also agree, when people talk about changing what is almost universally considered a broken matchmaker in some way… you either become “The Rigged Tinfoil Hat” guy/gal/them or an automatic defender that things are great, despite admitting that the matchmaker needs work.
1 Like
Obvious is relative, when you start stating how GMs in bronze and semi-pros vs High schoolers it gets lost. We can discuess HOW to make a convincing argument on another thread.
Season 23 - PLACED 2035 ended 1795 - 200 for an overall 51% win rate. - red flag one
again my threshold for a 51% would be 50 sr… for a MINOR INFLUENCE of SR adjustment.
Season 24 - 1795 - 1795 no change for a 55% win rate - red flag #2
Higher win rate and not an ounce high SR… (why people started leaving and feeling hardstuck).
Season 25 1795 → 1703 - win rate 52%
This hurts again. better than 50% yet - 92 SR.
S26 - 1703 - 1796 - 53% | Holy crap! no complaints!
S27 1796 - 1862 - 50% | Holy crap no complaints
S28 1862 - 1626 - 45% | no complaints! “Git gud son!”
S29 1626 - 1705 - 58% | no complaints, you got good son!
So again… Season 23 and 24… Sucks High win rate, net loss of or no gain with a high win rate. total games played134 (S23) + 150 (S24) = 284 games of winning and losing 200 SR.
You dont have to argue why or how, and or why its right I UNDERSTAND yes ty for re-explaining something because of lack of “seeing the otherside” entirely… I look at the community leaving, alts and general dissatisfaction. S23 and S24 is hardstuck, and S24 I’m sure had one of those “losing streaks”…
Yes wonderful system a season of no change with a 55% winning percentage, and -200 with a 51% win percentage.
emphasis Myst - (and yes you made up the fake 30% or whatever, because no1 knows the system):
1 Like
The thing is, every gaming community complains about their match maker in the same way. We aren’t necessarily talking about improvements that could be made; rather, we’re trying to slay the mythos that it is “rigged.”
Improvements that I would make:
-MMR of all teammates and their stats should be available to everyone in the game at all times–including per match performance; no more stat safespaces
-Any player “engagement” layers in the MM should be removed or made explicitly transparent to the player
-Narrower default SR windows that the player can optionally expand to a maximum range for better queue times
-MMR matching by role–a support at 1.0 MMR would ideally be matched with an opponent support at 1.0 MMR
-Detailed papers on how the MM works and how player MMR is calculated—similar to the publicly available information for Elo, Glicko/Glicko-2, and TrueSkill frameworks
-Per-game tracking of SR, individual stats, native analysis tools, and ways to download
3 Likes
And this is what all of the rigged people say. Mmr ia fine to match. I dont use rigged. It has a negative connotation. Using MMR instead of SR for your rank and being transparent with it is something everybody has asked for… But they dont because they dont want the lowest performer experience toxicity. Cool… but now we blame Everyone for being poor performers. With the current system medals are the indication… and it seems kills are what put you on fire, i used to get on fire with Lucio all the time. Then they adjusted fire and I dropped heals or saving lives with beat seemed to matter less.
And to be fair to my own criticism, role cue,which i still support, changed this. Because I dont think the skills of the bell curves match in each role. Until you get to the ends of the curves. I dont think a gold is the same in each role. I think the MM worked great until the role cue broke it, with no new system.
To add SR parking shouldnt be allowed either. Play get your SR, after say a weeks or two weeks time, you have to place again. EDIT 2 -There are so many minor fixes that MIGHT make competitive feel worthwhile, the first being everybody on the latter has exactly the same metrics. and Im hardstuck. And dont really mind. Im where I should be.
Pardon typos. Im walkingon the phone.
We can replace “obvious” with “demonstrable video evidence” if that’s more amenable to the semantic barrier here.
The logic is straight forward. Win rate is relative to skill differential and if the game were rigged to make players “hard stuck,” we would expect some high elo players to get stuck in low elos.
From the rough “napkin math” calculations I did above, OP is under performing in 30% of their losses and 20% of their wins. Overall, their performance is below average in 24% of their games and above average in 16%.
That results in a net loss of 8 SR per 25 games. Over the 869 games, that comes out to around -278 SR for lackluster performance. That’s pretty close to OP’s actual -300 SR.
Yes, it is a minor influence–an average of about 1.84 SR per game in OP’s case given the above calculations or 8% of the total SR per game.
1 Like
Yeah, I don’t agree with that personally. If I’m the weakest player in a lobby–oh well, I’ll try not to feed my brains out or tank the team. Imagine if you couldn’t look at your opponent’s Elo in a chess tournament or the stats of a professional soccer player. High elo chess players literally study entire games and moves from their opponents. It’s bizarre to me that OW doesn’t allow that transparency.
Yep, I’d like a Blizzard-provided on-fire point list for each hero. There are a few relatively accurate community driven ones though. Most of the on-fire points change when the hero is changed.
Yeah, I don’t think so either.
I think that overall we agree that changes need to happen, and probably overlap quite a bit,. You just know how to work the system better… rightly, while those on the opposite side (like me) are screaming in the wind.
Well thats nice and all but you ignore the rest of what i said which was the point. Its not that im confused about what pbsr is doing, but rather that it is flawed.
If a player is average, they would have average win rates (50%) and average pbsr rating, an above average player will have over 50% win ratio and above average pbsr, a below Average player would have under 50 and below average psbr. So how can a person have above average with ratio and below average pbsr? To not be possible because a player that’s doing good is getting wins and the players is getting wins it’s getting high pbsr because he’s doing good. PBSR only meant to compensate in the short term because a good player can still lose a few games due to teammates but this is not supposed to happen long term.
For any other discrepancies I already wrote them in my previous post I don’t want to write them again but those cancel out essentially you cannot have those ratios conflict in the long term
Win rate alone, in no way, tells you about the skill of the player–none whatsoever.
Do you logically understand and agree with the following statement: A 50% win rate at 1200 chess Elo is not the same as a 50% win rate at 1800 Elo.
2 Likes
Yes I do agree however this applies to pbsr as well, average PBSR at 1200 is not the same as average pbsr in 1800. Both of these scale to difficulty which is why they could never conflict, or should never conflict not in the long term
Correct. SR gain/loss is scaled independently of win rate. It has nothing to do with average win rate. It doesn’t matter if we are talking about 1000 games or 10 games–win rate tells you absolutely nothing about the player’s skill or rank.
Look at the rough calculations I did above. Using your SR tracking data, you perform below average 8% more often than you perform above average. That below average performance is also skewed toward your losses.
So, if you performed at the average level of someone else your rank and had a 50% win rate, you would climb. But, you under perform in 8% of your games. Additionally, it looks like you lose 50% of the games you’re favored to win. The combination of those things is causing you to be stuck.
On average, you lose ~8 SR per 25 games until your SR drops enough that your performance is average for that rank.
1 Like
Heres a good posit for you on this. In the metal ranks. At least anecdotally, i tend to have more leavers on my team. And when I get an actual chance to play, ill record it for anecdotal proof…
If PBSR is such a positive influence overall… Should I stay, get more kills and die more… Or leave when the timer goes off. Because just throwing the SR away is happening either way
Where my stats will end where i was. Likely lowerimg my MMR either way
Are people arguing with this thread? I always agreed with the point of the OP, but thought it was kind of obvious.
It’s measured as performance per time spent on the hero on that specific map.
So if the average healing at your rank for Mercy is 1000 per 10 minutes, but you only get to play her for 5 minutes and get 500 healing, you will still be rated as “average.”
It’s almost always better to leave the game after the timer so you don’t accrue time where you can’t heal a nonexistent teammate.
1 Like
Nah, I didn’t wnat it to become an argument when I joined in. I think it stayed rather a discussion. I haven’t seen much if any name calling. or being jerks to each other.
1 Like
But you’re ignoring half of what I’m telling you the other half is that win ratio no matter what overtime will prove that if you get above 50% you are more skilled than average, but I’ll round down mine to 50% and say that I am at least average skilled according to win ratio over time. While it is relative to my rank I’ve always been, except for one season, better than the rank I was in based off my win ratio you could see I consistently have more wins and then losses. So ranks May fluctuate but whatever SR range i was in the ratio stays the same. What this proves is that I have always been above average, or at least average whatever the rank I was at though there might have been times when I was below average there’s also the times when I was above average and that’s why I maintain a win ratio of 50 or over. Within a thousand games it’s enough to cancel out all other variables & because it is relative to rank I don’t have to necessarily have to do better than the rank I’m in to prove my point, I simply have to do better than the rank I’m at consistently which I’ve done.
You assume my performance is low but you do not know if my performance is low and trusting PBSR when I’ve already told you the ways that it potentially can be flawed that it cannot account for everything because it is not a human being. Think about it what’s the necessary need to average out the pbsr if pbsr is in fact accurate? Why not calculate it on a per match basis? What’s the necessity for that? And the most telling sign of all is that they would not reveal how pbsr is calculated. Because if it were calculated depending on your skill you cannot cheat that system but they said that they did not want to reveal it because it could potentially be abused, it would be impossible to abuse a system that detects skill correctly because it would able to differentiate between stat farming and actual skill and value and therefore would not award you pbsr.
That sounds true if you ignore the fact that not every match has a win probability of 50:50. In some matches you clearly have a higher win probability by how the matchmaker handles the games.
Let’s say you have 3 games where you win because you get “carried”. And now you lose 3 games. Obviously you are going to lose more SR since for example you gained 23 SR per win but lost 27 SR per loss. This would mean you gained 323-327= -12 SR even you won 50% of the games.
And even id you ignore PBSR this can still be the case if you play in games where your predicted win probability is higher.
They do calculate your PBSR adjustment for every match you play. You get rewarded or punished for your performance in the match, you gain/lose the SR for.
1 Like
That is true but after a thousand games the amount of games that I’ve played that are 60/40, 40/60, 50/50 will average out. Any advantage I might have had on my side the enemy also has after a thousand games. Everything would be expected to average out to where it would solely be reflective of my skill level because there’s been also games where I’ve been a disadvantage. If pbsr would have calculated correctly then I would have at least have pbsr that correlates to my win ratio. Because that’s what pbsr is supposed to do it’s supposed to get you close to what win ratio would get you in the long term but only faster because win ratio would ultimately get you to the place where you where meant to be but they decided they wanted to speed it up
No. I’m tired of explaining this. Win rate is a meaningless metric unless it’s contextualized by skill ratings.
Given the data you presented earlier, we know you under perform more than you over perform. We also know that 50% of your losses are coming from games that you should win.
That means you don’t gain enough SR to climb.
Yep. And I’ve already told you that every single person is taking the exact same exam as you. There is no free lunch and you don’t get extra points for doing the same things that other students are also doing.
Players performing better are objectively contributing more value to their teams.
1 Like
You do realize that OWL is strictly determined by win ratio right?
And you have told me that every single person just playing the same game and yes we all get that but imagine that if your playstyle was incorrectly calculated
Put it this way imagine 10 problems on your math test were automatically wrong while everybody had a potential to get a hundred out of 100 you only had the potential to get 90 out of 100. Overtime they will eventually outscore you no matter what. You will always be gimped by 10 points if you play a certain way