Guild Wars 2

now I know I have really crappy rating (really bad match making these past few days to be completely honest)
but I have
18 wins 14 losses 8 points
which means if I got 1 point per win (some of which were solo victories vs full premades) then I’d be losing .71 points for each loss.

lets compare this to some of our favorite top players.. according to the leaderboards.
#5!
81 wins, 90 losses 88 points
strange how these low mmr players are being rewarded for their losses still.. or at least not being punished.

which is .1 point gained per loss average, 1 point per win

Now Im sure youre wondering.. what would be the top leaderboards points if they were treated as high mmr and their losses were strictly punished even in their soloqs like me?
lets see
#1 118 wins 100 losses, 123 points
WOULD be 47

#2 104 wins 75 losses, 110 points
would be 50

#3 100 wins 46 losses, 103 points
would be 70, not bad

#4 75 wins, 55 losses, 92 points
would be 35

#5 81 wins, 90 losses, 88 points
would be 17

so like the last post I put up. WHY IS ANET PUNISHING HIGH MMR AND FONDLING LOW MMR TURRET BADDIES?

Too many numbers. Brain explode.

Can you draw picture?

I too would like to see a diagram. If you need, you can contact Cwysis or Bird of Fire. They are very good Paint diagram drawers.

As their system sits, a high MMR player should not be solo Q’ing. Because your losses hurt you more than it hurts a newbie. Since your losses hurt you more than the turret engi at the bottom; that means you were suppose to win the matches you lost. He was suppose to lose the matches he lost, so it doesn’t hurt him as much. He is playing as expected and you are completely disappointing the systems expectations of you. Shame on you. When the system says your team (Soloq’ers or not) is suppose to win and you proceed to loose. You take more negative points than the player that was suppose to lose and did lose. His negative points only comes from scoring under 200 pts in the round; or if it is a more 60-40 split, scoring under 300pts.

You say the system punishes you for loosing, but in reality you are suppose to win those matches. This can really hurt a player that always Q’s with a team prior to season start. They will have more wins and higher MMR than the solo player. Then when the season start, you decide to get more games in a go solo. Your team MMR is still high and you are expected to win, but without coms and 5 solo players, you can end up loosing; drastically hurting your LB points.

The low guy could also be gaining +2 pts for winning against a team that they should have drastically lost to. Then the players on the losing team (your team) would take -2 for disappointing and dishonoring your famiry.

kirito.4138:

Too many numbers. Brain explode.

Can you draw picture?

Basically, if a player starts the season with high MMR, and had similar W/L records to the low MMR people topping the leaderboards, the high MMR players would have virtually no points, and the low MMR players would (and are) completely rolling in the points.

The thing is, high MMR players no longer have any ability to carry when solo queuing. In the old SoloQ leaderboards, I had a 70% winrate, but if I were to try the same for the new leaderboards as a solo high MMR player, I bring SO many matchmaking handicaps to my team just for being there, my win rate would be around 55%, just like the OP here, due to the handicapped matchmaking.

So the matchmaking balances the odds quite well, but yet still expects the high MMR player to win everytime, effectively awarding this high MMR an absolute pittance of points.

I could farm ranked all day as a solo high MMR player, but at the end of the day I’d probably barely have any points.

If I farmed ranked all day as a low MMR player, I would have a metric sheet ton of points.

That means that as a high MMR player, the only viable strategy to make progress on the leaderboards is to team queue and avoid the handicaps. Enjoy 8 minute queues, and only being able to keep a full group focused for a few hrs a day, say goodbye to all your point generation.

Mr. Chaith said it well. The balance is there, just way to handicap. Instead of trying to find players close to Mr. Chaiths MMR to place with and against him, he is more likely to have a couple really low players to balance and go up against a medium level team. Now, while these players will be easy for Mr. Chaith, his teammates will have no shot in hell even in their 1v1’s. Once the season starts. Higher players are absolutely forced to team up if they want to make any ground whatsoever.

Take oRNG for example. They don’t sleep (probably don’t have jobs) and play with each other non stop all night. I went to EU to gain some traction in the evening since all my NA players were getting off. From 3-6 a.m. EU time I encountered oRNG with a full solo team 4 times on a Sunday evening (NA)/ Monday morning (EU). This was very unfortunate for my solo team, but very effective for high tier MMR players as a team. Team up or suffer (Unless you are low tier).

Points need to go forever.

Players should be ranked according to their MMR

Also, no player should earn any point for a lost game.

I agree with Chaith. In the old soloq, my winrate was much better than with the new system. Now I’m just glad I keep it around 50%, I queue solo all the time and there’s absolutely nothing I can do in so many games, it’s frustrating. When I manage to win, I only get 1 pt anyway.

Honestly, I don’t really care about the leaderboards, I just really want to have fun matches. I know it’s not really about the 1v1’s but when I’m stuck in one, I can’t ever say it’s challenging, I feel like I get matched with people who bought the game last week. Even the ability of decent people to 1v2 people in the top 100 shows it’s a really really wrong system. (And their team still manages to lose.) Not even counting how many people have been yelling at others that they’re better because they’re higher on the leaderboards. When sadly, it’s the complete opposite.

It’s just not fun nor challenging anymore and there is very little space for getting better when all you do is being frustrated.

The best you should be able to do for a loss is lose zero points and that should be against a team you have like <10% win probability against. MMR should be wiped frequently like after each season. There should be a cap on number of games that count toward leade rboard ranking. Its not like in the NFL one team plays 1000 games and another 16. However, a lot of the things people are complaining about are features of the system and not necessarily bad.

brannigan.9831:

The best you should be able to do for a loss is lose zero points and that should be against a team you have like <10% win probability against. MMR should be wiped frequently like after each season. There should be a cap on number of games that count toward leade rboard ranking.

no, no, and no.

always lose mmr for a loss, but scale the amount lost to win chance. so you lose about double for losing a game that is almost a certain win compared to an almost certain loss.

never wipe mmr, it only makes people suffer more. let it slowly, permanently decay for inactivity.

you only propose a cap on games to try to alleviate the most glaring symptoms of a flawed system and it would be entirely unnecessary in an mmr based leaderboard.

So many assuming they have a high MMR, Since no one knows their MMR I find this quite humourous. I also find it funny that all the supposed high MMR players have a ton of reasons why they can’t compete on a leaderboard that is basically a win calculator. If your MMR is that high you should be able to carry, you should be able to solo queue and still win. Something smells fishy. If as a "high"MMR player your MMR would adjust down thus avoiding these horrible scenarios, seems people are viewing their MMR as static.

Lexiceta.4156:

So many assuming they have a high MMR, Since no one knows their MMR I find this quite humourous. I also find it funny that all the supposed high MMR players have a ton of reasons why they can’t compete on a leaderboard that is basically a win calculator. If your MMR is that high you should be able to carry, you should be able to solo queue and still win. Something smells fishy.

You cannot carry as a top MMR player if the rest of your team is low MMR to balance you out. You can only “Carry” in matches that are more even. Even if you are winning 1v2’s and taking points, your teammates in the above example are loosing 4v3’s. It is A LOT harder for a high tier MMR player to climb the ladder as they get only 1 point for wins and either 0 or lose points for losses. A low tier player gets 1 or 2 points for wins and STILL gains points off their losses. Yes, some games you can carry. Most you cannot.

Even if you carry 60% of your matches you are still only gaining 1pt for those and loosing or scoring 0 for your losses on the other 40%. The lower tier players that you are carrying will be getting +1 or +2 for those matches you won and still gaining +1 at least, for most of the lost matches. Basically making you need to play a lot more matches than the lower tier guy.

Lower tier = 1: Maybe they just started and have no idea what they are really doing. Can’t carry someone that is almost useless. Might as well be a 4v5.
2: They been playing for a little while but loose matches all the time because they are doing things they shouldn’t and never get higher MMR. Again, might as well be 4v5.

Problem is a lot of newer players are joining PvP for the event. They don’t start at the bottom of the MMR. They start somewhere in the middle. A lot of these people have no idea what they are doing and bring anyone’s team down they are on. So now picture a high MMR player + a low MMR + 3 mediums = a balanced team. Imagine 1 of those mediums just stepped out of PvE for the event and has no idea what he is doing. 2/5 players on the team are just about useless, but the team is balanced. And you expect a high tier player to be able to carry the team? He would need to fulfill the roles of himself and 2 players to carry. Say the other team is 5 players that have been PvP’ing for a while and all have medium MMR’s. Their teams would be virtually identical in average MMR, but the top tier players team would get completely stomped out. Maybe 500-100 or 500-200. Can’t always carry and to think that is naive.

Another example: NOT a top tier player, but a medium lvl player over the past year. Knows what he is doing but runs 50% win in the off season keeping him at medium tier. The enemy 5 players are all his his same level and situation. His 4 teamates JUST walked into PvP for the event. They will have the same MMR as all the rest of the players, because you start in the middle. Which team do you think will win? The 5 players that have been playing for a long time but remain medium, or the 1 player that has been playing for a while with 4 fresh fish that have the same MMR? I predict a 500-0. That player will come on here kittened off.

YES, it is balanced. BUT, the matchmaking is one sided in these events. On paper it looks good. In reality it is flawed.

brannigan.9831:

The best you should be able to do for a loss is lose zero points and that should be against a team you have like <10% win probability against. MMR should be wiped frequently like after each season. There should be a cap on number of games that count toward leade rboard ranking. Its not like in the NFL one team plays 1000 games and another 16. However, a lot of the things people are complaining about are features of the system and not necessarily bad.

Wiping MMR regularly defeats the point of even having MMR and having to put up with a boatload of unbalanced matches at the start of every season. May as well just make all matches randomised.

Your MMR is not static if you can not carry you will lose your MMR will adjust down to place where your “high” MMR can carry, I mean if you are that good. So much QQing. All these examples of high MMR losing because of this and that, let it happen lose your MMR will adjust to something more accurate.

Lexiceta.4156:

Your MMR is not static if you can not carry you will lose your MMR will adjust down to place where your “high” MMR can carry, I mean if you are that good. So much QQing

You are not listening to anything anyone is saying are you? The top tier player could push a 60% win ratio. That means his MMR doesn’t go down….. It might for a couple games, then he carries and comes back up with a couple wins. You suggested they should be able to carry every match. FALSE. So now the top tier player has a 60% win ratio but the low tier player with a 40% win ratio actually has more points than the top tier player. Why you ask? Because the lower tier player gets more points for his wins AND gets points for losing. The top tier guy only gains +1 for winning. Top tier guy would have to play maybe twice as many games as the lower tier guy to be higher on the LB’s. How is that fair?

Lexiceta.4156:

Your MMR is not static if you can not carry you will lose your MMR will adjust down to place where your “high” MMR can carry, I mean if you are that good. So much QQing. All these examples of high MMR losing because of this and that, let it happen lose your MMR will adjust to something more accurate.

win 1
lose 1
win 1
lose 1

so every 2 games i gain .3 points yay. where you and your completely pathetic trash under 50% w/l gains 1 per 2 games.

Your sample size is 4 games play a realistic amount say 200 let your MMR adjust to something that reflects your impact

Let me show you an example without using names.

Currently on the LB’s as I post this:
Rank 21 has 70 pts and a win-loss of 67-52
Rank 51 has only 57 pts and a win-loss of 61-54

The point spread is greater than their win-loss ratio. This is most likely because the player rank 51 has higher MMR and and the player rank 21 has lower MMR and has either gained more points for his wins or gained points for more losses than the other guy. High MMR players never gain more than +1 for their wins. Lower MMR players can gain +2 and in RARE occasions +3! As the event goes on and the games reach into the hundreds upon hundreds, you will see players MILES apart in points with the same amount of games won & lost…

Lexiceta.4156:

Your sample size is 4 games play a realistic amount say 200 let your MMR adjust to something that reflects your impact

His sample remains the same. If a high tier player goes even 200-200 he might say have only 100 pts (somewhere around there). If a low MMR player is 200-200, he will have upwards of 300+ points. Higher MMR only rewards +1 per win because you are suppose to win and either 0 or -1 for your losses. Lower tier is expected to lose a lot so they gain +1 or +2 for their wins and +1 for most of their losses as well. Same amount of games played, but lower player gets rewarded. Higher player would been to play twice as much games to even try to compete. That is at a perfectly even win/ loss ratio between the two.

The win/loss ratio would look more likethis in an actual situation:
Top player 300-100 scores around 225 pts.
Bottom players 175-225 scores around 275 pts.

If you don’t see an issue with that, I don’t know what to tell you.

Yea, and you will see “high” MMR players. not be as “high” anymore and getting a more realistic reward for wins and losses and a much more accurate reward, MMR is not static. OR you could take your “high” MMR and avoid that altogether and play unranked and continue to QQ amount the LB’s are meaningless because i can not keep a high MMR and compete, most choose to keep their artificially “high” MMR by avoiding ranked, esp solo god forbid they lose and their MMR becomes more representative of their actual contribution,

I see your reply is basically- lets spew some hate and see what that does, how insightful. Your intelligent and compelling comment on this matter, will no doubt change many minds. And well i haven’t been on a LB sine like launch unless you count 95% on top, very witty though. Then again i don’t have my password to actually see the LB in a year or more, so you seem honest i will trust your assessment.

Lexiceta.4156:

So many assuming they have a high MMR, Since no one knows their MMR I find this quite humourous. I also find it funny that all the supposed high MMR players have a ton of reasons why they can’t compete on a leaderboard that is basically a win calculator. If your MMR is that high you should be able to carry, you should be able to solo queue and still win. Something smells fishy. If as a "high"MMR player your MMR would adjust down thus avoiding these horrible scenarios, seems people are viewing their MMR as static.

ive never seen you in a game, but the community isnt that big and i vary my play times and of course youre pretty high on a leaderboard that primarily measures games played. therefore our mmrs probably differ significantly. so is mine high or is yours high? well.. my queues are quite often longer than the average time, which means i cant really be in the middle of the bell curve, cuz if i was, i would bring down the average queue time more often than not. and the thing is, im often matched with and against people who are espurts.. like oe or the abjured or that guy who still reps apex prime despite ded team. so … my mmr is prolly much higher than yours, whether that means its average or anything above average isnt really something i can know… but i deduce its higher than yours. because if you were good, id prolly get matched with you at some point.

Why is anyone talking to the robot….

http://gyazo.com/9159f685a39cd4f21bdc501b025ba78d
#7 yup

Maybe it would make more sense if your team was awarded the same amount of points for a win or loss based on the team’s cumulative MMR and win chance. This way when low MMR players are carried to a victory they only get the same +1 the high MMR player would get. I figured this is how it would work already as the way people are explaining it is pretty bad, even for a test.

Not sure how you know your MMR or mine for that matter, Seems like guessing to me. I have not seen you in matches either so i assume my MMR is higher than yours, i have no idea who you play with and i don’t recognize the names, but if you are trying to pat yourself on the back, i’ll play along —-—- Atta boy, In all honesty all ques are long 10-15 mins is too long i agree.

Lexiceta.4156:

Your MMR is not static if you can not carry you will lose your MMR will adjust down to place where your “high” MMR can carry, I mean if you are that good. So much QQing. All these examples of high MMR losing because of this and that, let it happen lose your MMR will adjust to something more accurate.

This assumption absolutely depends on how the Glicko2 system has been extrapolated to a 5 on 5 game and might easily be flawed.
I wouldn’t be surprised if MMR variations were minimum for the outliers of any given match.

Chaith.8256:

kirito.4138:

Too many numbers. Brain explode.

Can you draw picture?

Basically, if a player starts the season with high MMR, and had similar W/L records to the low MMR people topping the leaderboards, the high MMR players would have virtually no points, and the low MMR players would (and are) completely rolling in the points.

The thing is, high MMR players no longer have any ability to carry when solo queuing. In the old SoloQ leaderboards, I had a 70% winrate, but if I were to try the same for the new leaderboards as a solo high MMR player, I bring SO many matchmaking handicaps to my team just for being there, my win rate would be around 55%, just like the OP here, due to the handicapped matchmaking.

So the matchmaking balances the odds quite well, but yet still expects the high MMR player to win everytime, effectively awarding this high MMR an absolute pittance of points.

I could farm ranked all day as a solo high MMR player, but at the end of the day I’d probably barely have any points.

If I farmed ranked all day as a low MMR player, I would have a metric sheet ton of points.

That means that as a high MMR player, the only viable strategy to make progress on the leaderboards is to team queue and avoid the handicaps. Enjoy 8 minute queues, and only being able to keep a full group focused for a few hrs a day, say goodbye to all your point generation.

I haz mild dyslexic & ADD problems. Wall o text is strong. I still need pictures or comics to understand.

NeXeD.3042:

Why is anyone talking to the robot….

cuz its fun to tell him hes bad with really solid logic? idk, seems petty but there it is..