Why Handicapping (MMR) is Wrong for Competitive Play

Competitive Discussion
Prev 1 16 17 18 50 Next
01/21/2018 09:38 AMPosted by FriendlyFire
Posted by FriendlyFire
overwhelming hard evidence he is wrong.

What evidence?


https://www.twitch.tv/directory/game/Overwatch

Even if you don't believe the dev's when they say how the match maker works and it's not rigged, you have effectively unlimited amounts of video of people playing competitive. Shockingly, despite "every match being handicapped" as you say, there is no video evidence of it happening!

Handicapping favors inexperienced players and DPS players.


And you know, twitch/youtube has many experienced players as well as tank/support mains. The point stands, there's never been a player who's recorded anything like their games being "handicapped" for playing too well.


exceptions are what makes a system plausible, since they are so few compared to the overall player base. Do you think humans differ so much from each other? Do you think that people dont spend many hours in the game and practice as much, as lets say a master or a gm? You are delusional then and you should really take a trip in my rank and check reality.
You guys keep asking for gameplay, again how does 1 persons gameplay decide the outcome you can have a terrible game but still win, or you can play amazing but still lose. Its a team based game so what if you get gameplay and its !@#$ how do you know that player isnt affected by the team around him?

I had a terrible game as Rein couldnt land a hit really bad but we won. I had the best game of my life as DVA I had the enemy team tilted as %^-* didnt get knocked out of my mech once got 3 4 player kill ults in the same game and we still lost because my team couldnt do anything.
01/21/2018 09:48 AMPosted by FleXy


exceptions are what makes a system plausible, since they are so few compared to the overall player base. Do you think humans differ so much from each other? Do you think that people dont spend many hours in the game and practice as much, as lets say a master or a gm? You are delusional then and you should really take a trip in my rank and check reality.

I don't think you understand the difference in skill between humans. It can take me 5 minutes to learn how to do something where it could take you 1 hour, and then the next person 2 hours, and so on. Just because 2 players are in gold, doesn't mean their skill is identical, there are too many variables.

To your argument of practice, just because you practice as much as a GM player doesn't mean you can get to that level of play, why? Well, because you don't have the raw talent for it. What would need to happen is, that you play an infinite amount of time while that person stagnates. For example that person only plays 1 hour and you play 12 hours a day for the next 5 years. I know that seems like an extreme example, but it's honestly how it works in the real world.
Just because 2 players are in gold, doesn't mean their skill is identical, there are too many variables.


Of course in Gold 1% of the player population is covered by just 16SR, whereas in GM 1% of players are covered by 1000SR...

But Zeff listed many great examples of players at roughly the same SR who are miles apart in terms of skill (Be that mechnical, teamwork, etc).

So, in my mind, the match making system isn't working in terms of placing players where they belong.

New accounts placing players in plat, when they should possibly be silver or gold, doesn't help matters. The game has 25 levels of quickplay + 10 games to place players and it sometimes gets it so wrong...

TLDR: With team mate quality varying so greatly at a given SR there's no wonder that people suspect some grand conspiracy in match making. Even if it's just a bad system delivering bad results.
01/21/2018 10:07 AMPosted by Hun
01/21/2018 09:48 AMPosted by FleXy


exceptions are what makes a system plausible, since they are so few compared to the overall player base. Do you think humans differ so much from each other? Do you think that people dont spend many hours in the game and practice as much, as lets say a master or a gm? You are delusional then and you should really take a trip in my rank and check reality.

I don't think you understand the difference in skill between humans. It can take me 5 minutes to learn how to do something where it could take you 1 hour, and then the next person 2 hours, and so on. Just because 2 players are in gold, doesn't mean their skill is identical, there are too many variables.

To your argument of practice, just because you practice as much as a GM player doesn't mean you can get to that level of play, why? Well, because you don't have the raw talent for it. What would need to happen is, that you play an infinite amount of time while that person stagnates. For example that person only plays 1 hour and you play 12 hours a day for the next 5 years. I know that seems like an extreme example, but it's honestly how it works in the real world.


There is no such thing as raw skill, maybe someone can be experienced and accostumed to a certain type of gamplay, like someone can be a talented dps because he played csgo or cod for a long time. But for a tank player expecially talent relies 80% in practice and gamesense, otherwise people like xQc wouldnt be plat portrait and I would have been bronze my entire life if I waited my "talent" to save me. Talent is a delusional excuse for lazy people, only hard work pays off.
01/21/2018 09:05 AMPosted by FriendlyFire
01/21/2018 08:45 AMPosted by Kotonoha
any words from developer?


10/31/2017 09:29 AMPosted by Jeff Kaplan
...It's not. Stop being so paranoid.

Addressed.


I think he meant "Any words from the developer about what exactly is the MMR system, and how does it actually work?"

I would love to know too.
01/21/2018 11:11 AMPosted by Stormtrooper
01/21/2018 10:07 AMPosted by Hun
...
I don't think you understand the difference in skill between humans. It can take me 5 minutes to learn how to do something where it could take you 1 hour, and then the next person 2 hours, and so on. Just because 2 players are in gold, doesn't mean their skill is identical, there are too many variables.

To your argument of practice, just because you practice as much as a GM player doesn't mean you can get to that level of play, why? Well, because you don't have the raw talent for it. What would need to happen is, that you play an infinite amount of time while that person stagnates. For example that person only plays 1 hour and you play 12 hours a day for the next 5 years. I know that seems like an extreme example, but it's honestly how it works in the real world.


There is no such thing as raw skill, maybe someone can be experienced and accostumed to a certain type of gamplay, like someone can be a talented dps because he played csgo or cod for a long time. But for a tank player expecially talent relies 80% in practice and gamesense, otherwise people like xQc wouldnt be plat portrait and I would have been bronze my entire life if I waited my "talent" to save me. Talent is a delusional excuse for lazy people, only hard work pays off.


Well this is an interesting tangent on the classic argument of "nature vs nurture". Your personal opinions on the specific cause aside, there is a MASSIVE difference between the high and low ranks.

Here's a video of 3 GMs beating 6 silvers in a match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh6zpCuWfkw

You know how hard it is to win with one leaver, imagine 3? Yet the GMs won solidly due to the enormous difference in skill. There are other similar matchups with different ranks, numbers, and sometimes extra rules on that channel if you want to see more.

However it ended up, people's ability to play Overwatch does in fact differ massively. Thinking anything else is pure delusion.
01/21/2018 09:38 AMPosted by FriendlyFire
...

https://www.twitch.tv/directory/game/Overwatch

Even if you don't believe the dev's when they say how the match maker works and it's not rigged, you have effectively unlimited amounts of video of people playing competitive. Shockingly, despite "every match being handicapped" as you say, there is no video evidence of it happening!

...

And you know, twitch/youtube has many experienced players as well as tank/support mains. The point stands, there's never been a player who's recorded anything like their games being "handicapped" for playing too well.


exceptions are what makes a system plausible, since they are so few compared to the overall player base. Do you think humans differ so much from each other? Do you think that people dont spend many hours in the game and practice as much, as lets say a master or a gm? You are delusional then and you should really take a trip in my rank and check reality.


1.86 elims per life 2.2k Mcree OMEGALUL

You are just another delusional forum elo hell believer who thinks they are better than they actually are.
...

exceptions are what makes a system plausible, since they are so few compared to the overall player base. Do you think humans differ so much from each other? Do you think that people dont spend many hours in the game and practice as much, as lets say a master or a gm? You are delusional then and you should really take a trip in my rank and check reality.


1.86 elims per life 2.2k Mcree OMEGALUL

You are just another delusional forum elo hell believer who thinks they are better than they actually are.


we get it you are a pro at OW lol
<span class="truncated">...</span>

1.86 elims per life 2.2k Mcree OMEGALUL

You are just another delusional forum elo hell believer who thinks they are better than they actually are.


we get it you are a pro at OW lol


I'm not, I'm only low diamond lol but I don't believe I'm better than I am like the people upvoting this trash thread lol. It's just funny seeing these people with trash stats complain about their teammates when they are just as bad.
01/04/2018 10:19 AMPosted by Cuthbert
I've been toxic in my own matches. I've chastised many of my own teams who didn't deserve it (especially new/inexperienced players). Because they weren't meant to play with me in the first place; they were destined for lower ranks just as I was destined for higher ones


First off, you're full of yourself.

Second off, you're not toxic because of Blizz, you're toxic because you're an elitist jerk.
01/21/2018 11:11 AMPosted by Stormtrooper
There is no such thing as raw skill, maybe someone can be experienced and accostumed to a certain type of gamplay, like someone can be a talented dps because he played csgo or cod for a long time. But for a tank player expecially talent relies 80% in practice and gamesense, otherwise people like xQc wouldnt be plat portrait and I would have been bronze my entire life if I waited my "talent" to save me. Talent is a delusional excuse for lazy people, only hard work pays off.


The most wonderful thing about Overwatch with its different roles is that yeah, there is a place for all types of people to excel here which is just, so exciting and new for fps games.

But to deny there is any raw talent.. even a tank or mercy will benefit from someone that just has the ultra fast reflexes and superior hand eye coordination.

I'm afraid these natural advantages are as real as people with obvious disadvantages like the clumsy or extreme cases like cerebral palsy sufferers.

But in an fps game, people with that spatial reasoning and fast reflexes are at a distinct advantage, and that's the raw talent.

Anyhow, I just needed to answer that one, it's so self reassuring to sort of think one day I'll be as good as xxx when reality is, at this particular craft you may never be. You no doubt would dominate them at some other life skill though.
01/21/2018 03:45 PMPosted by Oatmeal
I'm not, I'm only low diamond lol but I don't believe I'm better than I am like the people upvoting this trash thread lol. It's just funny seeing these people with trash stats complain about their teammates when they are just as bad.


To be fair though you really do need to see what the bronze and silver players are dealing with. That's where all this discussion comes from. We are being matched with people of such differing skill levels it's ridiculous.

Maybe the rating system at low level isn't spread enough, people talk about 200 SR in GM being massive differences and I get that. Back in the day the difference between AUS #1 quake player Reload and #2 Adder was ridiculous.. reload was a freak that had super high sens, could rocket jump spinning like 3-4 rotations and fire a rocket out for a head shot somewhere in the middle of it. He beat adder 50-2 in 10 mins I personally spectated, and consistently beat him by that degree.

But then adder only beat me like 12-2 in 10 mins, the rest of the top tier were fairly close together but consistently able to prove their ranks.

At the bottom tier back then well, they didn't get to enter competitions but you could take the worst players on a server and predict who'd win and by what score after you knew both players for a while and it was consistent.

It seems strange this game at the low levels can't seem to match at least close based on skill
This has reached farce levels… I can see how the conversation with FriendlyFire and Elo would go:


FriendlyFire: “Hi, I’d like to tell you about my new system, much better than yours.

It’s great, it can’t fail, has a perfect record, anybody that disagrees with me is obviously whining about inability to climb and is terrible at chess.

First, I take people and have them play 10 games, then I’ll decide based on stats that I haven’t told them where I think they belong on a scale from 1 to 5000. I won’t tell them where the average is, what the distribution is, how many people play and how many games each played on a weekly average. Oh, maybe I will tell them some of this just once, but then never again. It'll be used as 'evidence' over a year later, but I don't want this information properly public because of my own reasons.

Now, get how great this system is - I can determine how good players are based on these stats. I won’t even show them these stats and how I work it out because reasons. I won’t tell you the reasons either because reasons. That way no one can complain.

Now after a game I’ll adjust their ranking upwards on a win and downwards on a loss, but I won’t tell them how much they should expect before the game because, you guessed it, reasons.

But the true genius is that I’m not even using that rating to determine who they should be playing against! I do this because of reasons!

I’ll put people in matches based off my hidden numbers, so don’t be surprised when you have people in the low 500s facing people in the 3000s. Of course, those people at 3000s won’t complain about losses because it’ll be clear to them that the 500 players deserved the win and would welcome that player to the higher ranks. I can’t understand why the 500s could complain, as their hidden number is the same as those 3000s, so what is there to complain about?”

Elo: “Why can’t they just play people at 500? Wouldn’t they climb naturally until they reach the correct rating?”

FriendlyFire: “Geez, all you do is complain about your inability to climb!! I've clearly shown you that you will if you deserve it based off my hidden numbers and calculations I've gone to great lengths to hide! How many times do I have to tell you how perfect this system is before you understand it's perfect!”

Oatmeal: “Yeah, your stats suck Elo, look at your terrible average 15 pieces lost per game.”
Over 2 years since this game is out counting testing stages, still no role queue. It's borderline insane, for a dev team to think that a game that stresses heavily on teamwork and synchronization can allow this current "wild west" state.

Could you possibly imagine having the same kind of "solo queue" in sports? Where you'd have 4 centers in Basketball who can't shoot, getting rofled stomped by smaller and faster players? Or American Football where you have 3 kickers playing on defense? Or Soccer where you have 3 goal keepers, 2 who can't even use their hands in the penalty box?

How silly would that be huh?
01/21/2018 10:51 AMPosted by Gazzor

Of course in Gold 1% of the player population is covered by just 16SR, whereas in GM 1% of players are covered by 1000SR...

But Zeff listed many great examples of players at roughly the same SR who are miles apart in terms of skill (Be that mechnical, teamwork, etc).

So, in my mind, the match making system isn't working in terms of placing players where they belong.

New accounts placing players in plat, when they should possibly be silver or gold, doesn't help matters. The game has 25 levels of quickplay + 10 games to place players and it sometimes gets it so wrong...

TLDR: With team mate quality varying so greatly at a given SR there's no wonder that people suspect some grand conspiracy in match making. Even if it's just a bad system delivering bad results.


I completely agree with you the disparity, and I've always said this, that bronze holds 6% of the population at a range of 1500 SR which is just ridiculous. The population in Silver and Gold is way too much for such a small range.

That being said, I don't agree with increasing the level cap for ranked, but I do agree they need to lower the placement for new accounts. The way it currently seems to work is that new accounts tend to place around Gold almost no matter what. I believe that's completely unfair to the players in silver, gold, and platinum.

They need the move all the players from Silver to Bronze, so they create a new Silver from low SR Gold players. Honestly Bronze needs to be filled with more a lot more players, not 6%, but maybe 20%.

01/21/2018 11:11 AMPosted by Stormtrooper

There is no such thing as raw skill, maybe someone can be experienced and accostumed to a certain type of gamplay, like someone can be a talented dps because he played csgo or cod for a long time. But for a tank player expecially talent relies 80% in practice and gamesense, otherwise people like xQc wouldnt be plat portrait and I would have been bronze my entire life if I waited my "talent" to save me. Talent is a delusional excuse for lazy people, only hard work pays off.


If there was no such thing as raw talent, then I shouldn't had have no problem getting into the NBA or becoming an astronaut, but clearly I'm not doing both. Raw talent is everything, and I saw this in spots all the time. Even in OW you see talent difference, take Sinatra for example, I will never get to his level of skill even if I tried. I could practice 14 hours a day for a year, and I know I wouldn't reach his skill level. Maybe you've never been !@#$ on by Top 100 players, but it's quite enlightening and you realize exactly how "good" you are.
01/21/2018 07:43 PMPosted by Jorlan
This has reached farce levels… I can see how the conversation with FriendlyFire and Elo would go:

[quote]
FriendlyFire: “Hi, I’d like to tell you about my new system, much better than yours.

It’s great, it can’t fail, has a perfect record, anybody that disagrees with me is obviously whining about inability to climb and is terrible at chess.

First, I take people and have them play 10 games, then I’ll decide based on stats that I haven’t told them where I think they belong on a scale from 1 to 5000. I won’t tell them where the average is, what the distribution is, how many people play and how many games each played on a weekly average. Oh, maybe I will tell them some of this just once, but then never again. It'll be used as 'evidence' over a year later, but I don't want this information properly public because of my own reasons.

Now, get how great this system is - I can determine how good players are based on these stats. I won’t even show them these stats and how I work it out because reasons. I won’t tell you the reasons either because reasons. That way no one can complain.

Now after a game I’ll adjust their ranking upwards on a win and downwards on a loss, but I won’t tell them how much they should expect before the game because, you guessed it, reasons.

But the true genius is that I’m not even using that rating to determine who they should be playing against! I do this because of reasons!

I’ll put people in matches based off my hidden numbers, so don’t be surprised when you have people in the low 500s facing people in the 3000s. Of course, those people at 3000s won’t complain about losses because it’ll be clear to them that the 500 players deserved the win and would welcome that player to the higher ranks. I can’t understand why the 500s could complain, as their hidden number is the same as those 3000s, so what is there to complain about?”

Elo: “Why can’t they just play people at 500? Wouldn’t they climb naturally until they reach the correct rating?”

FriendlyFire: “Geez, all you do is complain about your inability to climb!! I've clearly shown you that you will if you deserve it based off my hidden numbers and calculations I've gone to great lengths to hide! How many times do I have to tell you how perfect this system is before you understand it's perfect!”

Oatmeal: “Yeah, your stats suck Elo, look at your terrible average 15 pieces lost per game.”


This is too funny not to quote :)
01/21/2018 08:37 PMPosted by nagisasama
Could you possibly imagine having the same kind of "solo queue" in sports? Where you'd have 4 centers in Basketball who can't shoot, getting rofled stomped by smaller and faster players? Or American Football where you have 3 kickers playing on defense? Or Soccer where you have 3 goal keepers, 2 who can't even use their hands in the penalty box?


The difference between your game in overwatch and sport is in sport you play in a club with know people. If you want the same think in Overwatch find friend and do a fix team. You will have better match.

Solo queue is like doing a soccer match with randow folk in a field for fun.

Role Queue is a bad thing (fix the meta at 2/2/2 and don't solde the problem of heroes swith during the game). I think their should had a clan or club functionality who is better in the way of doing Ow a sport.
01/22/2018 03:31 AMPosted by Faoline
01/21/2018 08:37 PMPosted by nagisasama
Could you possibly imagine having the same kind of "solo queue" in sports? Where you'd have 4 centers in Basketball who can't shoot, getting rofled stomped by smaller and faster players? Or American Football where you have 3 kickers playing on defense? Or Soccer where you have 3 goal keepers, 2 who can't even use their hands in the penalty box?


The difference between your game in overwatch and sport is in sport you play in a club with know people. If you want the same think in Overwatch find friend and do a fix team. You will have better match.

Solo queue is like doing a soccer match with randow folk in a field for fun.

Role Queue is a bad thing (fix the meta at 2/2/2 and don't solde the problem of heroes swith during the game). I think their should had a clan or club functionality who is better in the way of doing Ow a sport.


This bad thing fixed league of legends btw.
01/22/2018 03:33 AMPosted by nagisasama
This bad thing fixed league of legends btw.


LOL is not OW.

In lol, you cann't change you heroes during the match. In OW you Can.
In lol the meta is fix for ages. In OW, meta evolve. During the OWL, pro tried out some comp with 4 tank and 2 healer. So you cann't limit player at a 2/2/2 meta.

That working for LOL won't may be work for OW because it's not the same game.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum