Guild Wars 2

I posted a pic in S5 that was more outrageous and i posted 5 matches similar at the end of S5.

In the 1 match i was the highest rated at around 1680 at the time on my team with my team mates around 1600-1650.

The other team had 2 players in plat 3, 2 players in plat1 and 1 ele on the other team with about the same rating as me. So literally everyone on the other team was better then the team i was on and i lost like 18 rating for it.

To me Anet hasnt fixed this because of a few reasons

1- The +/- ratio they are using,
When elite players face each other and lose -40 points a match it brings them back to a normal rating with people they will destroy yet those people only lose 20 or so a match. Like i had a game where i faced Darek and his duo partner and this was when he was ranked number 1 in season 5. He gained 4 rating while i lost like 22. Had he lost i would of gained like 20 and he would of lost like 50. It doesnt make any sense from a Match Making perspective or a rating perspective. So i believe that Anet sets up so the ESL players have X matches favored for them.

2- Badge ratings
I brought this up before but S1-4 there was 1 more badge rating. Which meant another level of progression. To add to the rating system above they killed a whole badge so they could group up more people together. So if you check out the rating system with the badge, it becomes ohh it isnt so bad look they have 3 golds against 2 plats when really its 2 gold 1 and a gold 2 vs 2 plat 2.

3- Population
I feel the games are forced this way because of the low population and the fact most of the top 50 players in the game have alt accounts which really means the top 250 is really the top 100.

So what many like myself have asked is why doesnt Anet show badge level after match?

Why does Anet show the team rating levels after match?

Why doesnt Anet change the +/- system based on the % on what the losing teams chances are?

For me since we are in S7, Anet either doesnt care or doesnt want to change because of number 3 reason.

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

Matchmaking factors things (as least wiki page claims it does) such as dishonor, games played, profession and the amount of time you haven’t played the game. I suppose that skill rating is only around 70-80% of the equation.
Also there are like less than 1k people in plat playing daily. Not sure if even that. What can you expect from an algorithm designed for much larger playerbases?
Such things can be only expected, as sad as it may be ;/

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

This is wonderful thread. I noticed these same sort of things a long time ago but that was before we had a relevant rating system to compare/contrast different matches. Everyone told me to “l2p” and ignored what I was pointing out to them. Glad to see others are finally noticing this.

Long story short ~ Over the years I’ve also noticed that some accounts just get better matches much more often than others do. I’ll refrain from writing a text wall of theories but I will say that after 5 years and 10,000 matches of paying attention to this, it isn’t just good luck or a coincidence for these players. No, it’s rigged patterns that break the normal patterns of the algorithm’s match making. I’ve been certain of this for almost three years now. Is it simply meta smurfing tactics or is there something going on that arenanet isn’t telling us about? At this point, I believe it’s a little bit of both.

A few vague examples as to leave out names of actual players:

• Couple guys I know personally, repeatedly get the easiest matches I’ve ever seen. Even if I am not duo with them but land on their team in a ranked que, we get such easy matches that it’s boring. And let me tell you, they are good players! but they aren’t doing anything special to carry matches. They just get stacked with other good players, almost every single time that they que.
• Some other guys that most people know, I notice that whether I am with or against them, their team always wins. They are great players! but I notice the majority of these wins are not from these guys carrying so hard, they are because their team is simply stacked with veteran player base that most people know, almost every time they que.
• New players that arrive fresh out of pve, hoping to grind those wings. I see a lot of these somehow tag easy match after easy match and ride straight into plat with some ridiculously high win rate. This is very odd considering their visible lack of experience and ineptitude in combat. I’ve often wondered if the algorithm has implemented a function to give new guys on the scene easy matches for awhile so they maintain interest. Regardless of if that’s true, whatever is going on here is not only unfair for veteran participants but it’s insulting.
• Other players of various experience levels that I refuse to que with in ranked. I refuse to que ranked with them because I swear to god, I get the worst matches I have ever seen, every time I que with them. I’m not talking situations where you play with someone for the first time, get a 4 game lose streak and then dodge them forever. No, I’m talking people that I’ve played with for years. Some of which are strong players but they almost always, land on the bad side of a team in a ridiculously impossible to win match. I’m not sure if they were infracted too many times and kittened off the wrong person in the anet office or if too many people within the match manipulation community do not like them. Either way, they almost always get scum of the earth complete garbage matches, and I’ve watched it happening to them for years.

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

there aren’t a lot of players at the extreme end of the spectrum to play against. If your rating is putting you near the top 250 players, you are going to be getting matches with and against them once and a while. twice last season I was on a team with the person that had god of pvp title and I was low gold. That is a much bigger issue IMO. I was almost 700 points lower than my teammates. I know the team we played against both times was rated pretty high because I got 18-19 pts for the win. They would have ended up losing a lot of points for that match since I was dragging the team average rating down.

Trevor Boyer.6524:

This is wonderful thread. I noticed these same sort of things a long time ago but that was before we had a relevant rating system to compare/contrast different matches. Everyone told me to “l2p” and ignored what I was pointing out to them. Glad to see others are finally noticing this.

Long story short ~ Over the years I’ve also noticed that some accounts just get better matches much more often than others do. I’ll refrain from writing a text wall of theories but I will say that after 5 years and 10,000 matches of paying attention to this, it isn’t just good luck or a coincidence for these players. No, it’s rigged patterns that break the normal patterns of the algorithm’s match making. I’ve been certain of this for almost three years now. Is it simply meta smurfing tactics or is there something going on that arenanet isn’t telling us about? At this point, I believe it’s a little bit of both.

A few vague examples as to leave out names of actual players:

• Couple guys I know personally, repeatedly get the easiest matches I’ve ever seen. Even if I am not duo with them but land on their team in a ranked que, we get such easy matches that it’s boring. And let me tell you, they are good players! but they aren’t doing anything special to carry matches. They just get stacked with other good players, almost every single time that they que.
• Some other guys that most people know, I notice that whether I am with or against them, their team always wins. They are great players! but I notice the majority of these wins are not from these guys carrying so hard, they are because their team is simply stacked with veteran player base that most people know, almost every time they que.
• New players that arrive fresh out of pve, hoping to grind those wings. I see a lot of these somehow tag easy match after easy match and ride straight into plat with some ridiculously high win rate. This is very odd considering their visible lack of experience and ineptitude in combat. I’ve often wondered if the algorithm has implemented a function to give new guys on the scene easy matches for awhile so they maintain interest. Regardless of if that’s true, whatever is going on here is not only unfair for veteran participants but it’s insulting.
• Other players of various experience levels that I refuse to que with in ranked. I refuse to que ranked with them because I swear to god, I get the worst matches I have ever seen, every time I que with them. I’m not talking situations where you play with someone for the first time, get a 4 game lose streak and then dodge them forever. No, I’m talking people that I’ve played with for years. Some of which are strong players but they almost always, land on the bad side of a team in a ridiculously impossible to win match. I’m not sure if they were infracted too many times and kittened off the wrong person in the anet office or if too many people within the match manipulation community do not like them. Either way, they almost always get scum of the earth complete garbage matches, and I’ve watched it happening to them for years.

For new players in plat, The matchmaking algorithm tends to match similar players together. One of the factors is games played. alts of high level players will also fall in this category. these players are more likely to get carried by strong alts than people that have played a lot of matches. Eventually their rating will settle to where they belong. Another option was someone played them to plat, and now they are just playing the minimum number of matches needed to keep their rating.

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

there aren’t a lot of players at the extreme end of the spectrum to play against. If your rating is putting you near the top 250 players, you are going to be getting matches with and against them once and a while. twice last season I was on a team with the person that had god of pvp title and I was low gold. That is a much bigger issue IMO. I was almost 700 points lower than my teammates. I know the team we played against both times was rated pretty high because I got 18-19 pts for the win. They would have ended up losing a lot of points for that match since I was dragging the team average rating down.

The 1710 guy on team 2 probably lost like 13 or 14 though in a 0% chance to win game like that. Hardly fair.

I don’t think that an effort is being made to be balanced. I think that the system is still promoting lopsided “competitive” matches.

At the moment I’m staying in unranked. Better that and a slow decay than to queue ranked and be fed to teams that I have no reasonable chance of beating.

Maybe the population will decline far enough to sound an alarm at ANET.

You can’t do much, when more people are leaving GW2. The level of toxicity is the biggest problem and the class balance was the biggest set back for many players. WvW and PVE is by far the best to play and PVP will only bring you headaches.

I mean for heaven sake, why are they included beta maps in ranked?
Are you kitten kidding me?

Their PVP start was bad and distant to fail in the future. All they needed to do is follow GW1 footsteps and that’s it.

@ Acandis.3250

Careful when you say “broken”. Based on those ratings and what I recall from ANet Dev posts explaining the algorithm for team selection, the algorithm is working as intended.

What you really mean is that you don’t like the algorithm itself. But what ANet has chosen is the best in a bad situation. Think about it. You have two conflicting ideals:

1. Group players of similar rating on the same team. This way, you don’t have one really bad player dragging the others down. However in low population cases, especially at the top end, this leads to likely blowout matches.
2. Make each team have about the same average rating. In theory this should make the match more fair. But by offsetting a strong player with a weak player, it frustrates the higher rated player who has to make up for dead weight.

ANet’s solution was somewhere in the middle where they’d favor grouping players of similar rating together, but wouldn’t allow the average ratings of each team to get too far apart.

This has been going for a while, i also made similar post, with ratings and all but devs don’t care. They apparently think MM is fine because it produces fast relatively queues, whether matches are balanced or not is not issue for them by the looks of it, especially if you consider that 1710 player lost probably 20 ranks for that match because game still considers it a 1700 avg vs 1700 avg match. It just blows my mine. They are well aware that nearly every match is like this yet they refuse to at least adjust rank gain/losses based on actual rating of players in match instead of just tossing players in a lost match and punishing them with rank loss worth of 2 wins – how to make people stop pvp 101.

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

there aren’t a lot of players at the extreme end of the spectrum to play against. If your rating is putting you near the top 250 players, you are going to be getting matches with and against them once and a while. twice last season I was on a team with the person that had god of pvp title and I was low gold. That is a much bigger issue IMO. I was almost 700 points lower than my teammates. I know the team we played against both times was rated pretty high because I got 18-19 pts for the win. They would have ended up losing a lot of points for that match since I was dragging the team average rating down.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

Its the +/- which is the biggest issue.

Like i said in my big post, we the players should be able to see the team rating (at least) as well as team mate rating. With the % chance of our win since Anet has the system set up like that.

And with that Anet could make a fair +/- . I posted i cant thread because i was getting campers on my team. I do not believe they were gold 3/plat level players which was my rating. I shouldnt be losing 35 rating unless the other team has a similar rating.

I saw the best player in the game get a +4 after beating me and i got something like a -18.

Its not the MM im upset from the OP thread, im upset with how the rating system probably gave those guys a -20 for losing a match they were gonna lose. You can find peoples true ratings with huge spikes like that which force ESL players to only duo que and for other players to dodge que with the current rating system.

newbihack.7180:

You can’t do much, when more people are leaving GW2. The level of toxicity is the biggest problem and the class balance was the biggest set back for many players. WvW and PVE is by far the best to play and PVP will only bring you headaches.

I mean for heaven sake, why are they included beta maps in ranked?
Are you kitten kidding me?

Their PVP start was bad and distant to fail in the future. All they needed to do is follow GW1 footsteps and that’s it.

Um I don’t think toxicity was or is the biggest problem in PvP. Toxicity is in every PvP game’s community. We keep trying to tell you guys guys. Why “we” are leaving the PvP scene in this game. And yall continue to ignore us and keep claiming it’s toxicity.

Since I plays Smite now for my competitive PvP experience. I’ll use that as a example. Smite My match quality there is super high. Win or lose I’ll easy say 90% or more of the matches in that game. Are fun, super competitive, loads of mid match swings, mid match counterplay, and even a few Epic -Out of left field comebacks from zero to a win at the last second.- So in Smite it’s easy to look forward to PvPing over there.

Now lets talk about GW2’s PvP system. Without even talking about balance or what not. ANet’s system clearly feeds certain people wins, and others loses. As more and more players figure this out. They stop playing. I’ve found myself personally on the receiving end a few times. Of facing against teams of 2 high quality duos with maybe if I’m lucky one “ok” duo and the rest of us solo’s. After getting stomped like that quite a bit till it becomes the normal. And then on top of it noticing the types of matches these “top end” players get most of the times. I’m mean even when they are streaming. The MM system will rarely match them against each other. Instead it pairs them together to stomp on a few poor players. That will go on to lose 2 to 4 games worth of matches in a 0.00000001% situation. Then there’s the blatant match manipulation going on as well.

So naturally players either do one of three things. They either just sit there and mostly afk for rewards. They either stop playing ranked matches altogether, and go elsewhere. Or they just follow suit and start contributing to the woes of the PvP community. Either these things only serve to do one thing. That is the make players not even want to care, or try, which is what we have been seeing for a while now.

I can honestly say GW2’s have lost a good majority of it decent to good players, because of the completely unfair and no at all fun or competitive MM. Maybe even all of it’s actual competitive PvPers. Simply because the MM makes GW2’s PvP matches and leader boards a sham. So in turn it forces it’s self fulfilling prophecy of there are not enoth people to make decent matches for. And that’s why MM can not work. Which was a complete lie about 8 to 10 months ago. It had more then enoth people to grant fun and even matches. It just refused to. So people moved on the other competitive games that had MMs that produced even, meaningful, and competitive matches. ANet failed to make a MM system that promotes a evolving PvP community. Just like it’s WvW MMing system for a long time there.

It would also be nice to see how much actual MMR weighs in the match making vs. the current seasonal rating. That may answer some of the questions here.

I had 2 interesting matches this season

First situation was when I was doing my placement in a duo with CJ. We got solo players in our team versus mooobs, zeromis, nos & wakkey… like nos said in the stream “enjoy the free win”

Second situation was this week, I was playing in my alt acc that had only 1480 mmr in a duo with Ring that had in that moment 1620mmr.
We got Cj and Destroyer Free in our side and zeromis and a friend in the other team. We won, my alt acc didnt represent my skill, but why should MM put me versus top 10 players with only 1480 mmr?

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

MM is not fair. It weights games played way to much. As an average veteran pvp player with thousands of matches it becomes worse over time. It is simply no fun to get matched with player who don’t have a similiar experince to say it politely. Sometimes when watching twitch pvp streams I wonder how bad player are for their mmr. Then I see they only have a few games played (not even reached rank 80). Well I guess as a long time gw2 player you cannot expect fair match making.

i agree all the good people definitely quit because the MM was making them lose……..

anyone else see the issue with a statement like this?

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

kdaddy.5431:

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

To be honest here. There really is very little incentive for competitive mindsets in GW2. But I guess that’s what ANet is trying to push out. So the other players don’t have to deal with them. Problem is ANet doesn’t really punish the cheaters. Because they are paying customers. At that point, all attempts and tries at a competitive and meaningful rank PvP system dies. With the business model of the company. Simply put, real competitive PvP is not supported here.

Reaper Alim.4176:

kdaddy.5431:

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

To be honest here. There really is very little incentive for competitive mindsets in GW2. But I guess that’s what ANet is trying to push out. So the other players don’t have to deal with them. Problem is ANet doesn’t really punish the cheaters. Because they are paying customers. At that point, all attempts and tries at a competitive and meaningful rank PvP system dies. With the business model of the company. Simply put, real competitive PvP is not supported here.

While I do agree the system gaming, cheating and manipulation all needs to be punished, harshly, his point does still stand. There’s a very small pool of players with a high mechanical skill and with decent map and rotational awareness that matches for them are either very stale as they fight the same people or worse still opponents on their level are nowhere to be found at that time.

I think if the amount of rating you could gain or lose in a match had a cap it might solve some issues as the majority of complaints aren’t just about the games, it’s about how much rating they lose for being in these blow out matches.

People need to wake up to the fact that (as someone made a whole post about) the matchmaker does the best it can but there’s no way to get that impossibly amazing perfectly balanced game.

Reaper Alim.4176:

newbihack.7180:

You can’t do much, when more people are leaving GW2. The level of toxicity is the biggest problem and the class balance was the biggest set back for many players. WvW and PVE is by far the best to play and PVP will only bring you headaches.

I mean for heaven sake, why are they included beta maps in ranked?
Are you kitten kidding me?

Their PVP start was bad and distant to fail in the future. All they needed to do is follow GW1 footsteps and that’s it.

Um I don’t think toxicity was or is the biggest problem in PvP. Toxicity is in every PvP game’s community. We keep trying to tell you guys guys. Why “we” are leaving the PvP scene in this game. And yall continue to ignore us and keep claiming it’s toxicity.

Since I plays Smite now for my competitive PvP experience. I’ll use that as a example. Smite My match quality there is super high. Win or lose I’ll easy say 90% or more of the matches in that game. Are fun, super competitive, loads of mid match swings, mid match counterplay, and even a few Epic -Out of left field comebacks from zero to a win at the last second.- So in Smite it’s easy to look forward to PvPing over there.

Now lets talk about GW2’s PvP system. Without even talking about balance or what not. ANet’s system clearly feeds certain people wins, and others loses. As more and more players figure this out. They stop playing. I’ve found myself personally on the receiving end a few times. Of facing against teams of 2 high quality duos with maybe if I’m lucky one “ok” duo and the rest of us solo’s. After getting stomped like that quite a bit till it becomes the normal. And then on top of it noticing the types of matches these “top end” players get most of the times. I’m mean even when they are streaming. The MM system will rarely match them against each other. Instead it pairs them together to stomp on a few poor players. That will go on to lose 2 to 4 games worth of matches in a 0.00000001% situation. Then there’s the blatant match manipulation going on as well.

So naturally players either do one of three things. They either just sit there and mostly afk for rewards. They either stop playing ranked matches altogether, and go elsewhere. Or they just follow suit and start contributing to the woes of the PvP community. Either these things only serve to do one thing. That is the make players not even want to care, or try, which is what we have been seeing for a while now.

I can honestly say GW2’s have lost a good majority of it decent to good players, because of the completely unfair and no at all fun or competitive MM. Maybe even all of it’s actual competitive PvPers. Simply because the MM makes GW2’s PvP matches and leader boards a sham. So in turn it forces it’s self fulfilling prophecy of there are not enoth people to make decent matches for. And that’s why MM can not work. Which was a complete lie about 8 to 10 months ago. It had more then enoth people to grant fun and even matches. It just refused to. So people moved on the other competitive games that had MMs that produced even, meaningful, and competitive matches. ANet failed to make a MM system that promotes a evolving PvP community. Just like it’s WvW MMing system for a long time there.

Exactly. Ranked is nothing but a racket. A sham. Leaderboard and rating mean nothing. There’s only exploiters and the exploited. If the system actually worked, you would see beginners at bronze/silver, veterans in gold/plat and pros in legend. But you don’t. Vets and newbies are stuck together in all divisions thanks to placements. When that happens they literally cannot advance. They’re holding each other back. Vets have to carry and newbies can’t pull off wins, they don’t have the skill yet. Exploiters will exploit, of course. Get good placements, place in plat/legend, play one game every 3 days and you’re good to go. A little bribery, throwing, queue dodging, all set!

Basically, play fair and you get punished.

Now I ask, does anyone actually think that anyone competitive, sportsmanlike and fair-minded is going to stick around? I say…no! They’ll flee to auto tournaments, wvw, or another game.

kdaddy.5431:

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

A proper matchmaker would distribute the ESL players and high levels on both sides.

Instead, the MM appears puts them on one side so that they don’t complain. Well guess what? that’s not the least bit fair.

The health of the game is secondary to the priveleges and comfort of a few players. That’s plain wrong.

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

A proper matchmaker would distribute the ESL players and high levels on both sides.

Instead, the MM appears puts them on one side so that they don’t complain. Well guess what? that’s not the least bit fair.

The health of the game is secondary to the priveleges and comfort of a few players. That’s plain wrong.

Lets just the hypothetical.

You have 2 ESL players queing and no one at there level currently queing or in que. So you have 2 players of 1700+ rating. Then how do we put a match together?

Do you you put 1300 level players on there team? Then have them face 1500 level players?

For me matches will never be perfect but the rating system needs to be looked at. I have had matches this season where people had no idea how not to run to a point they didnt own.

On the blue team we own corners and for some odd reason 3 of our players have to run to the circle they dont own instead of playing the roads and defending a cap point. Best one today, we had a 4 vs 4 at our home and we won. Score is about 410- 440. What does 3 of our players do? Well went to mid to defend 1 sat in between home and mid. And 3 ran to far to engage a 3 vs 5.

Now this stuff is happening alot and it is driving me mad all game and threw all my games.

Are these the players we want being teamed up with the ESL players or playing against them? How should the +/- effect each player?

Right now the PvP badge system is a complete sham and to me it has to do with the +/- system from the ratings. It has to do with Duo que.

All im saying is Anet should make a better system. I agree that 4 ESL players on 1 team is unfair for a bunch of casual players to face. But i aslo realize that Anet made a horrible rating system where if they put 2 pairs of ESL players on separate teams 2 of them will then be put into matches against people they are far superior then.

To be honest i just think its bad all around

Reaper Alim.4176:

kdaddy.5431:

Ithilwen.1529:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

kdaddy.5431:

Faux Play.6104:

To me it doesn’t seem that odd. Both teams have a fairly tight grouping of players, and the teams are only ~200 points apart.

You have to be crazy to think this is fair, Edison might be the 2nd best thief in NA and you think 2 guys with a 1510 rating have a fair shot.

Come on bruh

It doesn’t need to be fair. The 1510 rated player probably lost around 7-8 pts that match. that match should be an anomaly for them.

I agree the MM does not need to be fair. Its a low player base and people in silver have posted matches against top 50 players.

It is that very attitude that is driving away players and making matches worse. The MM absolutely needs to be as fair as possible. No one like likes to be treated as cannon fodder.

The only people liking this system are the ones benefitting from easy matches. Still it means that there is no “prestige” whatever in a title unfairly won.

Who are the ESL level players suppose to play?

There are about 50 or so at that level in EU and NA and some simply work better with others in teams. So when we had 5 vs 5 and and OE was teamed up with his 3 man group and the the Full ESL teams are playing who ya think was gonna win?

Same goes now, in OP statement there were 4 ESL players on 1 side and some decent players on the other. Everyone needs to get there shot at the champ.

To me it wouldnt be such a huge problem if ESL players didnt lose 40-50 when playing each other and get +4 when they win.

The system itself rewards players for duo queing, dodge queing and punishes you if you want to challenge yourself. Where is the incentive for the best 100 or so players to come in the game every day and play each other?

To be honest here. There really is very little incentive for competitive mindsets in GW2. But I guess that’s what ANet is trying to push out. So the other players don’t have to deal with them. Problem is ANet doesn’t really punish the cheaters. Because they are paying customers. At that point, all attempts and tries at a competitive and meaningful rank PvP system dies. With the business model of the company. Simply put, real competitive PvP is not supported here.

Yeah im not sure what the plan is.

Like the AT would be a nice idea if people had a reason to group up.

Like i have been solo queing and im running into people who have no clue what to do. I cant make friends with these people and join a AT. I would have to shave my eye brows. ( got no more hair on my head)

The only people playing AT are people who already had a group of 5. PvP is lacking direction from end game to group up events.

So i completely agree

I think Anet is trying to revive ESports. Having the system prefer higher ranked players to win means you’ll have a group of players who can then claim to be the best of the best. Then you put those best of the best players against each other, and you get top ESports stream viewers.

The sad part is, the OP is completely correct with this statement.
Me and my significant other often duo que together because he usually covers a more offensive role, and I slot in for a defensive role (because some reason no one likes to support).
We were both in t2 gold at the time. (Originally we were in t3, but bad games is bad games).
I had mentioned this thread previously to him, so he decided to add all of our teammates and then add all of the people on the other side.
So, the match starts and we win the first teammfight. After, that we completely get thrashed into the floor.
Afterwards, my partner goes to look at the other team..

Guardian- 1504
Thief- 1560
Engie- 1545

The rest of their team consisted of a tier 2 and a t3 gold.
Our team had the average between 1300-1400 overall.

Why the -hell- do we have platinums in our game, at t2 gold? I understand can fully admit when I am beat by players that have been here longer than me (I’ve only been here for a year and a half now, going on two soon), but really? T1 plats against T1-2 golds? If there is one thing I cannot tolerate is being openly farmed because a company refuses to acknowledge a problem.

I can take my losses, swing with the stride and move on, but just knowing all of my practice with other guildies who legit took their time to team me and improve as a better bunker, went out the door and do not matter because I apparently am going to get paired up with t1-t2 plats who clearly have reached a skill cap I have not yet? What the heck is the point. I want matches my own tier, not getting farmed by others who been in this game since beta.

Truly disheartening, and honestly I do not even go on the forums that much to complain. I enjoy PVP, but that is just sad. Thank OP, for making people aware of this. Thought I’d put my experiences there.

First issue I’ve seen that I could’ve sworn I thought ANet had the intention to fix is 2 duo queues on the same team. That in itself is a frustrating match for randoms.

But ignoring that, the glicko system is annoying in its own right, because it determines a lot based on standard deviation, which is a hidden value for players, and deviation decreases with the amount of games played.

From my very limited understanding, your rating is a “guess” of the skill value plus or minus double the deviation value. So like, 1500 rating with 50 sd is an assumed rating of 1400 to 1600 with 95% confidence.

So what’s happening is that ANet using the upper bound of those players skill range to match them in these situations in order to match, with the assumption that there wasn’t a more available match closer (which we all know even matchups occurring over time should result in a 50% win/loss ratio and effectively reduce deviation).

Personally, I don’t like glicko. The impression I get from glicko is that it assumes your skill rating with too much strength and then actively works to make sure that quantity of games played quickly confirms that assumption. While I’m aware that you can continue to move up and down once your deviation has been reduced by enough games, it also means that you essentially have to play games like a full time job to see any meaningful movement in your skill rating.

Personally, I’d like to see Microsoft’s Trueskill system be able to be utilized more universally for team based games.

In the end, it’s the algorithm to blame. Though I wish that ANet would more rapidly reduce deviation, even if they have to do that by simply “hiding” the rating until the deviation is stable through more placements until a better solution can be set up.

kdaddy.5431:

Lets just the hypothetical.

You have 2 ESL players queing and no one at there level currently queing or in que. So you have 2 players of 1700+ rating. Then how do we put a match together?

I know some folks may hate this, and ANET would never do it…but personally, I would prefer a UI where you are allowed to setup a threshold. That threshold would be something like +-100 from my current rank. If the game cannot find 10 players to match me in that threshold, I would prefer the game tell me and stop playing.

There would need to be a minimum value to prevent manipulation, but I’d rather play less against good players and have the game tell me that I can’t play right now because nobody is on, than have faith that their system builds a team of randoms correctly.

why are u even bothering?

Its like complaiining about the quality of a mcdonalds restaurant…

Its a cheap fast food restaurant.

Same applies to GW2…its a cheap easy acces super casual game. U ccant expect anything from it.

ButterPeanut.9746:

kdaddy.5431:

Lets just the hypothetical.

You have 2 ESL players queing and no one at there level currently queing or in que. So you have 2 players of 1700+ rating. Then how do we put a match together?

I know some folks may hate this, and ANET would never do it…but personally, I would prefer a UI where you are allowed to setup a threshold. That threshold would be something like +-100 from my current rank. If the game cannot find 10 players to match me in that threshold, I would prefer the game tell me and stop playing.

There would need to be a minimum value to prevent manipulation, but I’d rather play less against good players and have the game tell me that I can’t play right now because nobody is on, than have faith that their system builds a team of randoms correctly.

Ok so heres the thing.

In S1-3 i was placed on certain players teams. For instance i had a duo with OE and his partner and we had Five gauge. We lost but the game was insanely close. This resulted with a pip loss. Nothing to big, later that day OE and his duo partner were on my team again and 2 ESL players were on the other side. We won this game. Once again i only gained a pip.

The problem now for everyone is when im losing a match i should of won im getting -20. If i lose a match i had no chance to win in i lose -15.

When i win im getting +10- +18 and it only gets worse for players higher up and some have even posted in the low golds of winning and getting a +4 and losing a -20.

I dont know what they set the algorithm to. Anet will not show us open ratings in a match or even our team mates badge rating after a match.

Anet could very easily make balanced matches. Setting up high level players with 1650+ rating with a slightly overall team rating against lower skilled players.

The good would be a even scored match, though experienced players would be upset with how bad there team mates played. The bad is it would bring these 1650+ rated players scores down so they looked like average players and then all of a sudden your getting 2-3 ESL players solo queing on 1 side against players in the 1400 ratings.

I was about to hit PLat and i had 3 games in a row where my team mates had no idea what rotations were. Im getting players who only know how to fight near the cap point and dont know how to defend. They have never defended a road as a player was heading to a point.

I dont think the game should make long ques again because players were waiting 1 hour + for a PvP match. But i dont think Anet should be stacking it which is what they are doing.

So the only option we have as players are to not play, complain ( i do alot of that) or grind out rewards then stop when its over. Get the tickets and get out.

I agree. If there are two relatively high ranked players and several medium-to-low; The proper response would be to divide the two high rankers, one on each team.

This would annoy those players. They often feel entitled to have a team that , in there judgement, is of suitable skill level. It would be much fairer though .

Ithilwen.1529:

I agree. If there are two relatively high ranked players and several medium-to-low; The proper response would be to divide the two high rankers, one on each team.

This would annoy those players. They often feel entitled to have a team that , in there judgement, is of suitable skill level. It would be much fairer though .

This however arbitrarily condemns one of them to lose a ton of rating while both have a frustrating game where their team runs around like headless chickens. Now if one of them wasn’t going to lose 20-40 rating g for this loss in this fair match up they might play a few games and leave when too frustrated. However if they lose 30 rating for playing just so Mr Pleberino has a more balanced team (where both teams behave equally clueless to the high rated players) they will usually log off after 1-2 games.

That isn’t the situation anyone wants, we want people to play and stay playing.

Cap losses and gains on rating and some small tweaks to the loss/gain rating system will make it more barrable for many. As I pointed out, many complaints aren’t at the match itself if you read them, it’s at how much they lose because of the match. Great example is kdaddy’s post above, it’s about rating gain and loss as much as it’s about clueless people rotating.

Also it’s more fair or fairer, you never say more fairer.

apharma.3741:

Ithilwen.1529:

I agree. If there are two relatively high ranked players and several medium-to-low; The proper response would be to divide the two high rankers, one on each team.

This would annoy those players. They often feel entitled to have a team that , in there judgement, is of suitable skill level. It would be much fairer though .

This however arbitrarily condemns one of them to lose a ton of rating while both have a frustrating game where their team runs around like headless chickens. Now if one of them wasn’t going to lose 20-40 rating g for this loss in this fair match up they might play a few games and leave when too frustrated. However if they lose 30 rating for playing just so Mr Pleberino has a more balanced team (where both teams behave equally clueless to the high rated players) they will usually log off after 1-2 games.

That isn’t the situation anyone wants, we want people to play and stay playing.

Cap losses and gains on rating and some small tweaks to the loss/gain rating system will make it more barrable for many. As I pointed out, many complaints aren’t at the match itself if you read them, it’s at how much they lose because of the match. Great example is kdaddy’s post above, it’s about rating gain and loss as much as it’s about clueless people rotating.

Also it’s more fair or fairer, you never say more fairer.

I wrote “much fairer.” Please read more carefully.

So now I should be afraid lest the high level players be insulted by having a tough match?

Well, in a recent tournament my team faced a group that was clearly far superior. One was wearing a “God of PvP” title.

One of our team immediately quit seeing the title( and was reported for all the good it will do. ) We were spawn camped, trolled and generally stomped into the ground. I got top offense for my team simply by a decap or two.

That wasn’t the least bit fun. In fact, I felt abused. I was more-or-less fed to a team against which I stood no chance.

It would benefit PvP for those players to step back and stop farming or have a league of there own. The constant farming is driving away anyone silly enough to venture into PvP.

Even a self aware masochist like myself has to think twice before logging in.

People kept spamming for class balance and now we no longer have MMR balance. The disparity is so great that ratings no longer have much meaning because there seems to be some unexpected consequence of the alg that is biasing certain players towards the higher MMR team. I don’t think it has anything to do with chosen ESL players or malicious flags, I think it has something to do with something offhand like account name spelling, creation dates, or even player race.

How players with little experience and skill are floating around in platinum while 10k+ match vets who get 4 tops per game are hanging out in T2 gold because they soloQ is beyond my understanding. It shouldn’t be happening but it do.

Regardless of whatever myserious flags are biasing players, tighter matching along MMR scores both in total and being balanced across the teams should help make the rating system somewhat valid.

Ithilwen.1529:

I agree. If there are two relatively high ranked players and several medium-to-low; The proper response would be to divide the two high rankers, one on each team.

This would annoy those players. They often feel entitled to have a team that , in there judgement, is of suitable skill level. It would be much fairer though .

That logic will drive everyone to the same rating. You should have teammates that are close to your rating in all your matches. Some of your matches should be against better players and some against worse players.

If you are the best player online you will always be playing people worse than you. If you are the worst player online you will always be playing people better than you.

I’m not a top player and i get plenty of loss steaks and frustrating matches. However, i can be objective and see the system does a good job at binning players where they belong. The other thing I noticed when doing the math is you can’t get below a deviation of 60. That means the system is 95% certain your rating is +-120 from your current rating.

Gonna evaluate this for those who seem to be defending the algorithm.

RED team
first duo: 1790 + 1750
second duo: 1700 + 1740
solo: 1680
avg: 1732

BLUE team
duo: 1620 + 1510
solos: 1710 + 1630 + 1510
avg: 1596

So when I read this thread, here is what I see:

• Algorithm takes 3x duo ques and looks at them mathematically. We are told it is supposed to create mathematically balanced matches or so they say.
• Algorithm decides to take the two mathematically strongest duo que teams and stack them together. These are not only the stronger duos but these duos are also comprised of the highest rated players out of the 10 players in the que. That right there alone, doesn’t make any sense mathematically.
• Then it takes the 2nd highest rated solo player, which is only 20 points away from the 1st “virtually the same rating” and stacks it together with the two strongest duos. The red team has been created.
• Now it takes clearly the weaker of the duos, which is ranked significantly lower than the two stronger duos, and puts it on a team with all of the weaker solo players. Blue team is created.

The algorithm, which we are told is designed to create mathematically balanced splits, given the rated numbers in the que, should have done something more like this:
RED
1st Duo – 1790 + 1750
Solo – 1710
Solo – 1630
Solo – 1510
Avg – 1678

BLUE
2nd Duo – 1700 + 1740
3rd Duo – 1620 + 1510
Solo – 1732
Avg – 1660

That makes much more sense in every way, from the perspective of mathematics and balance. The algorithm however, did not do that. That system designed around creating mathematically balanced splits, decided to stack every strongest player on the red team.

I mean, when I look at this, I don’t understand why there are people trying to defend the algorithm here. Whether it was match manipulation, server favoritism or a burp within the algorithm, something is wrong with that match making. It clearly chose to stack the red team instead of make a balanced match.

Just going to offer my preference here: I’d rather the matchmaker put me in a match where the average MMR is even for both teams than be on a stacked team. I was on a stacked team recently and the game was boring, we swept 500-50. I don’t log on for that, I’m 1600 and I’d rather carry some 1500s and rage at them and ping like a madman on the minimap but have a competitive match, than just steamroll or be steamrolled.

Trevor Boyer.6524:

Gonna evaluate this for those who seem to be defending the algorithm.

RED team
first duo: 1790 + 1750
second duo: 1700 + 1740
solo: 1680
avg: 1732

BLUE team
duo: 1620 + 1510
solos: 1710 + 1630 + 1510
avg: 1596

So when I read this thread, here is what I see:

• Algorithm takes 3x duo ques and looks at them mathematically. We are told it is supposed to create mathematically balanced matches or so they say.
• Algorithm decides to take the two mathematically strongest duo que teams and stack them together. These are not only the stronger duos but these duos are also comprised of the highest rated players out of the 10 players in the que. That right there alone, doesn’t make any sense mathematically.
• Then it takes the 2nd highest rated solo player, which is only 20 points away from the 1st “virtually the same rating” and stacks it together with the two strongest duos. The red team has been created.
• Now it takes clearly the weaker of the duos, which is ranked significantly lower than the two stronger duos, and puts it on a team with all of the weaker solo players. Blue team is created.

The algorithm, which we are told is designed to create mathematically balanced splits, given the rated numbers in the que, should have done something more like this:
RED
1st Duo – 1790 + 1750
Solo – 1710
Solo – 1630
Solo – 1510
Avg – 1678

BLUE
2nd Duo – 1700 + 1740
3rd Duo – 1620 + 1510
Solo – 1732
Avg – 1660

That makes much more sense in every way, from the perspective of mathematics and balance. The algorithm however, did not do that. That system designed around creating mathematically balanced splits, decided to stack every strongest player on the red team.

I mean, when I look at this, I don’t understand why there are people trying to defend the algorithm here. Whether it was match manipulation, server favoritism or a burp within the algorithm, something is wrong with that match making. It clearly chose to stack the red team instead of make a balanced match.

As I said in the other thread, those defending the algorithm or at least saying it’s not as out of line as people keep claiming didn’t have this info when they made their comments. I’m guessing you were in that game or did you log in just now and grab each players rating?

It would be nice if people posted a complete breakdown of the match, like you just did, rather than the half truths and misinformation we commonly get. The guys original post missed out most of that information and for that he should be stripped naked and forced to walk the streets home.

Shame.
Shame.
Shame.

Ok maybe not that but this is what ANet talks about when they say good feedback vs bad feedback.

Trevor Boyer.6524:

……..

That makes much more sense in every way, from the perspective of mathematics and balance. The algorithm however, did not do that. That system designed around creating mathematically balanced splits, decided to stack every strongest player on the red team.

I mean, when I look at this, I don’t understand why there are people trying to defend the algorithm here. Whether it was match manipulation, server favoritism or a burp within the algorithm, something is wrong with that match making. It clearly chose to stack the red team instead of make a balanced match.

I’m not defending the alg at all, but like I said earlier, this is probably a consequence of everyone demanding class stacking balance. They spammed the forums endlessly suggesting that mirror matchups are more important than skill balance. Now games are so far out of balance that appropriate rating is either moving way to slow or not at all.

You can practically game the system now by running a 4 man of all different classes and queing at the same time to get paired together.

Such is not the case for the blue team though. If you look at the .jpg, you can see that it is stacked with two DHs. The red team, which are players that I know as well, had no class stacking. So even when looked at from this perspective, the algorithm still chose to give the blue team which was clearly the weaker team, the class stacks as well.

Any way you look at that match making, it looks like the algorithm just stacked the teams so red could have a feeding frenzy.

Locuz.2651:

Its like complaiining about the quality of a mcdonalds restaurant…

McDonald’s in the US is a lot different from McDonald’s in e. g. Germany.

Clearly McDonalds in the US is a feeding frenzy.
Just like NA Ranked Que GW2

SneakyTouchy.6043:

Trevor Boyer.6524:

……..

That makes much more sense in every way, from the perspective of mathematics and balance. The algorithm however, did not do that. That system designed around creating mathematically balanced splits, decided to stack every strongest player on the red team.

I mean, when I look at this, I don’t understand why there are people trying to defend the algorithm here. Whether it was match manipulation, server favoritism or a burp within the algorithm, something is wrong with that match making. It clearly chose to stack the red team instead of make a balanced match.

I’m not defending the alg at all, but like I said earlier, this is probably a consequence of everyone demanding class stacking balance. They spammed the forums endlessly suggesting that mirror matchups are more important than skill balance. Now games are so far out of balance that appropriate rating is either moving way to slow or not at all.

You can practically game the system now by running a 4 man of all different classes and queing at the same time to get paired together.

This is something i also think might be true. It looks like they implemented a class balance priority. During prime time i get a large number of mirror matches and if not quite close to that. Stacking on one side is not very often anymore. If there are 3 guards it will be divide 2:1 if 4 its 2:2. It either weights class balance high or even priorizes it over MMR.
If true it will actually lead to more imbalanced matches. 200 rating weights much more then stacking … If it´s that way it´s a total fail with good intention or giving in to forum whining …

I don’t think ANet care much about PVP anymore, it’s not an Esport so it’s not going to make them money. They wasted so much time and effort on something the community told them would fail. The leagues are not competitive at all, not really, it’s just an excuse to get some new stuff and to drag people who don’t play PvP the rest of the year, to play PvP.

Match making will never be perfect, the population is just too small, and with new accounts given average MMR, it’s never going to balance out. We all end up with “those players” who are just bad, I was in a match where an ele died in under 3 seconds to a warrior, and this was in plat T2. So i’d not get hung up on it. Play get the loot, and ignore your rank, go in to the match that everyone on your team will not have a clue and your gonna lose, you’ll enjoy it way more that way.

SneakyTouchy.6043:

You can practically game the system now by running a 4 man of all different classes and queing at the same time to get paired together.

most likely you are right, i think anet is giving priority to class balance over mmr, but can you explain this?

Trevor Boyer.6524:

Gonna evaluate this for those who seem to be defending the algorithm.

RED team
first duo: 1790 + 1750
second duo: 1700 + 1740
solo: 1680
avg: 1732

BLUE team
duo: 1620 + 1510
solos: 1710 + 1630 + 1510
avg: 1596

So when I read this thread, here is what I see:

• Algorithm takes 3x duo ques and looks at them mathematically. We are told it is supposed to create mathematically balanced matches or so they say.
• Algorithm decides to take the two mathematically strongest duo que teams and stack them together. These are not only the stronger duos but these duos are also comprised of the highest rated players out of the 10 players in the que. That right there alone, doesn’t make any sense mathematically.
• Then it takes the 2nd highest rated solo player, which is only 20 points away from the 1st “virtually the same rating” and stacks it together with the two strongest duos. The red team has been created.
• Now it takes clearly the weaker of the duos, which is ranked significantly lower than the two stronger duos, and puts it on a team with all of the weaker solo players. Blue team is created.

The algorithm, which we are told is designed to create mathematically balanced splits, given the rated numbers in the que, should have done something more like this:
RED
1st Duo – 1790 + 1750
Solo – 1710
Solo – 1630
Solo – 1510
Avg – 1678

BLUE
2nd Duo – 1700 + 1740
3rd Duo – 1620 + 1510
Solo – 1732
Avg – 1660

That makes much more sense in every way, from the perspective of mathematics and balance. The algorithm however, did not do that. That system designed around creating mathematically balanced splits, decided to stack every strongest player on the red team.

I mean, when I look at this, I don’t understand why there are people trying to defend the algorithm here. Whether it was match manipulation, server favoritism or a burp within the algorithm, something is wrong with that match making. It clearly chose to stack the red team instead of make a balanced match.

Using N/A ratings, the original match was an average rank of 25 playing an average rank of 220. There were two people outside the top 250 in the match and they weren’t far out. Everyone on the blue team had a lower rating than the average for the red team so they won’t get punished very hard for the loss.

If all matches were normalized like you are requesting, and that is played out over several matches, everyone would end up with the same rating. The high rated players on the losing team would get a severe punishment for losing, and the low rated players on the winning team would get a significant boost. People need to accept the fact that some matches the will be underdogs and some they will be favorites.

Faux Play.6104:

If all matches were normalized like you are requesting, and that is played out over several matches, everyone would end up with the same rating. The high rated players on the losing team would get a severe punishment for losing, and the low rated players on the winning team would get a significant boost. People need to accept the fact that some matches the will be underdogs and some they will be favorites.

You lose more and win less for being on the favored team, so your logic doesn’t play out very far. Normalizing matches and tightening the spread would make every player entering a match have similar MMR, not every player in the game. They would simply be more accurately rated.

They don’t tell the Patriots Tom has to play for the other team