll for so long with made up tinfoil hat theories.
No, this will never happen under the current system. Players under 3000 SR must be within 1000 SR to get put into the same game. Players over 3000 must be within 500 SR to group. Your made up first group is something that will never be able to queue up in competitive.
1 Like