Oh, it does keep SR and yes, decayed still keeps your old SR, which it limits the matches with.
But there IS a hard limit on SR (or pre decayed) SR range.
Players are allowed to participate in Competitive Play as a group, though the following restrictions will be applied:
For players ranked Diamond and below, the SR of all group members must be within 1000 of each other. This SR range is reduced to 500 for Master players, and 350 for Grandmaster and Top 500 players.
Grandmaster and Top 500 players may only form a group consisting of two players.
They are constraints the engine is under. Blizzard has spelt them out.
This is not a theoretical debate. Blizzard has those limited as constraints in the matchmaker.
They put similar but wider limits on people soloQing in.
You are combining 2 separate but very different things: the requirements to form a group to play comp and the methods that the matchmaker uses to build a team. These are not the same thing. As a player before I hit queue there are limitations on who I can group with per your specifications.
However, once I hit queue the system does not care. The system does not look or care about your SR when trying to find a match for you or your group. The system does not think twice about whether you are a 4300 player and there is a 3400 player on your team, or the enemy team, but only looks at the MMR of all assorted players.
Iâm not super convinced that sufficient convergence is going to happen, and expect crazy oscillation, especially given the fact that the average âtrueâ SR/actual skill of everyone queuing fluctuates throughout the day and across the week. There absolutely needs to be some smoothing, momentum, and/or confidence aspect to it, or youâd wind up with pretty long term charts but horrible games.
I think Rigged is expecting that the chaos added in from the randomness of just ditching most of the matchmaker will act as this.
I think it will lead to WAY too many stomps and just bad games in general.
I think he has a REALLY twisted view of the quality of the games the matchmaker puts out, because he plays where the matchmaker breaks down completely.
<500 is just all smurfs mixed with various people with widely widely different abilities and issues in the game.
The issues are not matchmaker ones, but âblizzard doesnât really enforce stuff against smurfsâ ones.
oop yea thereâs no way any system can work at such an extreme and no amount of rigging or unrigging is gonna help. That system he keeps pushing is likely gonna result in either getting rolled by low golds on a bad day, or getting rolled by low golds on a bad day but also with extra trashy queue times.
Yeah I can agree on that. I sometimes still get low gm players in my games on a high diamond account. This would not be happening if there was that cap in the matchmaking. In game they also call it âCan group within {0} Skill Ratingâ.
If there was this cap, decay would also not have been possible in the past. If you decayed from 4300 to 3000 SR, your MMR stayed at for example +3.322222 (Idk what the average MMR of a 4.3k SR player is). So you would still end up in matches with other â+3.2 MMR / â4300 SR players even tho you have an effective difference of around 1300 SR.
The âCan group within {0} Skill Ratingâ cap is therefore only used to prevent people from grouping together and abusing how the matchmaker works and for example get 1500 SR players into a â4000 SR game, ending up in extreme long queue times, causing a bad match quality etc. Otherwise boosting could be done pretty easy as well.
I can see his point and I would agree that a random matchmaking could be really good, since it would even out with time. However the goal of the matchmaker, from the perspective of a gamer, is to try and provide 50:50 matches as much as possible.
We must remember that the number of games played is different for each player. There are players that just do the placements, some players just play around 15-20 games and then we have the players that play 300+ games per season. Having this factor, the random matches would get really chaotic. So the better way would be to try and get these 50:50 matches with a good designed matchmaking as you were talking about.
I think a big problem in the whole MMR/SR conversation is that people treat SR as the main number and MMR as some rigging tool to mess with them. In reality MMR is the main number while SR is just a number that feels better to look at. Jeff said something in the past that was close to your MMR might not change after a win but that would be very discouraging for players so SR gives players that reward while in reality their MMR never went up.
Yeah true, SR is just to reward players. MMR does not necessarily have to change as long as it reflects your current impact.
They didnât save your undecayed SR as far as I know. If you didnât manage to get back to that SR within X games, you could end up getting the normal adjustments even if you are not back to the SR you were before the decay happened. So it happened that you could lose SR. As @Tomi mentioned, in Overwatch SR is just a visual reward for players.
Looks like you tried to write your own system. Have you seen trueskill .org?
All the documentation is there, the only thing we donât really know much about is the PBSR.
But, be careful. Itâs been hard to discuss these things because when people say SR they mean MMR and when they say MMR they mean âan omniscient AI that knows exactly how good you truly areâ.
You may think Iâm being hyperbolic. I could only hope Iâm being hard trolled.
If you could force people to play the game, even with near 0% win rate, then the ranking system would work.
What happens in practice is that you cut off the top and bottom groups, the former because theyâre bored of no challenge and the later because theyâre bored of getting stomped.
A lot of this anti-MMR sentiment comes from people who grew up in that system and think that it was good enough for them. In their advocacy, they treat having Bronze and GM together as a good thing, a thing to strive for, as they deem it âtrue competitionâ.
Of course, there is more than one way to skin a competitive cat, but they donât want to hear alternatives. Iâm not quite sure why, though. I really donât quite see the motivation and some of these people are obviously to smart to truly just not get it.
Still, they just say âMMR badâ and endlessly repeat that removing MMR would be a panacea to get rid of smurfs, throwers, and âbad playersâ, whatever that means.
Of course, it works get rid of smurfs, technically, but the actual problem would remain since the very notion of smurfing assumes MMR is a good thing, as smurfing is intentionally breaking MMR.
They fail to mention that removing MMR would make the problem worse, at least until enough people quit that only one skill level was still playing.
They donât. Link with proof in a couple of posts above this one. Proof is video of developer saying so in an interview, not just a random YouTuber spouting off. Itâs legit.
DudeâŚ. Arenât you the one who always cried about Blizz needing to make the MM open source to allow capable (unintelligent) people like yourself to pick it apart?
Hereâs your chance to work with RobotWiz and show us all the excellence you urinate in the college courses you teach, or whatever.
For real though, if you collaborate with Robot on this project Iâll read it start to finish in genuine hopes of learning things I for sure donât know.
It looks like youâve been around awhile. Whatâs your most generous interpretation of the complaints, and how would you characterize/distinguish them?
I ask this as someone who has tried to generously interpret the complaints and characterize them, so Iâm just looking into some insight that maybe I havenât noticed.
