I have a friend in a similar predicament.
He is just hardstuck bronze despite the fact that he deserves at least Gold. The matchmaker, due to the fact that he was bronze for a while on release, says otherwise.
This is why an MMR reset was kinda needed.
One who fears loss is already defeated.
Impact is the key. These stats which seems good doesn’t measure your impact on the game. All elims are counted even if just 1 bullet touches the enemy and healing has little significance to rank. I can imagine many in bronze to have bloated stats because the competition is all over the place.
Lucio for example, do you beat to save your team from losing a team fight, do you beat to save them from a team wipe ult, do you speed boost to secure kills, do you boop people out of position to reduce their advantage. Most of Lucio’s kit is geared towards team play and if he is played as an individual you are leaving most of his impact out of your games.
I don’t know what your point is. You don’t know how the ranked system works?
That sounds about on point. You’ve haven’t even played 40 games. What the system does is put you much lower ranked than where you “should be,” so that you can grind up.
I think win/loss is actually one of the things they look the LEAST at. They mostly look at how well you perform. I actually won about 33% of my games last series, and I ranked up still. I went 7-15.
I don’t know where you are getting your figures from…overbuff? If so, those figures are not even remotely close to correct. No one has access to those figures except for blizzard.
And even if they were correct, getting 20 elims/minute in bronze doesn’t make you on par with someone that is getting 20 elims/minute in GM.
It’s funny because that’s what they do? Or at least what they did in OW1. They had something called PBSR (personal based skill rating), which would adjust your SR gains/losses depending on how well you performed individually. That was in effect for everyone under diamond. But in diamond and above, PBSR was no longer used. I don’t know if they have something similar for OW2.
I am often amazed by how frqeuently I see people saying “their mm system sucks they should change it to this,” and their suggestion is actually what is already happening. People don’t understand how it works so they just assume? I guess. It’s kind of funny though.
I totally get that and I 100% agree. As for support, I always play selfless and do exactly the things you’re talking about.
The problem is that they weight the win/loss + history about 95% and personal stats about 5%. I understand that and agree with it for high rank!!!
The issue is that low rank teamplay doesn’t sway the game nearly as much as personal skills because everyone (except smurfs) is so bad at all of it. There is a huge difference in skill level and game knowledge swaying the game too much to rely on win/loss and team effects.
At high rank there’s only so good you can be a technicals like aim and generally FPS stuff so teamplay timing and positioning is everything.
At the bottom everyone is garbage at those things AND at the technicals so your main contribution is actually just your technical FPS gameplay since playing coordinated (for DPS/Tank) when everyone else is playing individual DOESN’T WORK.
You’ve got to make stupid high-risk-high-reward plays at low rank to sway the game instead of self sacrificing “good” plays. I’ve played low ranks and plat…
Playing right for plat is playing wrong for bronze. Especially Tanking. (Well, Okay, not so different for support, actually)
The issue is that you’re not understanding analytical systems that must use historical aggregates. (IE They have to use previous rank to decide future rank)
I don’t and can’t grind so therefore I’ve always matched below my level. That’s bad design.
No. Sorry but that’s completely false. It’s very nearly 100% win/loss to capture your team-play contribution instead of individual play that can look good on paper but be counter-productive just like Goldark mentioned.
And I agreed. The point was that I’m consistently shooting fish in a barrel because the system is borked.
A tiny contribution to the adjustment that was minor at first and so small as to be irrelevant later on. I know through not just what Blizzard has said but through extensive testing.
You’re just not thinking it through.
If you believe they make you grind and I’m not putting in enough games…
If you see that my incredibly high performance is just an artifact of shooting fish in a barrel…
Then you agree with me. You probably just don’t understand historical weighting and Bayesian priors and that’s what is tricking you into thinking there is strong personal performance influence.
If you watched my old video, the greatest single contributor is where they think you “should” be based on your old data. (because they need and use tons of aggregate data to, theoretically, separate out your tiny effect from the team win/loss)
You were significantly below your historical rank, right? That was the reason you ranked up. The grind, not personal performance.
That’s my whole gripe and if you think about it I think you’ll agree.
Um. Why would I not understand that? Do you think that I thought they just reset everyone every season?
If you don’t play the game a lot, how do you expect the system to properly rank you? What exactly is a magical “good design?” If they can’t use your data from playing the game?
Um. I’ve had many seasons with negative win loss ratios and gained rank. So…you’re wrong. By the way, just saying, “it’s false” doesn’t make it false.
Or it’s the fact that despite losing most games, I’ve literally witnessed an increase in rank over multiple seasons, purely due to outplaying my opponents and teammates.
I was below my historical rank, yes. Just like every single person in OW2. That is what they do, they rank you lower. I have told you this.
Since you seem to be having a very hard time understanding their system, I suggest you read their latest developer post about matchmaking. It (kind of) explains how it works. At least, it might help you to get a better idea of what is going on.
I suggest you don’t overestimate your comprehension of a subject or underestimate others comprehension of it.
I read it and understand it from a perspective I don’t think you can conceive of. As a developer myself I know the design constraints and theories around ranking. (and I know what they gloss over and hide and why they hide it) I know the actual requirements of the mathematics and programming and how there are fundamental design issues with trying to suss out small effects from larger ones.
Google this: “Elo vs. Regression to the Mean: A Theoretical Comparison” for just one perspective I think will expand your horizons
You’re being tricked by their terminology like “your skill” when they mean the data they have about your performance that comes from mostly win/loss that is heavily adjusted and weighted by past aggregate ranks. (a feedback loop of doom)
I know they have to use some past data. The issue I have is about weighting and application of specific design metrics and theory. Something the average person knows literally nothing about and shouldn’t have to know. (If you haven’t heard of “TrueSkill” for instance, then you haven’t been doing any academic research and should adjust your self-image about your authority to speak about this topic accordingly)
There’s nothing shameful about not being a nerd about academic topics… so please don’t get offended! 
You don’t have to know everything in the universe.
I’ve outlined a system however, in my post here: How to Make Lower Ranks more Fun
Just read between the lines, friend. Everything they say is “skill” is actually just your win/loss rate. Here is a quote from that article and pay attention to what they say:
When a player wins more than 50% of their matches, we start to increase their MMR faster. This levels out once we see the player’s MMR value has them joining fair matches, which corresponds to a 50% win-rate. With this change, we’ve seen that new and returning players reach a 50% win-rate with much fewer matches than before.
Wins. Win-rate. IE it’s not actual personal metrics. They don’t use personal performance hardly at all. When they talk about your personal performance they MEAN your win/loss rate.
They fundamentally believe your skill and your win rate are the same thing so they use the terms that way.
They have an ELO philosophy for a team game and that is a scientifically untenable theory for individual ranking design in a random team game. (please read the article I told you to google) They are fooled by the fact that stable teams whose members do not change CAN use ELO to treat the team as a single group.
I’m not trying to be mean here but you just do not yet understand the underlying theory and design elements I’m addressing.
That’s not an accusation or a dig. It’s reasonable. You shouldn’t have to be an academic expert on a topic to just play and understand your entertainment. There is no possible shade on you here.
I’m not doing either one of those things. It is very clear that you don’t understand how it works.
Oh good. Then it should be very easy for you to understand how it works. Yet, you seem to struggle.
That’s not correct. I’m sorry.
At least, based on personal experience, and how my rank/SR was adjusted in OW1. I don’t really know how it works in OW2, since they basically hide EVERYTHING.
I’m glad you are not ashamed of your ignorance.
Is there some part of your brain that is glossing over my statements? I have LOST MORE GAMES THAN I HAVE WON, AND HIT SEASON HIGHS IN RANKS. READ THOSE WORDS PLEASE. Do you just have some kind of selective reading disorder?
so op complains that because of limited sample size, the mmr is rated a certain way and now hed have to grind to prove the system where he actually would be.
thats just the limits of the system. if you want the system to rank you correctly, play 50-100 games solo. playing with other ppl screws with mm and mmr, because as you said, the game with your wife are very low rated bc shes not playing that well.
you brought this upon yourself. id advice you to either not care bc you enjoy playing with your wife or of you care you maybe shouldnt play the competetive mode with sb of very different skill level so blizzard can mm and rank you properly.
It’s obvious you are getting emotional and reactionary at this point so let’s not continue.
But I will clarify for you. Prior data. (your previous rank) plays an enormous role in weighting the direction your rank trends.
When you are at or near your expected rank, the win/loss will start to play a greater role and when you are outside of that range your weighted history will have a greater role.
The system is designed to use the largest possible set of data.
Pretty sure it all boils down to blizz being a scum company. You play more, showing you’re more commited, meaning you’re likely more willing to play more to grind rank.
Would bet anything they got engagement based matchmaking going on
Could you just explain why you think this? Do you actually have some evidence to support this theory? Or are you just making things up. Because I have never experienced anything like that, in thousands of hours of gameplay.
I’m just really confused why you are completely ignoring my statements. You insist it only looks at wins/losses, despite me telling you that it doesn’t, from actual personal experience. It seems you are just making things up.
Limited sample size per season when they arbitrarily place you lower each season and expect you to grind up.
…and when you don’t grind to give them more data they add a stronger and stronger weight each season (by using the aggregate win/loss and final rank) to place and keep you lower ranked.
Yes, that’s a good point and I wish I had the time but I don’t. I know I’m not the only one with a similar problem and it screws up their whole system for people to have this problem.
It’s where a lot of instability is coming from.
Again, I don’t have a great argument here.
I like the game, but playing in a really unstable environment is also a huge detractor. I’d love the game so much more if they’d just alter their theory just slightly, and that would help a ton of other people at the same time.
So I “complain” because I just want enough people to know there is a solution that eventually someone at Blizzard reads it and thinks about it.
That’s actually my goal. Trying to get their attention so someone can tell them to stop thinking in ELO terms. …more specifically that they can promote team play without enforcing it at every level.
That’s the issue. they have a philosophy of selflessness over selfishness and I agree with them. It really does change the game. It just won’t work as a ranking system for low ranks.
thats a whole seperate issue they introduced with ow2. they are however not actually ranking you lower, only the visual representation. you are still getting matched according to your mmr. which basically means yes you gotta grind like 30 or so games per sason to climb up to the rank that matches your mmr of last season. its basically an auto climb. but yeah its stupid and i hope they get rid of it moving forward bc feedback from the players has been negative across the board.
i think all things considered, you probably should accept you are not really the target audience for ranked mode.
since both qp and comp feature mmr based matchmaking, it might be the better path to just stick to qp and arcade. comp is aimed at ppl who play a lot and got the time to do so.
Dude, it’s a video game. Chill. Your rank means absolutely nothing to everyone but you. If you aren’t having fun, stop playing. No reason to make yourself angry over something like a video game.
I’m sorry. I’m not trying to be a jerk. Maybe the problem is that I’m trying to shorten my posts constantly.
When I say “win/loss” I’m talking about the dominant strategy. I’m simultaneously referring to the weighting system that was created from previous win/loss.
So, yes I understand that you had an upside down win/loss rate and went up. There are two scales/sizes of consideration here. The big picture over time win/loss and the quicker win/loss.
When they have a large pool of data from you like all your games from quick play and competitive over years, they will favor that history over a recent dip in your ranking. It will pull you up or down faster based on that large set of data and if you are very far from the higher place they believe you should be then even losing a lot will still rank you up.
There are things like changes in skill and player improvement and new players that they have to try to put into the design to decide the interaction of different scales of datasets. My issue is with something called Bayesian priors. AKA “Where they think you should be” and how they create that is what is broken.
My problem is that the weight of their Bayesian priors and the way they created that data was all wrong and perpetually screwing me.
My problem is that I just wanted my skins and instead they screwed me with old wrong data. (big picture. Where you should be. Bayesian priors.) I know they did this with other people too.
I could just stop insisting on having my skins and go play my higher ranked accounts, but I see a clear problem and know how to fix it. So I’m hoping to communicate that.
Myabe they do like the game but don’t want to leave cause there’s still more to offer than any other game and the current system in place doesn’t work and want to be vocal about it in hope that it DOES get fixed and they can get back to enjoying it again.
Sigh. You’re probably right, but even QP is stomp-counterstomp for my low ranked account. I have better ranked accounts I could use that aren’t weighted all wrong but they don’t have my skins and I really want to be able to play with my wife in a less nonsensical environment.
It’s all smurfs mowing down everyone while their teammates are running into walls and falling off cliffs with no-one nearby. Sometimes it’s hilarious but it also makes for a frustrating game that could be sooooo good.
I see others having similar problems and can’t help but want to fix it for everyone instead of just switching over to one of my accounts where it’s not a problem.
I could fix it and it frustrates me to not be allowed to do so.
oh boy do i have news for you.
players of every elo are right now complaining about the game being stomp mania in either direction. all things considered thats just the state of the game right now.
ive always been a strong advocate for “players in every elo hate their teammates”. its true: ppl might think the game is inherently more fun in higher elos when all that really changes is every players individual skill. there is no more real team play anywhere, theres still snowball everywhere. theres still ppl dying in a stupid way, ppl flaming each other, people leaving games etc. essentially, its the same game but ppl tend to hit more shots and they tend to do smart things more often.