Why Handicapping (MMR) is Wrong for Competitive Play

Mod edit: This thread has been locked as it has drifted off course and is now quite old. Feel free to continue this discussion on a new thread - we only ask that you please remain civil with your fellow posters and adhere to the Code of Conduct.


Author’s note:
Players, please like and share this post if you agree that MMR should be removed from Competitive Play. In three polls on the Battlenet forum, we have voted overwhelmingly in favor (at 403 to 50, 320 to 42, and 295 to 56).

Objective
I argue to remove Match Making Rating (MMR) from Competitive matchmaking.

In Competitive matchmaking, MMR ensures the type of match that Blizzard wants players to have: hotly contested and as long as possible, with a 50% chance for either team to win. But true competitive players want no such guarantee.

And because the matchmaking system ensures those 50% odds by arranging teams based on hidden skill-metrics (MMR), it:

  • Covertly handicaps Competitive matches
  • Favors new players over experienced players,
  • Fails to prove the skill difference between players,
  • Requires prohibitively long wait times for groups, and
  • Lowers the quality of gameplay across all competitive tiers.

How is such a travesty possible? It is possible because most players do not realize their matches are being handicapped. And those of us who know of handicapping fail to see its implications. Overwatch’s own designers seem to have missed the point.

Overview
Overwatch’s designers say they “balance” matches with MMR. The system sorts the twelve players from each match into teams, based on the merit each player has shown in matches past. Matchmaking uses merit-tracking algorithms (MMR) to keep matches from being ‘uneven.’ Principal Overwatch Designer Scott Mercer explains:

"When the matchmaker creates a match, it determines the % chance for each team to win based on the match it made. The VAST majority of matches are usually near to 50% (especially if you’re a player closer to median skill rating and you’re not in a group). When we do put you in a match that we know isn’t a 50/50, we adjust your SR gain or loss based on your calculated change of winning.

"We model the synergistic effects of players being together in a group. Based upon the data we see in groups, we predict the win % for each team. We try to match similar sized groups together.

"The amount of MMR (and SR) you go up or down isn’t simply a matter of whether you won or lost, and what was your predicted chance of winning. There’s a couple of other things at work. One is the matchmaker’s confidence in what your MMR should be. Play a lot of games, it gets more certain. Don’t play Overwatch for a while, it gets less certain. You go on a large win or loss streak, it gets less certain. The more certain the matchmaker is about your MMR, the less your MMR will change in either direction based on a win or loss.

"We also do evaluate how well you played the heroes you used in a match. The comparison is based on historical data of people playing a specific hero (not medals, not pure damage done), and we’ve done a lot of work to this system based on the community’s feedback.

“While it’s a minor factor compared to wins/losses (The best way to increase your SR is still to play together and win as a team!), doing so does help us determine your skill more accurately and faster.”

However
In Quick Play, we do not count wins and losses as we do in Competitive Play. We do not stake our rank and reputation on a number, like we do with SR. And MMR skews everyone’s SR. Because if you are a relatively skilled player for your SR, handicapping/MMR makes your teams worse than they would be on average, by random chance.

Semantics – “Balance” vs. Handicap
This discussion has a fulcrum, a single word it turns around. A word that Blizzard has chosen incorrectly, misappropriated from the design parlances of casual, non-competitive games. The word is “balance,” which is actually handicapping in the context of a competitive game.

Dictionary .com defines a handicapped contest as one in which “certain disadvantages or advantages are placed upon competitors to equalize their chances of winning.” For example in old Quebec (French Canada), parishioners had a tradition of racing home from church in horse-drawn sleighs or wagons, which they would handicap by placing different numbers and sizes (weights) of passengers in either vehicle.

That’s an example of a friendly competition where handicapping is appropriate, because the important thing isn’t who wins the race; it’s the closeness of the race and the fun to be had along the way. The race itself is merely a pretense for a good time. Any scoring that took place between drivers would be in jest. That is what some of us expect from a game mode like Quick Play.

But players expect Competitive Play to be different. We have a “Skill Rating” (SR) that ticks up or down when we win or lose. That number is both our reputation and our right to compete with other players of our caliber. Handicapping makes light of that number and, in turn, it makes light of Competitive Overwatch players.

When you play Competitive Overwatch you may be a horse pulling your team along, or you may be a passenger just along for the ride. And the handicapping system might designate you as such correctly or incorrectly. But those designations happen to determine the nature of every match you play.

This is where the difference between individual and team competition comes in. Players participate in matches as teams, but they participate in the SR system as individuals.

Handicapping teams is not the same as treating individuals fairly in the SR system. Blizzard wrongly conflates those ideas, distorting players’ very notion of what fair competition is, and what they are doing in Competitive Play.

Blizzard says that handicapping/balancing matches makes them fair for competitive players, and that is false.

“Forced 50% win rate”
When players talk about this, they are trying to talk about handicapping. An argument against handicapping has already taken place in the Overwatch community, based on vague terms and phrases that do not address the problem. Without clear terms to inform the discussion, players have turned away from it like a losing battle.

But ‘handicapping’ is a real gaming term that many players understand. It is a word with history, meaning, and a proper definition. I bring you the word ‘handicapping’ as a banner to rally under. I urge you players: use this word to understand what MMR truly is, to frame your own discussions, and petition Blizzard for Competitive Play that is free of handicapping.

I have a long argument to make, but my case is simple. Anyone with basic understanding of game theory – any Overwatch player – can grasp it.

Case in point
In every match, MMR tells matchmaking which players are relatively strong and which players are relatively weak. The MMR/handicapping system does not put all of the strongest or weakest players on either team (6 v 6) because it predicts that as a one-sided match.

Instead, matchmaking ensures that both teams have about 3 strong players and 3 weak players. If one or two players from either team are real standouts (for good or ill), the ratio of strong and weak players might be closer to 2:4 or even 1:5, on either team.

The degree of difference in skill between players is different in every match. But MMR picks up on every discernible difference between players. According to those differences in player skill, matchmaking arranges the teams and effectively handicaps matches, with no regard for individual players’ SR, outside of the 1,000 unit range.

So what’s the problem?
These kinds of matches are unproductive by design; they consistently prove as little as possible about the relative skill of the players participating. When matchmaking uses MMR to mix strong players with weak players, it guarantees in every match that some strong players will move down in rank, and some weak players will move up.

Hypothetically speaking, the most productive match is one where all 6 of the strongest players are on one team and all 6 of the weakest players are on the other. Because in the win/lose result, the strongest players all gain SR and the weakest players all lose SR. Even an impartial matchmaking system would not produce this type of match all of the time. But MMR/handicapping turns it into a unicorn.

MMR circumvents the natural selection process that is supposed to be taking place in Competitive Play. It makes the SR system inefficient, stagnant, and keeps the SR system from sorting players according to their merit.

Evidence of handicapping
Here are three simple things you can observe for yourself, which show how matchmaking and MMR handicap your matches:

  1. Group and queue for matches with other players who you know are good at Overwatch. You will see that your wait times for matches scale up in direct proportion to how good you are, and how many of you are in the group. While there are other groups available to play at your collective SR level, matchmaking takes time to seek a group with an equal MMR profile.

  2. Win matches as a group, and you will see your wait times increase from match to match. Matchmaking delays your games in order to handicap them, based on your group’s record. Again, there are other groups available to play at your collective SR level, but matchmaking takes time to seek a group with an equal MMR profile.

  3. Note the spread of player experience (portrait color, stars) across teams, when you join matches in small groups or solo queue. You will see the teams in each game have roughly the same number of experienced and inexperienced players. The matchmaking system arranges teams this way to handicap matches.

It’s relative
Whether or not you sense the skewing of your matches depends on how good you are, as a team player, and where you find your SR rank to be. But if you are a relatively skilled player for your SR, then handicapping/MMR is designed to make every match difficult for you, specifically. It sounds like a persecution fantasy, but it’s patently real.

Fighting your own shadow
Under MMR’s influence, every player has to ‘fight at their weight’ in every match, regardless of SR standing. Handicapping/MMR ensures that every standout player finds a doppelganger or a set of players on the enemy team who are able to counteract them. This might sound fair-handed, but let me explain why it’s not.

Suppose your SR is low for your skill level, and you are the best one of twelve players in a match. In that case, handicapping/MMR singles you out by placing the second, third, and even fourth-best players in the match on the enemy team. Hence you, like a baited bear, must counteract their joint efforts.

That becomes a self-perpetuating cycle. The harder you try — the more you kill, heal, and play the objective — the more skilled opponents you will be faced with in your next match…the more skilled teammates you will be separated from. The challenge of the game is literally guaranteed to ramp up, whether or not you win your present match; whether you climb or fall in the SR system; as long as you try your hardest.

It is not enough to be good, to climb in SR. MMR follows you from match to match, figuring out how good you are. Then it informs matchmaking, which forces you to be better than yourself if you want to advance.

In this way, you can experience the same difficulty playing at most competitive ranks, regardless of how good you are. From a game design perspective, this seems like a magic formula, a dream. But from a player’s perspective, it is a nightmare.

Handicap favors inexperienced players
If you are an experienced player (with one or more stars of experience), you have a strong interest in MMR’s removal from matchmaking. MMR ensures that players of similar experience will be distributed evenly across teams. Again, this might sound fair-handed but let me explain why it’s not.

If you are the most experienced player in a match, handicapping/MMR teams you with the most inexperienced player in the match while placing the second, third, and even fourth-most experienced players to oppose you on the enemy team. It is inexperienced players who benefit from that arrangement, and experienced players who suffer.

You may deny the correlation of experience and skill. Why then, does matchmaking never place a slew of experienced players against a slew of inexperienced players? Is it interesting to see the outcome of such a match, or is it no contest? Why doesn’t handicapping/MMR allow those matches to take place?

Devalued experience
Inexperienced/unskilled players think they are being tested by placement matches and regular competitive matches in the same way that more experienced/skilled players are being tested. So a player with less than one star of experience assumes that they are equal to all players at their SR level, regardless of experience.

It does not occur to inexperienced players that they have arrived at their SR standing through the assistance of a handicap. And who can blame them? The handicapping/MMR system is hidden, after all. But it is not fair to experienced players that they should be forced to contribute to the success of less experienced players.

New players may have a right to prove themselves in Competitive Play. But they do not have a right to be braced by veterans in every match, and escorted to victory.

Handicapping has caused millions (billions?) of pointless arguments between experienced players and newbies who will not accept their advice or command. New players deride experienced players for not being ranked higher, for all their hours of practice. And since newbies and vets alike are unaware of the handicapping system, the situation suggests to everyone that experience counts for nothing.

Classification without consent
It’s not only about the number of stars under your portrait. If you are the best healer, tank, or DPS in a match then MMR brands you as such, and pits you against the next best player in your hero class. This might sound fair-handed, but…

If you step out of one role to fill another, your team is likely to crumble because no one on your team matches your proficiency with the hero/class you switched from. This effectively locks you into a role without your knowledge or consent. And it ensures that if you are proficient with many (or all) of Overwatch’s hero classes and characters, you gain no advantage from it.

Handicapping/MMR discourages groups and teamwork
By punishing outstanding performances, handicapping/MMR catches the most effective Overwatch strategies in its snare. When a group chooses characters who complement one another, they create 'statistical anomalies’ that the MMR system ‘corrects for’ in its 'matchmaking problem.’

When a coherent group presents itself, the MMR system painstakingly matches them against equally coherent groups, despite the availability of less coherent groups of the same size, at the same SR level. Not only does that mean prohibitively long wait times for everyone involved, it costs such coherent groups the advantage they are supposed to have, by working out strategies and vetting their teammates.

MMR costs coherent groups countless opportunities to apply strategy against opponents who do not. It negates the advantage a coherent group would naturally have, under an impartial matchmaking system. Conversely, handicapping/MMR coddles players who ignore the principles of good strategy, sheltering them from competition with coherent groups they should be facing in their SR level.

MMR makes Overwatch the antithesis of a team-based game – a running contradiction to the idea that group cohesion and synergy mean anything at all.

Handicapping/MMR promotes ‘DPS instalock’
Healing and tanking are desperately ineffective when you have unskilled/inexperienced players filling the other roles. Solo players know this intuitively, and that is why we start every match pleading for sanity with 3-5 DPS instalocks. Despise these players if you will, but they are acting in their best interest under the handicapping/MMR system.

When a player climbs in SR by playing DPS well, they are essentially locked in to that role. That is because handicapping/MMR ensures that equally skilled DPS players in subsequent matches will be placed on the enemy team, so changing to tank or heal leaves the enemy DPS unchecked.

The leaderboards are absolutely dominated by DPS players (link redacted). Is it because DPS characters are intrinsically more effective than tanks and healers? Or is it because they have an advantage in the handicapping/MMR system?

E-Sports above all
Blizzard wants to use Competitive Play as a mere filtration system for people with fast reflexes, nothing else. It is a casting call for E-Sports celebrities, not a proving system for team players who understand the game; the players who are truly the best at the game of Overwatch.

Those experienced and skilled players are buried in the middle tiers, the dumping grounds into which they are swept by a never-ending stream of new Overwatch players. New players have no problem qualifying for gold and higher, because of the boost that handicapping/MMR gives them.

Meanwhile smurf account buyers scramble over us, like drowning swimmers, clawing their way up by pushing the rest of us down. They are gaming the MMR system that Blizzard has created by giving them more money. Is it any surprise that Blizzard is complacent in that behaviour?

What this means for players
It violates the faith we all have had in Competitive Play; that we can climb the ranks of the SR system by showing merit as team players. SR is our only form of rank and reputation but when we show true merit, an invisible hand guides us to challenges that are virtually assured to destroy our SR, our rank and reputation.

Performance-based SR…
…is Blizzard’s feeble attempt to restore the meritocracy of Competitive Play; to offset the profound SR-skewing effects of handicapping/MMR. It is a tacit admission that the SR system fails its supposed function of ranking players according to their skill.

Performance-based SR means that Overwatch players do not share the goal of victory with their teammates. The most cynical and well-informed players give up on victory to game the system.

One-tricking…
…is a natural consequence of performance-based SR. When players see that they are being graded on their own stats rather than the win/lose result of the match, it demotivates them from being real team players. Instead of doing what is best for their team’s chance of winning the match, they start doing what is best for their own chances of racking up big numbers in damage, healing, kills, etc.

Reverse karma
MMR works like reverse karma. It restricts our mobility in the SR system. If you’re interested to watch your SR trend up and down, and figuring out the strategies involved in your losses and victories, then no governing system outside of SR and your own group selection can serve your interest.

Double standard
In SR/MMR, we have a set of systems that judge us on the performance of our team as a whole (SR), but divide us on our individual merit (MMR) at every instance. It is a galling and obvious double standard.

While SR decides the level we are allowed to compete at, the majority of us are stuck in a quagmire we cannot climb out from, because rising up makes you a target for handicapping/MMR to strike down.

Artificial equality
A handicapped match is much more likely to hang in the balance, making it more exciting for players. But by handicapping a match, MMR makes its outcome intrinsically unrelated to the skill of the individual players and groups participating. It is absurd to increase/decrease SR based on the wins/losses of handicapped matches.

No Competitive Overwatch player has a fair chance of winning a match according to their skill. Because of handicapping/MMR, unskilled/inexperienced players are more likely to win and skilled/experienced players are more likely to lose.

Stop worrying and love the MMR?
Once you realize what MMR is doing to your odds in Competitive Play, it is still possible to enjoy yourself. If you think you can rank up, you just have to recognize that you are guaranteed to be teamed up with a statistically unlikely number of inferior players in every match. But don’t ignore that fact, or you’ll go insane.

Handicapping/MMR defies pattern recognition
Pattern recognition is our birthright as human beings, who evolved to use the very stars for navigation. Our brains have grown to run advanced heuristics in wars, and heated battles against enemy tribes. Games like Overwatch are allegories for war, which we play to enjoy our faculty of pattern recognition.

But handicapping/MMR circumvents the math that we would all use to understand Overwatch and game an impartial matchmaking system. It contradicts the calculations that we all make, based on reasonable assumptions about how matchmaking works. We assume that matchmaking is impartial, but that is not true.

Invisible standards
Competitive Play systematically deceives players on a grand scale. When the fact of handicapping and the metrics of MMR are hidden from players, it takes away players’ ability to rely on their own senses. When matches are handicapped without our understanding or even our awareness, it debases our perception of the game we’re playing.

Worst game-design ethics since World of Warcraft
Blizzard is violating the right we have as players to see the factors affecting our matches. Handicapping/MMR is the dominant factor of Competitive Play, and it is completely hidden from view. That raises ethical issues about consent, because most players would not engage in “Competitive Play” if they understood handicapping/MMR.

Nothing in Overwatch’s user-interface even mentions “Match Making Rating,” nor does Blizzard define it elsewhere. Blizzard fails to warn players about handicapping, leaving them to labor under a delusion: that altruism is rewarded.

Cause of toxicity
Much toxicity in the Overwatch community stems from cognitive dissonance (a kind psychological distress) caused by handicapping/MMR. When a player succeeds in one match, they are challenged in their next match by design. Wondering “What changed?” they can attribute the sudden challenge to unrelated factors by mistake. They may blame their own character selection and actions, or those of their team.

I’ve been toxic in my own matches. I’ve chastised many of my own teams who didn’t deserve it (especially new/inexperienced players). Because they weren’t meant to play with me in the first place; they were destined for lower ranks just as I was destined for higher ones. But handicapping/MMR intervened to everyone’s misfortune.

Handicapping/MMR renders the SR system meaningless, and leaves us without means to differentiate from each other. We are not in a proving ground, we are in a mill, churning inexorably with players who are not our equals.

I sound immodest, but I face this problem with tens of thousands of players like me. It is a massive and systemic problem. But it’s a simple problem, and it’s Blizzard’s to fix if they have the mind.

“Soylent Green is made of people!”
The most insidious aspect of MMR is the way it uses people. It uses the appointment of your teammates and adversaries to create your handicap, suppressing your chance of being teamed up with players who are as good as you are. So your teammates are guaranteed to be your inferiors or superiors, on a per-match basis, while your enemies are guaranteed to be your equals. What a grand, dystopian future we live in.

The travesty
Dictionary .com defines a travesty as “a grotesque or debased likeness or imitation; an artistic burlesque of a serious work or subject, characterized by ludicrous incongruity of treatment, or subject matter.”

Handicapping/MMR makes Competitive Overwatch a travesty because it forces us, in every match, to play against those who are most like ourselves and with those who are least like ourselves.

Want a teammate who is as good at Hero X as you are? MMR prevents you from ever meeting them. At every instance, in every match, MMR ensures you can only be that player’s adversary; never their ally. And if you group with such a player, MMR prevents you from finding a fair match to play in.

Conflict of interest
If you would still defend the handicapping/MMR system as ‘fair-handed,’ reader, consider your principal interest as a Competitive player – victory.

Now consider these questions:

  • When you queue for a match, you deserve the same chance of victory as any other player in the match, do you not?
  • Would you accept a system that explicitly subtracts from your chance of victory, and adds to your chance of defeat?
  • If you are an experienced player, do you accept that you must babysit the inexperienced?
  • If you are an inexperienced player, do you want to be babysat?
    This is about more than just “victory.” It is about the poetry of group synergy, of lucky random encounters. The uncanny lack of that poetry is what players feel when they rail about incompetency and toxicity in their team mates. Blizzard redacted that poetry when they imputed the handicapping/MMR system to Competitive Play.

Competitive players have an interest in fair, impartial matchmaking; randomly assigned teams of players with similar SR. We want to win or lose according to our merit not despite our merit. If that makes for short matches, then so be it.

It’s about money for Blizzard
Blizzard has an opposing commercial interest in making matches as drawn out as possible; they designed the handicapping/MMR system to ensure that every match is a struggle. And it comes directly at the cost of players’ mobility in the SR system.

The handicapping/MMR system does not make Competitive Play fair or even fun for long-term players. It makes matches protracted and desparate. Because that is what gives the appearance, the illusion of fairness, regardless of the truth. And it leads to repeat sales from Smurf account buyers who try to eschew the system.

The impetus
When Blizzard took the decision to apply MMR in Competitive Overwatch, I think they were driven by fear. They feared that players would reject their game as unfair when they had one-sided matches, and especially when they had one-sided losses.

Thinking that MMR worked for Quick Play and apprehensive of the ‘negative customer experience,’ that could result without MMR’s careful stage-work, they put it in Competitive Play and we’ve been suffering for it ever since. Blizzard warped their own game to suit their business interests (or the business interests of other stakeholders) at the cost of user experience, ultimately failing Overwatch players.

Why do so many game designers and publishers fail to recognize the principles of fair competition, in the “competitive” games they give us players?

It is because the creation process inevitably falls prey to greed; to blind, slavering stakeholder interest, all forms of commercial interest. Marketability trumps integrity behind closed doors.

The cholicy baby
Overwatch players themselves are to blame when they tell Blizzard that one-sided matches are “unfair” or “boring.” In handicapping/MMR, Blizzard is trying to give us what we want. But a good parent knows the difference between wants and needs. Players want engaging matches, but need to compete in an equitable system.

Realistic expectations
One-sided matches are a perfectly natural thing, and we would see a lot of them at the onset of an impartial matchmaking system. But at the end of a great sorting process of natural selection, we might have clearly established leagues and be able to expect some standards of play, outside of the bottom rank.

If you were playing in a baseball league, would you expect every game to be hotly contested? Would you expect teams to swap their strongest and weakest players to even the odds of every match?

Once again
The MMR system is handicapping system that is hidden from players, rigging their every match and dampening their best efforts. Instead of experiencing natural winning/losing streaks, we get a carefully monitored slow-drip, with victory and defeat in as nearly equal measure as matchmaking can arrange. The effects of the system are confusion, incumbency, and a completely incoherent narrative for every player’s career. It detaches a player’s merit from their rank and reputation.

We Competitive players want to deepen our knowledge of Overwatch and keep discovering its nuances by playing with our peers. But we can’t find our peers in a system that decides the nature of every match we play by pitting the best of us against each other.

My proposal
For the SR system to really work, it must be the only system. Teams should not be “balanced” based on anything besides their SR and their group size. Throw all the handicapping/MMR metrics out the window.

To Blizzard
We know you worked hard on the handicapping/MMR system, Blizzard, but you can’t justify its existence in principle. You’re effectively forcing your best players to babysit your worst players, which is questionable. But you are also deceiving players by hiding the handicapping system from them, and that makes your game like a dirty casino.

Only when matchmaking is impartial can the win/lose outcome of an individual player’s matches be reflection their skill. Until then, Competitive Overwatch will be as a rigged slot machine, causing cognitive dissonance for all who play it. You need to consider the rights of your players, and decide what side of history you want to be on.

To the incumbents
Many Overwatch players (let’s say Platinum and above) have reason to be satisfied with handicapping/MMR. I haven’t been Platinum for several seasons, but I know that the most successful Overwatch players are lone-wolf DPS types.

Many incumbents have reason to fear the change I am suggesting, because it would reveal they are not as good at Overwatch as they think they are, or as the SR system suggests them to be. Their leadership and teamwork would be proven weak by an impartial matchmaking system, which would expose them to real competition.

These are folks like Blizzard’s precious cadre of “professional players,” who have been allowed to earn their titles under a false competitive system. I see the conflict of interest for them as well. But I hope they’ll prove their smarts by taking my side.

Let us see what Overwatch really is, together :slight_smile:

Appeal for action
The handicapping/MMR system prevents good team players from transcending the ranks of the bad. It uses experienced Overwatch players as training wheels for the inexperienced, rather than allowing us to separate as we would naturally.

Players, please speak up for yourselves. Complain to Blizzard and send them to this thread. Send other players here to comment and vote. Blizzard wronged us by designing Competitive Overwatch this way; let’s prove we are aware of that and demand better from them.

Player consensus
Blizzard, look at the like-to-dislike ratio on this post.

Look at these posts from other players about the problem of handicapping/MMR in Competitive Overwatch:

Players, tell Blizzard that you want fair Competitive Overwatch.

Please don’t request a response from Blizzard in your topic. Thanks - Forum Mod

562 Likes

Transparency on MMR would be good. Overwatch, with its heroes of varied difficulty and its accessibility, should be way easier to understand how players are matched.

63 Likes

I agree with this, 100%. It’s hard to enjoy Comp when it feels like the game’s punishing you for trying to claw out of Bronze. :frowning:

71 Likes

Yes there is way too much information hidden from players in Competitive.

57 Likes

I’m just letting you know I’ve found this thread again and I’m still working on my little experiment.

I’m not sure if I like the new set up for the Forums.

7 Likes

I really hoped that this thread wont appear here again.

1.Please search in Google Elo Rating.
2.MMR is the Elo Rating.
3.The MMR number could be enormously big and can have a lot of digits and a lot of zecimals.
4.SR is a “digestible” REPRESENTATION of that number as it was stated in a blue post in the old forums.
So, for example, instead of seeing 33344556,23443 as your Rank you see 2515. That’s the SR. A program takes the MMR number and transforms it in something a human can wrap his head around. Again, that’s the SR.
5. The SR and MMR, as a result are direct proportional. You are matched based on your MMR solely.
6. The Devs shouldn’t , in any way, tell the exact algorithm and formula which calculates your MMR because people would be looking to rig the system just to rank up. A lack of transpparency is a must here.

Can you now stop with this conspiracy? I think you refuse to understand how it works and can’t accept that maybe you are to be blamed for a loss.

Stop with this conspiracy. It makes no sense.

97 Likes

Cuthbert still does not understand what MMR (match-making-rating) is. It is not handicapping. It is not rigging.

MMR is a (hidden) number that goes up when you win, and down when you lose. How much it goes up and down is a complicated formula, based on many factors, but the essential truth of wins are good and losses are bad is certain (4).

That MMR is then used to match people with and against people of similar MMR, in an attempt to create a 50% match (32). Here is the key part:

If a player’s MMR is wrong and too low, then the odds to win will be greater than 50%, and the player will win more games than he loses, which will cause his MMR to rise over many games played. He will then be placed with stronger and stronger opponents (and stronger and stronger allies) until his MMR is correct, and his win percentage approaches 50% (with some random oscillation around 50%) (7).

Once a player finds himself trapped in a rating range, the only way to break out is to improve as a player and play enough games to overcome any random factors.

What is SR then? SR is a visible and friendlier approximation of MMR (23). It has no more meaning with respect to matchmaking than tier icons. However, except for top players who have decayed, MMR and SR are closely linked, so inspecting SR typically gives a reasonable estimate of a player’s MMR (23).

(4) Overwatch Forums “In Overwatch, whether your MMR goes up or down is contingent on winning or losing. But there are a number of factors that determine how much that rating goes up or down.” – Jeff Kaplan
(7) Overwatch Forums
(23) Overwatch Forums
(32) Overwatch Forums

See How Competitive Skill Rating Works (Season 9) for a much more thorough exposition.

58 Likes

True.

True, but in the case of sub Diamond, they also use personal performance factor. That is from the TrueSkill rating system developed by Microsoft, that is based on Elo.

Completely irrelevant. Even though this is known for Overwatch, that number would still roughly translate to certain 4 digit rating.

Skill rating or otherwise current rating is not representation of your MMR.
MMR is your potential. You may or may not reach it.
In a game like WoW, where you can see your MMR, you can have MMR of 2.5K. You can create a team, play 10 games and get to 1100 rating. Points exchange is (or should I say was, I haven’t played in a while) between 0 and 22 points. You get 100+, because you get bonus points due to the big disparity between your rating and your MMR.

Does that mean your MMR is 1100?

OK.

And this is where the BS begins. Sub Diamond you have a personal performance factor. You don’t know the exact metrics.
Say you do your best each and every game, but you change something in your play without even realizing. Something that the matchmaking considers bad, even though it isn’t necessarily.

You do your best, but your MMR starts to lower. You get matched with lower people. Your rating takes a dip and you don’t even know what you did wrong to cause this.
If anything, the personal performance factor needs to be removed for all divisions.

18 Likes

They themselves stated that in a blue post.
You cant have gold level MMR and master level SR.

10 Likes

I don’t care what they have written. I know the basics of how the system is supposed to work. Your SR is not a representation of your MMR.

I also very much doubt, that there can be that big of a disparity, but that still doesn’t mean, that your SR=MMR.

But let’s talk specifics:
I play with a friend of mine. Same people, same accounts.
Season 6 we did placements together. He placed 2.4 gold and started losing rating. I placed Plat and started gaining rating.
Season 7 he placed almost in Diamond, I placed low Plat and over the course of the next 60 games we dropped, then gained rating till he hit Diamond and I got back to Plat.
This season he placed 3250 Diamond, I placed ~2.3 gold.
Theoretically I could be even holding him back and he could be a Master player for all I know. Does his SR represent his MMR? I don’t know! You don’t know.
If he goes to solo queue, he could do better and hit Masters, because he would play with better players than me… or it could turn out, that they don’t help him when needed as much as I do and he could drop to lower Diamond.

We always play our best and try to win. I’ve watched Overbuff and the only thing I noticed, that has changed is, my character rank has dropped from like 90 to like 60. The only visible representation is, that I get a lot less gold medals now, because my friend steals them as Moira, when I used to hold them as Zen.
The devs have repeatedly said, that medals are not considered a factor, and yet that’s what I see to be the visible change.

Explain the phenomenon.

4 Likes

I’m afraid that is the case. I really don’t mean to be like this, but I was charitable and I did try to explain some stuff to him, but he clearly refuses to swallow his pride and do some reading, because he still posts the original version of his post.

Another poster made waay more internally consistent and logical post about the match making system. What he wrote was much closer representation of the real experiences I’ve had with competitive. The post can still be found on reddit.
The basic idea was, that the post explains the phenomenon of losing streaks.
Players that are considered to be performing poorly according to the matchmaker are marked for deraking, and are bunched together, so that they feed rating to people, that according to the matchmaker need to be higher than they are.
You might be missing one of several hidden metrics (not talking about medals), and then you start getting unwinnable matches one after another, despite you doing your best.

I don’t know whether this is true or not, but I can definitely confirm, that it feels to be true.
Cuthbert’s posts on the other hand is full of inconsistencies. He continues to blame the “MMR handicapping”.

1 Like

Well, nice conspiracy theory then.
They need just a number to match people with each other. Anything else is secondary, as is SR number in this case as just a viewer friendly representation of the number used to match people with each other.

And i have never stated that MMR=SR, i said that they are direct proportional.

9 Likes

it is EXTREMELY clear that there is more to the system than what they are telling you.

that much i can confirm by observation. more than that i cant say.

but i do hope we get answers.

8 Likes

Maybe it’s not what you meant to say, but that’s what I understood when you wrote this:

Yes, that’s the MMR, which you do not see.

Which you don’t know, because you don’t see the MMR, not in this game anyways. WoW revealed it’s MMR during WotLK or Cata. I don’t see the problem in the number being visible.
The only problem would arise is if people were to spot irregularities.

2 Likes

blizzard only cares about OWL the wont do a thing to make are game play exp and better.

9 Likes

At least let me know if I have MMR higher than the current SR or not, at least that will give people some hope or realize they need to improve

4 Likes

This is informative, thank you :slight_smile: I bookmarked for reference.

I was wondering why is it that I can only rise or plateau as Pharah. If I do anything else, another DPS, a healer, a tank, I fall dramatically. It’s like the only way to stop the enemy team is for me to play Pharah, or else we get stomped.

3 Likes

^
umm okay I need at least 20 characters now.

2 Likes

I read somewhere that you can lose a match but rise in mmr or you can win a match and drop in mmr.

Also your mmr tries to follow your sr.

Now combine those 2 things and one can only come to the conclusion that the system will put you in games where it thinks you are bound to win/lose so that your mmr catches up with your sr if its bigger/smaller.

Now what complicates things is how is mmr altered.IF it is compared to averages of the league then we are all in trouble because the averages are screwed by the amount of smurfs/boosters that exist nowdays.

Also people get mad cause they feel they performed great when in fact they might have performed below average.

Problem is we dont know what the averages are.The site omnicmeta had some interesting statistics but those numbers seem outdated.

Also at some point i think the statistics were measured in comparison to time but that also didnt work because you could swap to tracer for the last minute to stall and die twice and your averages would show you are a bronze level player when that is not true.

What i propose is for blizzard to implement a new game ending screen.There it can show which character each person played followed by a simple arrow that indicates if it did better than average or worse.Up for better Down for worse simple as that.

It will solve a lot of the community problems and toxicity because i think people get mad because they dont realize that even when they have all golds they still perform below the league average.

Biggest issue is your performance is related to your team.Your averages can suffer either from extremely poor teammates but also from extremely good ones.I ve had games where i didnt do enough damage because my teammates spawn camped the enemy team simply because the enemy was extremely bad.I imagine my mmr went down on that win.

But the real question is why was the enemy team so bad?(or my team in other situations?).We have a roughly idea of what a platinum player is capable of.So why does it feel sometimes that our teammates/enemies are bronzies??

That is the most interesting question.

9 Likes

Not being able to downvote conspiracy theories is a real downside of the new forum…

22 Likes