Soft Cap

Is there a soft cap to keep you inside your rank? I was talking with another player as we both felt there was a soft cap in our ranking. We both believe we experienced that if we got too high in our rank (both gold 2) we would lose a few games and the point loss would slide us back to down, then we would win our games and crawl our way back up.

We tried queing duo to see if we could break the cycle and it was pretty much the same, so we gave up on that.

I was slowly climbing my way up till today, I lost 6 games in a row, now I'm at the bottom of gold rank 2 and what do you know the next two games were 221 and 181 point victory's... I was supposed to win those games.

I have the same feeling. I have "excelent" matchups when i drop to silver 3 or silver 2 after a lot of bad matchups.It's games that my team win by, like, 500 - 200. And then when i'm at top on silver 3 i got matchups where a guardian follow me home at start, lol.

No, you just belong in or near gold2.
If you win a bit and start moving up, you'll play better opponents. When you can't compete at that level, you lose and get bumped back down.

@Exedore.6320 said:No, you just belong in or near gold2.

If you win a bit and start moving up, you'll play better opponents. When you can't compete at that level, you lose and get bumped back down.

It's not that simple. Really.I'm experiencing the same "issue" and i really don't care much about what tier i'm in. I'm here for the fun, really. Obviously i want to win, 'cos it's natural, but matchmaking behavior is still strange.

In fact i don't even get angry when i lost matches like 400 - 500, but when i'm about to step up from S1 to G3 what happens is a lot of matches where i get like 3 top stats and lose by 200 - 500. I was thinking about this last week, like: Maybe you have to carry hard to breake this milestone?

@Malafaia.8903 said:

@Exedore.6320 said:No, you just belong in or near gold2.

If you win a bit and start moving up, you'll play better opponents. When you can't compete at that level, you lose and get bumped back down.

That's the thing, if you aren't carrying your team that means you are on the same level as them, and therefore you should not be increasing your rating. The rating isn't a progression system, you are not expected to get to a higher rank unless you play better.

I'm sorry I might not have been clearThis is not a post saying "I should be in the top 10 on the leader board", I think I belong in gold tier 2 because in that tier I have some great games.

This is it's a post to ask do people feel there is a soft cap present. I did 10 games as a test where I refused to finish anyone or cap a point, when I did down a player I just waved at them and ran away. I had heaps of fun and my team were screaming at me for being a dick though at the end of the ten games... I was still mid gold tier 2.

I'm wondering if there is a soft cap at both the top and bottom of the tier to keep me in the tier, like my test of 10 games where I couldn't drop below the tier.

@ArthurDent.9538 said:

@Malafaia.8903 said:

@Exedore.6320 said:No, you just belong in or near gold2.

If you win a bit and start moving up, you'll play better opponents. When you can't compete at that level, you lose and get bumped back down.

Ok, let me be more clear here and be a little repetitive:I say when i'm about to break this milestone (S1 to G3) the team i have to carry is A LOT worst than the team i was playing in S3 or S2. In this games i'm forced to perform better, it's clearly pushing my limits, i'm often in 1v2. Sometimes i kill both but it takes time, sometimes i die (when i get outnumbered by a thief that surprises me, ie), and i always end up with a lot of top stats, but my team can't really handle their business even when they're in a better position, aka, outnumbering.

"...if you aren't carrying your team that means you are on the same level as them, and therefore you should not be increasing your rating." - This doesn't make sense either, as i said that i can handle enemies pretty well, even outnumbered, but my team can't perform at same level, not even in a lower level, as they're outnumbering.

And please, don't be passive agressive with statements like "... you are not expected to get to a higher rank unless you play better." as it is obvious. I'm trying to understand things here and giving examples on how this affects me.

yeah...at all when fights are around 400-500 wins/loses its not problem because you see you all had flad chance to win bet when you have fight 200 or even 100 to 500 then you is this team draw was just fucked and unfun to play for this loser team

and this is also nonsense

@ArthurDent.9538 said:That's the thing, if you aren't carrying your team that means you are on the same level as them, and therefore you should not be increasing your rating. The rating isn't a progression system, you are not expected to get to a higher rank unless you play better.

how I may to increase my rating when my team is shit and enemy team is much better so our team is getting outplayed? sorry but you alone cant carry you full team and your personal rating wont increase if you your team is losing, even if you carry your team but still losing your rating will go on lower level because it wasnt win, you will increase your skill rating only with other good players in your teamt to be able to make this win, in other way as I wrote..even when you carry your team but enemiest have more better players than just 1 like you in your group you wont get increase to your skill level because this isnt solo mode from pvp but team mode where single players even shouldnt be able to carry team

Your rating will vary. I'd expect you to vary +/-100-150 pts over the season.

If the enemy team is better than you, you won't lose as much rating. So that is a good gauge of where you are at.

The algo will purposefully seed you in " losing" matches to rebalance your w/l ratio closer to 50%.

@Angelweave.1856 said:I'm wondering if there is a soft cap at both the top and bottom of the tier to keep me in the tier, like my test of 10 games where I couldn't drop below the tier.

I believe there is and it also corresponde with the 50% w/l ratio. There is nothing like even match, just the game tries to force you into 50% w/l ratio. If they would reveal the rating of each player in every match, you would see how actually unabalanced the games are. Not all ofc. But once you are on a good win streak you can expect to be hammered by the algoritm and you will be matched with much lower ranked ppl against high ranked ppl. But thats just the result of the 50% w/l algoritm and this is not even secret, even Anet representative said this alone on the forum not long ago.

@Miyu.8137 said:

@Angelweave.1856 said:I'm wondering if there is a soft cap at both the top and bottom of the tier to keep me in the tier, like my test of 10 games where I couldn't drop below the tier.

They don't even need to reveal it. It has been done many times in the past by multiple players that checked ratings of teammates and enemy team and it didn't say anything good about MM. But it is like beating dead horse now.

Whoa! Don't know about that forced 50% W/L ratio.This explains everything, lol.

Sadly, your team has a huge effect. I just came from a tournament in which I was with legendary players and matched against legendary players and did acceptably. ( Not any great shakes, but no seriously bad mistakes and even a couple of revives. ) We made the second round.

I have not played placement matches this season because of the necro bug, but placed in Gold last season.

I'd contend that your team has a major effect. Which is why all ranked play should be solo only.

Thanks for that. Is there a current version of the code or pseudo code posted? I'd like to see it. Also, why doesn't the matchmaker take match history into account? After all, loss streaks are one of the biggest causes of toxicity.

During the late 1920's we saw the results of unmoderated competition, it ended in The Great Depression. Even in famously ruthless competitions such as Soling Class, steps are taken to moderate for the health of the game.

I'm gonna say "Doubt" on that, Ben.Last season i got a win streak of 7 matches (and had 1 defeat in the last 10 matches), the next day after that i got Bronze players in my team (according to those players), then i got people going afk in matches, and other random crappy team mates. Ended up losing 4 games in a row.From other anecdotal evidence it's a recurring trend for a lot of players.Also how sad is it that hot streaks don't matter... And, well, compared to any other competitive game out there GW2 pvp is not even mediocre right now... I could stay here listing reasons for ages, but it's apparent that you guys don't care. And PvE players will keep on trying for the skins so it'll seem populated.

All these excuses people come up with to say that their 50/50 rate is due to a fixed algorithm instead of getting placed where they are supposed to be is quite funny and sad at the same time.

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:There is no forced 50% w/l ratio or "soft cap." Also, the matchmaker has no knowledge of whether you won or lost your previous match. All it knows is your current rating.

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

@Ithilwen.1529 said:Thanks for that. Is there a current version of the code or pseudo code posted? I'd like to see it. Also, why doesn't the matchmaker take match history into account? After all, loss streaks are one of the biggest causes of toxicity.

https://imgur.com/a/aJKwU

This is just RNG. I will be honest with you, any game that has a margin of win over 150 points is a failure in match making (even 100 is a stretch). These are the majority of games. When I look at my play history I typically find no more than 1 game with a margin under 100 in the last 10 games, 2-3 games under 150 and at least half with over 200.

The match making just guestimates what your skill level is based on what ever your rank, MMR or what ever info. It is like guessing what someones IQ is based on their grades in school. The correlation is... limited.

If you are good, and persistent (as in playing boat load of games), the sample size gets big enough, and you will eventually climb-up the ranks to where you should be. Hey, just like in real life :#

But if you are thinking that the match making system figured out your skill level and manages to keep you within that "skill level" range, this is not even remotely true. This is way beyond the match making capacity.

@otto.5684 said:This is just RNG. I will be honest with you, any game that has a margin of win over 150 points is a failure in match making (even 100 is a stretch). These are the majority of games. When I look at my play history I typically find no more than 1 game with a margin under 100 in the last 10 games, 2-3 games under 150 and at least half with over 200.

The match making just guestimates what your skill level is based on what ever your rank, MMR or what ever info. It is like guessing what someones IQ is based on their grades in school. The correlation is... limited.

If you are good, and persistent (as in playing boat load of games), the sample size gets big enough, and you will eventually climb-up the ranks to where you should be. Hey, just like in real life :#

But if you are thinking that the match making system figured out your skill level and manages to keep you within that "skill level" range, this is not even remotely true. This is way beyond the match making capacity.

Man i had such games today people raging in going afk cant stop laughing.And honestly if their system is measuring my rating by having players going afk.That losing 60 games without even to put up fight 3vs5 or 4vs5 from my team. Same for the enemy team..We literally waiting each quene now out who will on which side go first afk hahahaha.And still cant stop laughing this is beyond hilarious.

@otto.5684 said:This is just RNG. I will be honest with you, any game that has a margin of win over 150 points is a failure in match making (even 100 is a stretch). These are the majority of games. When I look at my play history I typically find no more than 1 game with a margin under 100 in the last 10 games, 2-3 games under 150 and at least half with over 200.

The match making just guestimates what your skill level is based on what ever your rank, MMR or what ever info. It is like guessing what someones IQ is based on their grades in school. The correlation is... limited.

If you are good, and persistent (as in playing boat load of games), the sample size gets big enough, and you will eventually climb-up the ranks to where you should be. Hey, just like in real life :#

But if you are thinking that the match making system figured out your skill level and manages to keep you within that "skill level" range, this is not even remotely true. This is way beyond the match making capacity.

Ok, that makes a lot of sense.

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:All these excuses people come up with to say that their 50/50 rate is due to a fixed algorithm instead of getting placed where they are supposed to be is quite funny and sad at the same time.

If you read the topic carefully you will see that it's a healthy discussion about the matchmaking system.But instead of bringing construtive inputs, you take your time to post just to deliver some toxicity, right?

@Malafaia.8903 said:

@BlaqueFyre.5678 said:All these excuses people come up with to say that their 50/50 rate is due to a fixed algorithm instead of getting placed where they are supposed to be is quite funny and sad at the same time.

See the quote from the Pvp Dev rating no such thing exists, and players calling him a liar.

All you are doing is trying to bring toxicity into this conversation, right?