156 replies to this topic

[Idealsuspect]

Novakaine, on 12 August 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

2 Shooters.
2 Average Players.
2 Pro Players.
3 Utter iredeemiable gits
1 Drunken sod.
The average team complement.

I would say

2 Free Target.
3 Average Players & Drunken sod..
2 Pro Players.
4 Campers who move less than a turret

The average team complement and some time there is no average players.

Edited by Idealsuspect, 12 August 2016 - 01:03 PM.

[Revis Volek]

Dread Render, on 12 August 2016 - 12:00 PM, said:

All i am saying is if the MM was working correctly everyone would have a W/L ratio of close to 1:1 because they would be playing against people with the same skill level... great vs great, good vs good, okay vs okay, bad vs bad....
And that's what We Want isn't It? ... that's what I want.. that's what the OP wants. I think.
for the majority of players a close game is a good game,
I am complaining about stomps really...
If the MM was working well, there would not be so many.

again, this is false.

Like roughneck said, Single spawn high HP pool games are all likes this. This isnt unique to MWO its unique to single spawn games such as this.

[Tanil Kane]

Revis Volek, on 12 August 2016 - 12:43 PM, said:

again, this is false.

Like roughneck said, Single spawn high HP pool games are all likes this. This isnt unique to MWO its unique to single spawn games such as this.

Even respawn based games suffer from stomps. WoW, which has a much easier task of creating balanced teams, has lots of stomps, and a few high quality close matches.

[Roughneck45]

PORONOPAPOS, on 12 August 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

this sounds more likely for my case...
So if I want to have fun in this game I should create a new account every 2-3 months ?

Yes.

If seal clubbing is your thing go for it.

[PhoenixFire55]

Mister Blastman, on 12 August 2016 - 06:25 AM, said:

stuff

Deathlike, on 12 August 2016 - 07:32 AM, said:

stuff

Ghogiel, on 12 August 2016 - 08:11 AM, said:

stuff

Honestly guys I don't know why you even bother replying to these trolls. Proven bads at that with videos and all.

[Roughneck45]

PORONOPAPOS, on 12 August 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

my purpose playing (this or any game) is having fun. I have no ambition to become "master".
-In my main account I more often than not getting stomped (and this is not my fault, see my posted pic previous post)
-in my alt account I managed to win several matches while being last one alive dealing 3-4 and in 2 matches 6 of the enemy team. That's quite satisfying and if I have to open new accounts to get it yes I will so so...

But wouldn't it be more satisfying to do that against players that have a firmer grasp on the game and are around your skill level?

Everyone enjoys winning more than losing, but if you are only getting enjoyment when you get 3-6 kills as the last man alive, then yes, you are going to have to create new accounts to game the system and fight players that don't know what they are doing.

Those matches are great, but they are supposed to be the rarity, not the norm.

This is no different than creating a smurf account in any game ever, and its always for the same reason, to win over and over again against people that are easy to beat.

If that's your fun, go for it.

Edited by Roughneck45, 12 August 2016 - 01:16 PM.

[Roughneck45]

PORONOPAPOS, on 12 August 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

could you please take a look at the screenshot I posted back in post #87 and tell me how would you feel being over and over again in matches like the that one ?

I've been here since the start, I've had MANY of those nights.

Its just how this game works. Some nights are better than others. 12-3 or worse matches are the NORM for this game.

When I get frustrated, I just stop playing for a bit, cool off, come back to it later.

The only variable you can control is yourself. So continue to blame the MM or analyze your own performance and ton up to carry harder if necessary.

Edited by Roughneck45, 12 August 2016 - 01:24 PM.

[Tanil Kane]

PORONOPAPOS, on 12 August 2016 - 01:17 PM, said:

to answer your question yes I prefer more skilled competition I also got such "last man" matches recently in my main account because both teams had known T1 names, but....that's not the usual teams I get into.

could you please take a look at the screenshot I posted back in post #87 and tell me how would you feel being over and over again in matches like the that one ?

Either you are cherry picking data and ignoring win streaks, or had a run of bad luck in match making. The MM isn't specifically singling you out and putting you with terribads.

[Jimmy Page]

Mister Blastman, on 12 August 2016 - 06:25 AM, said:

That's a pretty bad win/loss ratio on your main account. If you are below 1.0 win/loss then you need to be trying significantly harder to help your team. The way the matchmaker is structured, it aims to put all players at 1/1 win/loss. To go below 1/1 means you're doing things that hurt your team.

Well, when you play against Lords, EmP and such almost every drop you are going to have a rough go of it. I can verify because i dropped with/ against him regularly. He is a solid player. As is his competition.
Cheers.
Jimmy Page

Edited by Jimmy Page, 12 August 2016 - 02:46 PM.

[MrJeffers]

Mister Blastman, on 12 August 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

I am making no assumption. I am stating fact per the developers of the game. The way the matchmaker is structured, per Paul, Russ and others, is to weight everyone towards a 1:1 ratio.

You can be higher or lower--and some of us significantly higher in the PUG only queue, but that is directly a result of our own efforts, not our teammates.

If you have a win/loss of 0.5/1, you EARNED that bad ratio by playing bad.

If you have a win/loss of 1.7/1, you EARNED that exemplary ratio by playing well.

This is fact.

They have never stated that the match maker tries for a 1:1 W/L ratio. In fact, quite the opposite if you followed the paging karl berg thread. The MM has no such programming. A 1:1 W/L ratio is the byproduct of a match maker that is doing effective relative skill based matches. AKA an elo based system.

The current PSR system is A ) Not skill based, B ) Not Relative rated to your peers, and so it's not creating skill based matches. Player A who is tier 1 but took 1000 matches to get there isn't the same skill as player B who is tier 1 but only took 100 matches to do it. Yet they are the same to the PSR MM. And this applies at every tier.
It won't ever achieve a 1:1 ratio for most players because it's not creating quality skill based matches where that will happen. My W:L ratio has gone up .29 since the implementation of PSR (from 1.10 to 1.39) because the match quality has dropped.

Edited by MrJeffers, 12 August 2016 - 03:32 PM.

[TLBFestus]

The simple answer, in the form of another question, to the OPs original question, "Is there a blackball list?" is


"Based on what you've seen in the development of this game do you think PGI could program a blacklist that works?

[Nerdboard]

@OP:

The difference between your two accounts could still be just bad or good luck. After all 100 to 200 games is not that much.

A second often underestimated component could be your mood. Since you after a couple of games you have gained the experience that you get better games in your second account it might subconsciously effect your playstyle. You may feel like you can take more risks since its the 'good' account and therefore help your team gain momentum while playing too passive on the other one. Or the other way around being too risky and dying a lot.

Finally there might very well still be a difference between tier 1 and tier 2. Its not a strictly skill based system so with people like you and me being tier 1 there is a still a couple of players who should be tier 0 in terms of skill then. You are still a bit more likely to meet those on a tier 1 account.

[Mister Blastman]

MrJeffers, on 12 August 2016 - 03:30 PM, said:

They have never stated that the match maker tries for a 1:1 W/L ratio. In fact, quite the opposite if you followed the paging karl berg thread. The MM has no such programming. A 1:1 W/L ratio is the byproduct of a match maker that is doing effective relative skill based matches. AKA an elo based system.

The current PSR system is A ) Not skill based, B ) Not Relative rated to your peers, and so it's not creating skill based matches. Player A who is tier 1 but took 1000 matches to get there isn't the same skill as player B who is tier 1 but only took 100 matches to do it. Yet they are the same to the PSR MM. And this applies at every tier.
It won't ever achieve a 1:1 ratio for most players because it's not creating quality skill based matches where that will happen. My W:L ratio has gone up .29 since the implementation of PSR (from 1.10 to 1.39) because the match quality has dropped.

Yet here we have a statistical median for the mm at 1:1 and an average at 1.09 overall for 34k players.

If you have a 1.39 win/loss ratio you're pulling your weight!

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

If there was a list, Id be hurt if I wasnt on it O.o

[Scout Derek]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 12 August 2016 - 06:17 PM, said:

If there was a list, Id be hurt if I wasnt on it O.o

If you're still here you aren't on it, sorry to burst your bubble.

That is if there is even such a thing, which there isn't.

Edited by Scout Derek, 12 August 2016 - 06:23 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Scout Derek, on 12 August 2016 - 06:23 PM, said:

If you're still here you aren't on it, sorry to burst your bubble.

That is if there is even such a thing, which there isn't.

is it like the island?

[Scout Derek]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 12 August 2016 - 06:28 PM, said:

is it like the island?

I don't know, but if I were to guess it would be adrift on a raft in the Bermuda Triangle.

[Zibmo]

Mister Blastman, on 12 August 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

I am making no assumption. I am stating fact per the developers of the game. The way the matchmaker is structured, per Paul, Russ and others, is to weight everyone towards a 1:1 ratio.

You can be higher or lower--and some of us significantly higher in the PUG only queue, but that is directly a result of our own efforts, not our teammates.

If you have a win/loss of 0.5/1, you EARNED that bad ratio by playing bad.

If you have a win/loss of 1.7/1, you EARNED that exemplary ratio by playing well.

This is fact.

Pucky.

[MrJeffers]

Mister Blastman, on 12 August 2016 - 05:27 PM, said:

Yet here we have a statistical median for the mm at 1:1 and an average at 1.09 overall for 34k players.

If you have a 1.39 win/loss ratio you're pulling your weight!

News flash - for every person who wins, one person will lose. So the global average must equal a 1:1 ratio.
The important part is the percentage of people that are at or near a 1:1 ratio. A perfect match maker would have 100% of the people at a 1:1 ratio, people are always playing their equals.
A good match maker would follow the 80/20 rule, where only the top 10 and bottom 10 percent is not close to that 1:1 ratio.

Putting it on a 5 point scale it would look like this:
5 - Perfect - 0% outside of the 1:1 range
4 - Good - <25% outside of 1:1 standard deviation range (top and bottom 12.5%)
3 - Average - <50% outside of 1:1 (top and bottom 25%)
2 - Poor - >75% outside of 1:1
1 - Awful - 100% outside

Using lost dragons numbers:

Lostdragon, on 12 August 2016 - 08:50 AM, said:

I downloaded this data and did a quick couple of formulas. For people with at least 10 games (32049 players) 50.57% are at 1.0 or better. Only 5.79% are at 0.5 W/L or lower. About 22% are lower than .75 W/L.

The average W/L is 1.09 and median is 1.0.

So looks like all the crying about the MM can just be dismissed as it is indeed only whining based on skewed perceptions.

Bottom 22% are getting crap matches, likewise there would be >22% top scores that are getting matches below their skill level. The top percentage is larger because the average numbers are greater than 1:1 so there are more winners than losers, caused by eliminating people with less than ten matches, who must have more losses then wins.

So lets say that the top is 23%. That means for 45% of the players, the match maker is failing. That is on the poor side of average on the above scale. That's hardly something commendable, and likely could be done with a random match maker that didn't use any rating. Nearly half the players are getting crap matches.

I would bet real money that if we had the same set of numbers from the elo based match maker the results would be higher, nearer to good but defiantly on the good side of average and probably in the high 60% to 70% range.

Edited by MrJeffers, 13 August 2016 - 10:43 AM.

[MrJeffers]

TLBFestus, on 12 August 2016 - 04:53 PM, said:

The simple answer, in the form of another question, to the OPs original question, "Is there a blackball list?" is


"Based on what you've seen in the development of this game do you think PGI could program a blacklist that works?

No. If Blizzard can't do it in a way that is not exploitable, it's unlikely that PGI could program a better one.
http://arstechnica.c...r-in-overwatch/