GW2 ranked PvP in my opinion is the most painful competitive online game i ever played. there is no information that shows you are a good player?, why i’m losing?, there is no self-knowledge because you have no information whether you do good or not. no visible MMR.
with all that said, ranked PvP in GW2 generates Dunning-Kruger effect. basically it means thinking that themselves is good player but in reality they are noob. and this is frustrate many ranked pvp player but in the same time people like me won’t stop playing ranked PvP because there is no way i know that i’m a bad player. i just think i’m having a bad luck. my winlose ratio is 55% last week. but now it drops to 53% and there is no way i know what have just happened. also no answer in forum. is the Matchmaking algorithm change? because if yes than let me tell you that it becomes worse.
additional note: Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias. it is the inability of the unskilled to evaluate their own ability level accurately
Yeah I find it incredibly frustrating that there isn’t any visible MMR when games like Pokemon have it for god’s sake. I guess leagues will solve that problem to an extent though.
Necromancer Main
Taking a break from GW2 to play various
Nintendo games..
i already read their post on League. as far as i know its all about winning or in some case getting a threshold point if fighting a higher bracket. it solves the problem where you are facing a higher bracket teams. it means if you lose it does not matter. it happens because they coordinate better.
but it does not solve the problem where if you need to win the game to get pips. if we always lose. we still don’t know what happened in our team.
It’s because it’s hard to judge individual skill in GW2 Conquest PvP. The only way to determine if you’re performing better than anyone else is if you have a good end score average via team points and it’s only noticeable by playing a lot of games. Hopefully the point system is working as intended and it’s a more detailed system than the algorithm that’s on the wiki.
aka FalseLights Rank: Top 250 since Season 2 #5 best gerdien in wurld
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
GW2 ranked PvP in my opinion is the most painful competitive online game i ever played. there is no information that shows you are a good player?, why i’m losing?, there is no self-knowledge because you have no information whether you do good or not. no visible MMR.
with all that said, ranked PvP in GW2 generates Dunning-Kruger effect. basically it means thinking that themselves is good player but in reality they are noob. and this is frustrate many ranked pvp player but in the same time people like me won’t stop playing ranked PvP because there is no way i know that i’m a bad player. i just think i’m having a bad luck. my winlose ratio is 55% last week. but now it drops to 53% and there is no way i know what have just happened. also no answer in forum. is the Matchmaking algorithm change? because if yes than let me tell you that it becomes worse.
additional note: Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias. it is the inability of the unskilled to evaluate their own ability level accurately
I always wondered if there was some sort of term used to describe the really really terrible performers on game shows like American Idol. haha
Mine is usually the opposite… I constantly wonder if I could have done better… If I had not accidentally stepped off point for a sec and let it decap would we have won? I just got man-handled by [insert bursty class here], am I a bad player?
Is that the same term? (Somewhat off topic, I know.)
It’s because it’s hard to judge individual skill in GW2 Conquest PvP. The only way to determine if you’re performing better than anyone else is if you have a good end score average via team points and it’s only noticeable by playing a lot of games.
Hopefully the point system is working as intended and it’s a more detailed system than the algorithm that’s on the wiki.
This is not correct yesterday we won a match 500 to 200ish somthing, where our best player had 90p all other members of our team had 45p,
while their best player had 170 and worst 90p
When some start accusing you for noobnes due to point u made its the sign the he is acctualy the biggest noob there.
Avereage of the team is also missleading due to aoe and point holding.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
It’s because it’s hard to judge individual skill in GW2 Conquest PvP. The only way to determine if you’re performing better than anyone else is if you have a good end score average via team points and it’s only noticeable by playing a lot of games.
Hopefully the point system is working as intended and it’s a more detailed system than the algorithm that’s on the wiki.
This is not correct yesterday we won a match 500 to 200ish somthing, where our best player had 90p all other members of our team had 45p,
while their best player had 170 and worst 90p
When some start accusing you for noobnes due to point u made its the sign the he is acctualy the biggest noob there.
Avereage of the team is also missleading due to aoe and point holding.
That’s not the points i’m talking about. Individual player score basically means zilch.
I’m talking about the score at the very top. Either you finish with a win of 500 points, or it’s less. The leaderboard-point-giving Gods will determine your rank based on matchmakimg. You just have to play many games to determine true mmr.
So, determining individual skill level is hard to do because of the intricate details in Conquest PvP. They all can’t be taken into account. It’s based on X amount of games played.
I’m curious about the new PvP Leagues. I hope it isn’t based on another grind fiasco system. It needs to accommodate for casuals who can only get a couple games in a day as oppose to teens who play 24/7.
aka FalseLights Rank: Top 250 since Season 2 #5 best gerdien in wurld
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
dota 2 is not complex. because there is gold/second which greatly correlate with winning.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
dota 2 is not complex. because there is gold/second which greatly correlate with winning.
Yes gold/second may correlate greatly with winning in dota2 but why would that make dota2 not complex?
I get the feeling that with complex we mean something different… though i think i understand what you mean.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
dota 2 is not complex. because there is gold/second which greatly correlate with winning.
Yes gold/second may correlate greatly with winning in dota2 but why would that make dota2 not complex?
I get the feeling that with complex we mean something different… though i think i understand what you mean.
what i mean by complex is how to calculate the MMR. yes we have different perspective. by the game design it is complex. but to calculate the MMR is not.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
dota 2 is not complex. because there is gold/second which greatly correlate with winning.
Yes gold/second may correlate greatly with winning in dota2 but why would that make dota2 not complex?
I get the feeling that with complex we mean something different… though i think i understand what you mean.
what i mean by complex is how to calculate the MMR. yes we have different perspective. by the game design it is complex. but to calculate the MMR is not.
As far as I know MMR basically is decided by the matches you play and it doesn’t take in-game statistics to determine anything. You get paired up against other players with a different MMR. If they are slightly higher than yours and you win, then you’ll gain MMR. If they are slightly lower than you and you lose, you’ll lose MMR (very VERY basic explanation).
If it doesn’t work like this in games like CS;GO, LoL, DotA2, etc then I’m confused. If it is the case that those game’s MMR take in-game statistics like Gold, kills or things like that, that’s something new I learnt I guess, but for what I know, MMR is just a matter of playing a lot of games. In every game.
that is also why i don’t understand why Anet do not want to make a PvP mode that can easily determine MMR. Conquest is too complex to have objective MMR.
Well complexity of your game mode shouldnt really matter if you use a good MMR algorithm (and have enough player for a good calibration).
i mean what is the parameter we should use for MMR? in Moba like dota2 it is very straight forward. such as gold/exp per minute and warding/deward. because it correlate to cotribution to win. see that is what i called objective MMR calibration. GW2 conquest has none of that. point do not really correlate to contribution.
Fair enough but i would rate dota2 more complex then gw2 conquest…
Though i think making a decent enough MMR system should be possible without additional parameters that you only have in certain game modes.
That said i agree seeing the MMR like it is in dota2 to would help alot.
dota 2 is not complex. because there is gold/second which greatly correlate with winning.
Yes gold/second may correlate greatly with winning in dota2 but why would that make dota2 not complex?
I get the feeling that with complex we mean something different… though i think i understand what you mean.
what i mean by complex is how to calculate the MMR. yes we have different perspective. by the game design it is complex. but to calculate the MMR is not.
As far as I know MMR basically is decided by the matches you play and it doesn’t take in-game statistics to determine anything. You get paired up against other players with a different MMR. If they are slightly higher than yours and you win, then you’ll gain MMR. If they are slightly lower than you and you lose, you’ll lose MMR (very VERY basic explanation).
If it doesn’t work like this in games like CS;GO, LoL, DotA2, etc then I’m confused. If it is the case that those game’s MMR take in-game statistics like Gold, kills or things like that, that’s something new I learnt I guess, but for what I know, MMR is just a matter of playing a lot of games. In every game.
in DotA2 before you got your MMR you have to go to calibration mechanism first. 10 ranked match first then the MMR is visible. in this calibration procedure. it does not count win/lose. you can win 1 and lose 9 and still have a good gold/minute and exp/minute or ward/deward if you are support then you still got high MMR.
One of our case studies in business grad school covered how destructive the Dunning Kruger effect is in the workplace. It’s quite similar to delusions of grandeur.
If you win a 1v2 and people still lose a 4v3 then “Dunning-Kruger” is fair game. Your team is legit bad and you have all the right to complain and be angry because that is an uncarry-able game. Sure it happens, and yeah its better to not rage. But there is no point in continuing a game like that so a surrender button would really help. I know each match only takes around 15 minutes it’s not hard to tell how bad your team is a few minutes in. You people don’t have a clue on how often people lose 4v3s and fail rotate so bad.
It is just that simple. This is why solo que can be such a pathetic joke that should NEVER be taken seriously on ANY game even with the League system getting implemented and “Dunning Kruger” CAN be fair-game if a good player is getting carried downwards by low IQ players.
TL;DR Now I’m not saying Solo Que should not happen, I’m just saying it is just hard to take RNG bs like solo que seriously over TEAM QUES and that Dunning Kruger is fair game if it’s so true anyways.
twitch.tv/blacktruth009
Schwahrheit, #1 Fuhrer NA, Just your everyday typical rager
