I am not at all okay operating under this assumption. You need to substantiate this before anything else you type becomes compelling.
You will need to substantiate this one too. I’m not okay continuing under this assumption.
I don’t think that’s nearly enough.
You are assuming the matchmaker knows who is going to be the “obvious carry”?
Hm… things are getting conspiratorial in here.
And how did you rule out confirmation bias exactly?
Not only that, you have done nothing to establish the truth of the claims quoted above.
Yeah, without any substantiation I’m going to easily disregard this.
Combating your claims does not make us contrarians in the insulting way you are using it. You make a lot of risky assumptions and don’t substantiate anything, so you are in no position to attack people for disbelieving you or showing the many errors in your logic. Especially when you are trying to convince people this is in fact true.
Proof? Not really (Well other than getting banned from old forums with message “While this is most likely a troll post, posting internal data not available through normal gameplay is against our Forum Code of Conduct.”, but not sure can you think it as proof) , good theory? Yes. Troll or not. But since blizzard won’t tell us how it works really (Wondering why not, don’t know any other game which does the same), its only players word’s again’st other players word. Like pretty much 99% of posts on these forums.
“The more sad part is we’re at a point that being a contrarian is somehow a bad thing. Apparently kowtowing to the herd is the only right way forward.” - Only a teflon-mind contrarian would think that anyone that is not a ‘contrarian’ automaticall falls into the group of ‘conformists’. No my little boy, they do not, and it is horrible to be a contrarian for the sake of it (when you dont agree with the words coming out of your mouth 50% of the time). Should I go through your posts to demonstrate how you post one opinion at one place, and then the contrary in another? This is what I remember you by, and I am just too lazy to bring them up + you are not worth it.
“Btw:MMR” - You are still operating under the assumption that Matchmaking is done via MMR and MMR only - which has NEVER been confirmed by the devs, nor do we know exactly how MMR works. The whole point of this thread is that matchmaking has another role and its not really trying to give us balanced games, but rather to keep us playing the game by delivering wins and losses in a balanced rate [similar to how most gambling traps work]. It should be noted that Blizzard has the biggest cognitive behavioural team (psychologists) from any triple A studio out there, so they are no strangers in creating patters that would keep you more addicted to their game.
@Sine, You want proof? Look at my seasons, hardstuck plat climbs to diamond one season, with ease and a big winrate - not playing my mains, and he does that in less then 1 week. If you want more proof, I can do it again, just pay me for it since I need to NOT play with my friend to prove sh i t to you.
As for the assumptions, I dont get where i claim it knows who is going to be an obvious carry. The only thing that you are supposed to be reading between the lines there is that the matchmaker know’s what player is toxic or not. I don’t get what more substantiation you need then the stats presented - this is here so that other people can try it out on their own. If you wanted me to rule out confirmation bias, then i need to play 1000+ games with this system (for a solid statistical sample) and do R analysis on it, for which, again - pay me (70$/hr) and i will do it just for you. You are contrarians not because you are combating my claims, but because you are doing it without any evidence (while crying for evidence) or extended opinions of your own.
Forum Moderator Note: Section attacking another poster removed. Keep to the topic, not the poster.
Show me another game that details exactly how MMR or SR is calculated.
They won’t do it because if we know what stats it looks for people will pad those stats in order to game the matchmaker.
Which means we should not take it as anything except an idea that we can’t know if it is true.
You don’t know the age or sex of this person so calling them a ‘little boy’ only makes you look more unreasonable.
Also being a contrarian is not inherently bad. You may want an echo-chamber, but that’s not something you should strive for.
You’re saying he’s not worth it, but you posted a wall of text.
Either have your cake or eat it.
Any source or way to substantiate this?
Source? This would be interesting.
Do you not?
That’s not proof. It’s actually not even slightly compelling honestly.
Do you understand that you need far more data to come to your conclusions?
I won’t pay you either. It is your job to substantiate your claims and it is not my job to fund it.
You can see the quote. And I was asking so I wasn’t claiming you said that. I was asking if you were claiming that.
How?
Really? What stats have you posted? And have you posted the methodology behind the gathering of those stats? Stats by themselves are basically worthless.
Cool, but you are not being honest with how little actual evidence you have for your position.
Also, I thought the reason was:
So which is it?
I do want you to rule it out, but your time is not worth that much to me and, again, it is your job to substantiate your claims, not mine.
Ah. Classic. Flipping the burden of proof.
I don’t need any evidence because I have not made a claim. I am scrutinizing your claim. I don’t need any evidence to simply point out the fallacious reasoning you are employing.
I’m also not “crying” for evidence. That language is what people backed into a corner with no logical defense use.
The fact that you have resorted to flipping the burden of proof and using intentionally insulting language shows me that you do not have a defensible position. Or, at least, you are not willing to adequately defend your position in a rational and respectful manner.
This theory falls apart with your assumption if QP mmr and Comp MMR being related.
I can tell you based off of a few accounts that they clearly are not.
This account alone plays QP with low diamonds, because when I started this account I only played Mercy and Winston to see how far I could get taking aim stats out of the equation.
Then I did placements (you start at 2500 then rapidly adjust from there), I was in high plat/low diamond in 6 games in using Winston, then I got bored and dropped to low Gold with Genji.
Hundreds of levels and many comp.seasons later, this account is still gold (Genji is hard). But my QP games are still with low Diamonds or very high plat.
But I will agree that the matchmaker is busted, and mostly in an effort to let everyone win 50% of the time when really, some accounts are misplaced and some people should be losing 99% of their games until they hit their real ELO. But the matchmaker coddles them, by splitting them between teams (it knows they are BAD and tries to make “fair” games around them so they don’t straight up quit the game entirely after losing 20 games in a row. Thus prolonging the agony of their misplacement on innocent teammates for HUNDREDS of games until they finally hit their ELO).
Ah the misconceptions. Nobody is reading what is written, they just get ONE thing from the whole topic that they dont like and stick to it like a fly on a piece of feces. It’s wonderous how you are able to write a wall of text focused on those things while refusing to spend half the time to actually read the post.
@Sine, I am referring to my comp stats which are open to skim over and if you have a bit of investigative capabilities you could find the history per match on certain websites (stats which I cannot post because its against bliz forum TOS btw). You want big data? Big data is a f ing job, and you want me to give you a statistical sample of 1k+ for free, cus blizzard sure wont give us any data.
Your logic is so false it hurts, cus it seems that we went from “/if not contrarian = you must be a comformist” to "/if not contrarian and doesnt like ‘devil’s advocates’ = must only want an echo chamber. Funny how I make assumptions based on s o m e data, you make rebuttals based on your own personal opinion and when that gets called out you go to ad hominem. Fun stuff.
@Sleepybear - You obviously didnt read the article. It claims that there is M o r e then just the Mmr and we get matched according to the social environments we experience in ea game.
Proving my point, both about your personality and your abilities to go through more then 3 lines of text.
If you want some evidence to disprove my claim, first play 100+ games with the process above (QP+Comp included), feel the games (to see if you are going from the TROLL>NO TROLL state that I am claiming) and come back here to tell me that I am talking out of my *ss. Simple
I obviously am, since you lost all capability to write more then one sentence before going into ad hominem. Then again, I am not the one cut-chopping only parts that are convenient for me to decontextualize.
Ah… how low can you go…
I am offering you my stats and my experience over playing with this method for several months to climb out of a wall that was there for the previous 10 seasons. This was not done with hacking or 1-tricking brig when she was OP, it was done by following what I transcribed above. The assumption is simple: the matchmaker rewards you with good teammates after you’ve done your best in a match with terrible team mates. If that is not enough evidence for you, that is OK - but rebutting with what you have (tl:dr:“I dont think your sample is big enough” - was the only logical arguement) and then going into a spiral of judgement is simply childish. Grow up.
The assumption that this is every other game is wrong. You will need to play a couple of games in QP until you notice the obvious troll round - you gotta play that one too.
I always find the tinfoil hat theory threads about match making to be amusing. The more Sky Net they make the AI when it comes to looking to hold back or boost up players the better.
most of them run into the whole -correlation does not imply causation- issue but whatever, don’t let that hold a person back from pitching the idea.
I would argue the easier way to reach diamond is just to stop doing poor ULT econ and so on that keeps players in plat but whatever.
almost all of these sort of Sky Net AI claims of pretty much fixing games never seems to answer the big why question. Like why would a company design a super complicated fuzzy AI with all sort of different variables to hold players down in some given SR?
If anything you would design it to bump people up, not hold them down as winning leads to feeling better. Yet all of these theories are “and here is why the system is build to hold us back!!”
