Matchmaking algorithm too rigged, - Page 4 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Matchmaking algorithm too rigged,

124

Comments

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 21, 2018

    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

  • choovanski.5462choovanski.5462 Member ✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

    myself, & others have also written extensively about the link between population decline & the loss of team queue in this thread also. both threads are very insightful, & useful if one wants to see why pvp is in the state it’s in. the connection between the loss of team queue & the current population state is undeniable.

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/36950/is-the-pvp-population-shrinking-and-if-so-why/p1

    I'm a punk kid, no reason why
    Nothing finer than the taste of tears running down my face
    Oh cry baby cry, oh cry baby cry oh

  • cptaylor.2670cptaylor.2670 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:

    @cptaylor.2670 said:
    People far worse than me with a lot higher rating.

    Maybe this seems far-fetched and really unbelievable.. But, WHAT IF they are actually better than you, that's why they are on a lot higher rating, while you are just being biased and overrating yourself, leading to blame the system instead?

    Just wondering.

    I’m just assuming I am because I stomp them every time I fight them. Perhaps they are better in terms of strategy and knowing exactly where to be and who to focus. But in terms of playing their class or 1 v 1, some of them just aren’t. I guess there are different ways to be better though.

  • @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

    Great vote about the community's opinion here:

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/33233/5-man-queue-season-11-trial

  • cptaylor.2670cptaylor.2670 Member ✭✭✭✭

    First game back into plat and it's a 500-10 blowout.

    Great matchmaking. Then proceeds the toxic trashtalking trash and the trolls and afk'ers.

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 21, 2018

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

    Great vote about the community's opinion here:

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/33233/5-man-queue-season-11-trial

    I'd say so, considering the weight of how many very experienced players are in the YES vote compared to the NO vote.

    It's the placebo that causes the new, the casuals, and the intermediates to vote NO.

  • I was 1 victory to reach the Gold tier. anet put my in a spriral of losses matching me with the worst players ever (im galss cannon thief and live more than all my team). talk about conspiracy. Now i've lost most of my progress and im in the middle of the rank bar. im so angry!!!! Ill quit of this frustating PvP system,.

  • Abraxxus.8971Abraxxus.8971 Member ✭✭✭

    @Axelteas.7192 said:
    I was 1 victory to reach the Gold tier. anet put my in a spriral of losses matching me with the worst players ever (im galss cannon thief and live more than all my team). talk about conspiracy. Now i've lost most of my progress and im in the middle of the rank bar. im so angry!!!! Ill quit of this frustating PvP system,.

    I was the same way. I've been within 5 points of breaking into the next tier 3 times so far this season, and each time I start to get into loss streaks by being teamed with horrible players, while the other team is steam rolling us. Hence why I gave up on the season and will just 4 pip my way to the llama box if I have to.

    Bring back Ceara

  • milego.4830milego.4830 Member ✭✭

    At this point, I'm pretty sure removing the matchmaking and have totally random matches would be better than the currently system.

  • Eddbopkins.2630Eddbopkins.2630 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Everyone in this thread would stop talking if we can only see our mmr and other peoples mmr rating that the matchmaker uses to make a game......whats there reasoning for not showing it?

  • Trevor Boyer.6524Trevor Boyer.6524 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

    Great vote about the community's opinion here:

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/33233/5-man-queue-season-11-trial

    I'd say so, considering the weight of how many very experienced players are in the YES vote compared to the NO vote.

    It's the placebo that causes the new, the casuals, and the intermediates to vote NO.

    And the fact that if 5 man were enabled, they could no longer match manipulate against the 5 man teams. They would only be able to manipulate vs. the margin of the community who chose not to run 5 man teams.

  • cptaylor.2670cptaylor.2670 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 23, 2018

    Recent history -

    Won, got matched up against someone higher and lost, won, matched up against higher and lost, lost again but that was because my team was stupid and fought off point.

    Now, the last game. 5 gold 3 people against presumably 4 gold 3 people and someone who is currently ranked 3 in the ratings. Of course it was a loss.

    I would rather wait 15 minutes for a queue to be matched with someone within even a fraction of my level than have the team leveled by someone 3 tiers higher and almost legend.

    Broken system.

    Without that one team making stupid mistakes costing us the game despite losing by 4 solely because I held two people at far for the last 5 minutes while they actually got caps, the win/lose/win/lose would have been highly predictable. But this isn't due to my personal skill level and capping out, this is due to matchmaking favoring one team over the other.

    I'm sure I could play better and have certainly made a lot of mistakes. I could handle the other two losses being careless error on my part or not being to a point faster. But being matched up against someone who is near legend is a clear sign that the system isn't doing a good job balancing teams.

    Now, I'm stuck wondering since I've lost two in a row if I'm going to start my 8-12 game losing streak back to gold 2 and have to climb my way up again.

    Just can't fathom how this system determined our team needed to be up against someone of that rating.

    And ended the night with my last two matches having a plat/former legend on my team and both matches being blowouts. It was nice to be on the winning side of the coin, but again isn’t all that fair to the other team. Most of them didn’t realize it at first so I don’t think it was just an issue of feeling discouraged as much as it was skill.

    Even having one person on a team leagues higher and the mean or average or whatever deviation being equal in technicality, it seems like it’s still too skewed in these cases.

    Anyway. Back to the less personal experiences or opinions from others.

  • lexasaniaalex.9860lexasaniaalex.9860 Member ✭✭
    edited April 23, 2018

    I just tired of it at all..Every season the same story: lose streak when a month till the end of the season.

    Last season I dropped plat till gold 2(or 1?) with macthes history like 4-5 loses -- 1 win -- 4-5 loses -- 1-2 win -- repeat. Now I was around 50/50 for some time and dropped plat to gold 3 several times, however it was really close so with one win I backed to Plat and was there and the end of the day everytime.

    It wasn such way till last 2 days: 4 loses - 2 wins - 7 loses. It's just ridiculous! Yesterday I was upset but with optimisn started to play today for..new loses. And now I'm not just upset, I'm really diss'apointed and just don't want to play GW2 for today(or more) anymore!

    I don't pretend to play Legendary/top250 or even Plat 3 right now! I was put to gold 3 with score really close to Plat after 10 matches! I always do my best and do hard to get higher! For what purpose? To lose it within 2 days cause amazing matchmaking system!

    When I was still Plat and was close to lose it I had people from gold and not even 3rd tier. Now I don't even ask with whom I play: people that fight nowhere and not decapping points / people who run 3 men far or close after mid / people who don't control the mini-map or even don't see enemies that run past them to decap. I have more stories but it doesn't matter.

    I just don't understand two things: 1. How they get Plat or Gold with such playstyle? Yes, We all can make mistake, we all can play better today and worse tomorrow cause some aside circumstances. But either way it doesn't justify such playstyle cause even if you are at bad mood or have some problems it will not dtop you to 'hey, I'm new one and don't even know how it works'!
    2. Why did I get these people for 7-8 matches from those 11 loses? Yes some matches I had a good team but we lost anyway cause we did mistakes or else(but such loses are acceptable ofc). But I had only 2-3 matches with such view. Others were like 100-500 / 200-500 etc. It's rare to lose even with 350-500 since almost all matches are just disaster. At least this season I had less AFK-players or DCed players cause last season I met both about every second match. Still it doesn't change anything since lose streak are here anyway!

    I want my 50/50 wins/loses(or at least something around) not this random horror!

  • FrizzFreston.5290FrizzFreston.5290 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 23, 2018

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    Great thread to read about community opinion of returning 5 man right here. -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/31128/bring-back-5-man-ranked-que-needs-to-happen-at-this-point-solo-duo-failed/p1

    Wouldn't be much complaint about the skill level of team mates if the it was the player's responsibility to choose those teammates.

    Great vote about the community's opinion here:

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/33233/5-man-queue-season-11-trial

    I'd say so, considering the weight of how many very experienced players are in the YES vote compared to the NO vote.

    It's the placebo that causes the new, the casuals, and the intermediates to vote NO.

    Sadly even the casuals and intermediates also have a valid opinion.

    I would look at gw1 though. RA and TA had similar populations like in that poll. I think a 5 man tier of ranking could be really interesting. But definitely I wouldnt do away with solo queue.

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    ITT : Players blaming MATCHMAKING for issues that have little to do with it.

    Let's define high rating queues as the queue with most of the top players. You know, the usual top 50 guys. Most of the day, this queue does NOT have 10 players of this level. I'd say when playing around 1600 on EU this is very noticable : you either get a game with random 1500-1600 plats or a game with predominantly 1750 rated players. The quality of the players in these games is very, very different. I'm talking about EU prime now, which is probably the most populated for skilled pvp players. In my experience both NA and off-prime are significantly worse.

    The skill difference between random 1550's and high end 1750 players is massive. Those 1750 which "cannot win" according to many in this thread end up winning far more often than not. Look at their winrates - they're generally very high. I get that it feels unfun; but that's not something anyone can change. It's the result of PvP's high end scene completely dying.

    So rather than complaining about being in queue against higher rated players; realise that if you don't feed too much you'll get A) carried by the high end players on your team and B) a lot of rating if you win, limited lost rating if you lose. Look at how they play and try to improve. And if you can't deal with the queue at a certain time of day, stop queueing.

    I have no issues keeping my rating relatively stable. I know my rating for various classes. It doesn't matter if games are high rating or lower rating queues. It doesn't matter if matches are somewhat unbalanced or very close. If you play consistent and well you should be fine.

    The issue is still that many, many low-end players don't grasp the basics of the game. Your matches become a LOT more snowbally and feel "impossible to win" if players refuse to regroup. And I honestly dont see teams regroup while wiping; ever.

    Watching streams at 1600 go "MATCHMAKING GAVE ME ANOTHER 500-50 GAME kitten IS THIS kitten!!!" meanwhile their team lost the initial teamfight and literally never regrouped. They just kept trickling into 5 players on legacy... I mean you can blame matchmaking all you like; and yes matches are inperfect. I agree even 1500's shouldn't play with 1700+ because the skill difference is huge. But most of the snowbally matches are nothing else but L 2 P issues and tilt.

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 1, 2018

    I'm one of those players with multiple accounts that vary wildly in rating

    1767 / 1604 / 1500 Am I a plat 1 2 or 3 player, these accounts remain in these tiers no matter what, I will go on insane losing streaks on account 3, only to barely be able to scrape back up to plat1, my main account however has NO issue remaining plat 3 sometimes upwards of legendary on NA.

    Also of note, high rated main account REGULARLY gets other top rated players on the same side team, the other 2 accounts ONLY face high rated players, there is never any one above plat 1 on my side on either of those accounts in any regular capacity. It is a constant stream of gold 2/3 and plat 1 players, against literally anything from double top 20 to a team of 5 bronze, it is arbitrary and a nightmare to play.

    RN I'm experiencing a dead lock in 50/50 win rate on 1 of the accounts, the other 2 accounts have a great wl, I guess I just play differently on 1 account. :thinking:

  • Hyraltia.4185Hyraltia.4185 Member ✭✭
    edited August 1, 2018

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    Hasn't there been statements by developers stating that that average distance in player score between highest and lowest players per game is less than 50?

    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50. The deviation is higher than that. Don't have the number off the top of my head though.

    We do our best to get the standard deviation as close as we can though.

    And no, I say it often, we don't rig matches to end loss or win streaks. But many people will never believe it.

    Except you stated the one issue that all current mmr systems fall victim to, AVERAGE is within 50 which means you can have 1600 1600 1600 1500 1400 and 1800 1700 1200 1300 1500 (didn't do the exact math but you get the picture). The team with the 1200 and 1300 is going to simply get smashed because those 2 players have no idea how to compete in that league and are simply not good enough to be there. Saying you try your hardest to keep games even while using average mmr is laughable at best, use a true mmr system and keep all players within 50 not the average, then you start seeing some good games.

    I personally don't care if it takes me 20 minutes to get a queue as long as its not spend 5 minutes in queue and 6 minutes in a match because it was a stomp either way. I stopped playing ranked after a plat 2 match where I was 1659 and we were losing pretty bad when our thief goes man I'm getting killed so easily, an ally asks him his rating and he responds 1362.....we lost that match hard needless to say because he fed voraciously. I took a real long hard look and said this games matchmaking is a literal joke and rating means nothing when I get put with a gold 2 in plat 2 matches during prime time, wasn't even late where population can be used as an excuse. A gold 2 cannot and shouldn't be competing in a match with players 3 tiers over his head, he won't have fun being stomped and the higher mmr players get frustrated at being handed a free loss because average mmr decided to lose them the match.

    At the very least give us a freakin check box or something for strict matchmaking like battlerite does so we have the option to sit in queue for a good match or be matched fast for some garbage stomp match.

  • Zedek.8932Zedek.8932 Member ✭✭✭

    @Delweyn.1309 said:
    It will never be possible to have perfect matchmaking and so, there will be either too easy or either too hard matches.

    If companies would finally stop this nonsense of "team effort" - especially in SoloQ - and finally introduce a personal rating based on your personal results in ALL stats, it would be so much better! On the other hand, restrict the padding to a minium and there you go.

    It is insane that your personal rating is influenced by 80% strangers over the internet that you don't know, never meet and don't even speak the same language - or worst, they don't even want to win. That makes me so mad in LoL already and it would drive me nuts in every other game as well.

    Personal stats, over a long time, would be a very good indicator. I am talking about a pure mix of damage, deaths and assists, heals and all that. Would take some time to figure out a balance there, but people with a high assist count (so not just only the "big players" of a match) should be rewarded equally. But right now, it's random people together, divide by 5, there you go. Now the MMR changed after the game despite you were only a small part. It's bad in both ways: Winning or losing. RIGHT NOW, the matchmaking COULD start to work, because it can figure out the MMR of the team working together (or not) -- it is disbanded. MMR can only work with less clutter like premades and always shifting teams. It need to be solid. And that would be achieved with a personal rating. You lose your game despite being awesome: Gain MMR. You are bad in 12 games in a row: Your stats lower a bit, it's called "average value" for a reason. You are permanently performing bad? Play against other equally badly performing players - and not being a filler to be carried by way higher team mates.

    Right now, this matchmaking is busted and does not even deserve that term. I could flip coins and get better results.

    Excelsior, my name is Zedexx; Asuran Deadeye and assassin.
    The Hunter / 2x Darksteel Pistols / 2x Whisper's Secret Daggers and my Springer. That's all I need and trust.
    "We [Asura] are the concentrated magnificence!"

  • BlaqueFyre.5678BlaqueFyre.5678 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Remember folks, if the player is doing well it’s always skill, if they are doing poorly it’s ermergherd Matchmaker is rigged!!!!!

    It’s rare for certain people to accept responsibility or acknowledge that the issue most likely is themselves, and will place the blame on anything but.

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zedek.8932 said:

    @Delweyn.1309 said:
    It will never be possible to have perfect matchmaking and so, there will be either too easy or either too hard matches.

    If companies would finally stop this nonsense of "team effort" - especially in SoloQ - and finally introduce a personal rating based on your personal results in ALL stats, it would be so much better! On the other hand, restrict the padding to a minium and there you go.

    It is insane that your personal rating is influenced by 80% strangers over the internet that you don't know, never meet and don't even speak the same language - or worst, they don't even want to win. That makes me so mad in LoL already and it would drive me nuts in every other game as well.

    Personal stats, over a long time, would be a very good indicator. I am talking about a pure mix of damage, deaths and assists, heals and all that. Would take some time to figure out a balance there, but people with a high assist count (so not just only the "big players" of a match) should be rewarded equally. But right now, it's random people together, divide by 5, there you go. Now the MMR changed after the game despite you were only a small part. It's bad in both ways: Winning or losing. RIGHT NOW, the matchmaking COULD start to work, because it can figure out the MMR of the team working together (or not) -- it is disbanded. MMR can only work with less clutter like premades and always shifting teams. It need to be solid. And that would be achieved with a personal rating. You lose your game despite being awesome: Gain MMR. You are bad in 12 games in a row: Your stats lower a bit, it's called "average value" for a reason. You are permanently performing bad? Play against other equally badly performing players - and not being a filler to be carried by way higher team mates.

    Right now, this matchmaking is busted and does not even deserve that term. I could flip coins and get better results.

    Name 1 game with a matchmakin that succesfully worked like that. Pro tip : doesn't exist.

    The PLAYERS in GW2 aren't even capable of recognising their own value and mistakes. How do you expect an ALGORITHM to accurately estimate how good you did regardless of your team? You're talking about algorithms for which "we do not have the technology". If anet has the technology, they should (and would) sell it to plenty of much more succesful games and probably get more money off that than GW2.

    General algorithms that accurately guess "personal contribution" in complex team games tend to create more problems than they solve.

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 1, 2018

    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams? EZ -15 for a game im not sure how im supposed to win. You're telling me this is the best it could come up with?

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 1, 2018

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

    I did. Provide context because unless you expect us to go ingame, add all these players and research their ratings we have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
    Imagine you at least tell us who's "super high" and "super low" rated here - or something.

  • Egorum.9506Egorum.9506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Trevor's right about the system, and the reason the same top players are on top is wintrading.

    The system is very easy to manipulate, and getting caught just means creating a new alt. Or doing nothing, since it doesn't result in a ban.

    Anet clearly has no intention of fixing this, and wouldn't even if they could because it would make them look incompetent for missing it or allowing it to go on for this long. Find a different game to enjoy, or wintrade like everyone else does. It's that simple.

  • DragonFury.6243DragonFury.6243 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:
    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50.

    please tell me you meant less than 205 because that the NO. i see for the most of my matches

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

    I did. Provide context because unless you expect us to go ingame, add all these players and research their ratings we have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
    Imagine you at least tell us who's "super high" and "super low" rated here - or something.

    Can you read???????????

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams? EZ -15 for a game im not sure how im supposed to win. You're telling me this is the best it could come up with?"

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

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    Hasn't there been statements by developers stating that that average distance in player score between highest and lowest players per game is less than 50?

    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50. The deviation is higher than that. Don't have the number off the top of my head though.

    We do our best to get the standard deviation as close as we can though.

    And no, I say it often, we don't rig matches to end loss or win streaks. But many people will never believe it.

    Notice he didn't say anything about starting the streaks or prolonging them. We have our evidence it is rigged!!

    /sarcasm

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

    I did. Provide context because unless you expect us to go ingame, add all these players and research their ratings we have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
    Imagine you at least tell us who's "super high" and "super low" rated here - or something.

    Can you read???????????

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams? EZ -15 for a game im not sure how im supposed to win. You're telling me this is the best it could come up with?"

    I see a screenshot of 10 players in a match, without ratings, without knowing what it means... Am I supposed to know all these players? Again, I didn't say this was an appropriate comp even. I asked you to provide context so we have the slightest clue of what you're on about. A picture of 10 players without knowing who these players are says absolutely nothing.

  • Reikou.7068Reikou.7068 Member ✭✭
    edited August 2, 2018

    @Cal Cohen.3527 said:

    @Frostball.9108 said:

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:
    I asked for numbers for this season to be pulled since people are always interested:

    Average skill rating difference between teams: 11.866
    Average standard deviation difference between teams: 11.643
    Average rating difference in a match: 98.203 (min rating vs max rating across all players in the match)

    One thing to keep in mind that end score difference never means that the match didn't start off even. Scores tend to snowball in our game for a number of factors. Some due to map layout/mechanic design. Some due to human nature, as people tend to tilt or give up after getting behind by a certain number. Sometimes people play above or below their potential. That's just part of human performance.

    Im curious about what the average rating difference in a match is when there is a legend tier player in it? This season or last season or whatever

    The sample of games with a legend player is pretty low, so I extended it down to 1700 (plat 3+). Here's the data including last season and this season:
    Average skill rating difference between teams: 14.16
    Average standard deviation difference between teams: 13.55
    Average rating difference in a match: 189.71
    Percent of games with average skill rating difference >50: 0.4%

    There's a significant increase in rating range at this level, but as seen the skill rating mean and standard deviation differences between teams are pretty similar. The rating range is always going to be higher at the edges of the rating curve as a tradeoff with keeping reasonable queue times , but it doesn't stop the matcher from making fair teams which is the most important.

    As some others have pointed out, the average game doesn't always tell the whole story. So I also grabbed all matches from last and this season and paired it down to the set of games with a rating range over 200 (these account for about 10% of all matches). Here's the data for that set:
    Average skill rating difference between teams: 19.83
    Average standard deviation difference between teams: 33.67
    Average rating difference in a match: 279.42
    Percent of games with average skill rating difference >50: 7.5%

    While the skill rating and standard deviation differences are a bit higher in this set, these numbers aren't too bad overall.

    I'm not trying to say that the matcher is perfect, but the vast majority of games are pretty balanced.

    Hello,

    Thank you for sharing these results.

    I'm curious if there has been any thought about making a hard limit on rating difference/search range of a match? like 150'ish?(1 whole division up and down) And if there are not enough players in that range just showing a message that "there are not enough players in your range, queue again later," or something?

    Alternatively, have you thought about just hiding MMR, and showing player "skill" simply through badges? Perhaps only showing MMR once the season is ended? That way people won't focus so much on their specific MMR and more on the skill-level they are at?

    There would probably need to be a few more badges thrown into the mix though. One for each 100 MMR range.

  • Delweyn.1309Delweyn.1309 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 2, 2018

    The problem is
    1800 + 1200 = 1800 + 1200.
    So the average is good, but the problem is why 1800 with 1200 ? (even if it is 1700 + 1300 the range is too far)

    And a 1800 support is not the same as a 1800 dps. Because support can't heal low player who will die anyway. But the dps will just wipe everyone in other team.

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

    I did. Provide context because unless you expect us to go ingame, add all these players and research their ratings we have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
    Imagine you at least tell us who's "super high" and "super low" rated here - or something.

    Can you read???????????

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams? EZ -15 for a game im not sure how im supposed to win. You're telling me this is the best it could come up with?"

    I see a screenshot of 10 players in a match, without ratings, without knowing what it means... Am I supposed to know all these players? Again, I didn't say this was an appropriate comp even. I asked you to provide context so we have the slightest clue of what you're on about. A picture of 10 players without knowing who these players are says absolutely nothing.

    HOLY kitten, ITS ABOUT THE TEAM COMP NOT THE RATINGS HOW MANY TIME DO I HAVE TO QUOTE IT FOR YOU?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"

    IS THAT ENOUGH? JESUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS this forum is a literal zoo.

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Vicariuz.1605 said:
    https://puu.sh/B6PoO/cf9a85c4dc.jpg

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?

    Care to tell us what we're looking at? :)

    Click the link....

    I did. Provide context because unless you expect us to go ingame, add all these players and research their ratings we have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
    Imagine you at least tell us who's "super high" and "super low" rated here - or something.

    Can you read???????????

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams? EZ -15 for a game im not sure how im supposed to win. You're telling me this is the best it could come up with?"

    I see a screenshot of 10 players in a match, without ratings, without knowing what it means... Am I supposed to know all these players? Again, I didn't say this was an appropriate comp even. I asked you to provide context so we have the slightest clue of what you're on about. A picture of 10 players without knowing who these players are says absolutely nothing.

    HOLY kitten, ITS ABOUT THE TEAM COMP NOT THE RATINGS HOW MANY TIME DO I HAVE TO QUOTE IT FOR YOU?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?

    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"
    "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?" "Care to tell me why the matchmaker decided this was an appropriate comp for both teams?"

    IS THAT ENOUGH? JESUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS this forum is a literal zoo.

    Lul, someone thinking matchmaking cares about making you a nice comp. You can reroll. You can't demand matchmaking to fix your comp. The only thing it should do; and it does; is try to avoid heavy class-stacking.

    You have 1.30 to fix your comp. What do you want anet to do, establish set comps AND enforce them? That's absurd.

  • @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    Hasn't there been statements by developers stating that that average distance in player score between highest and lowest players per game is less than 50?

    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50. The deviation is higher than that. Don't have the number off the top of my head though.

    We do our best to get the standard deviation as close as we can though.

    And no, I say it often, we don't rig matches to end loss or win streaks. But many people will never believe it.

    I wonder why?
    ANET's track record isn't the best these days...

  • I'm done with pvp in this game. I just went 0 for 15 after winning 9 out of last 10. Do not tell me matchmaking isn't rigged to be streaky because this streakiness has happened several times. THERE ARE NEVER ANY CLOSE GAMES. This is why spvp is dying out and there are less and less people playing every season. Anet just go full PVE. I mean you pretty much do anyway.

  • when you know st is up and you get a ton of weird excuses with a lot of passion to refute your assumptions, youre probably on to st. my guess is, some high ranked people want an easy pool to handle and avoid competition. they probably pay for a mod ui which also grants them access to the matchmaking system. ive witnessed manipulated matchmaking, ive witnessed people silly enough.

    just ask yourself, would silly people pay for that ? think about that, then what kind of people, nice self confident people who are fun to play with ? or maybe people who can barely spell with a whole bunch of other issues ? then whats your experience with platinum people, whats the vibe ?

    and why are you even wondering after everything that has been leaked so far ? i mean after 1k+ games you did look into it i suppose ?!

  • Evo.7408Evo.7408 Member

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:
    @cptaylor.2670

    I've been posting about the same thing for years now. There is definitely some kind of rigging in the system that isn't being talked about by anet. I don't mean match manipulations, occasional lose streaks or a player thinking he's better than he actually is. No, I mean obviously rigged match making. let me guess:

    • Match making feels somewhat balanced, aside from match manipulations and players using hack programs. You're winning or losing by margins of 50 to 100 points normally, sometimes get balanced matches looking like 490 to 500. This goes on until you reach some clearly identified marker within the rating system.
    • When you reach that identified marker, suddenly all match making goes straight to hell. It isn't even some slight increase in difficulty no, you just start getting the worst possible matches that the system could take effort towards creating. Teams of legendary and mid plat players vs. teams of: plat 1/gold 3/ gold 2/gold 2/gold 1. Let me guess, you sit and wonder to yourself -> "Why in the hell would the system not put a couple of golds from my team on the enemy team and give us a couple plats?" Even then, the enemy team would still have a higher average party MMR and be favored to win but at least it would be some better skew. So why would it literally put every strongest player on one side and the weaker players on the other?
    • Then you notice this starts happening for multiple matches in a row, sometimes 10 or more. You notice that during these matches it isn't you just fumbling plays and being a bad player, no you notice that your teammates are exploding on contact in every combat engagement. You notice there is nothing even relatively fair about your matches because the teams you are being put on are completely incapable of providing the enemy team the slightest bit of a challenge. The games start to look like loses all 500 to 150 or worse. Furthermore, you begin noticing the reality that no matter how good of a player you are, even if you were an old pro, that it would be impossible to carry such kitten matches for one big reason: 1 powerful player could survive all match and kill everyone in his path and defend every node he is at. But his kitten players are being crunched on the other 2 nodes where he is not at. Since the 1 powerful can only ever be on 1 node at a time, GG. Moral of the story is that 1 legendary player with a team of bronzes is not going to beat an enemy team consisting of all gold 3s.
    • You notice these "lose streaks" aren't random. They happen like clockwork as if there were some automated schedule within the algorithm. They happen immediately as soon as you're within about 10 points of ranking up and they don't stop until you hit that same exact bottomed out rating that it wants to make sure you return to. Then lo and behold, suddenly it stops and lets you have normal matches again, until you reach that exact threshold once again, and then the automated schedule kicks in.
    • You come to post in the forums about it because you are recognizing that the match making is deciding when you lose and for how long you lose and how far it resets your rating. You receive snarky cliché responses like: "git gud" "it's a l2p issue" "you've reached your peak, that is where you belong" "learn to 2 carry bro" "oh it's just low population" <- these are all cop-out responses to the completely obvious problem that the community should be in a rage to investigate. And you become frustrated because it's as if these players are not experiencing the same thing that you are. It's also frustrating because you identify that even if you were twice as good of a player as you are now, it would still be impossible to carry the kitten matches that the system is giving you. due to the bolded point above. So what in the hell is going on here?

    I asked myself that for years. I've paid close attention to not only my records for each season but also the records of players that I know within the community. I have 6 years invested into guild wars 2 spvp and over 12,000 games. I can tell you this, there are a lot of guys out there who are stuck in gold who should be playing plat and a lot of guys in plat who should be stuck in gold. I've sat and watched old professional players go on a bad day and drop from 1700+ rating down to 1400ish in one fell swoop, which makes absolutely no sense, which is why most of them have left the game now. Then I'll sit and watch someone "that I know for a fact is an intermediate at best player, from playing scrims and ATs with them" go from some 1450 rating up to 1700+ on the leaderboards and these are people who I know are not match manipulating, and this doesn't make any sense either. The flashing red hot spot of interest here, is that this always happens on win streaks or lose streaks. So we're being told that there is a system in place for us that is creating "balanced" matches. This is a system where, when you are reaching your peak rating, your matches should start looking more like: win 1, lose 1, win 1, lose 1, rating is down a bit now so, win 1, win 1, lose 1, win 1, win 1, back to peak rating again, lose 1, win 1, lose 1, win 1, rating down again, win 1, win 1, back peak rating, so on and so forth. <- that would make sense. But instead, you reach that peak rating and then BAM lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose, lose. back down to where you started and it happens EVERY TIME you hit the peak rating, like clockwork. Then you watch another player "who you know is intermediate at best", log in one day and win, win, win, win, win, win, win, win, win, win and completely surpass his old benchmark of gold 2, and somehow transcend into the world of plat 2 on a win streak, in about 3 hours of play. So.....to get a win streak or lose streak in a system that actually works the way their notes says it does..... would be a complete mathematical anomaly. For it to happen so often..... isn't a coincidence.... it's clearly a design.

    I have come to the conclusion after many years and many matches played, that the system has a hidden placement that puts players within a region of allowance for how high they can climb and for how low they can go, despite actual skill level. What the motive is behind this, I have no idea and I don't care at this point. My biggest question has always been: "What decides who is allowed to play in a particular region?"

    All in all, this very bizarre and not fun match making behavior, mixed with terrible class balance, is why I had to quit Guild Wars 2 and walk away. I'll always keep my eye on this game, to see if anything gets fixed, but boy I'm a happier gamer, gaming in other places right now.

    This is exactly how I observed it as well im very details. That's why I don't intend to play the game for rank anymore but for rewards instead. Heck I dont want to win any matches anymore either. Too bad it will take me longer to achieve the rewards. But it will lessen my stress from frustrations in trying to give my efforts only to face above match making system. Honestly and sincerely from the bottom of my heart, the match making really scks.

  • Evo.7408Evo.7408 Member

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    Hasn't there been statements by developers stating that that average distance in player score between highest and lowest players per game is less than 50?

    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50. The deviation is higher than that. Don't have the number off the top of my head though.

    We do our best to get the standard deviation as close as we can though.

    And no, I say it often, we don't rig matches to end loss or win streaks. But many people will never believe it.

    Many players' experiences and consistencies in the detailed observation tells otherwise.

  • Reikou.7068Reikou.7068 Member ✭✭

    Some notes and hopefully some changes.

    1) Ratings are on a bell curve. The player skill difference between 1600 and 1700 mmr is much higher than it is between 1100 and 1200. Thus the "average rating difference" kind of means very little.

    2) The current Glicko2 system of weighted rating for players works great if matchmaking is random / there is no matchmaking.

    Issues arise because of the blend of matchmaking with the weighted rating for players after a match.

    Players farther out from the middle are "punished/rewarded" twice. First with matchmaking where they are given "worse" allies to make an "even" match with an opposing team, and secondly after the match where they gain less and lose more (or the other way around for players with low rating.)

    Either go to complete random arena with no matchmaking and retain weighted player rating, or remove weighted rating and give every player in the team the same mmr gains and losses and retain matchmaking.

  • Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

  • Alatar.7364Alatar.7364 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sabatier.9634 said:
    Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

    Honestly the fact that it is 496 - 500 despite the fact they had two duos might actually mean it is working pretty well since it managed to balance out individual skill-rating with duo-skill-rating.

    ~ I Aear cân ven na mar

  • RisenHowl.2419RisenHowl.2419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @apharma.3741 said:
    There is another thing many might not be considering.

    You may be at the rating you should be at.

    That doesn’t mean you won’t get loss streaks, some days you won’t be playing at your best, some days you will, you may need time to get into the flow, you may lose focus. The algorithm will do its best to match you but it cannot account for a 1800 rating player being tired, it can’t account for a 1600 rating player playing their best or being a pro at rotation but lacking in combat. It can’t account for you playing a different class or an off meta build.

    There will always be an element of random chance, you’re playing with 9 other strangers in the match and people aren’t robots who play the most optimal thing possible at maximum effectiveness all the time.

    Difficult to believe that when the leaderboard is 60-4 w/l

    Randomness alone should prevent that kind of ratio, especially with a match maker that tries for even games

  • Sabatier.9634Sabatier.9634 Member ✭✭
    edited June 26, 2019

    @Alatar.7364 said:

    @Sabatier.9634 said:
    Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

    Honestly the fact that it is 496 - 500 despite the fact they had two duos might actually mean it is working pretty well since it managed to balance out individual skill-rating with duo-skill-rating.

    Yeah, i think your kind of right about that. Would be interesting to know how much the skillrating is raised trough a duo. Or maybe it is not?
    Also its quite strange that the matchmaking has to do something like this. Would have been better to divide the duos, right? Unless the Skill rating-difference of one or two players were just way to big. So the question should be why these players even had to play in that rating-"class".

  • witcher.3197witcher.3197 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sabatier.9634 said:
    Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

    This is as close as a game can get, I'm not sure what's your problem other than losing and looking for a scapegoat.

    Usually matchmaking gives duos a hard time, pitting them against solo player of way higher rating to compensate. The number of duos on a team aren't automatically going to make them stronger unless it's a very high rated game with good communication and comp synergy.

  • @witcher.3197 said:

    @Sabatier.9634 said:
    Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

    This is as close as a game can get, I'm not sure what's your problem other than losing and looking for a scapegoat.

    Usually matchmaking gives duos a hard time, pitting them against solo player of way higher rating to compensate. The number of duos on a team aren't automatically going to make them stronger unless it's a very high rated game with good communication and comp synergy.

    First of all, i dont have a problem. I just think that the matchmaking is useless.

    Its still a Teamgame right? So communication and tactics are an import part. But there is another point, how is the matchmaking able to determine the tactical-skillrating of two individuals?

    Are you sure that duo players getting matched with better opponents to get even? How the matchmaking is calculating the teamplayer- and communication- aspect of that in terms of the skillrating? In my example you even have to double that blindspot because of the two duos on one side.

    Its about the functionality of the matchmaking. It should not depend on high or low rated games.

  • ZeroTheCat.2684ZeroTheCat.2684 Member ✭✭✭

    I agree with OP. This happens every time I am on a winning streak or close to changing rank tier. At this point I can almost tell before when the matchmaking is going to match me with bad players. Or bad.. It's even worse. Thay are AFKers, griefers etc.. You know when a random pattern repeats often enough it's not random any more. I have seen this behaviour in other games to but not so aggressive as this. This algorithm is actually punishing you if you win. I also find it strange that a Anet dev comes to this thread only to deny this without any explanation as to how it works... It's almost as if they want pvp to die. They are succeding with that for sure..

  • @Sabatier.9634 said:

    @Alatar.7364 said:

    @Sabatier.9634 said:
    Just my two cents why i think the matchmaking is useless: https://ibb.co/zQg8v5M
    I know the pic is a bit older but the reason why i post it is the fact that its a ranked game with two duos on one side while my team does not have even one duo.

    Honestly the fact that it is 496 - 500 despite the fact they had two duos might actually mean it is working pretty well since it managed to balance out individual skill-rating with duo-skill-rating.

    Yeah, i think your kind of right about that. Would be interesting to know how much the skillrating is raised trough a duo. Or maybe it is not?
    Also its quite strange that the matchmaking has to do something like this. Would have been better to divide the duos, right? Unless the Skill rating-difference of one or two players were just way to big. So the question should be why these players even had to play in that rating-"class".

    The matchmaker used to work harder to spread out duo's. However, based on our data, skill rating is generally a better indicator of potential performance than whether someone queued up in a duo. So the matchmaker puts the greatest priority on making sure the average skill rating on each team is as even as possible. It also tries a bit to make sure the standard deviation of skill rating of each team is pretty close. In addition to these, the matchmaker will also do it's best not to put any more than +1 of a class on a team. Though, players can work around that themselves with character swapping. Something we've decided to leave in, based on community vote and because we think it's ok if players/teams who are skilled or knowledgeable enough to recognize bad compositions can resolve that themselves.

    I've said it many times and I'm sure people still won't believe it, but the match maker has no idea if you have won or lost your previous match. All it knows is your current skill rating, your class, and whether you're in a duo queue or not.

    Ben Phongluangtham
    Design Manager

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

    @Evo.7408 said:

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

    @mortrialus.3062 said:
    Hasn't there been statements by developers stating that that average distance in player score between highest and lowest players per game is less than 50?

    No. The average skill rating between teams is less than 50. The deviation is higher than that. Don't have the number off the top of my head though.

    We do our best to get the standard deviation as close as we can though.

    And no, I say it often, we don't rig matches to end loss or win streaks. But many people will never believe it.

    Many players' experiences and consistencies in the detailed observation tells otherwise.

    or maybe after 6 strait wins the match maker decided to put you against better players?
    I dunno... seems like a logical lay out.

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    06210311 251521 121512

  • EnderzShadow.2506EnderzShadow.2506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @cptaylor.2670 said:
    There is either too far of a gap between points and skill level, too few players, or the system is incredibly rigged when it wants you to lose.

    Everytime I get close to moving up a tier, I get put in a team comp that is the absolute worst against the other. In this case, a necro and two warriors, against my team that has a rev, thief, and a condi Mesmer. Not only is the comp impossible to beat, but the players are mostly high first tier to middle tier platinum players. My team is 2nd tier gold.

    If someone would be kind enough to teach me how to solo a map with a 3 point capping system while avoiding getting gang banged, please feel free. Because matchmaking clearly wants me to be able to make up for my teammates dying every time they spawn.

    I'm by far not a great player, but to intentionally create a system that punishes players by placing them against people of either higher skill (sometimes top 20) or a comp that is more favorable knowing that players may not switch to what is needed is a horrible way of keeping people involved in this pvp system.

    Not only is the current balance an issue, but nobody is going to want to suffer through a pvp season knowing that after any certain number of wins they're going to be automatically placed against a team with either marginally or significantly higher chances of winning and feeling discouraged when they don't know what they could possibly do to even begin to win the match.

    I guess the current system just decides where you should be and is designed specifically to keep you in that position? Even if it means placing you in a team with two zerker staff elementalists and a dagger/pistol thief?

    At least it's good for the easy 20 gold, but beyond that it's honestly no surprise I'm seeing the same seemingly 20 people in matches on a daily basis. (Except when I get close to moving back up and seeing some random team of people who beat us 500 to 0 and are clearly of a much higher rank.)

    Another thing I've noticed about this system is that if I have a bad match with particular people and choose to not queue for 15 minutes, I still somehow wind up with them on my team. I don't think this is coincidence because the queue time is significantly longer when it wants you to lose. I assume it's intentionally waiting for those other people to get out of the match. Not sure if this is because it wants you to improve with those particular people or because it knows you work poorly together and is assuring that it is a loss. Sometimes after said breaks, even if they're only 5 minutes or so which you would still think would be long enough, you queue up and it instantly pops, because it those people you were avoiding were waiting in queue this entire time and it was just waiting for you before it would generate the match making sure that you're on the same team.

    I'm sure this sounds like a conspiracy theory, but those of us playing ranked have to have had similar experiences with some of this. Especially with attempting to avoid certain people and against all odds still winding up with them on your team again even after taking what would seem like a very long break.

    I mean, I'm sure there are a lot of things I could do differently and I'm pretty terrible at pvp like pretty much everything else in life, but the old argument that you have to "carry" your team in a 3 point capture game has never made any sense to me even for the absolute best person. Unless you just have to be good enough to solo 5 people like some highly skilled wvw roamer.

    Some things are unavoidable. I know the system wants to keep you at a 50/50 win percentage. That much is clear.
    Add in a low population and the imbalances in PvP increase.

    The rest, eh, I dunno. But it sure seems fishy when I get put into a match where there are, lets say 2 core rangers on one team and 2 Soulbeasts on the other.
    Why weren't they split between the teams?
    Why have double of any class on one team?
    Sure you can change classes before the Game begins, but let's be real, MOST people don't do that.
    If Anet wanted something a little closer to balance, they wouldn't let anyone change.

    Or why is it one team has a Full Meta Team (FB/Holo/Scourge/Revenant etc) and my team is nearly all core classes? smh

    mhm, ok, sure, whatever you say, no after you, I insist, no really, please, be my guest,

  • EnderzShadow.2506EnderzShadow.2506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @MarshallLaw.9260 said:
    With all due respect, most of the "evidence" quoted in this thread is just a collection of stories/experiences. These are usually susceptible to exaggeration and we have seen very little collective evidence - eg tracking graphs of all matches from a sample of 3-4k players for a whole season. This would be closer to evidence than tales of "oh I was on a 98 match winning streak and then ANet punished me for being so good by making me lose the next 50 matches in a row" (anyone has the right to exaggerate).
    I don't believe ANet would have a good enough reason to bother doing this - do you really think they pick out people to "lock" into certain tiers intentionally?

    It's much simpler, and more logical to dismiss this as a conspiracy theory. As for the "1000 players" posting about losing streaks - well that's not proof - I've had a few such streaks now and then, some weeks none. On the whole I think the matchmaking isn't too bad when you take into account the low population the system has to work with - but unlike those posting about "100x losing streaks" - this is the first time I'm posting against it. Volume of comments/posts for an idea shouldn't be taken as evidence that it's the most prevalent. There could be 1,000 players who think MM is rigged versus 20,000 who don't - but are just not vocal about it.

    -

    Lastly, people who claim to have left the game, for some reason, seem to have quite a lot to say about its current state. I in no way think that those people should stop posting but bear in mind if you finish your statements with " ....that's why I've left the game and am greatly enjoying playing other MMOs for some time..." then why should anybody consider your comments relevant? Make your mind up - you've either left and have nothing to do with the game, or you've pretended to leave and are up-to-date.

    With as little respect as I can muster for deniers, your disbelief bears as much weight as the op's belief.

    There is no Gold Standard Double Blind Placebo study.
    No one has the numbers.

    There could be 20,000 players that don't think the system is Rigged versus 1000 who don't.

    I would say the top 400 are very vocal about it.
    That group has the most to lose.

    mhm, ok, sure, whatever you say, no after you, I insist, no really, please, be my guest,

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.