Score based rating instead of mmr

[saerni.2584]

MMR + Victory Point Rating Modifier is my preferred system. Shouldn’t be too huge, I’ve previously suggested a modifier of 5 points.

Close games have lower rating adjustments. Blowouts have higher rating adjustments. Middle games have current system.

That way everyone has a motivation to play hard until the end and close games don’t sting as much.

[Nimrud.5642]

@"The Ace.9105" said:

3. This system would allow bad players to drop out from good mmr matches more quickly and good players to climb more faster and thus would make the matchmaking better.

This is why it wont happen I guess... They are trying to keep ratings as close as possible. To make matchmaking easier for them (Anet). Closer ratings allow for smoother matchmaking. Ofc only on paper because the artificially inflated rating wont also raise given player's skill level. Somewhere in the 'matchmaking thread' Ben answered a question about this issue of wildly varying skill levels in a match by saying something along the lines of '99% of the matches the AVERAGE MMR of the opposing teams was within 5% of eachother.' Which sounds nice but we all know that 1legendary+1bronze isnt the same as 2 golds in a team.

So...

MMR of the community as a whole is artificially kept closer than what individual players' skill levels would require.

Introducing some kind of MMR that more accurately measures player skill would:

1. Make good players stand out even more and baddies to fall in rating even more. (Now a baddie gets the least punishment for a loss as pretty much all the time he will be playing against teams with higher average MMR than his personal. And get the most reward for a win for the same reasons. While a high rated player will lose the most in case of a loss and gain the least from a win, also for the same reasons.)
2. As a result of the expanded MMR range of the community, matchmaking timers would be longer.

I'd say that there are enough low rated/skilled players who could make up enough teams so that low rating matches could happen often and dont tkae too much queue time to get in. But for the upper end of the leaderboard... I dont know if there is a solution at all. It'd take hundreds of really good players to keep both matchmaking smooth and skill levels somewhat equal.

[The Ace.9105]

@Lilyanna.9361 said:I'm..on the fence about this.

At first I thought performance /WOULD/ be good, but it is terribly flawed. The reason? How can you just performance. It is very subjective. With the system we have now we do take the toll for 'bad' players on the teams, but it is better to have accurate, logical, and solid numbers then simply subjective algorithms that could be more exploitable than mathematical, solidified calculations.

The issue is not with the caculation of performance or even how much you lose or gain, but the sheer fact that depending on the roll you take is not being taken into account.

For example, DPS usually have more 'positive' scores and top stats compared to supports. What a support does should be taken into account just as much as the DPS. Yes, the system already does that, but it needs to be more than just simply how much you healed.

For example, league or solid moba game does that well. It takes in the fact that you are not the highest damage dealer, but has shown the fact you supported through the variety of tools that you had. I personally feels it just needs to show more to the players that you can be just as 'glorious' as a support/tank compared to DPS.

Though, regarding the loss/gain because of bad teammates..hate to break it to you guys, but that's in every competitive mmo or game. League has it, Smite has it, Overwatch has it. You can't get rid of them. You literally would not have a system.

I don't know if you read my edit in the post where I mentioned that the poll isn't about the personal score. The poll is about having a matchmaking rating system that gives your team +/- rating based on the score of the game (for example: 500-367) instead of having a fixed amount of +/- rating determined by matchmaker when the queue pops and you either win a certain fixed amount or you lose a certain fixed amount.

tl;drThis poll is not about personal stats or role. This poll is about team score.

[Dreams.3128]

@The Ace.9105 said:

@Lilyanna.9361 said:I'm..on the fence about this.

At first I thought performance /WOULD/ be good, but it is terribly flawed. The reason? How can you just performance. It is very subjective. With the system we have now we do take the toll for 'bad' players on the teams, but it is better to have accurate, logical, and solid numbers then simply subjective algorithms that could be more exploitable than mathematical, solidified calculations.

The issue is not with the caculation of performance or even how much you lose or gain, but the sheer fact that depending on the roll you take is not being taken into account.

For example, DPS usually have more 'positive' scores and top stats compared to supports. What a support does should be taken into account just as much as the DPS. Yes, the system already does that, but it needs to be more than just simply how much you healed.

For example, league or solid moba game does that well. It takes in the fact that you are not the highest damage dealer, but has shown the fact you supported through the variety of tools that you had. I personally feels it just needs to show more to the players that you can be just as 'glorious' as a support/tank compared to DPS.

Though, regarding the loss/gain because of bad teammates..hate to break it to you guys, but that's in every competitive mmo or game. League has it, Smite has it, Overwatch has it. You can't get rid of them. You literally would not have a system.

I don't know if you read my edit in the post where I mentioned that the poll isn't about the personal score. The poll is about having a matchmaking rating system that gives your team +/- rating based on the score of the game (for example: 500-367) instead of having a fixed amount of +/- rating determined by matchmaker when the queue pops and you either win a certain fixed amount or you lose a certain fixed amount.

tl;drThis poll is not about personal stats or role. This poll is about team score.

Apologies I was getting two different explaination while reading other people's responses.

Ignoring the chunk of my post then and for the last paragraph. I feasibly cannot see a way how a system could do that successfully. There could be so many variables that could screw that up.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but more my issue is, why is this a concern specifically in this game when most games have the set point system and people have to legit suffer through the same things we do. I don't see how changing the system to a more personalized theme for the player performance would improve anything.

Everyone has to go through that no matter what game they are on that has decent pvp.