The game creates an addictive nature in people therefore toxicity is there. OW’s matchmaker is designed to make you addicted like a drug so that you keep on playing. The matchmaker is the reason for toxicity because it wasn’t designed for fair matches, just to make you play more. Blizz/Activ don’t make games for fun anymore they make games for replayability and money.
If you continue playing something that was designed to keep you playing, but the matchmaker part of it is crap and you are losing then what happens, you get mad.
No, they could do better. They just gave it to someone they thought could do it.
Yes, it is almost certainly designed to retain players and increase their screen time. That is unethical if you don’t inform the user. There’s a developing body of research and legislation on the topic.
Despite the aim of player retention, it is also designed to fairly match players by equal or nearly equal skill level.
Technically with Bastion and double shield, you want to get around the barriers so you can spend your cooldowns on bastion. But breaking them can work too, just… Not as well.
Receipts showed it. Do you dispute the math there? It’s extremely conservative and the arguments are data free. They require basically no assumptions only that alts exist.
The burden of proof would be on you to show why his calculations are off.
SR is supposed to be your skill. Just like elo is supposed to be ur skill in chess. If I’m 3300, match me around 3300 randomly. And assign me offsets for matchmaking gaps. Don’t force the odds to 50-50 i.e. fixing the outcome i.e. rigging the match as per every definition every1 accepts except u.
A +/- 250sr window is all you need to ship fair matches around an SR range, relaxing that to +/- 500sr for extremely lowpop conditions. This assumes SR is not redundant, a fair measure of rank, paytout, and skill. Which it has to be, for valid discussion on fairness.
SR-only is more efficient in terms of trajectory times. Rigging for 50-50 matches is a forced, anti-competitive tax for people trying to climb or who deserve to rank down.
Mobility can be achieved with pbsr and sr gains/offsets for underdogs etc. You don’t need MMR. The mmr system you’re defending exists only to rig every single match player, which is a repulsive idea for fairplay ladder ranked systems. Fairplay means hands off, letting the labeled classification, ranks, and payouts appropriately do the work. Again, as per definition of rigging.
Have you agreed to the defintion of rigging yet? or are u still stuck on level1 bcuz u dont like the wording ? Also ur dice analogy is just way off. If anything it proves point for SR only matchmaking lmao
There’s so many things wrong in what you’re stating, its almost crazy how oblivious you are to reality. There’s so many books on how to make a game (or a gambling game) addictive you should read. Blizzard didn’t miss a single page, and even wrote some pages of their own. Toxicity is indirectly intended the same way someone will turn mad if you steal all his money, your goal was to steal his money, not to make the victim mad, right? It’s the result of unfairness which is a target to render a game addictive, because the harder you lose, the higher the reward if you win and your brain just loves those chemicals (a.k.a. retention). They’re deeply looking for ways to transpose all the gambling “rules of addiction” to their game, hey, they’re trying to make money, not to please you!
The system’s not rigged? You have no idea how well their match maker is constructed, it’s almost perfect. People hate it, it’s a proof that it’s working as intended. I’ve seen healers stuck in silver popping off in diamonds tournaments, same for tanks, silver windows/mcrees hitting every headshot accused of deranking when in fact, they just can’t climb out of their elo (early match ending when they pop off too early, leavers, too many smurfs…).
It’s all over the place, You may not play enough to notice those things, but all you need to do is read people’s experiences. It’s okay if 1 out of a million says the game is rigged, but how many are they now feeling it’s wrong, are you just willing to dismiss everybody’s experience because you want to keep it all rainbow-y ? Because your experience is different? Now if you’re that good of a player, you got to know that the more skilled you get, the less you’re affected by those rigging mechanics, and if you don’t care, it’s another thing. But you shouldn’t just reject everything because you’re experience is different.
Ok so I’ve stayed out of these conversations for some time now, since they are pointless.
I will say this now, the reason his calculations are off and/or wrong, is because he doesn’t have the actual numbers, coming to the conclusion he did, without the actual numbers is just making it up, unless, and this is highly unlikely, Blizzard released the numbers to him, and him alone.
Receipts didn’t perform any calculations. The post is equivalent to proposing conditional Shannon entropy, writing H(X|Y), and then asserting H has a specific value given unknown variables. That’s a completely worthless “data free” a priori and only convinces people that have no idea what they’re looking at. Show the data or GTFO.
How did you numerically determine +/- 250 SR is a fair match? How are you numerically defining “fair?”
How did you determine that? The data I posted earlier suggests the exact opposite of this claim. SR-only trajectories are slower and converge after nearly 3X the number of games. In no world is that “more efficient.”
Are you retracting the claim that this system “limits mobility” and holds players back?
How do you want to calculate PBSR in the absence of a comparator performance rating?
Demonstrably matching equally skilled opponents in a competitive environment will never qualify as “rigged.”
This is not a hard concept. How do you equally share a pie amongst 4 people?
Your answer: Everyone gets a random piece of the pie.
My answer: Everyone gets 25% of the pie.
Are you aware that punctually inserting laughing emoticons to accompany your text (as you have done regularly in your posts these days on various topics) does not attribute any value to it, nor to you, nor in reality it diminishes your interlocutor but only highlights how you feel the need to belittle your interlocutor?
This makes me think that the foundations of your thesis are not very solid.
You’re legitimately overreaching and expressing deep “victim mentality” behavior in attempts to silence other forum users who simply disagree with your perspective.
You follow people from forum thread to forum thread and you need to quit this extremely toxic behavior. How you haven’t been flagged by the moderators is beyond me. You’re the definition of Cyber bully.
Are you aware that I’m allowed to use emojis to represent the irl manifestation of emotions I experience while watching two people who don’t know each other irl mud sling back and forth?
Until they create a salts (smiled a little then stopped) emoji, I’m obligated to utilize the laughing emoji.
I have to be honest, I don’t see any thesis or great explanation being written in
I’m simply asking another user if he’s enjoying his conversation as much as I’m enjoying reading it.
Beyond that, I removed myself from the conversation outside of responding to another user.
If you find it offensive, sorry not sorry. I find your unnecessary and malapert comment inflammatory and would appreciate you discontinue trolling me or I’ll be obligated to put you on the ignore list.
Appreciate your support but I have hulk on my ignore list as all he does is harass me for sharing different opinions about the game, skill of the game required, and he always feels obligated to find some way or another to call someone toxic without realizing his own behavior.
Obsessively flaunting the interlocutor while he discusses his theses is objectively aimed at belittling his arguments, what makes a person laugh is “comical” or in any case not to be taken seriously into consideration; especially in a heated debate. As already written, if in a debate your arguments need these “tips” to stay on their feet, they probably don’t stand alone.
Forgive me, looking thoroughly at your profile I noticed that that type of emoticons are used only on occasions of strong confrontation, about 50% of times. In all other types of your posts, non conflictual, they are close to 0%. In the posts you made after my note, even in the unfriendly posts, the percentage has aligned to zero. So either what I pointed out to you has inhibited you as a sore point or you have re-evaluated, in a single instant, your hostile interlocutors (I hope of course in the dialectic alone), in dialectically close interlocutors.
I am really happy that I was able to convince you about emoticons
And did you change this habit only after I pointed it out to you in your entire profile history?
Let me guess, will you start using them again? What will be the lesser evil, using again the laughing emoticons after the method has been highlighted, ornot using them and making it clear that you are not doing it because they have been highlighted?
Hulk trashtalked Temporal for not having an open profile? Lmao. I would love to get free coaching from a professional coach, and this guy is just crying about it. Incredible.
Just goes to show that the person doesn’t care about improving, and in turn, can never expect to rank up. Or should never expect, at least. But if they want to be miserable, sure, demand reward without putting in any work. Because that’s how skillful hobbies work.
Also, I’m actually just watching a Temporal review. Really knows his stuff. I’ve also had a review from Spilo once, was very helpful for my Tracer.
Oh my god, this is embarrassing. I faintly remember a conversation with someone with your profile picture, but I couldn’t tell you what about or how much we talked. I’m so sorry ;-;
