If you are using MMR to pair teams, why are 1,4,2,3 even being teamed with 8,9,10’s? That’s why this system continues to frustrate people.
Because it’s a 10 player game. Those 10 players could have the exact same rating in the best case scenario.
Raw Skill Rating will never be given as a reward. If we had an accurate measure of match contribution based on stats, then it could get worked into the Glicko algorithm which would in turn maybe end up giving you more rating.
The leaderboard runs on different servers from the old one, so the web API isn’t hooked up yet. It’s being worked on, though!
I like the idea of giving a bonus pip or 2 to the losing team if scores are super close. Just have to be careful about organized farming.
My latest game:
Me (gold ) – dh (bronze) – dh ( bronze) – engi ( bronze ) – ranger (bronze)
hammer dh, owl rangers with lb…ofc blowout match.
For real screw this game ..it’s total garbage, awful balance and horrendous programming
Would be curious to look it up, but your display name has no PvP data associated with it.
Oh man, so for those who don’t know, this “pure MMR” system (as in, you just have a number that represents your rating) is really similar to the one that games like Dota 2 and CS:GO use to determine their matchmaking. In Dota, the number is visible, while in CS it is obscured by tiers, GW2 has a little of both.
In any case, there are a few things that people need to understand about matchmaking of this type.
1) The only real way to “Progress” in rating in this system, is to actually get better at the game. The pips system allowed you to basically get lucky over time and end up progressing just be getting a winstreak that gained a few pips, and hitting a tier that prevented backwards progress. In this system, if you are at the correct rating, then you should not be winning more than 50% of your games, not because the system forces you to, but because you are playing against roughly similarly skilled player and with players of similar skill (sort of, more on that later). If you aren’t actually getting better as a player, why would this system want to increase your rating?
2) Your rating is not a pure measure of your skill MMR in a team based game is, and always will be a measure of your ability to win matches. Just as an example, there is a well known example of a guy in the dota community who is ranked fairly high (5k MMR), despite the fact that many people who know and have played with him say that he has the mechanical skill of a ~3k player. The reason he is rated so highly is because he is very vocal, communicates a lot, stays incredibly positive, and moves around the map very well. Winning a game in GW2 comes down to a lot of fairly complex things, none of which can be easily measured by any “top stats” the only stat that measure how good you are at winning is how often you actually win.
3) You are the only constant factor in all of your matches. I see a lot of people saying “but I get bad teammates all the time, and I can’t carry them all”. Guess what, if that’s the case, you get bad opponents all the time too. Suppose for a moment we pretend that you are the only good player in the game, and every other player is just terrible, every single time you queue up, you get 4 terrible players on your team, and 5 terrible players on the other team, which team should win? The fact is that if you play well, and at or near your rating, there is a 25% percent greater chance for the enemy team to have awful players.
Now, all of this is true, but since the matchmaking pool is fairly small in GW2, we can have anomalies like the guy who said he ended up on a team with 4 bronze players as a gold rank player. This is only a problem if the enemy team didn’t have a similar composition (like 3 bronze players and two silver players) but regardless, matches like that shouldn’t happen.
In general though, i really like the new rating system, it’s a lot more straightforward as a system for rating players and matching them against each other. And as someone said earlier in this thread:
I think people here genuinely aren’t used to having their skill level represented as something tangible and when they find it doesn’t match their own perception of how skilled they are, they get angry.
Upvote for truth.
You are matchmade with Skill Rating.
Well now that we will have visible ratings, we will start talking to the community about averages, ranges, deltas, everything MMR. Average/starting rating is 1200, and has a bell curve distribution.
Hi Evan, 2 things.
First a Hypothesis. The 50/50 hate may be generated by the perception that the following can happen.
1) I am winning several matches in a row.
2) There is a small population of players queueing.
3) My reward for doing well is to be placed with worse and worse players to average out for my relatively high MMR. So with 10 players in queue my reward might be Me (MMR1) and MMR7 – MMR10 vs. MMR2 -MMR6. (where MMR1 is the highest of the 10 in the match)Essentially the perception that rather than teaming me up with better allies and against better quality opponents (which less people would object to as its more thrilling matches) , my reward for doing well could end up being matches where I’m teamed with crappier and crappier teammates to account for my doing well. Essentially seeing how far I can carry worse and worse people until I break. (Un-fun).
Is the above possible given certain populations of player queues?
No, the system is not out to get you. If you have the highest MMR in the queue, I believe the absolute worst outcome is 1,4,6,8,10 vs 2,3,5,7,9.
NEXT:
You are starting new players at 1200, an expected average rating? So if I really am 1200, I’ll be more likely to be teamed with new folks, and play against new unknown folks? (assuming a healthy dose of new folks keep coming in through out the season). Does this not seem somewhat problematic to you?
Now lets say you get teamed with 4 random blokes and the other 5 rando new blokes at 1200 are better, so you sink in MMR and will play with folks whom also happened to randomly lose. Would that not be frustrating if the bulk of people you keep getting teamed with are totally random unknown players and you keep getting 1 or 2 who sink things for you? Lets say you manage to climb back to 1200…. do you not then get the rando lottery of being likely to be paired with a bunch of untried folks again?
The matchmaker uses number of games played to avoid this. Moving the starting rating will just change which players get affected. Its best to start players where they are likely closest to their true rating.
So you can put up super rude names for all to see? I KNOW WHAT YOU DID ON THE GUILD BOARDS.
1st match isn’t counting for people.
Losses still being recorded when its 4v5 and affecting placement/skill.
Placement ladder says you still have 1 match left after you get your placement (even with that 1st match you played that didn’t count.)Would have went 11-0 for placement if people didn’t D/C and would have more than likely placed top 100 rather than top 250. Literally due to people just d/cing and the match getting thrown.
IMO this system needs to be fixed, and reset for the current season without these garbage bugs that completely affect what would otherwise be a legitimate outcome.
Losing with a disconnected player does not affect your rating, but it does consume a game played. You essentially got to see your placement rating 1 game ‘early’.
Only the leaderboard is missing the games and will be fixed retroactively.None of these would change the outcome of your placement.
If the match making algorithm is attempting to place a pool of similarly ranked players together before breaking them into teams, why are we not splitting double duo queues onto opposite teams. We are getting 2 duo queues vs 5 solo queues.
Because the duo queue has a rating boost and the matchmaker made the teams as evenly-skilled as possible. We balance this boost around premade winrates. We could split them up regardless of rating, but it would mostly affect perception and the case where duos are probably high skilled players without accurate ratings yet at the beginning of the season.
1st match isn’t counting for people.
Losses still being recorded when its 4v5 and affecting placement/skill.
Placement ladder says you still have 1 match left after you get your placement (even with that 1st match you played that didn’t count.)Would have went 11-0 for placement if people didn’t D/C and would have more than likely placed top 100 rather than top 250. Literally due to people just d/cing and the match getting thrown.
IMO this system needs to be fixed, and reset for the current season without these garbage bugs that completely affect what would otherwise be a legitimate outcome.
Losing with a disconnected player does not affect your rating, but it does consume a game played. You essentially got to see your placement rating 1 game ‘early’.
Only the leaderboard is missing the games and will be fixed retroactively.
None of these would change the outcome of your placement.
We are tracking these bugs.
Intended as of this moment. We will continue to evaluate the complexity/design trade-offs for how placement matches behave compared to non-placement matches.
Bug or just bad matchmaking?
Neither. This is how MMR works. The more accurate it gets, the less it moves.
Just had to log out of this. The first 10 games were fun and I went 7/3. Then once the rating hit it was defeat, defeat, win, defeat, defeat. Just like previous seasons, there’s this “screw you wall” where the game just starts putting you into impossible matches. Absolutely no fun to have such poor quality match’s either.
Should have tanked the first 10 games and probably would have had a much more fun season. Now I’m locked into this for months.
The longer the season runs, the better matches will gets. It hasn’t even been 12 hours yet. There are a lot of people that will be going through placement matches for a while, and they don’t have a fully accurate rating yet. This ‘wall’ could just be players getting home from work and school and playing PvP for the first time today.
I will wait a couple days before raging. I’ll be spending that time fixing bugs anyways.
Can’t you just say they would be features?
I’m actually getting nervous about the lack of bugs.
You want some bugs? Here you go: if you team up and your teammate queues while you are in combat, you can’t accept the queue (was the same before patch) HOWEVER once you get out of combat you STILL can’t accept the queue and have to cancel it and queue yourself.
Laaaame.
I found a bug for you Evan, system shows me with 1649 rating with platinum badge, but says the minimum bound is 1650 rating. If I had to guess I’d say there’s some rounding involved with one number but not the other, but idk.
I THOUGHT I FIXED THAT
awef;aw3f8q[2w34fgaiosdrf g
Apparently this didn’t get addressed. I thought it had, but we must have only planned on it. I will be addressing this before the end of the season. Either season ratings will get cleared on transfer (not ideal), or I will split NA/EU season stats.
Only the leaderboard is missing byes and forfeits. League UI and placement games are correct. The fix will be retroactive once you play a game after the fix goes out.
I guess my only question about the placement matches is this: Is our placement rating based on game stats or W/L?
If by game stats you meant he damage, healing, defense, etc, then no, those don’t factor into rating adjustments.
If those stats don’t factor, then how come the guy (jaberse.8726) that I duo’ed all ten placement matches with ended up with a different rating?
Because you had different ranked ratings that got moved towards the average to start the season with.
I believe its forfeits/byes missing.
I will wait a couple days before raging. I’ll be spending that time fixing bugs anyways.
Can’t you just say they would be features?
I’m actually getting nervous about the lack of bugs.
Glad you’re enjoying it!
Forfeits (teammate disconnected for 2 minutes and got dishonor) do not count against your rating, but do count as a game played, which I may change for placement.
I guess my only question about the placement matches is this: Is our placement rating based on game stats or W/L?
If by game stats you meant he damage, healing, defense, etc, then no, those don’t factor into rating adjustments.
Fifteen Yeseroos
Hmm, I suppose it would still count up games played, but ratings are not adjust on forfeits. I suppose they shouldn’t count as a placement game either.
We are discussing this internally.
Everyone got a rating reset, at least wait until you place.
What’s your sample set? 1 game?
Hey Evan, thanks for the replies. I’m still curious about if a legendary player could duo queue with a player in their placements. How would the system calculate this?
Everyone still has a rating during placement, we just don’t show it so people don’t freak out when it jumps all over the place.
Low rated party member would start climbing quickly in rating, or high rated party member would start dropping quickly.
Enemies would update normally against the other team’s average.
But if you’re averaging doesn’t this bring back the “shopping for ambers” problem?
You can only do it with one person because of duo queue, so you can’t get an entire premade outclassing another team. Also pips didn’t have backwards progression like ratings do, which auto-corrects the problem.
Couldn’t that still be gamed by simply getting a new “amber” every so often, thus eliminating the issue of the amber’s rating rapidly increasing, thus leaving the higher player’s decreasing mmr as the only pushback? It may not work long term but it could still provide a temporary manner to game the system.
Sure, you could ruin your high rating if you want and get less pips.
Low rated party member would start climbing quickly in rating, or high rated party member would start dropping quickly.
Enemies would update normally against the other team’s average.
But if you’re averaging doesn’t this bring back the “shopping for ambers” problem?
You can only do it with one person because of duo queue, so you can’t get an entire premade outclassing another team. Also pips didn’t have backwards progression like ratings do, which auto-corrects the problem.
Low rated party member would start climbing quickly in rating, or high rated party member would start dropping quickly.
Enemies would update normally against the other team’s average.
Ray gotchu. /15
What the hell? This patch comes with bugs?
I’m guessing at least 2.
Roaches and bedbugs or Lice and mosquitoes?
I personally prefer lice and mosquitoes. They don’t multiply as fast.
Roaches and mosquitoes. At least I can see them easier.
Looks like your ratings aren’t that far apart (assuming I looked up the right denshee). Both are a bit above average.
What the hell? This patch comes with bugs?
I’m guessing at least 2.
Here’s to hoping it’s actually OK instead of just ‘OK’.
Nothing is ever OK.
I will wait a couple days before raging. I’ll be spending that time fixing bugs anyways.
We can throw the switch anytime, but will wait until everything looks ‘OK’. So, some hours after the new build is activated.
Just your own and leaderboard.
Ok. I wish we got more, but I understand that it could lead to some toxicity. Could we perhaps get some anonymized or generalized ratings at some point to get an idea of where we stand within the entire community?
While I might know that my rating is 1500, the top player is 2200 and everyone who made the leaderboard is >2000, that doesn’t really mean a lot in a large community. I don’t really know if 1500 is average, above or below, in the 80 percentile, or 40 percentile.
Well now that we will have visible ratings, we will start talking to the community about averages, ranges, deltas, everything MMR. Average/starting rating is 1200, and has a bell curve distribution.
Visible skill rating should help shift focus from win rate to an actual performance metric.
Are we only going to see our own skill rating and the ones on the leaderboard(s)? Or will we know the ratings of other players in our matches?
Just your own and leaderboard.
I honestly do not know why people think 50/50 matchmaking is a bad thing. My best guess is that people just want want something to blame when they lose.
EDIT: I agree 50/50 matchmaking sucked for the pip-based league. My comment is more general, regarding desired match quality and rating accuracy.People don’t like it because statistically most people think they are above average. When they end up with a 50/50 win rate, they are made to feel average. Also, I think a very large part of it is how horribly it meshed with the pip system where it basically worked against you going up in divisions, which just left an extremely sour taste in people’s mouths for the system.
Visible skill rating should help shift focus from win rate to an actual performance metric.
It got to a point where, in non-premade matches, you got to know EVERYONE in your division. I assume, since this isn’t a 1v1 matchmaking system, it’s based on the “team’s average MMR”. Say you know you are evenly matched (again we got to know literally everyone in our division), but the system has us a point off of each other. A close game is had (499-498, clock ran out). The underdog (W) gets a boatload of rating and the L gets slammed? Are close match ups a factor? Is individual player skill a factor?
Close team score is not a factor, but close rating is. If two teams all have the exact same rating, winning or losing will barely effect your rating because everyone’s skill level is probably the exact same. I would really like to factor in team scores, but it’s very tricky because conquest scoring is not very indicative of skill. A totally outclassed team can often get 200 points just because of how 3 point conquest works.
I know there is A LOT of math behind the system, but like CS:GO this is modified. In CS, I can play great, lose, and still go up because of my performance. I can go on a win streak against better players, play poorly, and drop/go nowhere. The system knows me, the team, and my history.
GW2 hasn’t felt like that in the past seasons. Here all it seems like is: Your individual contribution doesn’t matter. You could have won the game 1v5, and you’ll still get the same gain as you would if you were 5 and the same predictable match up next game.
There is no good way of tracking individual player skill in gw2 conquest to help get more accurate ratings. There are way too many variables. This has been a case of not making kittenumptions that actually end up making ratings LESS accurate.
50/50 matchmaking is a bad thing because of the weight it has on the system. It needs to be adjusted because it’s so painfully obvious that this is the biggest factor in matchmaking right now. Instead of matchmaking based on SKILL, it’s matchmaking on what the outcome alone (was it a W or an L). Its way harder to carry solo/duo in this game than other MULTIPLAYER games that use Glicko. Plus, other games that effectively use Glicko put less priority in W or L.
Matchmaking has always been based on skill (your Glicko rating), not your win/loss record. Glicko rating updates obviously requires the outcome of the match (W/L) to adjust your rating. I think my answer above addresses this as well. There seems to be some confusion between two concepts: Using rating to pick 10 players for a match and using the outcome of a match to update an individual player’s rating.
Now, with the removal of pips and opening up the pool of players to choose from? That, on paper, sounds fantastic…but every season something like that has been said and it fell real short because it was pretty much vaguely presented like it was ‘No Man’s Sky’ or something. I think it’s better not to be so vague and have each Season just be a “test” (not a stab at GW2 PvP only…because, for example, there is a company that named itself after as “a severe snowstorm” and haven’t learned from their competitive changes in their other games).
We tried multiple flavors of matchmaking specifically to address the conflict of goals between balanced matches and the pip-based league. None of them worked, which is why we’ve scrapped it. Also, none of the changes we tried with matchmaking expanded the pool, it just changed how teams were formed.
(edited by Evan Lesh.3295)
So how is this blow out mechanic being addressed? It sucks the fun out of the game entirely. They’re totally not balanced or competitive,and it’s my experience that nearly every match is this way. We’re not talking the occasional blowout that will happen, it felt like it was designed to be that way.
Pips were limited the pool of players to match with, so sometimes the only options for matchmaking is a lopsided match. Games will be much more even in Season 5.
So how does the matchmaking work? Are teams formed of overall mmr, so that a team can have high mmr player and very low mmr player and then it produces average and pair it with similar average? Or the teams are formed with only players of similar mmr, so that actual average is quite similar to all players mmr?
You can take a look at the wiki linked above, but quickly: Matchmaking picks the first person in queue, then tries to find the closest acceptable people in skill rating. Once 10 players are found, it then balances them between the teams. A team will only have a large MMR spread if someone has been sitting in queue a long time.
I honestly do not know why people think 50/50 matchmaking is a bad thing. My best guess is that people just want want something to blame when they lose.
Are you serious?
How about maybe because you(Anet) created a grind based pip ladder system where a 50/50 mmr system is totally counter productive to how you are supposed to achieve progression.
I agree 50/50 matchmaking was bad for the pip system. That is why we tried 3 different styles of matchmaking for seasons 1, 2, and 3, and now revamped the system entirely. 50/50 will once again be best.
What I am saying is:
- Is this system just another long grind to the top?
- Will it be a fair, “good players will be ranked high as they should, despite their solo W/L ratio”?
- Will the godly PvP players be 100% subject to the luck of the “unknown forced 50%” matchmaking algorithm?
- Is top 250 simply based on W/L luck streaks?
I don’t mean to pick on you specifically as the “dreaded 50% matchmaking” conspiracy has a lot of the community in its grips. Ratings obviously can’t be known unless matches are played to generate data. Do you want to play random matches and have a chaotic experience with an inaccurate rating? Or have balanced, competitive matches with an accurate rating?
Sure, we could have zero matchmaking, but two things will happen: First, your teammates will have random ratings and your opponents will have random ratings. Did you lose because you are less skilled than your opponents, or because your teammates are less skilled than your opponents? There is no easy way to tell without a lot of complicated math. “Make a system to figure it out, then!” you say. Well, Glicko does this for us already. Matchmaking assumes its data is correct by pairing opponents that appear to be evenly matched, then Glicko does its job to adjust ratings in case the outcome wasn’t what was expected. Second, random matches make your rating update verrry slowly. Every match won against a much less skilled opponent won’t make you go up because of course you were suppose to beat them, your rating must already be accurate. Every match lost against much higher rated opponents won’t make you go down because of course you were suppose to lose, your rating must already be accurate.
I honestly do not know why people think 50/50 matchmaking is a bad thing. My best guess is that people just want want something to blame when they lose.
EDIT: I agree 50/50 matchmaking sucked for the pip-based league. My comment is more general, regarding desired match quality and rating accuracy.
(edited by Evan Lesh.3295)
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.