I’m pointing right at it. If you want more than that you’ll have to do your own research.
See, I’ve done your research for you in the past and invariably when you’re proven wrong you either a) ignore it or b) more commonly, shift the goalposts. So not this time. They have explained why and it’s all right there in the link.
I can’t find any orange text in any of that, at all. The source is speculative, and I quote Kaawumbaa here:
So basically he just drew his own conclusions based on guestimation and heresay. That is literally the opposite of official and authoritative.
That is tautological. I don’t want to get into this here, but it is much, much harder to improve in a closed-box hidded performance evaluation.
Hence why all the calls for transparency. People shouldn’t be tensors, and matches rated at the bottom 1-2% of all players ranked by skill shouldn’t be corrupted with people exibiting skill and talent far above that percentile.
It’s bad outdated math leading to a trash broken system. Show us the math so we can either fix it for them or see how they expect us to perform.
Call it whatever you like, but when you claim one thing and get disproven and then claim that you were talking about something entirely different that’s called shifting the goalposts.
They’ve already provided everything you need to know - you climb when you win, so “how they expect you to perform” is that you’ll win until you can’t, and that’s where you’re supposed to be until you improve yourself.
if you mean about the part where is says they want overwatch to be about winning and loosing and not k/d ratio and such, then I still want the MMR formula published
you play differently in the super bowl as you do when facing off against the team last in your divsioin at the end of the season. a tennis player doesn’t go all out on an amature
Again, that is tautological. ‘Win more games’ doesn’t tell people how to win better, how pbsr or mmr works, or how they’re being sneakishly scored, assessed, and matched.
And we’re still waiting for an official source. Please post a non out-dated link with orange font that explains how people are being measured.
Oh wait, you can’t. Because it doesn’t exist. They refuse to be transparent and accountable on how they track, rate, and rank people’s behaviour.
but that’s not even what I’m really asking. If MIT came out with this huge data set that spelled out the MMR formula with a 0.001% chance probability of error, I would still not be satisfied. I may be less persistent, but not satisfied.
I want the MMR formula to be public and endorsed. Official, if you will.
it’s like overbuff, I’m not asking to know what pick rates are, I’m asking for blizz to publish them
As a customer of this eports product/service, I sure would like to know how my data trail is being used to decide that I’m bottom 1% of all players ranked by skill. Always. Not saying I’m even Silver or on some path-to-pro, but why am I not classified as bottom 4%?
They would be telling us it’s not true, and that these rumors are baseless and that they just patent liberally, if they weren’t at least partially using the patent. Think of this like a warrant canary, the lack of official PR putting this thread down shows the canary has died.