Guild Wars 2

I’ve been in matches with Silvers (I’m in Gold 3) and losses heavily impact my rating. If the rating loss would be counted over the entirety of the team members that would be great. Your personal rating would of course still affect the result rating more but your team members make up 80% of the team other than yourself which is a major factor in winning a match.

SMITE ( moba by Hirez ) does something like this. If you get a team where you have noticeably higher rank than everyone else on your team, you will lose less for losing and win more rank for winning. It’s a fair tradeoff for being placed in a situation where you are expected to have to carry a team.

Sounds like a great idea. I’m going to trade duo queue matches with my buddy on tanked f2p accounts.

Faux Play.6104:

Sounds like a great idea. I’m going to trade duo queue matches with my buddy on tanked f2p accounts.

And in duo q it treats you as if you both have the highest elo between you.

Which is yet another thing anet should fix.

@OP:
Your proposed system is a bad option for evaluating rating.

Given three ways to evaluate rating changes:

1. Composite team vs. Composite team (what you’re suggesting)
2. Individual vs. opposing composite team
3. Individual vs. each opposing individual

The composite team vs. composite team option provides the least rating stabilization. Someone wrote a research paper on it.

The correct way to fix this is to prevent these huge rating differentials from ever happening with the matchmaker. Also, a lot of this silver vs. platinum reporting is because you’re seeing an opponent’s decayed rating.

Its pretty much the same issue WvW has suffered for years, except its on a micro scale.

I think for sPvP it should just be flat bonuses. Simple and effective. Is your teams total rating less than the enemy? If you loose, get a “fought against the odds” bonus of 5. Did you team loose within 50 points of the enemy (ie 450+ vs 500)? You get a “kitten son that was a hard fight” bonus of 5 points. Etc and so on.

Master Ketsu.4569:

Faux Play.6104:

Sounds like a great idea. I’m going to trade duo queue matches with my buddy on tanked f2p accounts.

And in duo q it treats you as if you both have the highest elo between you.

Which is yet another thing anet should fix.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. You are complaining that Duo Queue gets a handicap?
You are complaining that two people who can, most likely, use voice chat to gain an advantage have a slight handicap in rating?
Really?

And i’m questioning your logic as someone who’s using duo queue himself. Even if my buddy and me are on the opposite sides of the map we have an advantage in terms of map awareness as we can relate, without typing it out ‘Hey, don’t come here, enemy is outnumbering us’ or whatever else is important.

Yes, we should be treated as the highest elo among us two because we basically kitten up the system.

LouWolfskin.3492:

Master Ketsu.4569:

Faux Play.6104:

Sounds like a great idea. I’m going to trade duo queue matches with my buddy on tanked f2p accounts.

And in duo q it treats you as if you both have the highest elo between you.

Which is yet another thing anet should fix.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. You are complaining that Duo Queue gets a handicap?
You are complaining that two people who can, most likely, use voice chat to gain an advantage have a slight handicap in rating?
Really?

And i’m questioning your logic as someone who’s using duo queue himself. Even if my buddy and me are on the opposite sides of the map we have an advantage in terms of map awareness as we can relate, without typing it out ‘Hey, don’t come here, enemy is outnumbering us’ or whatever else is important.

Yes, we should be treated as the highest elo among us two because we basically kitten up the system.

You understood my post to mean exactly the opposite of what I actually meant.

That’s impressive.

Maybe work on your wording then.

LouWolfskin.3492:

Maybe work on your wording then.

was quite easy to understand

If I have 2k rating and my duo mate has 1500 rating it will take my 2k rating as our rating, not the 1.5k

bluri.2653:

LouWolfskin.3492:

Maybe work on your wording then.

was quite easy to understand

If I have 2k rating and my duo mate has 1500 rating it will take my 2k rating as our rating, not the 1.5k

And that’s not how it should be? From what i understand my reaction as “Well, yeah, this is how rating a Duo Queue should work as it is a form of handicap on the lower rated player” apparently wasn’t the intended reaction.

LouWolfskin.3492:

bluri.2653:

LouWolfskin.3492:

Maybe work on your wording then.

was quite easy to understand

If I have 2k rating and my duo mate has 1500 rating it will take my 2k rating as our rating, not the 1.5k

And that’s not how it should be? From what i understand my reaction as “Well, yeah, this is how rating a Duo Queue should work as it is a form of handicap on the lower rated player” apparently wasn’t the intended reaction.

It should be like that, otherwise any highrated player can make any duo partner tank down to low rating and then duoQ and have low rating and stomp lowbies and get easy points. So it should always be when you duo to take the highest rating and queue as that

bluri.2653:

LouWolfskin.3492:

bluri.2653:

LouWolfskin.3492:

Maybe work on your wording then.

was quite easy to understand

If I have 2k rating and my duo mate has 1500 rating it will take my 2k rating as our rating, not the 1.5k

And that’s not how it should be? From what i understand my reaction as “Well, yeah, this is how rating a Duo Queue should work as it is a form of handicap on the lower rated player” apparently wasn’t the intended reaction.

It should be like that, otherwise any highrated player can make any duo partner tank down to low rating and then duoQ and have low rating and stomp lowbies and get easy points. So it should always be when you duo to take the highest rating and queue as that

So it still works this way like previous seasons? I had read somewhere that ratings were averaged this season.

For example the match with Sind at 2,000 and the other player at 1,400; and other reports of vast differences in rating where no duos existed …

I’m not sure how a match could otherwise be made with that much discrepancy in rating if some kind of averaging wasn’t going on. Unless the population is truly that low.

LouWolfskin.3492:

bluri.2653:

LouWolfskin.3492:

Maybe work on your wording then.

was quite easy to understand

If I have 2k rating and my duo mate has 1500 rating it will take my 2k rating as our rating, not the 1.5k

And that’s not how it should be? From what i understand my reaction as “Well, yeah, this is how rating a Duo Queue should work as it is a form of handicap on the lower rated player” apparently wasn’t the intended reaction.

I think what you missed is that Master Ketsu was suggesting that duo queue SHOULD take the highest rating of the pair as the rating for both (which it currently does not) as a method of preventing abusing the matchmaker through smurf accounts as Faux Play raises as a reason for not using your teams average MMR to determine MMR gains and losses.

Essentially, your interpretation was the complete opposite of what was intended.

Personally, I agree. The current system creates a lot of problems, not least of which being that it tends to have harsh penalties for hard games to win (when you’re expected to carry) and high rewards for easy wins (when you’re being carried). Setting it so that the system causes everyone on a team to lose or gain the same amount, based on the comparison of the average MMRs of both teams, however, creates one problem: that people could game the system by having one good player using a smurf account to boost another player’s rating.

That problem can be solved by having both members of the duoqueue being treated as being at the higher rating of the pair for the purpose of matchmaking.