You sure about that? Because what we got on this season was half way to a full mmr reset so to say; the closest one we got so far.
A full mmr reset would most likely be even more chaotic and take longer to get back to normal.
I dont mean this as a gotcha, but, if you dont like how ranked feels this season, because all mmr were squished closer together, with full mmr reset you would have even … wilder games.
So you probably would not enjoy that either.
I have another Blizzard quote for you…
“Blizzard has investigated themselves and found no wrong doing.”
If you believe this company after all they have said and done then you are in fact a bot with no brain.
please report “small package for trolling” look at his post. the definition of troll
He’s just talking about games where one team has been calculated to have higher probability of winning to some degree. It’s to be expected to happen every now and then. Then you will see the uphill modifier etc.
Supposed to win != impossible to lose.
It may mean a game where they calculate the other team to have a 55% chance of winning, for example, instead of the golden 50%.
Here anyhow is Morgan talking about how the forced 50/50 is not a thing etc. (more recently than 7 years ago).
iirc Scott has retired.
https://youtu.be/wxu0ik3Vlf8?t=521
I think you guys are giving the matchmaker way to much credit. Q times would reflect fair balanced 50% matches. They don’t. This “new” competitive system transparency proves what we knew all along.
Suggesting matches “your supposed to win” as Scott states verbatim, mean one team is only “fractionally” favored is… optimistic.
I think a more logical conclusion would be the matchmaker is quite loose and these types of matches would be determined “balanced”.
Funny I remember watching that clip a while back. While I agree forced 50/50 isn’t real per say… If the matchmaker is trying to calibrate your rating so you “naturally” as Morgan states, win 50% of your games… is that really all that different?
Yeah apparently Scott rage quit. Can’t blame him. Still he was the OG, his clips have weight. He didn’t come across as coached up, lots of juicy off the cuff remarks about the matchmaker/mmr. I’ll have to watch more of Morgan.
What does it prove?
Yes in the context that many people in the forums say that the game intentionally -forces a loss- on an individual which is completely different.
As Morgan says, it does not look at anyones win loss history and decide if you should lose now, in that “oh you’ve won 5 last games? you should lose the next” - which is what many argue for here in the forums.
I suggest also watching the very recent talk with Gavin by ml7 where they talk about some other common questions and the changes in this season here:
https://youtu.be/sD6FvhdP2Rk?t=1700
This is probably true. All it does is pick 10 people based on a number from -6 to +6.
Me too. Add PBSR to that list as without that resetting MMR won’t do much. I’ve not played since I posted this and honestly I don’t miss it one bit.
I think the rigging for engagement was in OW1 as well, but as everyone was ranked more accurately, it was less extreme. And especially in “real” OW1 (not RQ), you could switch to counter or make up gaps in the team a lot easier. It did probably make you want to play longer without being obviously broken and frustrating.
Almost like they made fundamental changes to the game and didn’t bother to update the matchmaker to take those into account…
Potato patato…
It’s forced. Stop the white knighting.
That’s what most other FPS games go for. Quality matches where the outcome isn’t predetermined by the matchmaker when it picks ‘potentials’ out of a large pool of players and their ranks.
The system is Rigged so that it can keep the majority in low elos and retain high elo players who then make smurf accounts to keep even more people in low elos.
You get a few games where you roll the enemy team to keep the dopamine fix going, but that’s all.
The sooner people realize this, the better.
I for one am fed up. I want quality matches, and if that means longer queue times, then so be it. I’ve got other things to do while waiting for the queue to pop anyway.
It isn’t forced.
And them labeling it “expected” is misleading.
It is just when the 2 teams are dragged into the lobby, 1 team is always bound to have slightly higher average SR than the other. Just the way the cookie crumbles. Used to always have this displayed front and centre with OW1 (now we just have vague ranges displayed).
I think the only issue is the games labelling of things and semantics. They lead to players being confused, misunderstanding and spreading misinformation. As I am sure you will have seen countless times on here.
There is no rigging, no funky business, no forced anything, there isn’t EBMM. That isn’t to say match making is good or bad. I just isn’t forced or rigged.
The factor the white knights want you to forget is the team balancer aspect. Even overwatch tried to do Mmr mirroring (I even was asking for it). Not even sure if they still do it from some games with open profiles.
So there is a stage whether it be in the Mmr number or not, it looks at ping, looks at map win rate, use of voice… that’s the team balancer. There I think things can get wonky, combine that with time of day aspect, and stacks.
I really do think the #1 downplayed aspect is stacks. Even a bad duo with misguided principles taking over a role on the team can put a team at a disadvantage.
Expected vs forced… if every (a vast majority) player in overwatch for the last 8 years has walked away with 50/50 … I’d EXPECT it too.
idk who is “wanting to forget” something.
They will try to match mmr’s of people in roles on both teams, so its not just team average. it is relatively recent change.
It’s all just matchmaking for me, but semantics is pretty uninteresting.
ping yes, which of course it should (so a eu player wont be thrown to na). Map winrate no and voice no. Maps are randomized first by randomizing the game mode, and then the map in that game mode.
The devs have said a few times that grouping is maybe the biggest problem for matchmaking quality.
They’ve been on record in the past saying the only things that impact match making are skill (MMR), ping (obvious one), group size (trios try to match with trios and all that jazz), queue time (if queue goes long, sometimes that trio gets matched with a duo and a solo).
Any implication that they factor other things in like win rates and whatever people want to make up are pure waffle.
Know your stuff mate, Jeff kap already admitted this.
I doubt that.
You’ve probably misread what he has said.
Absolutely forced losses are thing. The people who deny it hide behind semantics where they define “forced” as there being 0% chance of winning. Realistically when you play well you’re suddenly given matches where you have around 20% chance of winning which is essentially forcing a loss.
You can tell when it’s going to happen. You get a string of wins and then after your next loss it triggers a loss streak, the matchmaker will take an extra long time to find a game and you can bet you’ll have around 20% chance of winning. Tested and proven by thousands of people.
Nope, just what the devs have said. The dont look into an individuals match history and force a loss if youve had a win streak.
Keep thinking that and enjoy your win streak followed by a predictable loss streak where the teams are blatantly lopsided.
Yep, ill trust the devs talking on public about it more than anonymous forum users. But you’re free to think they lie for no reason.