72 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

I've PUGed exclusively for the past week, and played about 60 matches.

My win/loss ratio, levelling my IIC Mechs, has been about 1 win from every 5 matches.

While I'm only a Tier 2 player, I do consistently finish in the top 3 damage and kills on my team. So it's not like I'm personally causing my team's to consistently fail.

I do seem to get lumped with a lance of quite inexperienced players every match. These players are unfamiliar with concepts such as sticking together to win etc. They frequently do 100 damage or less, and tend to spend most of the match taking cover instead of shooting enemies.

Is there anything in the current matchmaking algorithm that should lead to about a 50:50 win:loss ratio? Or is this what I should expect from MWO going forward ... mostly losses as I try to level Mechs and prove incapable of carrying inexperienced PUG players?

This is a genuine question. I'm wondering how I can be losing so many matches so consistently despite generally achieving personally reasonable scores?

[Bilbo]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

I've PUGed exclusively for the past week, and played about 60 matches.

My win/loss ratio, levelling my IIC Mechs, has been about 1 win from every 5 matches.

While I'm only a Tier 2 player, I do consistently finish in the top 3 damage and kills on my team. So it's not like I'm personally causing my team's to consistently fail.

I do seem to get lumped with a lance of quite inexperienced players every match. These players are unfamiliar with concepts such as sticking together to win etc. They frequently do 100 damage or less, and tend to spend most of the match taking cover instead of shooting enemies.

Is there anything in the current matchmaking algorithm that should lead to about a 50:50 win:loss ratio? Or is this what I should expect from MWO going forward ... mostly losses as I try to level Mechs and prove incapable of carrying inexperienced PUG players?

This is a genuine question. I'm wondering how I can be losing so many matches so consistently despite generally achieving personally reasonable scores?

In the long run you will be 50/50 or better if you are ranked where you are supposed to be. A week isn't the long run, though, and player behavior during events of any kind isn't necessarily typical anyway.

[Tarogato]

Your win/loss ratio should correlate roughly to your kill/death ratio. At least, according to my research. So if you're bad at the game, you'll lose more. If you're good at the game, you'll win more. If you're good at the game and losing more, then you are a statistical anomaly and can take comfort in the knowledge that it will come to pass and you'll be out of the rut eventually.

[Appogee]

But is the matchmaker trying to create equal teams?

Or is it just collecting Tier 1, 2, and 3 players together, putting them in a team, and no effort made to average the skill level?

Incidentally, there's no way some of the players I'm getting dropped with are in Tier 3. I'd be surprised if they're even in Tier 4.

(But that still doesn't explain the seemingly uneven distribution of inexperienced players.)

Tarogato, on 30 December 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Your win/loss ratio should correlate roughly to your kill/death ratio.

My personal k/d is 1.65. I tend to get at least one kill per match, even though I'm presently levelling Mechs.

But like I said, doing 400+ damage and multiple kills fairly consistently is still leading to consistent team losses, for some reason.

[Tarogato]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

But is the matchmaker trying to create equal teams?

Or is it just collecting Tier 1, 2, and 3 players together, putting them in a team, and no effort made to average the skill level?

Incidentally, there's no way some of the players I'm getting dropped with are in Tier 3. I'd be surprised if they're even in Tier 4.

(But that still doesn't explain the seemingly uneven distribution of inexperienced players.)

Well, Paul has explained how players get put into tiers, and he has explained that matches are constructed with a +1/-1 set of players (so any match can have three tiers worth of players in it). But he hasn't explained how the individual matches/teams are constructed, whether there are release valves, balance, etc. So your guess is as good as mine. =/

[Bilbo]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

But is the matchmaker trying to create equal teams?

Or is it just collecting Tier 1, 2, and 3 players together, putting them in a team, and no effort made to average the skill level?

Incidentally, there's no way some of the players I'm getting dropped with are in Tier 3. I'd be surprised if they're even in Tier 4.

(But that still doesn't explain the seemingly uneven distribution of inexperienced players.)

In tier 2 there is no restriction on who you can play. That being said, if they were doing as you suggest, I would expect near instant matchmaking and I'm never seeing that even in NA primetime.

[Bilbo]

Tarogato, on 30 December 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Your win/loss ratio should correlate roughly to your kill/death ratio. At least, according to my research. So if you're bad at the game, you'll lose more. If you're good at the game, you'll win more. If you're good at the game and losing more, then you are a statistical anomaly and can take comfort in the knowledge that it will come to pass and you'll be out of the rut eventually.

Sweet...I'm a statistical anomaly. By your chart, I should have a win loss record well below 1.

[Mister Blastman]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

I've PUGed exclusively for the past week, and played about 60 matches.

My win/loss ratio, levelling my IIC Mechs, has been about 1 win from every 5 matches.

While I'm only a Tier 2 player, I do consistently finish in the top 3 damage and kills on my team. So it's not like I'm personally causing my team's to consistently fail.

I do seem to get lumped with a lance of quite inexperienced players every match. These players are unfamiliar with concepts such as sticking together to win etc. They frequently do 100 damage or less, and tend to spend most of the match taking cover instead of shooting enemies.

Is there anything in the current matchmaking algorithm that should lead to about a 50:50 win:loss ratio? Or is this what I should expect from MWO going forward ... mostly losses as I try to level Mechs and prove incapable of carrying inexperienced PUG players?

This is a genuine question. I'm wondering how I can be losing so many matches so consistently despite generally achieving personally reasonable scores?

If you are credit to team you should have a win/loss ratio of somewhere around 1.3 or 56% win ratio or greater. Ideally you are breaking 60% if you're a true credit to team.

This is despite what the matchmaker throws at you and over a long period of several hundred PUG only matches.

[Tyler Valentine]

Tarogato, on 30 December 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Your win/loss ratio should correlate roughly to your kill/death ratio. At least, according to my research. So if you're bad at the game, you'll lose more. If you're good at the game, you'll win more. If you're good at the game and losing more, then you are a statistical anomaly and can take comfort in the knowledge that it will come to pass and you'll be out of the rut eventually.

Seems legit. I only PUG. K/D is 1.07 and my W/L is 1820/1785

[Sethliopod]

As a member of the large, yet very secret, group of players tasked by PGI to bring down specific players, exclusively on the blue team, I will tell you simply:

working as intended.

edit: Welcome to "Tier 2 Hell!" Bwa hah haha haha!

Edited by Sethliopod, 30 December 2015 - 12:05 PM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Over the course of a year or so you'll average out to around 1:1 or better. A week? That's nothing.

[Appogee]

Mister Blastman, on 30 December 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

If you are credit to team you should have a win/loss ratio of somewhere around 1.3 or 56% win ratio or greater. Ideally you are breaking 60% if you're a true credit to team.

Is your statement based on knowledge of PGI's maths/algorithm, your personal observations and player experience, or something else...?

[sycocys]

MM is just jamming players together.
In some ways the 5 tier PSR system is worse in the sense there is very little separation between horrible and okay players (T5-T4/low T3).
There should really be 10+ tiers to offer some actual separation.

But I do feel your pain, there's so many strings where the MM is just a flat out obvious fail right at the start of the match and it seems like its trying to set you up to carry 6 players against a team of players actually at your skill level.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Taragoto, are you only sampling those dots or do they represent clusters of players? My KDR after 11000 matches is a full point higher than my win-loss and I pug about 80/20 (with statistically similar results). 2.59 and 57.1% win/loss. I am not sure in a large sampling size that KDR and win/loss would actually be similar.

[C E Dwyer]

There are some bad t3 t2 players, and some good ones.

I always thought match marker was 'balanced' to try keep everyone at roughly equal in the win loss, department, I seem to recall some link to a twitter statement by Russ over a year ago.

PSR or KDR isn't the real skill of a pilot, its how far over 1.0 they can go in win lose, as you have to do some serious carrying in solo pugs to get there, which of course is reandered pointless if you group and get carried

[C E Dwyer]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

Is your statement based on knowledge of PGI's maths/algorithm, your personal observations and player experience, or something else...?

Probably the fact his is 1.35 ?

[RussianWolf]

ELO was designed to target a 50% win/loss averagea dn was pretty close usually.

PSR isn't designed with that in mind as it has been explained. I just grabs 24 players of the 3 active tiers and goes. So you could see wider ratios in the W/L column.

[Bilbo]

RussianWolf, on 30 December 2015 - 12:28 PM, said:

ELO was designed to target a 50% win/loss averagea dn was pretty close usually.

PSR isn't designed with that in mind as it has been explained. I just grabs 24 players of the 3 active tiers and goes. So you could see wider ratios in the W/L column.

Again, if this were the case I'd expect to see near instant matchmaking. I do not. My guess is the underlying PSR number is used in the same fashion as elo. The only difference being the tier 1 players never see the those in the bottom two.

[Revis Volek]

If you are bad, you will have a 50/50 ratio

If you are decent you will have a 52/48 ratio

Good players will start getting into 55/45 and 60/40 ratios....



I dont consider myself "good" merely decent and i have about 600 more wins then losses and its creeping up all the time.


Currently have 600 more wins then losses out of about 6,000 matches in total.

[Mister Blastman]

Appogee, on 30 December 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

Is your statement based on knowledge of PGI's maths/algorithm, your personal observations and player experience, or something else...?

My personal observations as a player with tens of thousands of games and other extremely skilled players and their stats.

Lukoi Banacek, on 30 December 2015 - 12:21 PM, said:

Taragoto, are you only sampling those dots or do they represent clusters of players? My KDR after 11000 matches is a full point higher than my win-loss and I pug about 80/20 (with statistically similar results). 2.59 and 57.1% win/loss. I am not sure in a large sampling size that KDR and win/loss would actually be similar.

Lukoi is credit to team.