What I don't get about "forced losses"

Competitive Discussion
51

I look forward to your data. What time do you generally play? You’re in a pretty common rank as well, this really isn’t expected but I have no reason to doubt you. Do you play at really uncommon hours?

Performance Based Skill Rating (PBSR) was applied to all ranks prior to Season 8 but only below 3000 SR afterwards. According to the developers the system looks at how well you perform in terms of undisclosed statistics compared to others of your same rank playing the same hero. The stats compared are similar but not equal to the same stats that cause you to be on fire. However, being on fire is compared to your current team, not across the entire playerbase. There is a SMALL, but non-specific amount of SR gained for extraordinary performance.

Prior to Season 8 there was much consternation among the Overwatch media that it causes people to play selfishly and also overranks uncommon one-trick players (Sombra, Torb, Symmetra as contemporaneous examples) who don’t lose the SR they should since they are so much better than their hero peers. They were often able to maintain SR with a <50% win rate.

It’s a legitimate controversy and there are valid opinions on both sides. Essentially, PBSR allows faster movement that matches the steeper learning curve of the lower ranks but the concerns that affect >3kSR still affect lower ranks as well.

For more info, go to How Competitive Skill Rating Works (Season 12) and click the " Performance Modifier" section in post 1.

You should note that I really have no opinion on the subject. I just don’t have the data I feel I would need to make the determination.

Correct me if I’m misunderstanding, please, but it sounds like you are frustrated with how selfishly people play and that you think that if you were with a team that was less selfish you could rank up more?

I mean…I’m not sure what you expect the matchmaker to accomplish here. It’s only goal is to find 12 people of approximately equal skill. Yes, teamwork is one skill, but unless you build a team that is able to consistently play together and be coached (also bypassing half the matchmaker), teamwork isn’t going to outshine the mechanical skills and game sense skills that those of ranks above us have. There is PBSR, but that’s not against your teammates and you still need to win to gain rank. Winning doesn’t care if you are mechanically skilled or a great teammate so it’s the best indicator available. Though I agree with you that it would be nice if people worked together better, that’s a problem with humanity, not Overwatch.

The system can’t really find the ideal group, which is 12 people of the same MMR/SR. Given that practical impossibility, it’s always the case that one team is favored to win. Favored, not guaranteed. As long as it’s still fairly close, having the expected winner win still provides information to the system, so that’s fine.

There are some who say that they would rather know going in how much they are going to lose or win upon either outcome (I doubt people would really want this, myself, despite what they say…this is the debate over “hidden MMR”.)

The fact remains that if you win 4 games you should have won then lose 4 games you should have won, you will end up lower than you started. That’s how it has to work. Otherwise the ranking would be essentially random. I explain it a bit better in the link above, in the 3rd post (How Competitive Skill Rating Works (Season 12) - #3 by OzoneOOO-1681)

I don’t mean to say I don’t understand your position on the matter, but as much as I would like your ideal to be true…reality has a way of asserting itself. Also, this could be affected by PBSR which I’ve already covered.

If you remove the double negatives in here, you’re saying “Give them normal SR movement because they’re average on the team.” Which, I think you would tend to agree with when stated like that, or even the corollary, give bad movement to those who are worst on the team.

Yeah, I’d love for this thread to be about if PBSR should be removed for all ranks. There are threads about that, but they’re not as popular, unfortunately.

It’s hard to discuss the actual problems with the system when fake problems remove the air from the room. It sounds like you have concerns with creating good groups, the efficacy of PBSR, how fast people move through the ladder, and hidden MMR. These are not conspiracy theory concerns and none of this is what people talk about when they say “forced losses”.

If you have questions please ask, especially after you read the link I posted. It’s quite helpful.

2 Likes
52

Why do you not simply think that you’re probably not being as effective on your non-mains?

Games being easier because you’re better on your main seems like a far more likely reason than " the matchmaker gives me easier games", doesn’t it?

It’s the same premise and conclusion, but the first gives you agency to get better on other heroes if you wish and the last leaves it all up to an all powerful, all knowing, algorithm that judges you on hero choice.

1 Like
53

Nah, that’s not what i’m getting at. Although, it would be great if people were less selfish lol.

It’s just that with PBSR, the main focus of min-maxing your SR gains would be to carry. This will cause, over time, more and more people to play in a way that goes against playing as a team.

So in a way, you’re right. People do play selfishly. But I don’t necessarily blame them, i blame the system in place for making that the (supposedly) best way to rank up.

I’m starting to wonder if the matchmaking is even the real problem. If anything, I really think it’s the hidden MMR. Hidden MMR takes responsibility out of the hands of the players. How can someone improve, if all they know is that they are playing with other “golds, silvers, plats, etc.” If I go into a game, and I can see that i’m the highest MMR compared to the rest of the team by a good margin, i may be more inclined to try and carry or call shots. My SR would be more on the line than the rest.

Instead, I just assume we’re roughly all on the same level, since we’re all in the same tier. I think visible transparency of MMR is the right way to go.It definitely has its own drawbacks but I think it still promotes improvement on the individual level. Baby steps of course, maybe to start out just show each team’s Average mmr.

Creating good groups is the least of my concern, at least in the sense of player skill. I’m in low gold at the moment, since most people place gold after just picking up the game and going into comp, i really don’t expect the best of teams. All I can do is try and help our team to win.

But to get back into “forced losses” The only time that really happens is when a player is the MMR carry of a team. If both teams average, let’s say, 2200. One team could have people between 2150-2250, while the other team has someone that’s 2450 and the rest of the team lowers that average. If the person with the high MMR doesn’t try and carry, it’s basically a forced loss. That’s why I believe that info needs to be known to the players at the start of the match. If the 2450 knows that the team average is 2200, he knows he’s the one with the most to lose on the team. He probably won’t flex. They do that with SR, but not MMR, which it’s all based on. I say we just get rid of SR and have everything based on mmr

I definitely posted off topic lol. I am not upset about it one bit though, this conversation is both informative and fun!

1 Like
54

This is probably the strongest argument against PBSR, IMO. I think it’s overblown in the sense that I don’t really think for most people it makes a huge difference. It’s true that at upper levels and off-meta heroes there was an exploit that was unintentional, but I think overall it does a fine job in a technical sense.

However, in a psychological sense I would have to agree that people think, or act like they think, that performance is 90% of your gainz. Which is almost certainly false but what is true doesn’t matter if no one believes it.

It’s unfortunate, really, because the 2 alternatives to PBSR don’t work nearly as well to get fast learners where they need to be (or people who swap to heroes they can’t play to drop to where they aren’t throwing).

Well, I would agree with you on the first part and I see where you’re coming from on the second, but does it really make any difference whether you’re the best or the worst on the team in how much effort you should be giving? Seems you’re blaming the system for an individual’s lack of effort which, ironically, causes the system to fail.

By that account, we should just tell everyone that they’re the “carry”.

Actually, that’s what we do, those of us who dispute these conspiracy theories. The opposite of the game being out of your control is you being the “carry”, is it not?

In short, I think you have it backwards, hidden MMR doesn’t cause lack of effort, lack of effort causes hidden MMR to not be accurate.

I’m mostly against showing MMR on psychological grounds, in that I think SR is sufficiently accurate regarding “unhiding” MMR and any more detail would generate poor responses. Could you imagine the same people who insist the system is rigged going into a game knowing they only have a 43.8% chance to win? I just don’t think it would be handled well. I already think part of the problem is the SR is over-precise.

Lol…this is a new version of “Version 5” above. Not a leaver or thrower but someone that just isn’t good enough or isn’t trying hard enough does not make it “forced” by an outside entity, which is what they mean. It’s another term for “rigged” around here.

Really, the person doesn’t have to be the “carry”. ANYONE who isn’t pulling their weight will cause your idea of “forced loss”. You’ve just described a specific version of “throwing” where the best person on the team isn’t playing good enough to make the “TeamMMR” accurate. (Using terms I defined in

this link:

Algorithmic Handicapping (MMR) is Wrong for Overwatch - #559 by OzoneOOO-1681

Another take on what you say is that (again using words I’ve previously defined) the TeamMMR isn’t accurate between the two teams simply because it’s wrong, i.e., the team with a wider variant doesn’t have a TrueMMR that matches their opposition due to a miscalculation in TeamMMR.

This is a potential fair critique of the system and one of the better arguments, IMO, for getting rid of hidden MMR (open source verification, Kaawumba’s argument). That’s not “forced” though, that’s just an error. It’s not on purpose.

I don’t mean to sound like I’m telling you how to use words, but the term “forced loss” is generally used to imply that Blizzard is forcing you to lose through one of the methods I describe in Post 4 here.

If that’s not what you believe, it may be wise to use a different term lest you be misunderstood.

1 Like
55

When you phrase it like that, it seems like i’m defending laziness. There is a difference between playing with the team to win and making the win happen on your lonesome. If by any chance you know you need to make some outrageous moves in order to win from the get go, you can work towards it, pick a hero that can make it happen. Instead of moving with a team that’s heading nowhere and figure it out when it’s a few minutes too late.

I was agreeing with you. What I was trying to say was that the closest thing to a forced loss is a great mismatching to even out TeamMMR. Since it’s the system trying to make things 50/50ish.

If instead of showing both teams SR for a few seconds and have it disappearing, it could always be there when you hit tab. At least then, whomever is on the high end of the SR or the low end, knows what’s in store for them if a win or a loss happens and not blame the boogie man.

1 Like
56

I didn’t take it like that. There are certain assumptions that are made in the MMR system that don’t always apply, but no other assumption would be reasonable.

For instance, the assumption is that you’re playing as well as you can. Seems reasonable, you can’t really build a system where you assume everyone throws, but it’s not necessarily true and we all know it.

Generally we talk about throwers and smurfs destroying the proper function of the MMR system. We also talk about people’s expectations regarding hero choice and how being over flexible can make you not great at all the characters rather than good at one.

The way you got there is new, but the concept certainly isn’t. It’s true that in nearly all ranks, people should just play their best hero. If they get shut down then move to counter or compensate.

What we see instead is some idea that we always need 2/2/2. Which can certainly work, but I’ve worked with a lot of bronze players. I know that in a lot of ranks people insist on a random 2/2/2 comp and then manage to not even be able to play who they choose.

To me, this is a FAR bigger problem than smurfs, throwers, or any natural SR variations that may occur. For most people, Flexing = Throwing. No one complains about Zenyatta one tricks, I should know!

It’s the best “complaint” about the MM too, though it’s not really fair. It would be nice to get a 2/2/2 where everyone was on their mains. Someone could get very rich by patenting such a system that can read minds and predict the future.

The LFG system could have been a lot better, that’s for sure.

This is interesting. I certainly wouldn’t be against it as it’s already info they give. Personally, I’m generally of the view that SR is over precise, by which I mean that there are 5000 levels but there is no noticeable difference within about 250SR up or down, for most people. 5000/250=20, so maybe there should be 20 levels…something like that. I’m not under the delusion that will ever happen. They changed it from 80 to 5000 based on community complaints that they weren’t seeing enough “precision”, then the community complains that it’s not accurate enough. The truth is that multiple SR values are just as correct and some people have a much wider set of correct ones than others, just like there’s millions of 10 decimal GPS coordinates that correctly describe your location and more if you’re laying down.

That being said, I’m a bit skeptical of ideas to give people more precise estimates of what’s expected. I just think the problem is the other way around. To apply it to your idea I would assume that the person who is ACTUALLY the best isn’t necessarily the one with the highest current MMR. I mean, in your example it would, but in my ideal system they would already know that they’re level 12 in a level 10 average game.

It also brings up the question of groups and a group SR, which IMO doesn’t get talked about enough. The situation you describe doesn’t actually occur much without groups messing it all up.

Edit: I discuss the precision problem here: How Competitive Skill Rating Works (Season 11) - #56 by OzoneOOO-1681

1 Like
57

I think the real question is: Why would the matchmaker build such an obviously imbalanced team comp?
In my opinion its because we have two metrics (SR and MMR) and the MM uses both to create matches:

  1. All players need to be within the same SR range, as close as possible to 2000
  2. The average of all player’s MMR on each team needs to be as close to equal as possible

I, say, we only had MMR used to creating matches, the 2450 player would be teamed up with other 2450 players, against a team with 2450 players. There wouldnt be any “carry outlier” that needs to get hit with a bucket filled with cold water in order to get sober because he has been put on an important mission to save the world.

I know that what im describing (both SR and MMR being used at the same time) has been heavily disputed in the past. But, reading this thread now and the forum recently (ive taken 4 months break), it seems that the “MMR outlier” theory has become more popular and less disputed. Correct me if im wrong, but isnt this what Cuthberts famous/notorious “Handicapping” theory has been about all along?

What i can add to this discussion is my recent experience from just one week of play. When i came back, i placed 2200. I had been up to 2700 about 4 months ago, played in low Plat stably for about 150 games before i took a heavy streak of losses and went back to 2200, where i placed now.

When i decided to give OW another chance, i did so with a free and open mind. I told myself i had to work on improving my gamesense, especially tracking the important Ults on both teams to judge how tempo currently is in the game and what the chances are for the next team fight. In the first few days, this seemed to work pretty well, as i saw good improvements and my increased efforts to improve gamesense paying out.

But then i noticed that i wouldnt really move away from the 2100-2000 range as i would expect. So i looked into SR gains again and PBSR became a higher focus again. I experimented a little with what stats i should focus on (playing Moira), e.g. more healing/def assists vs. damage/elims and what would yield better SR gains.

I also started checking Overbuff/Oversumo/c0derwatch again to see how my personal performance would fare. All of these 3 source indicate that my personal performance was way overperforming those of my peers at around 2200. c0derwatch sees me at around 2500. Oversumo sais im overperforming 80% of my peers. And Overbuff had my recent Moira sessions display stats (except damage) in the 90ish percentile.

Yet i could not climb up to where these statistic-based tools see me. Also dispite my efforts to improve gamesense as well. The day i quit the game, after just one week of playing again, i climbed from high silver back to 2200, only to go on an (almost) straight loss streak of 10 losses back down to silver.

That was the point where i decided that all of my efforts on this game were wasted. Just as wasted as theyve always been before. And that giving the game a chance and trying to improve even more than ever before would not get me anywhere. Its also when i started to check this forum again and see how far the discussion about “forced losses” and hidden MMR would be.

Just as a side note: I would prefer to not equate the “forced losses” discussion with “conspiracy theories”. There might be people who actually believe that Blizzard is conspiring against them or a group they belong to, but i think that most people just believe that there is a flaw, an error, in the system. Or maybe if not an error per se, at least an implementation that leads to unproductive results.

1 Like
58

This is not true. I play in Gold. I’m constantly getting “platinum+silver” groups in my matches. If you will tell me about “average MMR”, I would like to hear it.

Regarding MMR difference. I keep track of team SR difference at the start of the match. This SR difference changes from negative to positive values in a cycle. The only randomness there - where is baseline for this change. So, in the end - matchmaker DOES give you higher, THEN lower MMR opponents (and teammates). In a cycle.

59

“Forced losses” is literally a conspiracy theory. If you believe it’s just an error or flaw, it’s not “forced”. The forcing is the line over which the rational critique turns into conspiracy.

I speak a lot of educating people on what is a reasonable expectation of what the MM and ranking system can do. I get that it’s frustrating, but if you’re only 300 SR below where an app thinks you should be, you’re well within the range where it’s nearly impossible to tell the difference. It’ll be a long slog up from there even assuming that’s where you actually belong This goes to my 'over precise" argument above. 10 losses sucks, but if you’re 500 SR from where you really should be those games should be pretty easy wins.

One week though…that’s not enough time. Even if you’re playing 10 hours a day it’s doubtful you’re playing well all 10 of those hours.

This is my Version HC so yes. The idea has several flaws though. First, as Oldphardt mentions below you it’s generally groups that are the issue, not the matchmaking. That’s not a distinction Version HC makes. Second, as I mentioned above if the teams are “even” then they’re even. The idea of someone having to carry is a mistake because everyone has to do their job well no matter their skill level. Third and more specific to Cuthbert in particular, he has a tendency to take any complaint, valid or not, and tell people that it’s due to MMR and that MMR should be eliminated, even when the actual problem is that MMR is being misused in some way, e.g. groups, smurfs, and simply not playing to your skill level.

He also is a conspiracy theorist by definition as he thinks MMR is used by Blizzard to get people addicted to the game to make more money.

Exactly… it would be super stupid to do that. They allow groups of widely varying SR and I think that’s a huge mistake for this very reason. Outside of grouping which it’s understandable why they do it, it’s just not done as a matter of policy. You’ll get games in unpopulated times and SR brackets that will have wider variation, but if you’re soloQ in gold at peak you won’t have a platinum on your team unless they’re grouped with a silver.

You used to get more complaints about this when someone’s season high was displayed on their icon, e.g. having a “Plat” in a silver game when in reality they were either boosted or made it up there very briefly and fell down to silver, but they changed how that works. Most of the imbalance complaints aren’t substantiated in any way and if they are, it’s groups of 800SR differential.

Edit: Someone else asked about this in Cuthberts thread. I posted a more detailed response here: Algorithmic Handicapping (MMR) is Wrong for Overwatch - #562 by OzoneOOO-1681

1 Like
60

I think you missed the “as possible” in what he said. Nothing you say in this post disputes the fact that “the matchmaker always tries to find people with as close MMR as possible”.

Even your “platinum+silver” groups, I don’t like them, but if you’re gold getting groups of 800SR differential that’s not a problem with the matchmaker, that’s a problem with Blizzards stupid grouping policy for comp. A policy that I don’t feel gets enough attention and even when brought up people throw a fit because they “want to play with their friends”.

What they need is a separate group and solo SR. They may even be able to work it into the dynamic queue, but I’m not sure.

61

I’m not sure what you are complaining about. Of course groups of platinum+silver players will have an “average MMR” in or near the gold range, and will usually be put into games around gold. What else would you expect or want?

I guarantee this is just a misunderstanding of probability and statistics. Let’s say I flip a coin repeatedly, and look at the count of heads or tails for the last 10 throws. You’ll see it cycle between having more heads, or more tails.

You have a binary outcome, whether your team or the enemy team is higher. And it’s random. So of course you’ll alternate (or cycle) between the two possible outcomes. I’m not trying to be condescending, but people mistakenly find patterns in completely random events all the time. It’s a well known phenomenon. Actually write down all the SRs for 20 games if you want, and with proper analysis you’ll immediately see there is no non-random “cycle” of harder/easier opponents.

You’ve discovered:

  1. You play better on your mains, and thus tend to win more.
  2. The basic existence of tilting and hot streaks that exist in every video game, and even real sports.

Do you know anything about sports? Do you know how players all refuse to speak to a pitcher who is currently throwing a no-hitter? Do you think that happens because they are given easier batting opponents? Of course not. Humans are complex psychological creatures. Success feeds our confidence and success further.

The same is true in reverse. Professional atheletes have bad games and slumps. In the video game world it’s usually called “tilting”. Nothing makes you tilt more than struggling and losing (like you are likely to do if you flex to heroes you are bad at). This is why EVERY game ever has had people go on huge 20+ game losing streaks, and why the common advice to “take a break” after a few loses is spread around.

A final, more humurous, point against what you are saying. If you read this forum with any regularity I’m sure you’ve seen Cuthbert’s “Handicapped MMR” threads. He, and the people who agree with him, claim the exact OPPOSITE of what you say. You say playing well means the game gives you easy matches to get you up where you should be. He says playing well makes the game “balance you out” by giving you harder opponents. Who is right? Neither. It just shows how neither of these conspiracy theories are formed from any actual testing, and y’all both experience confirmation bias on your own ideas while playing.

The vast majority of the time a stomped match has nothing to do with any match maker problems. Remember old KotH when it was best of 5? You know how many games I played where one side got STOMPED for two rounds, than reverse swept? Currently you’d just end the match as a loss as say “what an imbalanced match” but they weren’t imbalanced at all.

Small things, sometimes random, can add up to make big differences in outcomes during a game. People don’t realize how close most games are. One of my last games the other team finishes Hanamura with 4 minutes left, pretty good attack right? Except they barely got point A in overtime, after never touching it. If one fight went slightly worse for them, they end without even 1 tick. Instead, my team is tilted over our defense is crumbling, and people started fighting, leading towards terrible play and a loss. The game was easily within our ability to win, but small things caused this disparate outcome.

Phew I’ve rambled a lot. Point still remains. No such things as “forced losses”.

62

He actually did this. Used the moving average with graph smoothing and then called it “cycling”. If you removed the average and the smoothing it’s just a bunch of random jumps to and fro. How Competitive Skill Rating Works (Season 11) - #24 by Oldphardt-2154

No man…it’s the ALIENS!

I’m a bit surprised and saddened that I was able to describe all of those conspiracy theories as quickly as I did.

I should play more.

1 Like
63

You know, why I don’t believe in random nature of team SR difference change? Because there are no long streaks. There are no long streaks in my data, there are no streaks in Kaawumba’s data regarding 3000+ players. It’s obviously controlled in some manner. If it would be totally random, we would see long streaks in one direction. But there are none.
Streaks are present in SR movement (as it should be in case of random events).

If you, or FriendlyFire are proficient in statistics and math, maybe you could help with interpreting the results of spectral analysis I did on my season 11 team SR difference data. I would also appreciate Kaawumba’s opinion.
Here is the spectral analysis result:

https://imgur.com/a/SXq2kgt

64

Do you have more data than the 68 games? He gave his opinion, which was that there wasn’t enough good data to determine anything one way or the other.

I’m simply pointing out that the claim make is just, like, your opinion man. It may look like a cycle to you, but it doesn’t look like one to me, and there’s not enough data to say objectively one way or another.

65
  1. 25 games completed this season. I am 13 to 12. Of the 12 losses, 3 were due to Leavers and 2 due to throwers. So far no enemy Leavers and no enemy throwers I am aware of. So in theory I’ve been robbed of circa 125 SR already this season.

I’ve won games at 2500 before. I’ve regularly held 2350 for 4 seasons. But I crutches on my team’s dps being solid.

When I lose games fairly, is mainly due to being massively out dpsed. Enemy Pharah that no one can hit, etc. Team Sombra that doesn’t get kills and EMPS when we’re all dead at spawn, etc.

As a support I can’t output enough raw damage to carry poor dps. When I climbed from 1700 to 2350 with 65% win rate in season 4, was one tricking Torb.

If I want to dps my way up, need to learn a new carry hero.

  1. My natural Sr is presumably 1800 as that’s where I’m at. I could get a free alt account and likely place 500 SR higher no problem.
    My performance depends on what team mates I get. I can stay alive and support adequately vs. 2.8k to 3k enemies when in qp with my 3.9k dps friend. Conversely I imagine I can lose games at 1.5k Sr if my dps are rotten.
    I played 5 games of 2.4k Sr last season. Won 3 and drew 2.

What is my real Sr? Who knows?

66

It’s 184 games now in season 11

67

I took a quick look…there’s some pretty long streaks in there, red and green. 11 (or 9, you skipped one), 7, 8…seems normal for 189 instances but I’m just looking on my phone real quick.

Was I looking in the wrong place?

68

Look at teams sr difference graph

69

I guess I was looking right then.

11 is a pretty long streak for 189 games. Even a streak of 9 would only occur in 1 of every 6 simulations of 189 coin flips. Edit…I see now it’s 184…stupid phone.

What exactly are you expecting?

1 Like
70

Can you interpret the spectral analysis results?