Leeto.1570 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 So if new players still dont know the matchmaking does not work properly and whenever soloq w/r gets too far off 50% it starts pulling players from bottom of the barrel, the very bottom. When you go on winstreak it gets so bad that theres just no point in playing because you know that there is no chance to win/lose. Dont wonder why every player starts duoquing because "bad players quing atm" after couple wins. Most people dont impact matches enough for it to be noticable but as someone who never plays duoq and plays below hes supposed rating its horrible, every time i go on 5 wins it gets ridiculous there isnt even fighting back your teammates are so inexperienced that you cant even say they are trying to fight back before instadying, for first seasons i thought its actual bots until realizing that it cant that bots always appear after i get multiple wins. Wont go much in theory what this is, might be that there just are not any good players to put on enemy team for challange or something but for sure system shouldnt put players in match where they get destroyed even when outnumbering enemies. If i can perfectly call outcome of first couple fights without even looking at team setups or afk 150 games in season without going below 50% rate then obviously i know something that i shouldnt nor it should exist. If you wanna argue or flame if this bug exists in matchmaking i wont engage, if you pvp and you dont know this you just kitten thats it. btw you are, how can this exist and pvp community is not up in arms about it daily, go record 5 wins and then play 3 more matches and i will lead you through the footage as if you are baby and explain you how to notice player who has mouse and keyboard vs players who actually think they sat down to watch twitch stream. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeto.1570 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 I know calling people kitten isnt the right way to get them behind your cause but its so obviously broken that truth dont affect the need to fix this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeto.1570 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 BTW if you dont know about this and doubt it then comment with a way how one could test this to prove it, i have years of footage and statistics just wonder which method you would prefer, and for extra dense ones - im not complaining about not being able to get rating i could put in effort and start playing duo but put me in bronze for all i care just give me matches where i dont need to pretend that one team has 0 chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arazoth.7290 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 4 minutes ago, Leeto.1570 said: i have years of statistics curious what that looks like 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeto.1570 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 For example 8 wins in row showing that my rating has improved my 80+ points and then showing how in next games i go afk after 1 fight and still get multiple top stats. If you can tell difference between new player and someone who knows basics of pvp then i can show difference. But i said you can test it yourself, go on 5 game winstreak and then when you loose i can point out how obvious is that your team shouldnt be facing enemies, i can even bet you on it, if after winstreak you lose and the teams are similiar in skill level i pay you something like 50 euros. But anyway this is a fact, arenanet should know it, if they dont then they should look into it, because someday enough ppl will notice it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 A 50% winrate means youre at your actual skill rating. You go vs teams that are the same level and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. A >50% winrate means youre outperforming in the current elo which leads to climbing in rank. A <50% winrate means youre underperfoming in current elo which leads to declining in rank. When youre on a high winning streak of lets assume 10 matches. That means you will probaly increased your rank by 1 entire tier. That results in better players you face. If you cant deal with them it will most likely end in a losing streak. DuoQ with a better player will ofc result in a higher rating than you would normally achieve on your own. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arazoth.7290 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 20 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: A >50% winrate means youre outperforming in the current elo which leads to climbing in rank. A <50% winrate means youre underperfoming in current elo which leads to declining in rank. nah it litarly isn't. I started season in gold 1 with 35% win rate first 25-30 matches. Then I stayed in gold 2 with 45-50% win rate some time around 70 matches. Then to gold 3 with some 50% win rate. And now plat with 54,5% win rate. All done with same 2 builds, both having the same amount of wins/loses so it isn't the build on class or me. Aside this rng, many their win/lose ratio have close to the same amount but the rating can differ a lot. Some can have same amount win/loses but one has 75 rating higher and the other can have 50 rating lower. That's a lot of difference, 125 rating... pvp rating for titles/rewards is a joke how this works, not worth going to reach plat or beyond or for titles ect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Boyer.6524 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Leeto.1570 said: how can this exist and pvp community is not up in arms about it daily Oh trust me, you're preaching to the choir. Some of us have been riding this topic hotter than you are now for like the past 10+ years. What happens is people stop trying to talk about after 10 years when they realize Arenanet seemingly isn't listening at all. 1 hour ago, Leeto.1570 said: BTW if you dont know about this and doubt it then comment with a way how one could test this to prove it, i have years of footage and statistics just wonder which method you would prefer, and for extra dense ones - im not complaining about not being able to get rating i could put in effort and start playing duo but put me in bronze for all i care just give me matches where i dont need to pretend that one team has 0 chance Yup, it isn't even about winning or losing at this point, it's just about players wanting GGs again "Good Games". It's just boring going from one match to another, knowing you're either going to win 500 to 80 or lose 80 to 500. There are many reasons why this is happening, but I'm not going to go all into it here. You're right though, there are many things that are just seriously wrong with the ranked match making. It goes much deeper than what you'd probably think. The best thing people can do is avoid that game mode and move on to Unranked/AT play, or maybe even get more involved in WvW. Ranked is actually entirely dysfunctional and completely ruined in 2024. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 16 minutes ago, arazoth.7290 said: nah it litarly isn't. So you wanna tell me that having a 60% winrate means you will not gain rating? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxwelgm.4315 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 57 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: A 50% winrate means youre at your actual skill rating. You go vs teams that are the same level and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. A >50% winrate means youre outperforming in the current elo which leads to climbing in rank. A <50% winrate means youre underperfoming in current elo which leads to declining in rank. When youre on a high winning streak of lets assume 10 matches. That means you will probaly increased your rank by 1 entire tier. That results in better players you face. If you cant deal with them it will most likely end in a losing streak. DuoQ with a better player will ofc result in a higher rating than you would normally achieve on your own. This is certainly accurate for large numbers but unfortunately I think many top players (inadvertently, to give them the benefit of doubt) bias their ratings by playing as few matches as possible, making sure they boost whatever alt happens to have a large winstreak when the season starts. So we can have things like a few players in the top 10 with 1700+ ratings while everyone else has a gap of 50+ points from them, but the topmost players have only the minimum 150 matches whereas others may have several hundreds (hence being a more accurate representation of their true rating). This is not a problem in other competitive games like LoL because decay kicks in heavily there and there is a large incentive to play up to thousands of matches. Ratings in other competitive games end up directly reflecting winrates (so that a challenger LoL player does have a 60%+ rating most of the time) because they are all typically sampling from a larger number of matches. I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, just that I don't think it quite applies to the top 25 "mini-game" we have that they are reflecting their "true rating" most of the time. This is even before accounting for the fact most are duos and boosting whichever alts they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 7 minutes ago, maxwelgm.4315 said: So we can have things like a few players in the top 10 with 1700+ ratings while everyone else has a gap of 50+ points from them Can you stop saying such bs. No top player is boosting themself to 1700 rating because theres no reason or benefit for them. The reason why this gap exists is because theres such a big skill gap between the top 0.01% players and top 1% players. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxwelgm.4315 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 9 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: Can you stop saying such bs. No top player is boosting themself to 1700 rating because theres no reason or benefit for them. The reason why this gap exists is because theres such a big skill gap between the top 0.01% players and top 1% players. Those players rarely, if ever, achieve a 50% winrate which was your criteria for having reached their "true rating"! It doesn't matter if they play well or not, I know that one person we're talking about (and we're talking about like 3 people at most in here to be clear to the others) does play very well. It also doesn't matter if there's a perceived skill gap or not, or if there's a real skill gap or not - it simply doesn't fit the criteria established by the post itself for having reached the actual player rating. It's not like it's even possible in GW2 to achieve a large enough number of matches for the sampling to be properly made. If you are good enough to get a 149/1 win/loss ratio (as it has happened before, curiously more than once), you get your God of PvP and that's it, regardless of whether or not this is enough games to truly reflect your rating, that is the criticism being made, not whether or not they are good (I suspect after so many years only the top players themselves care to remind people they are good, in fact). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 1 minute ago, maxwelgm.4315 said: Those players rarely, if ever, achieve a 50% winrate Theres a reason why thats happening. There are simply not enough good players at their level. They always play vs worse players. Thats why they have a higher winrate. The reason why they dont climb to 2100 rating is because of how the rating gain works. You will get rating depending on the enemies rating. If youre alot higher than the enemies, you will not gain much rating for a win but also lose alot more. Meaning at a certain rating you will win maybe 70% of your matches but still not increase in rank. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shion.2084 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 (edited) 6 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: And whats the problem with that? It tries to balance out an avg rating on both teams and similar classes on both teams. So both teams have the same ''strength'' and the outcome for a team to lose/win should be 50/50. Now thats often not the case but not due to the algorithm, rather because of the circumstances that are there (allowing class swapping after accepting q, being able to silver q, low population in general, not punishing afk'ers). Alot of these problems could be fixed and would improve the general ranked experience. The problem with it is exactly what I've explained. Your team had was either expected to win based on MMR or lose. What the game does is apply your personal MMR vs. the other teams. Meaning that players who happen to be grouped into matches where they are the top rated player, lose more when their team loses. Ie. the best player on your team loses say 14mmr, where as the other players lose 10 or less. So it makes it so that top rank players are incentivised not to play. Because a loss will cost them say 18 MMR rank loss for example, but a win only gains 8. When you are a top player in a pool of players who are worse than you, you stand to lose much more than you gain. So you have a game, where to do well, its best players are incentivised not to play beyond the bare minimum. A given player that makes up a team should not be more accountable for its loss than another. the adjustment to MMR should be based on the team's relative chance of winning. I don't know how to put it more simply Edited July 24 by shion.2084 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arazoth.7290 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: So you wanna tell me that having a 60% winrate means you will not gain rating? If you saw what I wrote, win/lose ratio + amount of rating gained/lost differs too much on many factors which are bs, because of how the system works. With 60% win rate you should in practical situation gain yes. But theoractical this is indeed possible, practical haven't seen it so let me explain with some situations. • I am going to use your 60% win rate you spoke off, lets say your rating is in the median range of how rating can differ in lower or higher. And lets for example take that 100 matches are played for holding it simple with the math. • The the minimum range could be 1550 rating with 60% win rate. • The maximum range could be 1650 rating with 60% win rate. Comparison between 1550 rating and 1650 rating win/loses. - So the ones at 1550 rating have to win 63,87 matches (64) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 instead. - The ones at 1650 had to win 56,36 matches (56) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 rating. Both have 60% win rate like yours, yours is more in between but the min and maxes are often seen on leaderboard even in the top. It isn't balanced that by this example I show here that to gain same rating, 7 matches more have to be played... And this win/lose ratio is one of the many factors that are rng why this is happening, it's flawed. Hope this helped you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 37 minutes ago, arazoth.7290 said: Comparison between 1550 rating and 1650 rating win/loses. - So the ones at 1550 rating have to win 63,87 matches (64) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 instead. - The ones at 1650 had to win 56,36 matches (56) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 rating. Both have 60% win rate like yours, yours is more in between but the min and maxes are often seen on leaderboard even in the top. What is that calculation supposed to be lmao?! Also if you win 64 or 56 matches out of 100 matches. Thats not a 60% winrate?! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arazoth.7290 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: What is that calculation supposed to be lmao?! Also if you win 64 or 56 matches out of 100 matches. Thats not a 60% winrate?! a simple one that is simply explained, idk how to explain it more simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 (edited) 51 minutes ago, arazoth.7290 said: idk how to explain it more simple 2 hours ago, arazoth.7290 said: The the minimum range could be 1550 rating with 60% win rate. • The maximum range could be 1650 rating with 60% win rate. Comparison between 1550 rating and 1650 rating win/loses. - So the ones at 1550 rating have to win 63,87 matches (64) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 instead. - The ones at 1650 had to win 56,36 matches (56) out of the 100 to gain that 1650 rating. Like what are you even trying to prove here? Edited July 24 by Mne Malo Tebya.2965 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multicolorhipster.9751 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 23 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said: TBH this game is the only game I have ever seen where the community crying for solo que is treated as normal. Its not normal. Not in CS, League, Apex, Fortnite, Smite, WoW, Etc. Yes it is lol Especially in League I can point you to over a dozen posts in the last month asking for duo to be removed and just have it be flex queue and solo queue. League came so close to getting it right and then they went and made solo queue solo/duo for no good reason They won't complain about it in Apex and Fortnite because those games already have dedicated solos mode that are true solos. In Apex I'm pretty sure its on a rotation but it might have been made permanent. In Fortnite you can choose solos and only be matched against solos. I can't speak for Smite, WoW, or CS because I'm not a masochist or of eastern European descent Also, unrelated to you but @Vancho.8750 won. Simple contradiction and dismissal, saying 'nah' is intellectual cowardice. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotejjeken.1267 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 10 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: A 50% winrate means youre at your actual skill rating. You go vs teams that are the same level and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. A >50% winrate means youre outperforming in the current elo which leads to climbing in rank. A <50% winrate means youre underperfoming in current elo which leads to declining in rank. When youre on a high winning streak of lets assume 10 matches. That means you will probaly increased your rank by 1 entire tier. That results in better players you face. If you cant deal with them it will most likely end in a losing streak. DuoQ with a better player will ofc result in a higher rating than you would normally achieve on your own. This just isn't true in current landscape. I know, because I can literally post videos of facing a double mesmer princess of arena / baroness of the arena duo when I was at 1290 and 49% winrate? Thing is, we won like 500-50--not sure if this was a throw game or they were playing badly comparatively to possible plat alts on my own team. Anyway, I could go on a 10 winstreak, shoot up to 1400 and still have the exact same matches as at 1290. The population is too low for anything to work properly. Even if it DID work properly, the 'win and gain +10, lose and lose -15' that this game does will always ensure higher ranked players in lower brackets simply due to bad games here and there. Win and lose streaks don't mean much except for what many have witnessed, in that the matchmaker tries to force you to 50% no matter what, so will put you in games on its own to either throw or carry to get you there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 15 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said: that the matchmaker tries to force you to 50% no matter what look at top 100, none of them have a winrate of 50%. Most are higher than 50%. That either means your statement is not true or you can actually carry your winrate above 50% 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mne Malo Tebya.2965 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 24 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said: I know, because I can literally post videos of facing a double mesmer princess of arena / baroness of the arena duo when I was at 1290 and 49% winrate? Thing is, we won like 500-50--not sure if this was a throw game or they were playing badly comparatively to possible plat alts on my own team. Just having any of those titles doest mean youre good. Also due to low population, the matchmaker will put people with a high rating difference together in a match to reduce q time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Boyer.6524 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 41 minutes ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said: Also, unrelated to you but @Vancho.8750 won. Simple contradiction and dismissal, saying 'nah' is intellectual cowardice. More like dismissal. His statements are completely upside down and in no way factual based off historical data. What is intellectual cowardice, is telling everyone they are a "tinfoil hat" when they are simply stating historical truths we've been witnessing for 12 years now. If he wants to hold a real conversation, he needs to buck up and spit some wording that isn't entirely comprised of logical fallacies, otherwise he's going to have a lot of people telling him "No" and moving on with their day. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotejjeken.1267 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: look at top 100, none of them have a winrate of 50%. Most are higher than 50%. That either means your statement is not true or you can actually carry your winrate above 50% You posting in a topic about matchmaking abuse with this statement. I wonder how do the top 100 have a winrate of over 50%? Sometimes even up to 90%! Then to top it off immediately follow with: 1 hour ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said: Just having any of those titles doest mean youre good. Again, if you have way over 50% winrate in Top 100 and 'aren't good' then what could be going on here? Based on your previous statements these players played into their natural bracket, have essentially no one higher than them, but...aren't good. So, to boil it down, the matchmaker works fine but Top 100 aren't good and titles mean nothing...possibly because you are one and want to stay up there uncontested using some interesting means? Plainly, pretty sure you may be an alt at this point. Edited July 24 by Gotejjeken.1267 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multicolorhipster.9751 Posted July 24 Share Posted July 24 1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said: More like dismissal. His statements are completely upside down and in no way factual based off historical data. If he wants to hold a real conversation, he needs to buck up and spit some wording that isn't entirely comprised of logical fallacies, otherwise he's going to have a lot of people telling him "No" and moving on with their day. The data supports that soloq is and always has been the most popular way to queue in ranked spvp since its inception by an overwhelming majority. Larger team sizes had their chance and very few people bothered with it, aside from a small handful of sweats. That's fact and it has no care for heavy-handed idealism. 1 hour ago, Trevor Boyer.6524 said: What is intellectual cowardice, is telling everyone they are a "tinfoil hat" when they are simply stating historical truths we've been witnessing for 12 years now. That's the only mention of tinfoil hats or anything related in this thread 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts