PvP Rating Adjustments

PVP Arenas
485

Only if MMR > CR.

Because they aren’t understanding what is happening or why. Go look at the ladder and see the top-end players are still Qing. A normal distribution isn’t skewed by average players, it’s only skewed by outliers. If we see the top-end is still the same, but a skew is occurring, it HAS to be the bottom end. That’s the ONLY causal explanation. This is just how math works.

If you don’t believe me, go to your local university and explain the situation to a professor and they’ll tell you the exact same thing.

1 Like
486

Some of them are, but what does that have to do with anything? They’ll always queue no matter what and that’s what makes them top players. They have been playing the game for 20 years nonstop. For some of them its their job to stream. Still has nothing to do with the ladder health.

Anyone who isn’t the top of the ladder is the bottom end? lol what

487

It literally works on the ladders lol. This is clear evidence that win trading generates the MMR to climb. the two teams dont trade zero sum. its inflationary.

Neither do you, to be clear. ive challenged you for evidence 3+ times now and you have yet to actually source anything remotely compelling. You’re pedaling a theory.

How many times does it need to be clearly stated that you have no idea how blizzard is calculating any of this. stop acting like you do. You don’t, and you admit that you don’t.

Provide data that supports your theory, or admit that its just a theory.

488

Because it’s OUTLIERS that cause inflation. If you have 10,000 players who all go 50/50, every single player will be 1500. If you have 10 players that go 10/90, 30/70, 50/50, 70/30, and 90/10, you’ll see players at 1100, 1300, 1500, 1700, and 1900. Wow MMR is a forced normal distribution.

It is the top-end and bottom-end that cause the spread. If we see the top end is still there, but there’s deflation, the bottom end HAS to be missing.

No, I never said that. You still see all the R1/top end players Qing, but you DON’T see the bottom sub 1k players playing. That is exactly what’s causing the deflation. We know it’s not just the MMR coefficient, because we never saw this in s2-s4 of dragonflight despite the coefficient being adjusted there.

Again, ONLY IF MMR > CR. How many complaints have you seen on the forums or reddit or trade chat or in-game lobbies where a player malds that they lose rating after going 3-3? It’s because their mmr < cr. Wintrading ONLY WORKS if mmr > cr.

Wrong.

Because I don’t have access to every player’s data. I DO have a basic understanding of math and statistics, though, and this is the only workable explanation.

Because it’s a normal distribution and that’s how normal distributions work. You don’t have to believe me if you don’t want, but that’s exactly what is happening.

1 Like
489

Can someone just make this about Trump or Kamala, so we can have ourselves a real American argument?

490

Who are these players that you’re talking about and why do you think they’re ALL playing? Like what even is this argument.

No it’s not. They artificially add inflation.

1 Like
491

Bro do you literally not understand what win trading is? People ‘trade wins’ back and forth with queue synced opponents all the way up the ladder. they have been getting banned for it for well over a decade. I dont know how to even continue this point with you when you are completely ignorant to what it even is.

Ah so you’re also a liar. or does your dad work for blizzard?

Right which is why its a ‘theory’, and you need to stop speaking with such certainty.

This is called a theory.

Again you have no idea how they are calculating any of this. do you realize that this is a company that makes money off of giving us little dopamine hits? lol. Stop claiming that you know how any of this is being calculated while you admit that you don’t know how any of this is being calculated.

492

How he explained MMR in his post to me isn’t even how it works lmao. He’s thinking of a bell curve :joy:

493

Yes, and they only go up in rating if their mmr is higher than their CR. How else would you explain someone losing points for a 3-3 in shuffle?

Or just playing 2x 3s games and getting a +12 and a -14? The MMR HAS to be higher than the CR.

Me explaining how math works doesn’t make me a liar, man.

We already have an official statement from blizzard that they don’t cap the MMR and it’s based off participation and the type of participation. If you wanna throw on your tinfoil hat then you’re more than welcome to, but this is exactly how math works.

Swole, that’s what a normal distribution is.

1 Like
494

What does this even mean lmao? Bro you have no idea what you’re on about.

Bell curves aren’t enforced by the MMR system because that’s not the aim of an MMR system.

1 Like
495

Are you trolling or do you actually need an explanation?

A bell curve IS a normal distribution.

How do you figure?
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/normaldistribution.asp#:~:text=The%20Bottom%20Line-,Normal%20distribution%2C%20also%20known%20as%20the%20Gaussian%20distribution%2C%20is%20a,defined%20by%20the%20standard%20deviation.

Just say you don’t know how math works, man.

1 Like
496

I wish you would use the correct word: Hypothesis.

1 Like
497

you’re 100% the one thats trolling. The aim of MMR isn’t to make people go 10/90 or 90/10 its to make people go 50/50 in their respective MMR LOL.

498

You actually could not be more right. i let myself down there

2 Likes
499

Correct, and that’s why they adjust up or down along the bell curve to fight better or worse players which naturally causes a normal distribution.

Swole, come on, man. This is high school math stuff.

2 Likes
500

That is not true, and if you would finally click on the link I gave you, you would find proof that your argument is not valid.

Furthermore, you might get the idea to look at how close the top players in shuffle are rating-wise. This completely contradicts the typical picture we would expect from an ELO system.

This only leads to the conclusion that the mmr/rating in shuffle cannot develop freely, but is artificially pushed towards the starting mmr.

So there is solid evidence that points in a completely different direction than your supposed “mathematical proof”.

1 Like
501

Yeah I don’t really know what to think on the Shuffle mmr subject anymore I hear too many different things from here then from the Rank 1 players I watch stream like Absterge and Venruki to name a couple so I have no idea tbh. One thing I do agree with is based on participation numbers shuffle should mathematically speaking have higher ratings than 3s or 2s but at the same time it should be lower than Blitz. On all activity monitoring sites Shuffle has slightly higher than 2x the participation of 3s. I love 3s don’t get me wrong but something ain’t mathing when you look at Shuffle VS 3s when it comes to looking at comparisons of highest rated players.

502

You just linked player activity.

Show me the same bottom-end players for dragonflight seasons.

If the top end players only Q into the top-end players and go roughly 50/50, then they stagnate. You need the bottom rungs of a ladder to raise the top.

It is ABSOLUTELY Truncated, we know this, blizzard confirmed this. That’s why it was ~3600 s1 of DF, but then ~3k for S2-4. They said that they intentionally did that.

No, because you have to look at EVERYTHING. 3s is approximately the same as it was, shuffle is deflated, blitz is inflated. Blitz is easier to climb, so people play that; especially at the lower end.

503

You don’t even know what you’re arguing man, just stop.

1 Like
504

Hi Pifz, I have no dog in this fight and only want the correct answer. Have you seen this before?

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/720492-Guide-Match-Making-Rating-(MMR)

It has a direct post from Blizzard regarding how mmr works from way back in the day, 2011? Those forums have since been discontinued, but MMO-C maintains the original text in quotes like above.

Entire post copied for those that don’t want to use the link:

FROM BLIZZARD ABOUT MMR 2010 POST:
Let’s turn the question around first. Why is my record 50/50? If your record is 50/50, that means your match-making rating (MMR) is almost exactly correct for you. It means we are finding teams that as near as possible match the ability of your team. It means that you are being matched as fairly as possible. If we matched 1300 teams at 1500 instead, they would only win 30% of their matches. We would rather those teams win half their matches.

But I’m 70/30, what about that?
If you are 70/30 and we think you are 1300, your MMR will climb to roughly 1533. You will then be matched with 1500+ teams, and your record should decrease to 50/50.

Yeah, so why is my rating still going down then?
The team rating will drop until it reaches the average match-making rating of the teams you beat 50% of the time. For example, if we are matching you against 1200-rated teams, and you are winning half the time, it will drop to 1200. If you are winning 70% of the time against 1200-rated teams, then your MMR and TR should move up to 1433.

But I’m not matching 1200-rated teams, I looked these teams up and most are near 1500.
It is likely that those teams have an MMR of 1200, even though their TR is 1500. This means that even though they look like 1500 or 1400-rated teams, they have been playing more like 1200-rated teams this season.

No matter what I do, my rating gets stuck on 1300
If your team rating keeps getting stuck on 1300 while you win 50% of your matches, then you are winning matches against 1300 players.
Being 1300 means:
– You go 50/50 vs 1300 teams
– You are better than 25% of all teams
It means that the teams we are matching you against have average MMRs well under 1500.

How will I get to 1650?
– The definition of a 1650 team in both the new and old system is “Better than 68% of all teams on this BG in this bracket”
– To be 1650, your team needs to be better than 68% of all teams
– This means you will beat a team with an MMR of 1500 63 out of 100 matches, and go 50/50 vs. a team with an MMR of 1650

Wait, why 63%? Shouldn’t it be 68% then?
– Smart question! The reason it’s not 68% is because a 1650-rated team does not always perform exactly at 1650. We take this into account.

But I’m stuck at 1300, I never get to play those higher-rated teams:
– A 1650 player will win about 4 of 5 matches against a 1300 player
– If you are at 1300 but belong at 1650, you should be winning 4 of every 5 matches
– If you do that, your MMR will go up steadily, and you will face harder and harder opponents
– Once you move your MMR to 1650, your TR will follow

How long will this take?
– This depends on how much evidence we have that you were a 1300 team
– If your team Really is a 1650 team, average case is 40 games
– But it can go higher and lower. Great luck = 16, Terrible luck = 150

FURTHER BLIZZARD STATEMENT:
•1. Personal Ratings will now always trend toward Team Ratings (instead of the internal matchmaking rating). This should eliminate the odd behavior players noticed of seeing their PR change in ways that seemed bizzare. It also eliminates the possibility that you can play every game with your team, yet be ineligible to get items when the team qualifies for them (or ineligible to receive full points).
•2. You will now gain or lose around 12 points when winning or losing to teams of roughly equivalent matchmaking rating to your own team (previously this number was 8 ).
•3. The rating scale has been extended to a range of 240 to about 2800 to more accurately reflect what was possible under the old system. This means that most players over 1500 will experience some slightly easier than expected rating gain as their team adjusts upward to the new scale.
•4. Players with less than 1500 rating will still get the same number of points as players at 1500.

It is now easier to get higher ratings
It is easier to get higher ratings due to the scale adjustment. However, I’d still expect a very small percentage of the population to get the arena master achievement, by no means would I call it trivialized.

Q&A
Is hidden rating wiped on character transfer?
No

What determines hidden rating besides win/loss? Resilience, damage, healing?
Only winning/losing determines the rating

What is the min/max amount of points able to be lost/won now?
24

Is any of the rating affected by your gear?
None of the rating systems have the slightest clue or are in any way affected by what gear you have.

1 Like