why do you lose more rating the worse your teammates are (the lower elo they are) — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home PVP

why do you lose more rating the worse your teammates are (the lower elo they are)

incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭
edited April 12, 2019 in PVP

I mean if anyone from arena net actually bothers to read these forums ,there should've been at least 1 person mentioning this (and i'm pretty sure i've mentioned it myself in the past but nothing's been done bout it)

the worse your teammates are the less elo you'll gain on winning and the more elo you'll lose on losing (which is the biggest reason why the game is dead at night and in the morning and you can only play ranked in the afternoon/around peak hours but even then it's not perfect.)

Last patch was absolutely horrible and now the pvp population is very thin (cus ppl dont wanna play) so it constantly matches you with people who are 150+ and lower elo than you which is the game's failure and arena net's matchmaking failure and not your personal failure. You have no control over the matchmaking but you get punished if the matchmaking fails and you are the one that pays the price.

If you have 1700 rating and you get matched with 1600 and below, instead of gaining less if you manage to carry/win and losing more if you lose because your team is horrible and clueless then you should be compensated by the game for arena net's failure on the matchmaking part and NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. This is literally basic logic and common sense but perhaps expecting common sense at this point is too much.

The worse your teammates are (compared to you) the less rating you should lose and the more rating you should gain with say an exception of 1800+ but even then there's no need for such exceptions .

as it currently stands, if there's no other good people playing you're punished for playing the game. Even if you get 75%+ win rate in soloq at times like these you'll still lose more than you gain because logic 404 not found

Comments

  • Noir.8561Noir.8561 Member ✭✭

    Anet doesnt have to reinvent the wheel .
    Just copy other systems from other games (4months) that work just fine
    Just like the current matchmaking rating sysetm

  • Megametzler.5729Megametzler.5729 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 12, 2019

    The system has issues, this is not one of them.

    More constructive: Thinking about population issues, duos, class stacking and balance, "afk but jumping around in base", wintrading... if your enemies are bad, your allies are bad, you should get less points. If your enemies are great, your allies are bad, then it is (probably) subjective or a population/class stacking/duo issue.

  • yanniell.1236yanniell.1236 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 12, 2019

    It has being said many times before, and at this point, I'm pretty sure Anet is OK with how things are.

    If you add to that the fact that the point gap to cross divisions is too much (300 points, which means roughly 30 wins in a row), you'll understand why people aren't playing the game mode.

    I'm mostly certain that @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 himself said somewhere in this foruns that less than 30% of players put in gold make it to platinum, which basically means that 70%+ of the players aren't getting any sense of progression whatsoever and are just stuck in a division, which can translate to 70%+ of the player base aren't having fun in the game mode, which, in turn, explains the population steady decrease.

    Their inability to realize that baffles me.

  • incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭

    @Falan.1839 said:
    The problem is that your opponents are also low rating and hence in those cases you stand out as the highest rated player in the match, with little to gain and a lot to lose.

    that's not always the case, not every time my opponents are also low rating. If i sign in the afternoon and im 1700+ and i meet a duo of 1750+/1800+ (which is what exactly happened) but there are no other 1700 +ppl signing (or are all in a game) then the game will be filled with lower rate ppl and even tho im against 2x leggo people i'll still lose more or gain less

  • Fortus.6175Fortus.6175 Member ✭✭✭

    @Megametzler.5729 said:
    The system has issues, this is not one of them.

    More constructive: Thinking about population issues, duos, class stacking and balance, "afk but jumping around in base", wintrading... if your enemies are bad, your allies are bad, you should get less points. If your enemies are great, your allies are bad, then it is (probably) subjective or a population/class stacking/duo issue.

    This.

    I had been taking screenshots of how many times I get matched agaisnt premades, but at some point I realized my screenshot folder was just getting cluttered and that nobody would even care, specially not Anet.

    https://imgur.com/F0VrrUg <<< This should NEVER be happening in a ranked game, EVER. This is not healthy, this is not fun for anyone, maybe for the ones facerolling through, but I can guarantee you, eventually these people will too get bored of it. Leave AT for premades, because as it stands, all premades are doing right now is farming those of us that want competitive matches on equal grounds .

    It is also frustrating that I can win 7-9 points, but lose 14-17 points on a single match, specially the higher I go. I understand that it makes sense mathematically, but I'm rank 120-180, why do I have people gold 1-2 in my team while still I being matched against rank 7 and 12 in a premade with no premades in my team, IN THE SAME GAME ?!

    Is population that low? If thats the case, then thats on you Anet, for neglecting the mode for so long that people have given up on it. Im doing my part, still playing despite the frustration, im sticking through it, so why do you punish me by pitting me agaisnt premades time and time again?

  • Megametzler.5729Megametzler.5729 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @yanniell.1236 said:
    It has being said many times before, and at this point, I'm pretty sure Anet is OK with how things are.

    If you add to that the fact that the point gap to cross divisions is too much (300 points, which means roughly 30 wins in a row), you'll understand why people aren't playing the game mode.

    I'm mostly certain that @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 himself said somewhere in this foruns that less than 30% of players put in gold make it to platinum, which basically means that 70%+ of the players aren't getting any sense of progression whatsoever and are just stuck in a division, which can translate to 70%+ of the player base aren't having fun in the game mode, which, in turn, explains the population steady decrease.

    Their inability to realize that baffles me.

    It would have to be "relative skill progression" to climb higher. The current divisions have nothing to do with farming or so, it is purely relative skill to others.

    Those 30% probably got placed there due to bad luck, some might learn quicker than others. Those 70% probably simply had good luck in some games or just do not learn quicker than others. It is not about progression because I play a lot. You only climb if your skill is actually higher.

    I really would like to know what you suggest. Would you like to encourage the matchmaker to team Golds up as if they were higher ranked (potentially getting farmed and being the reason for the loss) or lower (to farm newbies)? Would that be more fun? I would honestly like to know what you wish for.

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @yanniell.1236 said:
    It has being said many times before, and at this point, I'm pretty sure Anet is OK with how things are.

    If you add to that the fact that the point gap to cross divisions is too much (300 points, which means roughly 30 wins in a row), you'll understand why people aren't playing the game mode.

    I'm mostly certain that @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 himself said somewhere in this foruns that less than 30% of players put in gold make it to platinum, which basically means that 70%+ of the players aren't getting any sense of progression whatsoever and are just stuck in a division, which can translate to 70%+ of the player base aren't having fun in the game mode, which, in turn, explains the population steady decrease.

    Their inability to realize that baffles me.

    The actual stat was a little over 30 percent of players placed in the upper half of gold finish the season in platinum. The percentage for lower gold placement was around 7 percent. Which would seem to indicate that placement isn't as inaccurate as many players seem to believe and neither is the rating system at the mid range.

    Is it satisfying? Probably not. Because the goal isn't actually to ensure the highest percentage of even matches, but rather to reflect the impact a single player has over a large number of games with a relative numerical score.

    A perfect system would have everyone reaching equilibrium and moving closer and closer to a 50/50 win rate. Getting stuck winning as often as you lose doesn't feel satisfying. Neither does the fact that in reality a significant portion of games played are not close enough to be decided by the actions of a single player. This means your rating gain or loss over time is actually determined by the subset of games where you did make the difference. Again, not satisfying. But it does what the system is intended to do.

  • This.

    I had been taking screenshots of how many times I get matched agaisnt premades, but at some point I realized my screenshot folder was just getting cluttered and that nobody would even care, specially not Anet.

    https://imgur.com/F0VrrUg <<< This should NEVER be happening in a ranked game, EVER. This is not healthy, this is not fun for anyone, maybe for the ones facerolling through, but I can guarantee you, eventually these people will too get bored of it. Leave AT for premades, because as it stands, all premades are doing right now is farming those of us that want competitive matches on equal grounds .

    It is also frustrating that I can win 7-9 points, but lose 14-17 points on a single match, specially the higher I go. I understand that it makes sense mathematically, but I'm rank 120-180, why do I have people gold 1-2 in my team while still I being matched against rank 7 and 12 in a premade with no premades in my team, IN THE SAME GAME ?!

    Is population that low? If thats the case, then thats on you Anet, for neglecting the mode for so long that people have given up on it. Im doing my part, still playing despite the frustration, im sticking through it, so why do you punish me by pitting me agaisnt premades time and time again?

    Your image is the story of my pvp life. I try to tell myself I'm playing ranked for the rewards, but I also want a win sometimes too. It just isn't fun anymore.

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    "Horrible patch done by horrible people, believe me, believe me."

    @ventusthunder.5067 said:
    This can all be traced back to the COMPLETELY UNDESERVED nerfs of OP's main, the WORST, CYBERBULLIED CLASS. Unfortunate.

    Also this.


    But really. The game is the same as it was both population wise and quality of play as it was last patch and the patch before it. Matchmaking isn't perfect, the rating system isn't perfect, but Ranked PvP isn't really that indicative of skill anyways, so take it like the meme it can be and enjoy it, or don't play it if you don't enjoy it.

  • dominik.9721dominik.9721 Member ✭✭✭

    Rating gain and loss should be dedicated by the average team rating and not by the personal rating. If you have 1800 rating but your team in average only 1600 you shouldn't lose 20 points if you lose to another team with 1600 rating on average.

    Current system punishes you if you have high rating but keep playing. It also makes ppl to go on alts once you reached high rating. If you top 5 for example, you just go on an alt try to steal rating from rank 1-4 without risking your own rating on your main acc. Chance that you get into the matches of rank 1-4 with your alt acc are high anyways due to small player base.

    Only time ppl play with their mains then is at 3 am to avoid decay and to do minimal required games.

    This system makes lb basically a joke.

  • Miyu.8137Miyu.8137 Member ✭✭
    edited April 12, 2019

    I understand what you mean and it would be more fair, but imagine top players going duo and farming points in off-time. They would gain a lot of points ending at 2500+ points for example. How would the matchmaking make a fair game with someone having 2500 while the rest available ppl in queue having around 1600-1700. Such game would be totally messed up, or the algoritm would simply not find anyone in your range and you could be stucked in queue for hours. No, due small player base, this is the only way, I don't like it either, but thats how it is ...

  • Safandula.8723Safandula.8723 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 12, 2019

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    so it constantly matches you with people who are 150+ and lower elo than you which is the game's failure and arena net's matchmaking failure and not your personal failure.

    Actually its failure of low player base. U don't want to be matched with lower rated ppl, than play in prime times. If it doesn't help u cuz ur 1800 and ur matched with 1500-1600, than as I told, it's about player base. Script that would match only ppl with similar rating, would cause way longer matching time, which would touch everyone badly.
    Tldr find game with more ppl

    make prepardness baseline plz

  • incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭

    @Safandula.8723 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    so it constantly matches you with people who are 150+ and lower elo than you which is the game's failure and arena net's matchmaking failure and not your personal failure.

    Actually its failure of low player base. U don't want to be matched with lower rated ppl, than play in prime times. If it doesn't help u cuz ur 1800 and ur matched with 1500-1600, than as I told, it's about player base. Script that would match only ppl with similar rating, would cause way longer matching time, which would touch everyone badly.
    Tldr find game with more ppl

    that's true but instead of punishing people for still trying to play the game then the system should protect people

    if your teammates are much lower elo= you lose less instead more (you'll still lose 10+ anyway so its not like that's low) and if your enemies are lower elo than you = you'll gain less instead more

    that way if a high elo player spammed games, at most he'd just get better win rate and u would need insane win rate to stay positive elo gain anyway if fighting much worse players but at least you'll have incentive to play and not "quit"

  • incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭

    I just signed to play a game in sunday afternoon/peak hours and there were no people my elo so it matched me with sub-1600 rated people (when im at 1750)

    in fact im pretty sure some of the ppl in the game might've been even sub 1550

    constantly doing 1v2 and my team is literally wiping in 3v4 which is almost impossible in a normal game, it's just not fun, you're carrying so much weight in games like these and if you lose you lose nearly double rating and if you win you get 2x less rating. I don't get it. This is why gw2 has a lot less people than it could have. I don't feel motivated to play after this and i'm an active gw2 player, imagine if it was someone trying to get into the game? Efforts arent even remotely rewarded and you are punished for playing the game and that's gw2

    if this is a tactic to get people to quit gw2 so they can announce gw3 or something i can understand but if they honestly think this is doing anything positive to the game then they're very deluded and wrong

    this isn't even salt since we somehow managed to win the game, it's just the most flawed design ive ever seen. If you're going to put a 1750 player in a 1500 game then you better protect the 1750 player for ROBBING HIM/HER out of the matchmaking itself. Add a checkup button that says strict matchmaking that doesn't match you with ppl lower than 100-150 than you or something. I would gladly wait 2x longer for queue time than be forced to play with people from gold in a game where i lose 2x if i do lose. If the loss was lower than normal then i wouldn't care as much but considering its 2x normal it's just too much

    and you know elo doesn't matter in this game any more but you still have ppl trashtalking you for elo even if you're messing around and stuff and on top of that games on low elo are really bad (they aren't fun) cause people just don't know how to play the game. It's actually funny that in 1500 elo if i played a cheese build i would have LESS win rate than if i played it in 1700+ because it's actually EASIER TO PLAY THE GAME when everyone knows what he's doing and you can make more things work, while in 1500 and lower you're forced to play a build / playstyle that can "carry" your team which could be fun if you weren't penalized so incredibly much for not carrying your team cause at the end of the day 1 person doesn't win a 5 man game and no player in gw2 can single-handedly win 1v5 simply because the points are spread across the map and you can't be everywhere at once so even if you won every fight you were in - you could still lose the game if your teammates fail to do the basics

  • Having a point system that rewards you based on RNG matchmaking is exactly why it's always been awful. As the population drops, and as systems like DuoQ are implemented, the more often you get put in the carry role as the highest rated player, and end up tanking loads of points if you lose in that scenario. Enough so that it will take two consecutive wins to earn back the points for that loss, despite being at an inherent disadvantage. Getting trapped in a tier is a complete myth though, l2p(Kappa).

    If you win in that exact same carry role, despite the odds being stacked against you, and it being fairly difficult; ranked will always find a way to reward less for that win. If there were some type of formula that took personal performance per role, win/loss streaks, and average team rating into consideration at the end of a match(such a formula that exists in many if not all modern competitive games) then ranked would overall feel less like a dice-roll and be more visibly competitive.

    Remove or Split DuoQ, revolution of our time! 😷

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think the system worked better with team queue.
    Another thing about team queue is you can't wintrade either.

    Would be cool if we had team queue again.

  • tacoclaw.8251tacoclaw.8251 Member ✭✭
    edited April 15, 2019

    Incisorr: I hear you, but I just can’t see a solution for you. You may want to expand your gaming frontier. Looking for high end competitive balanced pvp with good matchmaking in GW2 is akin to going to Taco Bell for Chinese food.

  • Sampson.2403Sampson.2403 Member ✭✭✭

    Taco bell sells chinese food? :o

  • incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 16, 2019

    I signed today for another game, thinking "ok it's been some time maybe i get matched with normal people" and lo and behold, not a single one of my teammates is within 200 rating of me or in top 250 as far as i'm aware. I've never seen any of them. I've seen 3 of my enemies which were 100-150 rating behind me. Not a single one of my teammates could play

    they were perma dead, they couldn't hold a cap, we lost 500-200 when i had 42% dmg despite not playing the full game because i was busy typing and because i didn't want to play or was being chased/killed by 3 people. I lost 20 rating (which is the maximum)

    I get matched with complete newbies, i get robbed by the matchmaking, i get punished by the rating system instead protected which is what rating should be there for. Instead of me losing less because the game failed to find me adequate teammates - i lose more because the person who made the system is completely devoid of common reasoning.

    Guild Wars 2 is the only game in which the higher rating you get the easier your games become.

    If i could only play with high rated/competent/high elo people, my win rate would be MUCH higher than it is now. I'm talking about double digit percentages higher. It's absolutely amazing actually how when you get matched with people below plat they don't even understand the concept of conquest or efficiency or pressure or anything.

    If you are matched with bad teammates vs at least 2 okay-decent-good enemies then the game is unwinnable. There is nothing you can do to win. I have thousands of games in gw2 and i've been matched with all sorts of elo people and this is my takeout from it.

    You have a person in top 10 get matched with people outside of top 250 and then lose double rating. it's absolutely mind-boggling. The game punishes you for attempting to play it. It's not fun. It's not even so much about rating as much as it is about nerves and game quality. I had nothing to do today (like every day btw) and i was planning on playing gw2 this afternoon but after this game i just don't want to. It's not the people's fault, it's not my gold teammates's fault. It's arena net's fault for not understanding logic.
    I UNDERSTAND THAT THE GAME HAS LOW POPULATION BUT

    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE! If i lost LESS rating than usual (the usual loss is around 12) then i could make it up in 1 game but i lost 20 rating which is 3 times more than what i should be losing in a game like this. This has nothing to do with the population of the game, if you punish people for trying to play the game then people simply won't play the game. Literally everybody loses from this situation

    You also gain less rating if you win a game with lower elo people which is fair at least but the loss makes no sense. I'm aware it pushes you for better win rate than 50/50 but it pushes you for an unrealistically high to achieve win rate in such clown fiesta games which is why it needs to be adjusted. At least for solo play. On low elo games where you get bad teammates and bad enemies you can carry unrealistically much but on high elo where you get butchered matchmaking games then you have the chance to be matched against semi-decent people while having bad people and those are the games that are unwinnable because you can't be everywhere at once.

    low elo gw2 isn't fun and with the matchmaking being so broken you often get low elo games even at 1700 + rating. People who haven't played high rating games don't know what they're missing out. The problem is that even when you get to high elo you can still be put in a bad game and {{WE UNDERSTAND THAT GW2 SPVP LACKS POPULATION}} but the fact that you can be dragged down to the mud so easily by the flawed matchmaking system is just making people not want to play. @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 if this was addressed there would be more reason to play gw2 spvp ranked, i would be playing right now instead of making this post

    now if i want to play decent games i would have to wait for good people to be playing but i can't know when that'll be cause sometimes its at this time and sometimes its in 4 am and usually its at night and im pretty sure if there was a way to look at my overall win rate for the past few seasons then i would have the highest win rate on average around peak hours and not in the afternoons, which doesn't speak about my abilities as an individual but about the stupid matchmaking the game has. And win rate aside, i would even be fine with this as long as the game didn't punish me for playing it by making me lose double rating due to its own failures

    so let me sum it up , again, the solution is simple - if the matchmaking fails to provide you adequate teammates (within a window of your rating) then upon a loss you should lose less rating than the average/normal/usual rating loss and not more. You already gain less. If a 1750 person is matched with 1500 one then instead of losing 20 as you would - you should lose like 7. At the same time you'll only win 5 or so rating which still pushes you for a 50%+ win rate but not for some unrealistic to achieve 75%+ win rate as a solo player in a 5v5 game.
    For duo sign the loss can be more stingy. It's probably 5 lines of code to adjust all this and can be done within a day.

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

    ^ He's right though, and here is why:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.
    • It looks like the algorithm is doing a perfect job on paper mathematically. In reality this is garbage match making because Conquest is played on 3 nodes and the 1700 who is being expected to carry his weight for his team within the algorithm, can only be on 1 node at any given time. This means that wherever the 1700 is at holding his node and winning, his 1525 teammates are getting crunched by the 1600 opponents and losing the other 2 nodes. It only takes holding 2 nodes to win a Conquest game and a Conquest game cannot be won by only holding 1 node.
    • Essentially, the match maker is expecting the 1700 to 1v2 the entire game and successfully WIN those 1v2s and never disengage, to even realistically grant his team a chance to win in 4v3 on the other 2 nodes. That's a lot of weight to carry when you're talking 1700 vs 1600 1600. And even if he does successfully do this, at the best his team is 1525 1525 vs 1600 on one node, and 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 on the other.
    • Here is where it gets interesting. Even if the 1700 can actually successfully 1v2 and win the entire game while holding some node his color, that still is not enough to ensure a victory for his team, despite his hard carry performance. The reason is because if a 1700 can 1v2 1600 1600 and win all game, it is also possible that a 1600 could 1v2 1525 1525 and win all game as well. So even if the 1700 1v2s and wins all game, it is still equal win/lose opportunity on the other two nodes for both sides of the team, despite the 1700's team having a 4v3 advantage. If one of the 1600s can at least hold 1v2 vs. 1525 1525 while his other 1600 1600 wins vs. 1525 1525, it'll be a no-win situation for the 1700, despite his hard carry performance. For the system to make a match and expect the 1700 to 1v3 1600s to ENSURE his victory, that is ridiculous and in no way realistic with how the game of Conquest actually works in-game.
    • So what we are looking at here, when the match maker digs too far down into divisions to make a match for high rated players, are virtually impossible to carry matches for the high rated player, despite the numbers on paper making it look like the algorithm is working perfectly. The algorithm is allocating too much weight onto the shoulders of the high rated player, that due to the nature of how Conquest is played and game engine limitations, isn't realistically possible to carry. This is because he can only be on one node at a given time, he only has so much DPS, only so much sustain, and only so much mobility.

    Incisorr's idea is in the right direction. It might also be time to consider elongating the algorithm's search for players.

  • bluri.2653bluri.2653 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

    ^ He's right though, and here is why:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.
    • It looks like the algorithm is doing a perfect job on paper mathematically. In reality this is garbage match making because Conquest is played on 3 nodes and the 1700 who is being expected to carry his weight for his team within the algorithm, can only be on 1 node at any given time. This means that wherever the 1700 is at holding his node and winning, his 1525 teammates are getting crunched by the 1600 opponents and losing the other 2 nodes. It only takes holding 2 nodes to win a Conquest game and a Conquest game cannot be won by only holding 1 node.
    • Essentially, the match maker is expecting the 1700 to 1v2 the entire game and successfully WIN those 1v2s and never disengage, to even realistically grant his team a chance to win in 4v3 on the other 2 nodes. That's a lot of weight to carry when you're talking 1700 vs 1600 1600. And even if he does successfully do this, at the best his team is 1525 1525 vs 1600 on one node, and 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 on the other.
    • Here is where it gets interesting. Even if the 1700 can actually successfully 1v2 and win the entire game while holding some node his color, that still is not enough to ensure a victory for his team, despite his hard carry performance. The reason is because if a 1700 can 1v2 1600 1600 and win all game, it is also possible that a 1600 could 1v2 1525 1525 and win all game as well. So even if the 1700 1v2s and wins all game, it is still equal win/lose opportunity on the other two nodes for both sides of the team, despite the 1700's team having a 4v3 advantage. If one of the 1600s can at least hold 1v2 vs. 1525 1525 while his other 1600 1600 wins vs. 1525 1525, it'll be a no-win situation for the 1700, despite his hard carry performance. For the system to make a match and expect the 1700 to 1v3 1600s to ENSURE his victory, that is ridiculous and in no way realistic with how the game of Conquest actually works in-game.
    • So what we are looking at here, when the match maker digs too far down into divisions to make a match for high rated players, are virtually impossible to carry matches for the high rated player, despite the numbers on paper making it look like the algorithm is working perfectly. The algorithm is allocating too much weight onto the shoulders of the high rated player, that due to the nature of how Conquest is played and game engine limitations, isn't realistically possible to carry. This is because he can only be on one node at a given time, he only has so much DPS, only so much sustain, and only so much mobility.

    Incisorr's idea is in the right direction. It might also be time to consider elongating the algorithm's search for players.

    "all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!"

    You do know that then I'd simply just queue offpeak hours where the average will be even bigger and since I'm supposed to lose less, I will eventually gain and gain and gain.

    No you guys have no idea what you are on about

    www.twitch.tv/sindrener - Rank 55 Dragons/Orange Logo/Team Aggression

  • shadowpass.4236shadowpass.4236 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 17, 2019

    @bluri.2653 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

    ^ He's right though, and here is why:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.
    • It looks like the algorithm is doing a perfect job on paper mathematically. In reality this is garbage match making because Conquest is played on 3 nodes and the 1700 who is being expected to carry his weight for his team within the algorithm, can only be on 1 node at any given time. This means that wherever the 1700 is at holding his node and winning, his 1525 teammates are getting crunched by the 1600 opponents and losing the other 2 nodes. It only takes holding 2 nodes to win a Conquest game and a Conquest game cannot be won by only holding 1 node.
    • Essentially, the match maker is expecting the 1700 to 1v2 the entire game and successfully WIN those 1v2s and never disengage, to even realistically grant his team a chance to win in 4v3 on the other 2 nodes. That's a lot of weight to carry when you're talking 1700 vs 1600 1600. And even if he does successfully do this, at the best his team is 1525 1525 vs 1600 on one node, and 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 on the other.
    • Here is where it gets interesting. Even if the 1700 can actually successfully 1v2 and win the entire game while holding some node his color, that still is not enough to ensure a victory for his team, despite his hard carry performance. The reason is because if a 1700 can 1v2 1600 1600 and win all game, it is also possible that a 1600 could 1v2 1525 1525 and win all game as well. So even if the 1700 1v2s and wins all game, it is still equal win/lose opportunity on the other two nodes for both sides of the team, despite the 1700's team having a 4v3 advantage. If one of the 1600s can at least hold 1v2 vs. 1525 1525 while his other 1600 1600 wins vs. 1525 1525, it'll be a no-win situation for the 1700, despite his hard carry performance. For the system to make a match and expect the 1700 to 1v3 1600s to ENSURE his victory, that is ridiculous and in no way realistic with how the game of Conquest actually works in-game.
    • So what we are looking at here, when the match maker digs too far down into divisions to make a match for high rated players, are virtually impossible to carry matches for the high rated player, despite the numbers on paper making it look like the algorithm is working perfectly. The algorithm is allocating too much weight onto the shoulders of the high rated player, that due to the nature of how Conquest is played and game engine limitations, isn't realistically possible to carry. This is because he can only be on one node at a given time, he only has so much DPS, only so much sustain, and only so much mobility.

    Incisorr's idea is in the right direction. It might also be time to consider elongating the algorithm's search for players.

    "all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!"

    You do know that then I'd simply just queue offpeak hours where the average will be even bigger and since I'm supposed to lose less, I will eventually gain and gain and gain.

    No you guys have no idea what you are on about

    Reducing the rating a high elo person gains if he has good teammates might offset that. I'm not sure though as I'm certain there are a lot more variables to take into account.

    Regardless, the scenario Trevor mentioned is true and a common occurrence. My teammates frequently wipe on the other two nodes no matter how many 1vXs I'm winning/stalemating at any given moment. It actually doesn't make sense when I'm kiting 4 people around on a node for 20 seconds, and the other two nodes are either neutral or on the enemy cap.

    Yet I end up frustrated as I still drop 20 rating for the loss even though my efforts should have easily won us the match.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    cuz your enemies are also lower elo so the mm assumes you will win. pretty basic.

    Te lazla otstara.

  • Snellibee.2761Snellibee.2761 Member ✭✭✭

    First thing I see you say that I actually agree on

  • incisorr.9502incisorr.9502 Member ✭✭✭

    @bluri.2653 said:

    "all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!"

    You do know that then I'd simply just queue offpeak hours where the average will be even bigger and since I'm supposed to lose less, I will eventually gain and gain and gain.

    No you guys have no idea what you are on about

    I don't think you actually know how bad low elo games are. Lol. If you think that you're going to get 80% win rate with only bad players on your team then maybe you deserve your rating , for which you'll have to grind more hours on average than usual.

    The thing is, if this suggestion is "implemented" then there won't be off-hours as much as there are now. People will play the game more. I'm usually awake at night but i don't play gw2 because i'd gain 6 and lose 20 and its not possible to have 80% win rate in this game, i simply don't think you've seen lower elo games. You can end 20-0 after securing/winning multiple 1v2 nodes/fights and still lose. I have. Over a year ago or so when i was playing entirely at night i couldn't get even plat 2 and when i stopped playing at night i started getting legendary

    so the problem with your post is that you think that getting high win rate in games with bad people is easy but it is not, and if you DO manage to get high win rate vs bad people then you should be rewarded for it somehow. I don't see anything wrong with someone who plays for 4 hours in "off-hours" to gain some rating. It's not like the gain will be huge anyway and the game will be more alive. You'll have more incentive to play in off hours and so will your enemies and therefore the 'off-hours' will be much less and when you're trying to farm noobs in 4 am there might be other higher elo people who want to do the same or to stop you and then you'll meet (and most likely be placed against each other, with 4 bad teammates) and it'll be a clown fiesta but at least the game won't punish you by making you lose 20 rating so the game can be played and the price you'll have to pay for getting unlucky will be much smaller and bearable

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @Mbelch.9028 said:
    "Horrible patch done by horrible people, believe me, believe me."

    @ventusthunder.5067 said:
    This can all be traced back to the COMPLETELY UNDESERVED nerfs of OP's main, the WORST, CYBERBULLIED CLASS. Unfortunate.

    Also this.


    But really. The game is the same as it was both population wise and quality of play as it was last patch and the patch before it. Matchmaking isn't perfect, the rating system isn't perfect, but Ranked PvP isn't really that indicative of skill anyways, so take it like the meme it can be and enjoy it, or don't play it if you don't enjoy it.

    We sure about that? Just yesterday I checked the leaderboard and saw that the top 250 included a significant portion of Gold 3. I've never seen that before outside of like the very first day of the season.

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @incisorr.9502 said:

    @bluri.2653 said:

    "all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!"

    You do know that then I'd simply just queue offpeak hours where the average will be even bigger and since I'm supposed to lose less, I will eventually gain and gain and gain.

    No you guys have no idea what you are on about

    so the problem with your post is that you think that getting high win rate in games with bad people is easy but it is not

    It's because low rated players are completely random. In high rated matches or let's even use the final round of an AT as example, most if not all of the players understand the full meta dynamic, in terms of what classes are capable of and what they are not, when every player is playing those classes at a nearly fully optimized level. So you can make judgements like: "I can stay or leave and I know with a 95% accuracy, what will likely happen when I stay or leave." or "I know where the stealthed enemy is going because a player at his level has only one good option right now and I know what it is." However, in low rated matches, players are completely random. There are situations like this happening:

    • You're defending a side node against a Herald. One of your teammates who is a Condi Mirage, shows up to + you even though you were already winning the 1v1 and holding the node your color. The Herald is already at bellow 50% health, so you leave to quickly rotate where you are needed, feeling confident that the Condi Mirage will be able to easily defend your node and finish off the Herald. When you arrive at the mid node, you look at the mini map and notice that the Condi Mirage who was at full resource when you left, has somehow lost the node and died.
    • You're 1v2ing on a side node at Legacy and holding the node your color. The mid node is also your color and you have a teammate who is a Power Longbow Ranger who is standing on the hill watching the mid node. An enemy Necromancer waddles onto the mid node to decap it. For some reason, the Power Longbow Ranger decides to come and help you, instead of kill the Necromancer who is capping mid.
    • You're in a 2v2 at mid in Temple. The game timer is at something like 9:20. The person who is helping support you in the 2v2 suddenly leaves the mid node and runs all the way to Tranquility, because he figured it would be a good idea to get there early.

    ^ All of this kind of stuff results in matches that are ridiculously difficult to carry, because you cannot form proper rotational judgments around a team that takes random actions the entire match. You have no idea what they are going to do next. Winning these kinds of matches begins to feel a lot less about how hard you can carry, and a lot more about if your PUGs will happen to land reasonable decisions or not, because we all know that a single stupid decision can throw a game instantly.

  • yanniell.1236yanniell.1236 Member ✭✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @bluri.2653 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

    ^ He's right though, and here is why:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.
    • It looks like the algorithm is doing a perfect job on paper mathematically. In reality this is garbage match making because Conquest is played on 3 nodes and the 1700 who is being expected to carry his weight for his team within the algorithm, can only be on 1 node at any given time. This means that wherever the 1700 is at holding his node and winning, his 1525 teammates are getting crunched by the 1600 opponents and losing the other 2 nodes. It only takes holding 2 nodes to win a Conquest game and a Conquest game cannot be won by only holding 1 node.
    • Essentially, the match maker is expecting the 1700 to 1v2 the entire game and successfully WIN those 1v2s and never disengage, to even realistically grant his team a chance to win in 4v3 on the other 2 nodes. That's a lot of weight to carry when you're talking 1700 vs 1600 1600. And even if he does successfully do this, at the best his team is 1525 1525 vs 1600 on one node, and 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 on the other.
    • Here is where it gets interesting. Even if the 1700 can actually successfully 1v2 and win the entire game while holding some node his color, that still is not enough to ensure a victory for his team, despite his hard carry performance. The reason is because if a 1700 can 1v2 1600 1600 and win all game, it is also possible that a 1600 could 1v2 1525 1525 and win all game as well. So even if the 1700 1v2s and wins all game, it is still equal win/lose opportunity on the other two nodes for both sides of the team, despite the 1700's team having a 4v3 advantage. If one of the 1600s can at least hold 1v2 vs. 1525 1525 while his other 1600 1600 wins vs. 1525 1525, it'll be a no-win situation for the 1700, despite his hard carry performance. For the system to make a match and expect the 1700 to 1v3 1600s to ENSURE his victory, that is ridiculous and in no way realistic with how the game of Conquest actually works in-game.
    • So what we are looking at here, when the match maker digs too far down into divisions to make a match for high rated players, are virtually impossible to carry matches for the high rated player, despite the numbers on paper making it look like the algorithm is working perfectly. The algorithm is allocating too much weight onto the shoulders of the high rated player, that due to the nature of how Conquest is played and game engine limitations, isn't realistically possible to carry. This is because he can only be on one node at a given time, he only has so much DPS, only so much sustain, and only so much mobility.

    Incisorr's idea is in the right direction. It might also be time to consider elongating the algorithm's search for players.

    "all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!"

    You do know that then I'd simply just queue offpeak hours where the average will be even bigger and since I'm supposed to lose less, I will eventually gain and gain and gain.

    No you guys have no idea what you are on about

    If you think you can solo queue off hours with horrible teammates and have a decent enough winrate to make "tons" of rank points from your +4~5 points per win, go for it. You deserve this "tons" of ranking points you'll make. But I've seem some of your streams, and I'm pretty sure even you can't carry unwinnable matches that hard to make the effort worthy.

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    @Mbelch.9028 said:
    "Horrible patch done by horrible people, believe me, believe me."

    @ventusthunder.5067 said:
    This can all be traced back to the COMPLETELY UNDESERVED nerfs of OP's main, the WORST, CYBERBULLIED CLASS. Unfortunate.

    Also this.


    But really. The game is the same as it was both population wise and quality of play as it was last patch and the patch before it. Matchmaking isn't perfect, the rating system isn't perfect, but Ranked PvP isn't really that indicative of skill anyways, so take it like the meme it can be and enjoy it, or don't play it if you don't enjoy it.

    We sure about that? Just yesterday I checked the leaderboard and saw that the top 250 included a significant portion of Gold 3. I've never seen that before outside of like the very first day of the season.

    Am I sure about the playing population? Yes. Only anet can confirm if I'm correct or incorrect. Do I think people are spamming ranked like they used to? No. That might be the answer of the question, but who knows.

  • Markri.9475Markri.9475 Member ✭✭
    edited April 18, 2019

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.

    for it to be 1600 average it needs to be 1575, not 1525.
    edit; or the 1700 be 1900.

  • Bazsi.2734Bazsi.2734 Member ✭✭✭

    Is this a troll post? "Hurr losing to trash players should have next to no consequences durr" What even is this forum anymore?

  • Faux Play.6104Faux Play.6104 Member ✭✭✭

    From the perspective of the gold player, I don't want to be stuck in matches with 1600+ players. But this issue is their own doing. Top players duck other top players and play alts to protect their rating. If alt accounts were forced to share rating, and the matchmaker didn't allow matches with huge mmr Delta's on the same team this problem would solve itself.

    If they are still having issues getting enough matches, let automated tournament results count towards their rating.

  • Vancho.8750Vancho.8750 Member ✭✭✭

    I like to add to the suggestion that after reaching certain rating , lets say 1699 your rating gain loss is capped around low numbers 3 to 8, so the best of the best don't get some kind of ridiculous rating that they can't match at all ( remember that as a case in the early days of League of Legends), also if you win vs low rating players you get the tremendous amount of 1 and if you lose you get -3 , it is the same % as now but removes the yo yo effect where people can be knocked off the board for one game while being in the 50 to 100 position.

  • huluobo.7036huluobo.7036 Member ✭✭✭

    You are just a data, the game is without feelings, just like Guild Wars 1, pvp will be less and less, this is a pvp game without feelings, no matter how many times you experience no one cares.

  • JTGuevara.9018JTGuevara.9018 Member ✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    all you have to do is reduce the rating a high elo person loses if he has bad teammates, IT'S THAT SIMPLE!

    ^ He's right though, and here is why:

    • Say you're 1700 in a match and you get paired with 1525 1525 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 = an even 1600 vs. 1600 avg.
    • It looks like the algorithm is doing a perfect job on paper mathematically. In reality this is garbage match making because Conquest is played on 3 nodes and the 1700 who is being expected to carry his weight for his team within the algorithm, can only be on 1 node at any given time. This means that wherever the 1700 is at holding his node and winning, his 1525 teammates are getting crunched by the 1600 opponents and losing the other 2 nodes. It only takes holding 2 nodes to win a Conquest game and a Conquest game cannot be won by only holding 1 node.
    • Essentially, the match maker is expecting the 1700 to 1v2 the entire game and successfully WIN those 1v2s and never disengage, to even realistically grant his team a chance to win in 4v3 on the other 2 nodes. That's a lot of weight to carry when you're talking 1700 vs 1600 1600. And even if he does successfully do this, at the best his team is 1525 1525 vs 1600 on one node, and 1525 1525 vs. 1600 1600 on the other.
    • Here is where it gets interesting. Even if the 1700 can actually successfully 1v2 and win the entire game while holding some node his color, that still is not enough to ensure a victory for his team, despite his hard carry performance. The reason is because if a 1700 can 1v2 1600 1600 and win all game, it is also possible that a 1600 could 1v2 1525 1525 and win all game as well. So even if the 1700 1v2s and wins all game, it is still equal win/lose opportunity on the other two nodes for both sides of the team, despite the 1700's team having a 4v3 advantage. If one of the 1600s can at least hold 1v2 vs. 1525 1525 while his other 1600 1600 wins vs. 1525 1525, it'll be a no-win situation for the 1700, despite his hard carry performance. For the system to make a match and expect the 1700 to 1v3 1600s to ENSURE his victory, that is ridiculous and in no way realistic with how the game of Conquest actually works in-game.
    • So what we are looking at here, when the match maker digs too far down into divisions to make a match for high rated players, are virtually impossible to carry matches for the high rated player, despite the numbers on paper making it look like the algorithm is working perfectly. The algorithm is allocating too much weight onto the shoulders of the high rated player, that due to the nature of how Conquest is played and game engine limitations, isn't realistically possible to carry. This is because he can only be on one node at a given time, he only has so much DPS, only so much sustain, and only so much mobility.

    Incisorr's idea is in the right direction. It might also be time to consider elongating the algorithm's search for players.

    So...basically good players get f-ed by the system? Sounds about right!

  • JTGuevara.9018JTGuevara.9018 Member ✭✭✭

    @Safandula.8723 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    so it constantly matches you with people who are 150+ and lower elo than you which is the game's failure and arena net's matchmaking failure and not your personal failure.

    Actually its failure of low player base. U don't want to be matched with lower rated ppl, than play in prime times. If it doesn't help u cuz ur 1800 and ur matched with 1500-1600, than as I told, it's about player base. Script that would match only ppl with similar rating, would cause way longer matching time, which would touch everyone badly.
    Tldr find game with more ppl

    Nonsense. Player base is just fine. Every day, I see Heart of the Mists PACKED. The SYSTEM is the problem. We have people playing, they're just not getting matched up like they're supposed to.

  • Safandula.8723Safandula.8723 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @JTGuevara.9018 said:

    @Safandula.8723 said:

    @incisorr.9502 said:
    so it constantly matches you with people who are 150+ and lower elo than you which is the game's failure and arena net's matchmaking failure and not your personal failure.

    Actually its failure of low player base. U don't want to be matched with lower rated ppl, than play in prime times. If it doesn't help u cuz ur 1800 and ur matched with 1500-1600, than as I told, it's about player base. Script that would match only ppl with similar rating, would cause way longer matching time, which would touch everyone badly.
    Tldr find game with more ppl

    Nonsense. Player base is just fine. Every day, I see Heart of the Mists PACKED. The SYSTEM is the problem. We have people playing, they're just not getting matched up like they're supposed to.

    And most of them are playing unranked. There is a lot of ppl playing at silver and gold but there is so few players from legendary that they are alway matched with platinums. And similar with platinums, they are not always matched with only plants but also with legends and golds

    make prepardness baseline plz