In games like CoD people absolutely despise the SBMM (which is basically a repackaged MMR) and they’re already looking at SBMM2.0, which will use even more analytics and rig/adapt matches even more tighter for the sake of engagement and retention and supposed “fairness”.
I’m sorry but competition isn’t meant to be fair via rigging, it’s meant to be fair by NOT rigging.
The rigging topic comes up all the time (not just on these forums), because we’re at an ethical turning point in AAA and gaming industry. Where companies want to move forward on analytical tools and techniques that tailor the gameplay experience. It ends up being psychological manipulation for the sake of profit. This might otherwise be fine/allowable for entertainment reasons, but not for esports/competition.
7 Likes
Wait you all know about the last gunslingers too? They were the most respected clan on TF2.
Over 2000 games played but they never won a game. Gotta respect that determination.
4 Likes
The last gunslingers were not the greatest TF2 guild of all time.
Therefore, the game isn’t rigged.
4 Likes
You know while you cant prove it due to lack of transparency, neither could you ever disprove it for the same reason. The main issue is that Blizzard even tried introducing mmr and all that mess because good intentions or not you’re only introducing system which can only bring errors into a system an otherwise stable and simple way to do it.
Everyone starts at 0, win +1, lose -1, pair within general range. Basically they could have just uses the SR and it would have resulted in more a more stable and accurate ranking system because its pretty much how nature does it. the MMR and all that hidden mess unless guaranteed to be perfect from the beginning is only ever going to be susceptible to abuse or error
Oh course transparency would simply solve all problems in this regard.
2 Likes
Better yet why don’t the devs make a clear statement concerning this issue?
2 Likes
Alone the system that you have a SR which reprents your “skill rating” and an MMR which places you in matches is wrong.
When you lose a match and lose SR but your MMR increases because you played well which creates a gap between these values, no matter how small it is, the matchmaking is rigged and does not represent your real “Skill-Rating”.
Pairing this which a (enforced) 50:50 winchance for both teams, which is defined by the MMR from the matchmaker and not your SR, you end up with harder enemies even when you are stuck at a certain SR.
Why is there even a discussion about that? These are all confirmed facts by the devs and everyone with a bit logical thinking knows it.
4 Likes
This is a good question.
Trying to disprove something that doesn’t exist is near impossible. It’s the Flying Spaghetti Monster argument.
Dev’s have made statements that it’s a skill-based matchmaking system, they don’t need to reply to every accusation especially when its evidence is things taken out of context and pure opinion.
This is speculation and hasn’t been proven by devs outside of MMR exists.
1 Like
Hey now, I’m low ranked, don’t lump me in this those guys lol.
6 Likes
Depends what you mean, to a degree something already is happening beyond required by a rank system with the MMR thing which cannot guarantee it properly gauging all relevant value that cannot be measured in statistics alone.
That’s as far as I can know. Any further suspicions are simply based on other Ranking system’s I’ve played. I did a comparison of overwatch with the Halo 2 matchmaking system as a reply to post a while back and I
I calculated what SR would be in terms of halo ranks and vice versa because I felt that Halo 2 had a great ranking system. Inthe Halo equivalent of SR rank, you would find yourself fluctuating an equivalent of ±/- 100 SR while im OverWatch I get ranges of about +/-250 SR fluctuations. OverWatch is a lot more volatile than Halo 2. In Halo 2 you would reach your peak and then you would stay around your peak and any progress you would make would be slow and incremental which to me felt right, compared to OverWatch which I find my rank fluctuating 500 SR only to have to climb it back up again maybe make a little progress before it fluctuates wildly again making it feel like a grind. The length of the streaks I’ve found myself having whether they were wins and losses were also new behavior which was ridiculous when I was newer to the game getting things like 11 wins and then 11 losses and 9 wins and 9 losses and 13 wins and 13 losses almost in exact mirrors. It happened for quite a while but it seems to have stopped happening so wildly now but I found that highly suspicious.
That’s the questionable thing I find about it a ranking system isn’t hard to design It literally can go by wins and losses and group similar levels and that’s it, That’s precisely the system Halo 2 used. I don’t know many other ways to do accurate rankings. So I would assume that OverWatch would use the same ranking system methodology that Halo 2 used. However the matchmaker and ranking system have widely different behavior, This shouldn’t be the case unless they’re using something different, And I can’t think of a different way to do it that wouldn’t be introducing errors or would be all that appealing. So I can’t confirm my suspicion but this behavior seems to go against logic which is another thing that’s hard to ignore
3 Likes
If you don’t complain and look for improvement, then you are all good homie =]
3 Likes
That’s very unreasonable and unfair. Why would anyone think this?
When in fact they’re expressly telling you they feel it’s the system, and one of the many factors in that is buying a new account.
I see why people have to disagree with you. That is absurd.
1 Like
Im low ranked too Sue. They dont lump me in either because im not delusional and what not lol. Im silver/gold border player max though im not great and i struggle to just be average.
I accept my rank and its 100% related to my skill. I think thats the important point that some other low rank players are missing. They want to think their rank is outside of their control somehow.
Stay level headed and keep it up <3 !
6 Likes
Balancing around a hidden performance statistic is rigging. What people are playing for is an SR rating. In quick play this performance rating is fine because it is based on all players as a whole. In competitive, you have to be within an SR bracket and then matched against a performance statistic that goes up and down for every match you play, win or lose.
On paper MMR seems like a fine concept. But in reality when you have smurfs who intentionally soft throw games and “play slow”, you end up with a gate keeping system. Essentially when you reach the border of a rank your MMR is “higher”, and you get put up against smurfs that are “in your rank”.
So lets say there are 1-10% of the players who are smufing in your rank. When you reach that MMR threshold, your chance of getting them rises to 30-40% or higher.
This is not to say that you do not “deserve” your rank. This doesn’t make a gold player GM. But it might mean the gold player is actually low plat, or actually silver. This MMR manipulation and gate keeping effect causes a lot a SR churn. That causes wildly good or bad matches, depending on who the match maker favors.
If match making was purely based on SR and truly random, your chance of running into a smurf would be about equal to the amount there are (1-10%). Games would “feel” better overall. Again, this doesn’t magically make someone 2 ranks higher than they are. But with less frustrating games they might be less stressed out and wiling to look at their mistakes and learn from them.
Also “they are low rank” has nothing to do with their raw intelligence or understanding of a subject like math or statistics. Low rank means they are not good at a video game. Some of these “low rank” players may have degrees and make more money than you. Something to think about.
6 Likes
Have you seen the comments that reciepts and similar make?
They call people (like myself) and others, who have legitimately spent hours working towards self improvement, lucky.
Now I’ll be the first to admit that there were definitely some games I probably shouldn’t have won (Luck), but… There were plenty of games that I lost that I definitely shouldn’t have lost (luck for the enemy team).
They got that lucky head shot, my teammate (or myself) were out of position trying to make a play and we got shut down…
Overwatch (and competitive games in general) aren’t a function of time. Its more about recognizing the issues and constantly micro managing your performance until it becomes reflex.
1 Like
It’s not. You can call it handicapping but even so it’s no different than any skill based matchmaking. Rigging is the fixing of the outcome. Matchmaking isn’t that good to do that.
3 Likes
It’s a skill based match making system on paper. It fails to be that because it is at odds with a ranked ladder system. One is performance based, win or lose. The other is based on win or loss. If everyone played fair, perhaps MMR would kind of work. But when you have people actively sabotaging it (you can’t avoid this in real life), it fails.
A pure bracket system without MMR is more “fair” in the real world because it is Rng. If you are good, you climb and earn SR. If you don’t belong, you lose and fall down. It is kind of that, but with a match making system saying “I think these players are the same skill” within the bracket. The problem is even smurfs who soft throw are out performing people in that rank. So when someone actually tries and performs good, the system decides that you are on their level.
This is not the only problem Overwatch has, and it all stems from the same problem: Blizzard gives players too much credit. They are overly optimistic. LFG, role queue, every feature they have ever had they always think about how “good” players are and they never approach players with the cynicism they deserve. Players will actively try to sabotage and break everything. They should be thinking about how players will break something and build in safe guards… but instead they release something with this naïve sense of how “good” the players are and it ends up backfiring.
This is why you have throw groups in LFG. This is why people throw for priority passes. And this is why the match maker has broken and largely the same since season 2, abet some changes to map win conditions. They still claim “it isn’t a problem” when it clearly is.
Again, I’m not saying people deserve a better rank. But games could feel better overall. And the reason it doesn’t is because the match maker tries to make “fair matches” when in reality it does the opposite. It makes games that make people toxic and not want to play the game. So toxic they don’t want to learn and get better.
4 Likes
Rigging is fixing the result of a match.
Balancing around hidden performance statistics doesn’t mean it’s rigging games. It just means it could.
If you want to say it could. Go for it. Want to say it does… doesn’t matter which way you skin a cat it doesn’t mean that.
3 Likes
Casinos don’t always rig games. The house always wins in the end though. Some people do win though.
Same argument really. On paper the match maker system is supposed to make matches fair. It sometimes makes fair matches, but that “could be rigged games” get more likely when your MMR goes up from performing well. Just like a casino will rig a game to make your odds of winning less likely.
Like I get that the intention of the match maker is to make fair matches and not to “rig” games. But it happens because the design takes what was supposed to be good into a bad thing when people mess with it. So the difference between the two is a casino does it on purpose. With the MMR system it’s a consequence of the design and variables not properly accounted for, or not possible to account for.
1 Like
Casino rigging games would be loading dice or using magnets to fix outcomes. Most casino’s win in the long run because there the odds of winning are always higher than the odd of the bet meaning overall they win.
1 Like
Not always. Sometimes it can be as subtle as changing out the deck, or adding more decks. They can manipulate odds without it be considered “cheating” under the guise of “being fair”. They often do this to hook the player and give them that rush, only to take it away in the end. Some casinos are that blatant though.
You can believe what ever you want. But there are patents from Blizzard on match making that are really sus. And from my own experience, pickup games (PUGS) have a much higher match quality, even when you have bronze to GM players in the same lobby randomly matches against each other without thought of balance. Like sure, the bronze player may not contribute much, and the games may be wildly unbalanced, but people try more and have more fun in those games.
What I’m asking for is a random assortment of players within the same rank without performance manipulation. Which should be far better than some of the PUGS I’ve played considering people should be within the same rank.
3 Likes