Yeah and his argument falls flat once you get into diamond+. When your gains are identical as all that matters is W v L.
You misquoted. SR and MMR are âclosely linkedâ. That does not say that they are the same, or even close. What does âlinkedâ even mean??
1 Like
Performance based tweaks are removed in Diamond and above. That does not mean gains/losses are identical between MMR and SR on a match-to-match basis.
The result is the same, the argument is flat, but I just wanted to clarify that itâs not as if you hit 3k rating and every win or loss becomes a fixed number.
If they are âcloselyâ linked, then why wouldnât they be âcloseâ under most normal circumstances? Sure, we can argue what numerical values constitute âcloseâ amongst ourselves, but we canât say the values arenât close in the general sense that they wouldnât be in roughly the same ballpark most of the time.
As for what âlinkedâ means, itâs that theyâre inherently connected. Most of the time they travel the same direction, and SR is constantly chasing MMR to settle you into the âproperâ rank.
1 Like
Thatâs the full quote, yes. The quotes, read in totality, generally indicate that SR and MMR are close to each other in normal circumstances (active players with win rates around 50%). But there are delicate differences such as this one.
I donât think so. All the âevidenceâ Iâve seen of rigging is actually a study of textbook cognitive biases in action.
3 Likes
If y and x are closely linked, then y = f(x) +/- g(x), where f(x) is constant and g(x)/f(x) is small.
If that math doesnât makes sense to you, then perhaps say âas a yoyo with a short string is closely linked to a handâ.
2 Likes
The thing with this argument, is that you donât know if they are close or not. Regardless of your definition of close. You nor anyone else has access to these numbers or their relation, so itâs a pointless argument to complain about the way a system functions when we donât know how that system functions.
More importantly, if the MMR system places you at a certain SR, and the match making places you vs people of similar/same SR. You can then reasonably assume that the MMR is the same as SR. Not to mention as time goes on and more data points are added the gap between SR and and MMR shorten and become much more accurate.
All the complaints regarding this system are made with new accounts/alts in mind which have a very volatile gain/loss attributed to it.
Donât even go down this road. We canât have a conversation if you donât trust what the Devs tell us in plain English. We donât have to know the intimate details of every aspect to refute most of the complaints we see, as they have been expressly answered already. If someone wants to operate under the assumption that the Blues are producing misinformation (like in Prophetâs thread), intentionally or not, then everything under the sun becomes speculation.
I agree with this.
There are plenty of reports that are aimed at thigns veteran accounts experience, but yeah, most of the time, the more volatile accounts get brought up as they try to validate their stances.
1 Like
I get what you are saying but, if we can trust what the Devs say in plain english, why are there threads popping up contesting what the devs have said?
Upon re-reading your post, I think we might be arguing the same point haha.
2 Likes
Weâre definitely on the same side. 
Edit: As for why threads pop up questioning stuff. Some of them are more reasonable than others. Take this thread, as an example, itâs at least mostly rooted in interpretations of official posts. Now, when I read those posts, along with some others, I donât get the same message that some other people do, and so Iâm more intrigued in hearing their take on it than trying to shut their conversation down.
Now, there are also people that jump in and put their spin on it that are just blatantly wrong. Their post can be quickly refuted by posts where no ambiguity exists.
2 Likes
My general basis of trusting Blizz in this case is backed up by hundreds of hours playing HoTS (before blizz royally screwed up the MMR system). A website called hotslogs worked similarly to overbuff etc in that it would create itâs own MMR ranking based on your wins/losses and performance numbers. After the volatility died down from about 100 games or so, it was staggeringly close to what blizz reported as your MMR in game. Weâre talking +/- 50.
People always conflate their rank with a broken system as they usually assume they are better than they are. One thing I am certainly critical about is how the system handles old accounts where players have increased proficiency considerably from older seasons, but they hold the same âweightâ when it comes to MMR gains/losses.
How I performed in season 1 should have no bearing on how I perform in season 9, yet that is exactly how the system works.
4 Likes
I never played the competitive modes in HotS, 'cause MOBAâs arenât really my thing, but I am quite familiar with that site. ![:slight_smile:](https://d74zh8edaijub.cloudfront.net/en/overwatch/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=5" ":slight_smile:")
I do think there is a certain point where the certainty level attached to your account can do more harm than good, but I also believe it is overcome by grinding⊠even though itâs hard to stay motivated to do the grinding.
Also, if what Kaawumba has mentioned is true, taking a break for a while and coming back to competitive actually lowers the certainty attached to your rating. So, some people might find it easier to climb if they take a season off, for example.
I think itâs mostly a matter of practicality. I spoke to this is another thread recently. There are a few people that are punished (in a loose sense) for the benefit of thousands of others (due to the chaos an MMR reset would cause). Ultimately, though, I do believe that if someone belongs higher or lower, itâs merely a matter of putting in the time to get there.
2 Likes
Yeah, I just think itâs a horrible idea for a company to try and solve the problem by their clients not using their product haha.
I agree, I just think it might be a little too grindy.
2 Likes
I agree with that.
Close could be that one âcloselyâ affects the other. Doesnât mean that the affect is proportional or, in fact, what that affect even is⊠Itâs purposely misleading. Says nothing definitive. Iâll go with my 1000 hours of experience with the game itself.
1 Like
If you want to go with your personal feelings over the laymanâs interpretation of a Blue post, more power to you.
I prefer for my rationale not to require such reaches, personally.
2 Likes
Thatâs exactly right. This is what happens when you are accurately ranked.
Well not really based on âhow well you playâ, thatâs only a small factor for people under 3000SR, but yes. When you win, you go up in rank, so the match maker puts you against better players.
You will be stuck at a new higher rank, because you just won games and moved up. Exactly where you will become stuck is wherever other players are as good as you.
You are presenting a paradox, where the system can judge your skill incredibly well, but doesnât rank you accurately. Both your matches and your SR are based on your MMR. So itâs either both, or neither.
If the system accurately knows how well you play, that means your MMR is accurate, which means your SR is accurate (or will soon be if there was some disturbance, as bonus gains ensure SR always chases to MMR, even with a 50% win-rate).
1 Like
Seeing as youâve been one of the most patient and respectful posters on this thread, regardless of the position you take in this discussion, I respect your opinions, but I also partially disagree with them on a fundamental level. Your position is that Blizzard has been 100% clear and transparant, never tells partial truths, isnât ever inherently misleading toward customers, and has always been upfront about the competitive matchmaking process. I argue that this simply is false. While I donât think theyâve outright lied about anything, I do think that they have not been transparent or given clear cut definitions of how the system works.
Jeff and others have given very simplified definitions of MMR, SR, and how they relate, but they have not at any point given an exact definition. Everything said by blizzard employees has been extremely generalized, to the point where it can be interpreted in multiple ways. The ways Cuthbert and others have interpreted is one valid way to understand it, while yours, FriendlyFireâs, and the like have another way of understanding it. Neither group knows for sure, and itâs a fallacy to wholeheartedly assume either POV is the correct one.
What Iâm trying to say is that Cuthbert and co have valid reasoning, at least based on anectodal evidence and their inherent confirmation bias. The same goes for your sideâs reasoning. Neither group can be outright told theyâre wrong, although many who take the definition as you do think it justified. Fact is, Blizzard has not and probably will not ever fully explain the entire truth of the matter, barring a rogue current or ex employee leaking the info to us. That probably wonât happen anytime soon though.
I think itâs a fallacy to blindly go with one interpretation of the facts given without ever considering the others as being possibly true. Thereâs plenty of anecdotal evidence to show that the other side may be correct. Dismissing it off-hand as if Blizzard would be liars if you interpret it differently is naive. Just because some cannot accept that the quotes blizzard has given can be interpreted multiple ways does not mean they are correct.
My real question in all of this is why certain people cannot even fathom other interpretations from their own as being possible. Thereâs also absolutely no reason to assume Blizzard has given a complete picture of how the system works, because any layman can see that they have not. Anyone that understands that Blizzard is a company rather than a caretaker understands that Jeff and co are not permitted to explain many aspects of the game to us. When everything said by them has been vague and generalized to the point where it can be understood in many competing ways, it shows that we as a whole are not getting the absolute full picture truth on the matter.
4 Likes
Thatâs not completely true, if Iâm being honest. I think that some things they tell us are pretty straight-forward, and could be taken at face value. I think others are pretty vague. There are some stances that I donât believe require intimate knowledge of how the system works, though.
For instance, if someone says MMR and SR arenât close. I will gladly acknowledge itâs possible in some instances (streaks, new accounts, decay), but I donât think it is the norm for active accounts based upon the quote about them being closely linked. When someone says the system is rigged against them, I likewise could refer to the quote where Jeff comments that people should stop being paranoid.
I donât refuse to acknowledge that those possibilities exist, so much as I feel it is unproductive to argue from those standpoints based upon what type of baggage comes with the stance that they are being deliberately misleading when talking, 'cause at the end of the day , yeah, it could be heavily stacked against players in some scenarios to keep them coming back if they have research that indicates failure motivates them to keep playing for whatever reason, and as crazy as that sounds in a utopian world, we know of way too many corporate scandals to say they âwouldnâtâ do that to their player base. Handicapping could totally be a thing, but I think it is slightly less reasonable to adopt that stance than it is to say the system is unbiased.
For the rest of what youâve said, and this might come as a surprise, but I actually agree with you. I donât think everything theyâve said gives us an accurate or complete picture of what is happening under the hood. I think itâs quite reasonable to assume thereâs a lot more going on than what theyâve told us. I also think they used generalized language intentionally in many instances, which is problematic due to the ambiguity it can create.
That is to say that I do think Cuthbert and supporters have a leg to stand on. We (Cuthbert and I) actually had an excellent conversation at one point in the thread that simply ended with me noting that what he was saying made perfect sense, but that the presuppositions I was working with didnât allow for his argument to exist (An âIf A , then Bâ, where I could agree that B would follow, but that A didnât exist in the first place).
Most of the time, Iâm not posting in this thread to dismiss their opinions or argue that theyâre wearing tinfoil hats without a basis, but to simply discuss the topics from my point of view. I donât assume that Iâm the one that has the answers (in most cases), but am attempting to engage in a dialogue on the topic of matchmaking, 'cause honestly, I think something about it is broke. I just find it difficult to pinpoint what mechanism in particular is broken, or if itâs a byproduct of the variables the system is attempting to work with.
I honestly enjoy the discussions in this thread a great deal. Itâs probably my favorite thread on the forums. Cuthbert and a few others have been amazing to talk to, and not because we agree, but because I feel like this is a controversial topic where we have so many different worldviews that are actively engaging in an open-minded talk. If I didnât feel that way, I wouldâve left long ago, like I did the âForced loss streaksâ thread.
3 Likes
Not immediately, or gradually (which is what should happen), which is why you run into win- and loss streaks. This just happened to me. Iâd been on quite the loss streak, and suddenly won 5 games in a row. But, aside from the players in them, they were all basically the same games; we start out on Defense, have a hard time defending, usually into overtime, or lose the round right before it, and when attacking, we somehow rush onto the objective and snowball across the map. Clearly, after having me lose 200 SR, the game felt I did not belong that low, and has since tried ranking me back up. Somethingâs afoot here.
Erm, no. This âstuckâ is only as far as the âmedalâ (like Platinum) goes. But within that, you can be all over the place for reasons unknown to man. As Iâve stated before, I feel my âplaceâ on the ladder should be around 2850, why this number? Itâs the average I get when I compare my season low and season high for the past 6 seasons or so. If 2850 is my âcapâ, then why canât I somewhat stably maintain that SR? Who do I get win streaks that sometime see me jump up into Diamond, or loss streaks that nearly drop me into Gold?
1 Like
(34) Overwatch Forums
In addition, because you are a Mercy main, these oscillations around your true rank are wider, because your win/loss results are more team dependent than most.
1 Like