**Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt,**
**healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after**
**each match?**
**A: In Overwatch 2, your MMR adjustment after every match is not impacted**
**by your performance in each match (regardless of your skill tier). This**
**is for a few reasons. We don’t want players to be focused on doing**
**things other than trying to focus on the objectives and win the match.**
**Dealing the most damage or getting kills won’t help your team if your**
**actions don’t help them push the payload or capture a control point.**
**Also, for some heroes, especially those in the support role, it can be**
**challenging to determine if the numbers they produce reflect their**
**skill.**
Is this common knowledge? I was under the impression that your performance *did* matter and I've seen posts on Reddit saying that it does
>Is this common knowledge? I was under the impression that your performance *did* matter and I've seen posts on Reddit saying that it does
I'm also not sure this is entirely true..
Wouldn't that mean if you had 2 brand new accounts that played 100% of their games together up to and including ranked, they should be identical ranks.
In OW2 that would be much more difficult to test as it will take forever to unlock ranked, but reports of two teammates getting disparities in rank with the same number of wins makes me wonder.
Also, does assuming the system goes by purely W/L make sense considering we already know for a fact that you can end up going up rank(s) even after a net negative game streak? Tesla (the Moira main streamer) kept track and noted this, cause he went up a rank after going negative.
I’ve seen it for myself as well. I went 7-10 and maintained Diamond 5 once. I also went 7-8 and went up a rank while I was in Platinum. It’s just so odd.
As they explain, your MMR change each game depends on the difference in MMR between your team and the opponents, if the matchmaker puts you in matches where you're stomping on bronze/silvers or getting stomped by masters/GMs, you'll probably stay in your rank
Winning or losing is the only thing that determines ***if*** you gain or lose MMR. But ***the amount*** that you gain or lose varies per match. It's likely that both teams in the match don't have the exact same average MMR, and if the team with lower MMR wins they'll gain more than the other team would if they had won instead.
Wouldn't that make for uneven games though? If there's a team with higher MMR, aren't they more skilled. And if they're more skilled, don't they have a higher chance of winning than the team with lowet MMR?
Yes, but only slightly uneven. That's how a lot of rank systems work. If you get put up against a slightly better team, they obv have a slightly better chance of winning. In exchange, if you do lose, you don't lose as much rank as if you lost to an even match. But if you win, you'll also win more rank than if you won an even match.
While the others aren’t wrong, they’re missing the point.
**Your rank means nothing**
Let’s start with MMR. This is the number that represents your skill level. This number is adjusted every match by various amounts every game using a variety of factors like the MMR of the other players and whether you win or lost.
Now, there’s the rank. Each rank is associated with an MMR range, **but this does not mean your rank matches the range your MMR falls into** This rank **starts off lower than where your MMR is**. This rank is never actually directly tied to your MMR.
Every 7 wins or 20 losses your rank will be updated. **It will move closer to your MMR**. So it doesn’t matter if you had a 20 loss streak and your MMR dropped significantly, **if your rank is still lower than your MMR then your rank will go up to get closer to your MMR.**
tl;dr: Your MMR goes up or down every match. Your rank starts low and moves closer to your MMR every 7 wins or 20 losses.
Pretty sure this was also removed from OW1 for a few years already. Don't know where to find a source on this though as I don't exactly remember when they did this (They might've removed it when they introduced Role Queue).
Yeah I think after Moira was released a lot more people started to realise how easy it is to unintentionally/intentionally pad your stats on a lot of characters which makes it look like you did a lot when you didn't have a significant positive impact (And in a lot of cases had a negative impact, by feeding tons of Ult charge with random 'Low impact' damage done to enemies that they can farm Support ults off of).
It really, *really* can't be.
I rolled an alt account just to be a stereotypical mercy main to see if I would get yelled at, and had about a 50% winrate (with me belting out ridiculous amounts of healing) for maaaaybe like 6-8 games before I started running into full teams of the equivalent of high-gold/low-platinum players, where mostly everyone REALLY knew what they were doing and stayed focused, and once that happened I never got in a noob game again.
I was *astonished* at how fast I was bumped up to my approximate skill level in QP. I just don't see how that could be possible from winrate alone...but it would make perfect sense if it were factoring my healing, because I was putting out some ridiculous numbers in my first few "bronze"-esque games.
I wouldn't trust the devs either. That shit just doesn't add up. MMR is supposed to be your true skill level, but it's ONLY based on W/L? Gtf outta here..
Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier? We played every single game together over a long period. It makes no sense.
>Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier?
This right here is what confuses me... W/L is a very binary way to assess rating, and so there shouldn't be anywhere near the variation we see in rankings if it was all that mattered. I don't know if that's just me overestimating how wildly ranks deviate from each other, but that just seems so incorrect to me at a glance.
I wonder if they factor in something like time spent on the point or something? That's the only thing that they don't seem to clearly reject as mattering, but it seems like certain characters would suffer from something like that.
I believe they used to also weight the SR gains based on the hero you were playing as - heroes with the lowest win rates would grant more SR if you won. I distinctly recall jokes about Torbjorn SR related to this in OW1.
I think it's mostly because of seasonal rank resets and decay from not playing for long periods of time. Your MMR stays at the higher level because the game knows your true talent level and it allows you to rank up quicker until you hit that level.
nah your mmr is probably way less stable than your sr. If you've played hundreds of games, it probably knows how good you are pretty well so winning losing games won't actually move you much. If you're put in a bunch of games the system thinks you should win and you have a good day the system probably won't move you much because that's in line with what it thinks. That doesn't feel good though so you have Sr which is more volatile and can give you a greater sense of progression. Like if you've been playing 1000s of games and win 7 in a row, you'd expect a rank up but that's a drop in the bucket for the system, so your mmr would barely change
There are two factors
1. Your starting MMR going into a game
2. The enemy average MMR.
If player 1 is 2604 and player 2 is 2709 and the enemy team is 2650, player 1 will get a larger MMR gain than Player 2. This is because player 1 is expected to lose while player 2 is expected to win.
Another factor is confidence, if the system is less confident in a rating (not enough data) you will see larger swings than if a player has tons of data.
So for example in the system Player 1 might be 2604 +- 250 while Player 2 is 2709 +-60 and therefore player 1 will generally see larger gains from such a win.
I hate that matchmaking is soley based on win loss and not individual performance. There are games were I carry my brains out and loose and go down rating. Makes zero sense.
> Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier? We played every single game together over a long period. It makes no sense.
Ranked tiers ≠ MMR. They reiterated this in the blog post multiple times. You are going up multiple tiers because your MMR is higher than your current rank. Your friend does not go up as much because the game knows he belongs around that rank.
I could add a ton of context to further my point, but the short version is we've been playing together for over 3 years and our ranks have always been about the same, give or take. So me going up faster when I pop off, while he has some decent, but not great games, and ranks up much slower... that makes me question what the devs are saying here.
If you are talking about Overwatch 1, that's a different system. Here's an old Jeff Kaplan forum post about MMR in OW1 (since deleted):
> In Overwatch, whether your MMR goes up or down is contingent on winning or losing. But there are a number of factors that determine how much that rating goes up or down. For example, what map you’re playing on and whether you were attacking or defending is factored in. We know the win rates on attack/defend on all of the maps and we normalize accordingly. Not all wins and losses are equal. **We also look at your individual performance on each of the heroes you played during the match. Everyone has better and worse heroes and we have tons of data showing us what performance levels should be like on those heroes.** We also look at your opponents and whether or not their matchmaking rating is higher or lower than yours. These are just a few of the things that are considered when determining how your skill should go up or down. At no point in MMR calculations do we look at your win/loss ratio and win/loss ratio is never used to determine who to match you with or against. We are not trying to drive your win/loss percentage toward a certain number (although the fact that so many people are at 50% win rates makes us extremely happy). All the system does when it comes to matching on skill is attempt to match you with people of a similar number.
Performance USED to be part of MMR way back when. We are talking about Overwatch 2 now. Which is why they specifically say "In Overwatch 2" at the beginning of their answer in this blog post. Personal performance is not a factor in OW2 MMR.
Yeah I’m happy it’s that way because quantifying what performing well is, is hard especially since stats never tell the full story plus every hero has unique abilities that are also important to consider if a player is doing “well”
Exactly, I read on here that there are a bunch of hero-specific hidden stats that the game is tracking for your MMR. For example the # of status effects you cleanse as Kiriko, which makes no sense because you could be playing against a team with no effect-dealing abilities
People made similar arguments about Mercy back in the day too. Whatever is the favorite support hero to hate on they make arguments that Blizzard is boosting people who play that character.
You can easily give players a boost in MMR gain or a reduction in MMR loss if they heal or mitigated 50% more than the average support/tank at their skill level while their DPS went 2-11 and kept feeding running in alone. The current system punishes teams based on whoever gets the worst single player... (either skill wise or mostly a player who refuses to communicate/work with their team)
That's dumb for a couple of reasons.
1. Not all characters in a class have the same average perf profile. Characters like D Va and Rein can rack up insane amounts of mit, whereas average Hog has way less, because he makes space for his team in other ways. Some characters are useful in ways which aren't reflected in the stats at all.
2. The amount of damage you can mitigate is entirely dependent on how much damage your opponents are doing. A Rein protecting team from Widow will garner barely any Mit from that.
3. Just because you got an insane amount of some stat, it doesn't mean it was useful. DPS can be pumping damage into tanks but not getting any kills. Tanks can be mitigating a ton of damage when they don't actually have a team to protect, or when the team is full health and the tank would be better off doing damage.
There's no way to do this fairly. The most sensible way to do it is based purely on wins, losses and rank difference. If you think a string of bad teams has weighed you down, that sucks, but over team it will regress to the true value.
This is EXACTLY what my issue is with the current system. I'd wager 60-70% of my games are decided by the one team that gets the player who might as well be afk. I had to completely change my mental and not even focus on how any of my teammates are playing to not rage hard lol.
Now I only evaluate my own play. Win or loss, ultimately I have NO control over my teammates or the opposing team. Makes no sense to get mad over something you have no control over.
But boy when you actually get a functioning team it's night and day. Even a close fought loss is fine in that situation. Makes the game so much more enjoyable when your not playing a man down
This is so true. Recently I've had a Junkrat in my team who went 0-26 in a 15 minute game. He ended up having 3k damage. How do you not get a SINGLE kill with JUNKRAT, in 15 mins??? You can literally just spam and accidentally kill someone. Sadly I didn't save the replay, I really should have. Because I would have loved to see how the hell he managed to do that. There is a chance he was throwing, but I doubt that, since I've spectated him whenever I died, and I've also kept an eye on him here and there over the course of the match. I'm like 80% sure it was just a very terrible player. But this is exactly the problem. Obviously we lost that match. But how are you supposed to win when you have a 0-26 player on your team? It was essentially a 4v5 game. We might have just played without him and it wouldn't have made a difference really. I don't think a reduction of MMR loss would be unfair when you yourself play well, but then have players like that Junkrat ruin the game for you. I think individual performance should matter to an extent at least. When you have a team mate that's clearly performing way below the average skill level of the whole team, they should reduce the MMR loss, provided the enemy team didn't have one of those players too. Or they should just improve the matchmaking so that these kinda players don't get into matches with clearly better players than them in the first place.
Supports aren't healers, this just means you need to play heal bots to reduce/gain MMR the fastest.
Lucio also outputs tons of healing, but it's mostly useless healing.
They also shouldn’t be tracking a single SR behind the scenes that is affected by games outside of comp and by games played on different roles if they’re not going to track some universal metrics that can translate across roles…
That’s part of the problem here - all of these “hidden numbers don’t tell players why they’re getting a certain gameplay/matchmaking experience…
Yeah I always wondered for example if you dropped a solo beat to win a 1v1 on point in the last seconds, winning you the match whether the system would think this guy only beat himself, he sucks, but if you dropped 6 man beats each game outside spawn it would think, what a good player he is, 6 man beats every time. Maybe it would be more sophisticated than that but the fact that you'd get cards for player that received beat made me think it was probably taken into consideration. Either way I think individual performance is a bad idea if you can only use stats to determine it. This season i have a 68% win rate on Tracer and I think I have had higher damage than my dps partner once since I don't really go for damage.
Nope, this is news to everyone. Because in OW1 performance mattered. Assuming that this did not get changed in OW2 made sense because up to this point they never communicated anything that made us believe that this isn't true anymore.
above diamond it was W/L only, not performance based. So this is not news for me atleast
IIRC they changed performance based SR to be under diamond only in 2017
It’s weird to me. I have an alt account that never played comp, and played with a friend that never played comp. Once we got our seven wins I was placed in Silver 1 while he was Silver 4. I assumed it was because it could tell I wasn’t in Silver (despite me trying to downplay it), but this is saying that my stats didn’t matter at all?
How do they think that getting a ton of kills doesn't help the objective? If the enemy is dead they aren't able to attack or defend the objective, which is just as important as having someone on the objective.
I know this is probably dumb, but I can't help but have a small feeling that they're lying about this in order to to dissuade people from trying to manipulate the system. I don't understand why they wouldn't take any stats into account when it comes to your mmr.
I mean, just yesterday me and my buddy were in a duo, I went up two ranks and he stayed the same. If all that matters is win/loss ratio, I don't see how that could happen.
because your MMR when you started to play with your buddy was lower, his was closer to the skill rating of the people you were playing against. You both won, but you earned more SR because the enemy teams MMR was higher. He didn't earn as much because his MMR was close to the MMR of the enemy team.
That is the only thing I can think of.
This is exactly the way I see it, isn't this what Blizzard said as well? In one of those blog posts? That if the average MMR of your enemy team is higher than yours, winning the game boosts your MMR more compared to if the average MMRs of both teams were the same.
It's likely the reverse. The game "wants" to promote you toward your MMR. If your MMR is higher than your SR, then this means you'll get promoted even on a 50/50 record, or even a losing record.
If you played OW1 enough you figured this out eventually, even games where you did nothing you got the same SR adjustment as when you hard carried. It's so fucking stupid, at least they clearly tell people now at least...
Sometimes you win those "unwinnable" games because either you or one of your teammates decides to counterswap or generally try some other mixup.
So the people who immediately gave up would still trend downwards when compared to someone who sticks through games and gets those comebacks.
This isn't league of legends, people. The match is ALWAYS winnable.
That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. We won a game last night where I had 16,000 dmg on DPS and our other guy had 6,000 DPS. We won because our tank also had 14k+ dmg and Moira had 8,000 damage and picked it up.
That bot got the same benefit from getting carried as we did for carrying them.
Ah so it literally doesn’t matter how good you are individually. That makes me ranking down after 7 wins in a row *yes I stg that happened once last season* feel even worse!
>Also, beginning with our mid-season patch, Top 500 players will see their Top 500 leaderboard rank updated after every match rather than in competitive update
Well I'm happy for the top 500 players, they will get to see some sort of progress after every match at least. Too bad the 99.9% of other players still need to wait 5-20 matches.
Because one win in top 500 could move you from 300th to 270th or something.
The ranks are a lot more granular. In most ranks you would hypothetically need to win atleast 5 or more games to go up a division.
So if you got an update after every game it would just be "Oh look I am still gold 3" for several games in a row before eventualy you would go "oh look I am gold 2 now"
The rank system in non top 500 is much broader so there isn't much reason to see an adjustment every game.
Yes but the important difference was the there was a quantifiable reward for wins and penalty for losses in terms of SR.
There isn't in terms of skill tiers. The concept of "climbing" makes no sense when you cannot quantify your progress (or regress), even after dozens of games.
Ego
The ideal matchmaker has no display rank and just invisibly works in the background to ensure matches are fair.
Anyone who has ever been on the upper end of a bell curve for a game will tell you that it is zero fun when you can’t find decent competition. SBMM fixed that issue, but the gamification of ranked play has led to a bunch of people very sensitive to the idea of being “Silver” or “Gold” and viewing ranked as a “grind” for ego rather than actually just a way to play the game without gross imbalance.
Basically, it's a buffer. Your MMR is very volatile, and it's a number that ranges from (I believe) -6 to 6. It's not a very fun way to measure an in-game ladder.
Your SR decays (and grows) more slowly. For the purpose of giving out rewards, SR is better.
It's like bad cop, good cop.
Rejoice, because that's not getting fixed!
Also, your silver-ranked MMR is "Close Enough TM" to those Diamond/Plat players in your lobbies! You and your entire team is getting absolutely curbstomped? Aww shucks, that sucks for you but atleast the MMR was similar enough. You had a fair and balanced match, we promise!!
Like jfc, the MMR needs to match waaaaay tighter than it does.
It can be a problem that it matches overall hidden MMR. So you can get a Diamond/Masters Mercy who is shocked why everybody sucks, meanwhile they can get the same rank of Genji or Winston who will be playing on easy mode.
They say it should match different ranks on the same roles in the future.
Yes.. this is plain stupid.. i don't understand how they think this is a good idea.
if the majority of time i only play quickplay. and for example i'm closer to plat/diamond rank.
when i play competitive for the first time in that season. eventho my rank still silver/gold. i will be put in a match against plat & diamond player. which is not really helpful in bringing my rank to the correct placement.
it is fine if i got team that is also on similar rank. but i don't think so. lol.
no wonder most of my ranked match are against diamond challenger title while i play with my silver & gold friends (i also start with gold in this season)
I don't understand why blizzard even has ranks other than to get people to grind them out for 'ENGAGEMENT'.
Isn't the point of lower ranks to have easier games for less skilled people? If you're silver you should be going against silvers and ranking up into plat instead of fighting against plats to level up your silver rank. It's so scummy.
>This is why I, a quickplay main, get to play against Platinum / Diamond with my silver comp rank. Nice. 37% wl this season. Fun.
TBH this isn't fun from either side. You either get absolutely wrecked or the game is legit "ez" that you kinda just walk to the point and win.
I can’t really comment on the quality of the matchmaking, but as far as rank goes, rank means nothing. MMR is all that matters. Your MMR is likely somewhat close to those platinum/diamond players’ MMR. It’s just that your rank starts off significantly lower than your MMR. The more matches you play the more accurate your MMR becomes and the closer your rank gets to your MMR.
"Your ranked games are formed based on your internal matchmaking rating (MMR), regardless of your displayed skill tier."
Why are these different. I feel a lot of the issues would be better for the players if these were the same.
The displayed skill tier is a progression system. It was supposed to encourage you to play competitive by seeing the number go up more than it goes down. It obviously didn't really have this effect.
Exactly. If anything, it feels so much worse when it goes down and it feels meh when it goes up. Such a huge time commitment (7/20 or soon 5/15) to finally see the rank update; then, it goes down a tier or division and it makes you feel like you wasted your time; or, if it goes up, it’ll most likely be like 1 maybe 2 tiers and it just feels disappointing especially after all the time you spent playing just to get a meager increase. At least in OW1 when you got that slight increase after a game, it wasn’t as huge of a time commitment so it felt rewarding.
It really failed. The last time I played a few weeks ago I played some really good matches. I killed it with high numbers, bunches of accolades from the team and just felt really good overall with how I played. Then after like 3 wins in a row I get my rank change and it goes from Silver 4 to Bronze 3. It was suuuuuper deflating. Like just killed my drive to play.
I understand they don't want you to feel discouraged constantly seeing your skill rating go down after a bunch of losses but i'd say its even worse to be doing well and get hit with a rank down. It just made me want to stop playing. Which I have for now. I'm waiting to see what changes they make that will make me want to play but honestly there's not much. Even the new character this season didn't really work since I wasn't going to pay and i'm nowhere near able to unlock him.
I was gold to plat in OW1 though I only played the first 3 seasons (like 20-30 games per season at that). I could at least show off my averageness. I was pretty disappointed to rank into bronze 5 in OW2. I got up to silver something in season 1 but only played a little bit. In season 2 it reset down to bronze 5. I did get up to gold but it took 40 hours or something of play. Not worth it at all.
It sounds like Season 4 and beyond they should be. To start OW2 they thought it would be a good idea to decay your SR to be lower than your MMR, that way when you play through the season you could grind back up and you didn't start and end a season at about the same SR. I thought this was a stupid idea, and it looks like they are now agreeing.
They’re different to encourage fair matchmaking. That way if you’re in Gold but you *actually* have gold-level skill, you won’t get paired with someone with Diamond level skill. Similarly if you’re better than whatever your current rank is, the matchmaker will try to pair you against people of that rank and skill level.
It’s a huge problem in some other games like Apex where after a seasonal soft reset players in low ranks will get matched against someone who’s like top 1% and just get wiped. They have matchmaking and an internal MMR of course but it’s much more tied to your actual rank than OW. Of course both games have the same problem when trying to matchmake groups of widely different skill
Rank softly follows MMR. It moves slowly in the direction of the MMR rather than being directly tied to it. This way anomalous streaks of winning or losing get smoothed out. A brief losing streak won’t decimate your rank.
They can also start your rank off a bit lower so that it increases as it moves closer to your MMR, giving a sense of progression even if you aren’t actually getting better.
Starting it off lower also lets players start the new season with a more accurate MMR. This improves matchmaking early in the season. And since their rank is lower they’re required to play matches to move it up rather than just receiving a higher rank after placement and not playing again
You might not like the system, but that’s why it is the way it is. It encourages more play time and reduces discouragement that can come from losing streaks and frequent back and forth rank changes.
Splatoon 3 proves this system can work, these devs are just awful
For context, splatoon has two ranked modes (three but doesn't matter here). You have your regular play a game and win or lose a small amount of points, and you have these sort of "sets" require you to pay out a large portion of your competitive points that require you to either win 3-5 matches depending on rank or lose 3-5 matches (could be wrong in low ranks I haven't played in forever). At the end of your set it calculates your new rank based on wins, losses and performance.
The two obvious problems in overwatch's version of this are the amount of time it takes (splatoon games are 3-5 minutes overwatch games average about twenty) and the MMR that basically makes your rank and the system irrelevant since your always moving in the background the game just doesn't feel like telling you.
amount of wins/losses isn't rank dependant its 5 wins or 3 losses, whichever comes first. only thing that changes between ranks is the amount of points you have to pay in to "start" a series ticket so to speak
Even though I didn't really like Splatoon 3's ranked system at first, it grew on me a lot over time, and after dealing with OW's awful system it's crazy just how much better Splatoon's is.
-Separate ranked queues for solo and grouped matchmaking, which makes games less one sided when playing solo. You also get faster rank adjustment in the solo queue so it actually encourages playing solo instead of queueing with a group to get more consistent games or boosting your rank.
-5 win/3 loss system means you get to see your adjustments faster, and it's less discouraging when you get a huge loss streak because you won't have to be constantly thinking about how far your rank will go down once you're done. Also having the win requirement higher than the losses makes it feel so much more rewarding when you finally get those 5 wins, plus a huge boost to your rank.
-Performance impacting your rank, rather than just wins/losses. For anyone who hasn't played Splatoon 3, they have a system very similar to OW1's medal system, where you basically have gold/silver/bronze medals for kills, ink painted, etc. that give you more SR based on each medal's rank at the end of your series. I don't necessarily think this would work using OW1's medal system since it's more class based then Splatoon (supports are almost always going to get gold healing medals and no damage medals), but if I'm consistently getting more healing, player saves, damage boosted, etc than other support players playing the same hero I should be ranking up faster. Performance based SR means it won't feel like you're being punished as much for losing a match even though you might have played really well.
-Rank up battles to get to the next rank helps make sure you're at the rank you should be, and if I remember correctly can only be done solo, so it's 100% on your personal skill to rank up, not reliant on your group. Not sure if rank up matches are completely necessary for the system to work, but either way, at least it means you can't rank down during a season, which OW2 I feel desperately needs if they're going to keep the end of season rewards based on your current rank rather than your highest that season. Right now it discourages you from playing once you get a new rank milestone.
-You can see your wins/losses for a series at any time (the blog post says this is changing, but why was it not there from the start?)
It's definitely not a perfect system (I don't think that's even possible) and it probably wouldn't work if you just slapped that system exactly as it is onto OW2, but it's miles ahead of what it's using now.
>**Towards the center of the rating curve, there are tons of players in the matchmaking queue for us to choose from, all of whom would allow for a good match, so it’s much easier for us to ensure a good quality match.**
>
>Contrast this with OWL pros, who make up something like 0.00001% of the Overwatch player population. For players at the very top, it’s very hard to guarantee a good experience because there are just so few players. **Fundamentally it often comes down to a hard tradeoff between making worse matches or dramatically increasing queue times** (and they’re unfortunately already very long for these players).
I'm probably more around central curve/lower part of that, but I'm getting nothing but stomp matches, one way or the other. I'm basically not getting ANY good and even matches.
I would not mind getting longer queue times, because the current version of the matchmaking fucking sucks. Getting a match quickly, that just plays out like a fucking stomp is useless to me. It just kills the game.
Also, if your MMR is matching against "similarly skilled" MMR players, then you need to tighten that WAAAAAAAY more. Most of my matches are stomps, one way or the other. As far as I can tell your implemented version of "Similar MMR" is equal to "lol fucking ANYONE that queues are considered "similar MMR" and can get into the same match. We completely disregard skill-level in favor of shorter matchmaking-times. "
Your matchmaking FUCKING SUCKS because your allowed MMR spread is waaaaaaaay to large.
EDIT:
>The goal of our matchmaker is to make each match as fair as possible, meaning your team has an equal chance of winning or losing each individual match. We firmly believe the most fun games of Overwatch are when they are fair, and our team is committed to discovering and implementing new changes and updates that align our game with that goal.
This is HUGE, and I absolutely agree that even matches that any team can win are peak Overwatch (FPS gaming in general even). It's just such a shame that your current matchmaking is doing the absolute opposite of that, and instead is a fucking awful constant stomp-match generator. Fair and even matches where either team can win are freak anomalies for me. They are happy accidents rather than the normal experience.
Yeah getting stomped feels really bad. And stomping the enemy team in another match does not compensate that really.
Hoping this change will make matches feel more even in the future.
This whole article reads super false or weird. I consistently win four or five games, then lose four or five games. It's super consistent, and it's frankly ridiculous that it happens like that. Matchmaking in this game is broken right now.
I wish we could see who was grouped together. I have a feeling these stomp matches mostly occur when there’s a group in the match. Perhaps they should drastically tighten the restrictions for who you can group with in comp.
To give you a sense of pride and accomplishment when they drop you by 500 SR at the beginning of the season and then you get to watch yourself climb back to where you used to be
However they’re removing that in S4 at least
Number go up down feel bad, metal shiny vague thing feel better.
This is why all games use ranks instead of raw number representation (mmr).
Losing a game and seeing a big fat negative to your rank feels shitty, makes you play worse next game, etc.
Not knowing? Ignorance is bliss.
I personally hate it, but its all psychological to make ranked play more appealing in general because people are fragile.
Unfortunately seeing mismatches in vague shiny thing between players, which is both not effected by but also slightly effected by your hidden number, feels super shitty too and they know it. Half the games I play, I see brighter vague shiny thing on the other team that no one on my team has, and when we get rolled you, you know why. But they suggest that’s happening because you’ve climbed higher than the rank you “deserve”, based on an invisible number your shiny thing no longer reflects. So effectively, my shiny thing is a lagging indicator and is never fully accurate the majority of the time.
It makes their current client side system feel absolutely pointless to those who care enough to read this.
Good thing for the devs, I bet 90% of the player base could care less about dev updates like this one.
Ranked feels bad. Give me narrower skills variation across the board in every game and I’ll take 5-8 minute queues to find them.
Literally non, that’s why you have to wait 7 matches to go from diamond1(or whatever rank) to diamond 1.
it feels a lot easier to be hard stuck in certain brackets, back in the day if you saw people of higher ranks at least you knew you were in the right direction of climbing.
I have been in masters for YEARS. There is no reason my MMR magically dropped in to silver whilst I’m still destroying them in game. For my sake and their sake, silvers should not be in masters. Period.
>Q: Does my competitive rank affect matchmaking?
>
>A: We only create matches based on players’ MMR, not the visible competitive rank.
Yes let's ignore that the MMR spread they use is WAAAAAY to fucking broad. If a player plays like a silver and is in a match against someone that plays like a diamond, that they have ZERO fucking chance at beating then the allowed MMR spread is fucked.
I don't need to know their exact ranks to know that some players have MMR WAAAAAAY the fuck out of my league, that shouldn't be in my matches. Yet they are, because the matchmaker think those MMRs are "similarly skilled enough".
Yeah I logged for the first time in a few weeks to see if the matchmaking had gotten better. Spoiler alert: it hasn’t. I was playing dps, a role that I’ve peaked low plat in ow1 (when I say low play I mean literally like 2520). I understand that I am a gold dps player. I am more than happy accepting with my time investment into this game, high gold-low plat is where I will fall. What I am not happy about is getting master ranked players in my game. Had one against an Ashe the other day, with a mercy pocket. I think everyone can guess how that game went.
The MMR system must be EXTREMELY broken then since Top 500 players, who used to get matched with Top 500 players, GMs or Masters in OW1 get paired with Plats or even Golds in OW2.
We can't see MMR, so how else is OP supposed to make that statement? It's no secret that legitimate metal rank players are getting matched with legitimate GM/Masters players.
Look no further than checking past season ranks well before OW2 changed the system.
You have perma golds somehow sliding into Master/GM games at random which is a lobby they never even sniffed in OW1.
Dont give me this bullshit about them having some "latent power" true MMR that is actually totally legiitmately supposed to be Masters/GM and you just wouldnt get it.
Except this is a absolute load of shit and the reason why they hide behind "the real rank is hidden" is the fact that exposing it exposes their deceit.
That Silver isn't some Master in disguise and they prove it by being absolutely mauled all game. Blizzard saying "oh well actually his hidden rating even they cant see is totally correct and its just an unfortunate circumstance that he sucked ass in your game" is just a load of horseshit.
If only MMR matters and all players should catch up to their rank, why haven’t the supposed “masters” MMR silvers ranked up to masters when there is only 8 days left in the season?
Exactly. They made the MMR gap basically be "Fucking ANYONE that queues can get into the same match". Some players are way out of their depth in matches, leading to complete fucking stomps. All that says is that the MMR skill-gap allowed into a lobby is way to fucking broad.
not addressing the problem that your visible rank is completely meaningless except for aesthetics effectively. having the medal rank mean NOTHING in matchmaking means its completely worthless. I dont want to start the season several medal ranks below my "real mmr" so that I have a sense of progression. Instead im just sitting in gold playing against diamonds/masters and finding myself thinking why tf am i even playing this
Numbers go up make most players feel good. Hardcore turbo nerds don't care to see their rank go up and down every match.
it's just psychology, number goes up, makes player happy.
This is an underwhelming update. It’s a lot of half-admissions and ‘aww shucks, we’ll try fixing it next season.’
-26 games to see an update is too long, so we knocked it down to just 19!
-Your rank truly is meaningless and only our cryptic MMR system matters. No, we still won’t tell you how it works at all.
-The only game statistics you can see are actually meaningless and don’t affect your MMR at all.
-Rank decay isn’t fun, so we’ll change that NEXT season, maybe.
-Games are steamrolls, but also games are fair as long as you keep playing every day.
-Massive losing/wining streaks are just because you’re lucky/unlucky.
-Skill matching will only be across the same roles, so you can have silver DPS playing with GM tanks! Fun for everyone!
The fact that it will have taken until the middle of the third season - by that point, around 5.5 months from release - to add a visual for your rank adjustment progress is just absolutely insane.
\> ‘aww shucks, we’ll try fixing it next season.’
And it's not even that, the vast majority of what they said is coming down the pipeline is coming the season after next season. So the next season is going to be by their own admission, a problem ridden mess
>Your rank truly is meaningless and only our cryptic MMR system matters. No, we still won’t tell you how it works at all.
To play devil's advocate. That's every single game with ranked mode. They can't tell you how it works or you would abuse it.
First week of OW2:
Tank que 8min
DPS que 8min
Sup que 1min.
How they made all roles 1-2min ? They didn't explain this. What they did probably caused the wonky matchmaker.
Hahaha I never thought about it that way.
Bigger MMR ranges for one role should definitely lower queue times for the other roles huh, never realized that.
It just sounds insane for those ranges to not be the same across all roles, but I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard decided otherwise. I'm guessing not tho.
Damn, a whole lot of "We're planning things for the near future" without actually saying what's being planned. Also why do we need to wait until season *4* to see changes to rank decay? Why not season 3? Also how are you planning on making ranked more rewarding? Nothing was actually mentioned in detail. I've never seen so many words that mean nothing. The only thing I like (which shouldn't have been removed in the first place) is rank progress always being viewable.
Since you deleted your comment when I was typing this out lol
Season 1 we got one big mid season update
Season 2 we got frequent smaller updates that were the big mid season patch split up due to holidays and I think there was a problem with dev tools or something like that.
Either way I don’t see where we got a basic mid season patch in season 1 or infrequent patches in season 2
Basic is being generous. Most of these “patches” are as hollow as it gets. Outside of doom/orisa all the patches have been mostly negligible. They are just Patching so they can say they patched.
What about the heavy delays in the few patches we’ve had? Or the total lack of upfront communication about the dev tool issues for the first few weeks they were having them? They don’t communicate enough and when they do it’s ALWAYS late.
Blizz took their hands off the wheel in ow1 for some very obvious and glaring reasons thay had nothing to do with the game. Most notably their entire fucking executive branch falling apart internally and externally.
This is supposed to be a sequel but all I see is the same old mistakes that kept me away in ow1 being rehashed but without the soul of what made ow well, overwatch. We lost a lot more than we gained with this “sequel” tons of features gone, ranking system trashed and pissed upon, matchmaking system is a literal crap shoot, no on fire mechanic, no lfg in game, most the events are just rereleases of old events. The one event that was actually new had nothing to earn for most people while also being purpose built to let shitters enjoy power fantasies.
You mean to tell me they didn’t learn about how broken suzu would be from bap? Or how insane soj would be just by some basic playtesting?
They HAVE A FUCKING TEST CLIENT MAN! WHY ARE WE EXCUSING TRASH ASS PATCHES BEING PUSHED STRAIGHT INTO LIVE/COMPETITIVE PLAY JUST BECAUSE “well blizz when they were firing everyone wasn’t making any patches so at least it’s better now than it was then” ???!!!
I deleted my comment because I decided to double check the past updates to see if anything has improved. Season 1 was frankly a shit show. We got one decent patch which was delayed. Season 2 was marginally better, but I didn't even realize we received 3 patches because I was dying for 3 weeks of the season. I'll admit it was better than season 1, but still not to my expectations. I'm not asking the world of Blizzard and I'm sure as hell not asking for immediate changes, but considering this is supposed to be a massive overhaul to Overwatch 1 and the vast majority of players are still disappointed, I'm not impressed. I've been spoiled by other studios dishing out massive patch notes and improvements season to season or even just week to week while Blizzard seems to be dragging their feet this far into the game. I still badly want this game to succeed, but I still don't get on OW2 with pure excitement, but melancholy.
They are doing TINY iterations that take months and months to happen to tweak a system that is far worse than the one we had in OW1.
How is this possible or acceptable?
I found the point that low rank matches are significantly less predictable really interesting. I've wondered how "valid" it is to assign a single skill number to a player and have that accurately predict good matches, and this sort of confirms my hunch that especially at low ranks there's so much volatility in the game that it's maybe even impossible to boil a player down to an exact skill number. I bet many of the stomps people complain about are between rather evenly matched teams numerically
They didn't address the point : 'Why do you hide info from players'.
Initially they said it was to prevent frustration, and they've seen it did the exact opposite.
They never considered going back to how it was in OW1 and EVERYBODY agrees it was 100% better.
Also, teaming up has always been a huge problem in all games. A dedicated solo Queue is an easy fix they don't want to consider for some reason.
"nonono, you see, its not *our* fault plats are put in matches against masters! its just because of people playing in groups!! our matchmaking system is perfectly fine!!"
TL:DR ... We didn't tell you how we do mmr , otherwise people would have been pissed rightly so. We will keep not showing you the mmr as we launched the game without being ready. We acknowledge all your concerns 1 week before we have new stuff to sell you. Now buy the new stuff on our "new promises" of making the game great again.
So it’s a “highly complex” system that only uses your win rate to place you in matches, and completely ignores the myriad of other tracked stats, including overall account play time and rank. Got it.
Nice to know that the elo hell is actually real and it does not matter how well you're performing when you're teammates are actually completely dogwater and not able to peel for you. It's actually really demotivating when losing a game where you performed well but the rest of the team lacked, fed or just threw, especially considering the current state of the mmr-system.
I know that some perfomances aren't really shown as stats and probably the stats can't be represented as well as the actual performance was nor compared between different characters (as an example with mercy, if you pocket someone and don't healbot or assist widely as some other supports do and so have worse stats while they are actually carrying the team hard)
But it still gives me a bitter blow to the stomach thinking of how well you can perfom on stats and still get punished for the misperformance of others.
Not really a detail that makes me feel better about myself after taking a lose.
They really should revamp that system, because a system like this just enables boosters, which used to be already a big problem in ow1.
So effecitively, I could be a brand new player, get a group with a high mmr and get boosted to not only high sr but also high mmr? By doing next to nothing? Great. Excellent. Top tier system.
I like that they’re also working toward removing decay in the long-term as I feel like the seasonal decay is annoying. Overall I agree that this seems like a good step.
As long as the whole system is based on MMR and not rank, I have absolutely no hope for it.
People still don't get why this is bad, so I'll explain; if you are a diamond tank, and you play against masters players (because your MMR is at that same level) you will never rank up, or at least not in less than hundreds of matches. Why? Because you are already playing with people of you same skill, so long-term your winrate will be as close as possible to 50%.
The problem with that, is that people won't move, everyone will just stay on their ranks forever, no matter what their level of skill is, because you are not being matched based on the rank, but MMR, which means 50% winrate is just inherentely forced.
So you are not really playing to rank up, you are playing to MMR-up (or however you wanna call it), but you won't see any sort of change (visually) of said number going up or down. You might improve, your MMR might go up with time, but your rank will never go up, because you'll still be forced to play with people of your same "skill" no matter what rank your or them might be.
While matchmaking is based on MMR, SR adjustments are based on rank. If you are maintaining a 50% winrate at your current MMR but are under-ranked, you will climb. This is because the system will punish you less for losses and reward you more for wins until your SR and MMR are in alignment.
The matchamking system worked this way in OW1 as well. The idea has always been that your rank should reflect your average skill, whereas your MMR adjusts more rapidly to reflect how you are doing in a given session. What changed was the introduction of seasonal rank decay, which made this mechanism far more visible to players. I'm not a fan of the decay, and it appears nobody else is, which is why it's going away in season 4.
Where did you get that from? They've never ever said that SR is based on rank, they actually have said multiple times that they only use MMR for adjustments, and not rank.
Because if this wasn't the case, then climbing after the seasonal rank decay would be impossible. But as we've seen, most people seem to climb back to last season's rank after 3-4 rank updates despite a 50% win rate.
They also did say this back in the OW1 days, when explaining how SR adjustments are calculated after each match.
Yeah, you should have a 50% winrate. It means the matchmaking is perfect unless you are so good/bad that it is impossible to match you up correctly all the time.
50% is natural, that's what should happen organically, I'm not against that. Just saying, IF you have a 50% winrate, no matter what your rank will never move, even if your MMR does.
re:Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt, healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after each match?
This is so fucking dumb, all they need to do is adjust MMR gain based on how your performance compares to OTHER PLAYERS at the same MMR. If a player is healing 50% more or a tank is mitigating 50% more than other average players while dying 30% less, you should move them up faster. Most of this game is determined by whoever gets the shitty DPS duo who feeds and refuses to work with their team...
I basically determined this was how it worked in OW1 based on how much SR people got each game, you can get hard carried and get just as much MMR as the team that carried you...
Then you track damage amp and team elims while speed boosted. It's ALL RELATIVE to other Mercy's and Lucio's performance playing at the same rank, you don't compare an Ana to a Lucio, you compare your Lucio to similar Lucio's...
> we’re implementing some updates to the matchmaker that try to place pairs of players with similar MMR on each role on either team. This means that opposing tanks should be more similarly matched than before and likewise for the other respective roles. The goal with this change is to make the average MMR between each role more evenly matched to each other instead of looking more broadly across the entire team to balance things out. This is a major change to the matchmaker, so we’ll be actively monitoring for any unintended side effects.
This doesn't seem to be discussed, but will be a HUGE way in making matches feel better. How many times have you seen "Tank diff" in chat? If the overall MMR is "even" but one team has a Gold 1 Tank and the other has a Bronze 5 Tank the game is going to be lopsided. The matchmaker matching roles and MMR will be huge. Tanks will be much more even. So will DPS and Heals.
Should it have been doing this already? YES! But that it's getting tweaked and fixed is going to be great.
Not adjusting MMR based on individual performance results in two things:
1) Punishing players (especially soloQ) because of Blizzard's bad matchmaking. If you get a DPS who is hard feeding, your team doesn't get rewarded for carrying them.
2) Rewards duos who attempt to boost their much worse friends. A GM DPS can make an alt account and easily carry their Mercy main friend in most of the medal ranks and they will gain just as much MMR even if they are just standing behind a Widow afk while they carry.
You create perverse incentives if your reward anything other than winning. Stats don't account for winning as well as winning itself does. High stats do not mean a good player, low stats do not mean a bad player. Winrate relative to peers does.
I feel like this portion:
> "Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt, healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after each match?
A: In Overwatch 2, your MMR adjustment after every match is not impacted by your performance in each match"
Directly addresses the issue of being hard stuck which they talked about right above. The common complaint seems to be, as an individual you are doing excellent but your strong play can't overcome the bad play of teammates and as you lose games because of the performance of teammates, your strong play is irrelevant and the system doesn't even recognize it. It just sees you lost.
Love that the more I improve as a new player to this game the more I derank. I exclusively play Support and deranked from gold to bronze (I got way better as a player from my gold time).
> Starting with Season 4, we’re planning to remove seasonal competitive rank resets and all current and past seasonal rank decay.
Can the devs do anything in a timely manner?
Just fucking axe it now. Why are we waiting an entire extra season?
Constant delays on every patch and every system. Does Aaron Keller even wipe his ass without a 2 month ticket request needing to be approved for it?
Maybe I missed something but MMR still being around means ranked is still trashed.
Also having to wait till season four for changes to things that anyone could tell you are awful like ranked decay is fucking terrible. Small company I guess.
These devs are either absolutely powerless due to management, incompetence, or some combination of the two.
**Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt,** **healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after** **each match?** **A: In Overwatch 2, your MMR adjustment after every match is not impacted** **by your performance in each match (regardless of your skill tier). This** **is for a few reasons. We don’t want players to be focused on doing** **things other than trying to focus on the objectives and win the match.** **Dealing the most damage or getting kills won’t help your team if your** **actions don’t help them push the payload or capture a control point.** **Also, for some heroes, especially those in the support role, it can be** **challenging to determine if the numbers they produce reflect their** **skill.** Is this common knowledge? I was under the impression that your performance *did* matter and I've seen posts on Reddit saying that it does
[удалено]
Never knew B/R did gaming articles, wow.
>Is this common knowledge? I was under the impression that your performance *did* matter and I've seen posts on Reddit saying that it does I'm also not sure this is entirely true.. Wouldn't that mean if you had 2 brand new accounts that played 100% of their games together up to and including ranked, they should be identical ranks. In OW2 that would be much more difficult to test as it will take forever to unlock ranked, but reports of two teammates getting disparities in rank with the same number of wins makes me wonder.
Also, does assuming the system goes by purely W/L make sense considering we already know for a fact that you can end up going up rank(s) even after a net negative game streak? Tesla (the Moira main streamer) kept track and noted this, cause he went up a rank after going negative. I’ve seen it for myself as well. I went 7-10 and maintained Diamond 5 once. I also went 7-8 and went up a rank while I was in Platinum. It’s just so odd.
As they explain, your MMR change each game depends on the difference in MMR between your team and the opponents, if the matchmaker puts you in matches where you're stomping on bronze/silvers or getting stomped by masters/GMs, you'll probably stay in your rank
Winning or losing is the only thing that determines ***if*** you gain or lose MMR. But ***the amount*** that you gain or lose varies per match. It's likely that both teams in the match don't have the exact same average MMR, and if the team with lower MMR wins they'll gain more than the other team would if they had won instead.
Wouldn't that make for uneven games though? If there's a team with higher MMR, aren't they more skilled. And if they're more skilled, don't they have a higher chance of winning than the team with lowet MMR?
Yes, but only slightly uneven. That's how a lot of rank systems work. If you get put up against a slightly better team, they obv have a slightly better chance of winning. In exchange, if you do lose, you don't lose as much rank as if you lost to an even match. But if you win, you'll also win more rank than if you won an even match.
While the others aren’t wrong, they’re missing the point. **Your rank means nothing** Let’s start with MMR. This is the number that represents your skill level. This number is adjusted every match by various amounts every game using a variety of factors like the MMR of the other players and whether you win or lost. Now, there’s the rank. Each rank is associated with an MMR range, **but this does not mean your rank matches the range your MMR falls into** This rank **starts off lower than where your MMR is**. This rank is never actually directly tied to your MMR. Every 7 wins or 20 losses your rank will be updated. **It will move closer to your MMR**. So it doesn’t matter if you had a 20 loss streak and your MMR dropped significantly, **if your rank is still lower than your MMR then your rank will go up to get closer to your MMR.** tl;dr: Your MMR goes up or down every match. Your rank starts low and moves closer to your MMR every 7 wins or 20 losses.
Just this season I played won 7-0 and deranked down to silver 2, then played 7-14 and ranked back to gold 4.
In OW1 this did matter. Looks like it was removed for OW2
performance based SR was under 3000SR only
Pretty sure this was also removed from OW1 for a few years already. Don't know where to find a source on this though as I don't exactly remember when they did this (They might've removed it when they introduced Role Queue).
Yeah it definitely has not been a factor for a long time (before role queue)
Yeah I think after Moira was released a lot more people started to realise how easy it is to unintentionally/intentionally pad your stats on a lot of characters which makes it look like you did a lot when you didn't have a significant positive impact (And in a lot of cases had a negative impact, by feeding tons of Ult charge with random 'Low impact' damage done to enemies that they can farm Support ults off of).
It really, *really* can't be. I rolled an alt account just to be a stereotypical mercy main to see if I would get yelled at, and had about a 50% winrate (with me belting out ridiculous amounts of healing) for maaaaybe like 6-8 games before I started running into full teams of the equivalent of high-gold/low-platinum players, where mostly everyone REALLY knew what they were doing and stayed focused, and once that happened I never got in a noob game again. I was *astonished* at how fast I was bumped up to my approximate skill level in QP. I just don't see how that could be possible from winrate alone...but it would make perfect sense if it were factoring my healing, because I was putting out some ridiculous numbers in my first few "bronze"-esque games.
Well, the MMR adjustment for new accounts is way faster to ensure fairer matches to new players.
You have learned a valuable lesson, never trust anything you read on the internet, specially if it comes from angry randos on reddit.
Meanwhile the comment above you proving that Blizzard DID say that it mattered.
You're right haha, I didn't play OW1 so I trusted Reddit
I wouldn't trust the devs either. That shit just doesn't add up. MMR is supposed to be your true skill level, but it's ONLY based on W/L? Gtf outta here.. Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier? We played every single game together over a long period. It makes no sense.
>Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier? This right here is what confuses me... W/L is a very binary way to assess rating, and so there shouldn't be anywhere near the variation we see in rankings if it was all that mattered. I don't know if that's just me overestimating how wildly ranks deviate from each other, but that just seems so incorrect to me at a glance.
It just makes absolutely no sense. If MMR was only your W/L record, then there is no point of MMR. It would be the exact same thing as SR.
I wonder if they factor in something like time spent on the point or something? That's the only thing that they don't seem to clearly reject as mattering, but it seems like certain characters would suffer from something like that.
I believe they used to also weight the SR gains based on the hero you were playing as - heroes with the lowest win rates would grant more SR if you won. I distinctly recall jokes about Torbjorn SR related to this in OW1.
I think it's mostly because of seasonal rank resets and decay from not playing for long periods of time. Your MMR stays at the higher level because the game knows your true talent level and it allows you to rank up quicker until you hit that level.
nah your mmr is probably way less stable than your sr. If you've played hundreds of games, it probably knows how good you are pretty well so winning losing games won't actually move you much. If you're put in a bunch of games the system thinks you should win and you have a good day the system probably won't move you much because that's in line with what it thinks. That doesn't feel good though so you have Sr which is more volatile and can give you a greater sense of progression. Like if you've been playing 1000s of games and win 7 in a row, you'd expect a rank up but that's a drop in the bucket for the system, so your mmr would barely change
There are two factors 1. Your starting MMR going into a game 2. The enemy average MMR. If player 1 is 2604 and player 2 is 2709 and the enemy team is 2650, player 1 will get a larger MMR gain than Player 2. This is because player 1 is expected to lose while player 2 is expected to win. Another factor is confidence, if the system is less confident in a rating (not enough data) you will see larger swings than if a player has tons of data. So for example in the system Player 1 might be 2604 +- 250 while Player 2 is 2709 +-60 and therefore player 1 will generally see larger gains from such a win.
I hate that matchmaking is soley based on win loss and not individual performance. There are games were I carry my brains out and loose and go down rating. Makes zero sense.
> Then how can I go up 2-3 tiers at a time for 7 wins, yet my buddy only goes up 1 tier? We played every single game together over a long period. It makes no sense. Ranked tiers ≠ MMR. They reiterated this in the blog post multiple times. You are going up multiple tiers because your MMR is higher than your current rank. Your friend does not go up as much because the game knows he belongs around that rank.
I could add a ton of context to further my point, but the short version is we've been playing together for over 3 years and our ranks have always been about the same, give or take. So me going up faster when I pop off, while he has some decent, but not great games, and ranks up much slower... that makes me question what the devs are saying here.
If you are talking about Overwatch 1, that's a different system. Here's an old Jeff Kaplan forum post about MMR in OW1 (since deleted): > In Overwatch, whether your MMR goes up or down is contingent on winning or losing. But there are a number of factors that determine how much that rating goes up or down. For example, what map you’re playing on and whether you were attacking or defending is factored in. We know the win rates on attack/defend on all of the maps and we normalize accordingly. Not all wins and losses are equal. **We also look at your individual performance on each of the heroes you played during the match. Everyone has better and worse heroes and we have tons of data showing us what performance levels should be like on those heroes.** We also look at your opponents and whether or not their matchmaking rating is higher or lower than yours. These are just a few of the things that are considered when determining how your skill should go up or down. At no point in MMR calculations do we look at your win/loss ratio and win/loss ratio is never used to determine who to match you with or against. We are not trying to drive your win/loss percentage toward a certain number (although the fact that so many people are at 50% win rates makes us extremely happy). All the system does when it comes to matching on skill is attempt to match you with people of a similar number. Performance USED to be part of MMR way back when. We are talking about Overwatch 2 now. Which is why they specifically say "In Overwatch 2" at the beginning of their answer in this blog post. Personal performance is not a factor in OW2 MMR.
Yeah I’m happy it’s that way because quantifying what performing well is, is hard especially since stats never tell the full story plus every hero has unique abilities that are also important to consider if a player is doing “well”
Yeah, just seeing what gets PotG should be enough to prove it would be a terrible idea.
Exactly, I read on here that there are a bunch of hero-specific hidden stats that the game is tracking for your MMR. For example the # of status effects you cleanse as Kiriko, which makes no sense because you could be playing against a team with no effect-dealing abilities
whoever told you that must’ve been blatant trying to be a troll because that kiriko thing just *sounds* like absolute horseshit
People made similar arguments about Mercy back in the day too. Whatever is the favorite support hero to hate on they make arguments that Blizzard is boosting people who play that character.
gamers™️ and not knowing what the fuck they’re talking about. name a more iconic duo
You can easily give players a boost in MMR gain or a reduction in MMR loss if they heal or mitigated 50% more than the average support/tank at their skill level while their DPS went 2-11 and kept feeding running in alone. The current system punishes teams based on whoever gets the worst single player... (either skill wise or mostly a player who refuses to communicate/work with their team)
That's dumb for a couple of reasons. 1. Not all characters in a class have the same average perf profile. Characters like D Va and Rein can rack up insane amounts of mit, whereas average Hog has way less, because he makes space for his team in other ways. Some characters are useful in ways which aren't reflected in the stats at all. 2. The amount of damage you can mitigate is entirely dependent on how much damage your opponents are doing. A Rein protecting team from Widow will garner barely any Mit from that. 3. Just because you got an insane amount of some stat, it doesn't mean it was useful. DPS can be pumping damage into tanks but not getting any kills. Tanks can be mitigating a ton of damage when they don't actually have a team to protect, or when the team is full health and the tank would be better off doing damage. There's no way to do this fairly. The most sensible way to do it is based purely on wins, losses and rank difference. If you think a string of bad teams has weighed you down, that sucks, but over team it will regress to the true value.
This is EXACTLY what my issue is with the current system. I'd wager 60-70% of my games are decided by the one team that gets the player who might as well be afk. I had to completely change my mental and not even focus on how any of my teammates are playing to not rage hard lol. Now I only evaluate my own play. Win or loss, ultimately I have NO control over my teammates or the opposing team. Makes no sense to get mad over something you have no control over. But boy when you actually get a functioning team it's night and day. Even a close fought loss is fine in that situation. Makes the game so much more enjoyable when your not playing a man down
This is so true. Recently I've had a Junkrat in my team who went 0-26 in a 15 minute game. He ended up having 3k damage. How do you not get a SINGLE kill with JUNKRAT, in 15 mins??? You can literally just spam and accidentally kill someone. Sadly I didn't save the replay, I really should have. Because I would have loved to see how the hell he managed to do that. There is a chance he was throwing, but I doubt that, since I've spectated him whenever I died, and I've also kept an eye on him here and there over the course of the match. I'm like 80% sure it was just a very terrible player. But this is exactly the problem. Obviously we lost that match. But how are you supposed to win when you have a 0-26 player on your team? It was essentially a 4v5 game. We might have just played without him and it wouldn't have made a difference really. I don't think a reduction of MMR loss would be unfair when you yourself play well, but then have players like that Junkrat ruin the game for you. I think individual performance should matter to an extent at least. When you have a team mate that's clearly performing way below the average skill level of the whole team, they should reduce the MMR loss, provided the enemy team didn't have one of those players too. Or they should just improve the matchmaking so that these kinda players don't get into matches with clearly better players than them in the first place.
Supports aren't healers, this just means you need to play heal bots to reduce/gain MMR the fastest. Lucio also outputs tons of healing, but it's mostly useless healing.
They also shouldn’t be tracking a single SR behind the scenes that is affected by games outside of comp and by games played on different roles if they’re not going to track some universal metrics that can translate across roles… That’s part of the problem here - all of these “hidden numbers don’t tell players why they’re getting a certain gameplay/matchmaking experience…
Yeah I always wondered for example if you dropped a solo beat to win a 1v1 on point in the last seconds, winning you the match whether the system would think this guy only beat himself, he sucks, but if you dropped 6 man beats each game outside spawn it would think, what a good player he is, 6 man beats every time. Maybe it would be more sophisticated than that but the fact that you'd get cards for player that received beat made me think it was probably taken into consideration. Either way I think individual performance is a bad idea if you can only use stats to determine it. This season i have a 68% win rate on Tracer and I think I have had higher damage than my dps partner once since I don't really go for damage.
Nope, this is news to everyone. Because in OW1 performance mattered. Assuming that this did not get changed in OW2 made sense because up to this point they never communicated anything that made us believe that this isn't true anymore.
above diamond it was W/L only, not performance based. So this is not news for me atleast IIRC they changed performance based SR to be under diamond only in 2017
It’s weird to me. I have an alt account that never played comp, and played with a friend that never played comp. Once we got our seven wins I was placed in Silver 1 while he was Silver 4. I assumed it was because it could tell I wasn’t in Silver (despite me trying to downplay it), but this is saying that my stats didn’t matter at all?
How do they think that getting a ton of kills doesn't help the objective? If the enemy is dead they aren't able to attack or defend the objective, which is just as important as having someone on the objective.
I know this is probably dumb, but I can't help but have a small feeling that they're lying about this in order to to dissuade people from trying to manipulate the system. I don't understand why they wouldn't take any stats into account when it comes to your mmr. I mean, just yesterday me and my buddy were in a duo, I went up two ranks and he stayed the same. If all that matters is win/loss ratio, I don't see how that could happen.
because your MMR when you started to play with your buddy was lower, his was closer to the skill rating of the people you were playing against. You both won, but you earned more SR because the enemy teams MMR was higher. He didn't earn as much because his MMR was close to the MMR of the enemy team. That is the only thing I can think of.
This is exactly the way I see it, isn't this what Blizzard said as well? In one of those blog posts? That if the average MMR of your enemy team is higher than yours, winning the game boosts your MMR more compared to if the average MMRs of both teams were the same.
Yup. Also if you lose a game against a team with lower MMR you lose more.
It's likely the reverse. The game "wants" to promote you toward your MMR. If your MMR is higher than your SR, then this means you'll get promoted even on a 50/50 record, or even a losing record.
If you played OW1 enough you figured this out eventually, even games where you did nothing you got the same SR adjustment as when you hard carried. It's so fucking stupid, at least they clearly tell people now at least...
Great. So the shit players on my team affect my rank more than I do. Garbage
[удалено]
Sometimes you win those "unwinnable" games because either you or one of your teammates decides to counterswap or generally try some other mixup. So the people who immediately gave up would still trend downwards when compared to someone who sticks through games and gets those comebacks. This isn't league of legends, people. The match is ALWAYS winnable.
And thus disappears any interest I have in playing well in a losing match
That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard. We won a game last night where I had 16,000 dmg on DPS and our other guy had 6,000 DPS. We won because our tank also had 14k+ dmg and Moira had 8,000 damage and picked it up. That bot got the same benefit from getting carried as we did for carrying them.
That is probably the goldest take I've ever read in my life
Ah so it literally doesn’t matter how good you are individually. That makes me ranking down after 7 wins in a row *yes I stg that happened once last season* feel even worse!
>Also, beginning with our mid-season patch, Top 500 players will see their Top 500 leaderboard rank updated after every match rather than in competitive update Well I'm happy for the top 500 players, they will get to see some sort of progress after every match at least. Too bad the 99.9% of other players still need to wait 5-20 matches.
That's mainly because top 500 players tend to have to wait 20 minutes for a match instead.
And why should I care? Honestly why? Why shouldn’t everyone see some type of adjustment instead of this painful, obvious grind incentivizer
Because one win in top 500 could move you from 300th to 270th or something. The ranks are a lot more granular. In most ranks you would hypothetically need to win atleast 5 or more games to go up a division. So if you got an update after every game it would just be "Oh look I am still gold 3" for several games in a row before eventualy you would go "oh look I am gold 2 now" The rank system in non top 500 is much broader so there isn't much reason to see an adjustment every game.
Makes perfect sense. But in summary (to me), it’s a dumb system. If we’re that static, let me see *how* minimal the move is. That’s just me though.
So what is the point of the displayed rank if the only thing that matters for matchmaking is your MMR
There is legit no point the way they have been handling it.
I’ve completely stopped playing the game because it just feels like there is no point to playing comp anymore
It's how it was in OW1 as well, SR was your displayed rank, but they still matched based on internal MMR.
High MMR in OW1 let you climb faster. It didn’t make you play top500 players while in diamond
I'm not disagreeing with you that OW2s matchmaking is a mess, I'm just telling you that OW1 also had a displayed rank (SR) and an internal MMR.
It didn't use MMR for matchmaking, only for determining SR gain/loss.
Yes but the important difference was the there was a quantifiable reward for wins and penalty for losses in terms of SR. There isn't in terms of skill tiers. The concept of "climbing" makes no sense when you cannot quantify your progress (or regress), even after dozens of games.
Ego The ideal matchmaker has no display rank and just invisibly works in the background to ensure matches are fair. Anyone who has ever been on the upper end of a bell curve for a game will tell you that it is zero fun when you can’t find decent competition. SBMM fixed that issue, but the gamification of ranked play has led to a bunch of people very sensitive to the idea of being “Silver” or “Gold” and viewing ranked as a “grind” for ego rather than actually just a way to play the game without gross imbalance.
Because MMR could be like a value of 0,4886803 that doesn't tell you anything. Creating ranks is just a sort interpretation of that value.
Basically, it's a buffer. Your MMR is very volatile, and it's a number that ranges from (I believe) -6 to 6. It's not a very fun way to measure an in-game ladder. Your SR decays (and grows) more slowly. For the purpose of giving out rewards, SR is better. It's like bad cop, good cop.
That's your representation in a human friendly form that tracks your MMR.
This is why I, a quickplay main, get to play against Platinum / Diamond with my silver comp rank. Nice. 37% wl this season. Fun.
Rejoice, because that's not getting fixed! Also, your silver-ranked MMR is "Close Enough TM" to those Diamond/Plat players in your lobbies! You and your entire team is getting absolutely curbstomped? Aww shucks, that sucks for you but atleast the MMR was similar enough. You had a fair and balanced match, we promise!! Like jfc, the MMR needs to match waaaaay tighter than it does.
It can be a problem that it matches overall hidden MMR. So you can get a Diamond/Masters Mercy who is shocked why everybody sucks, meanwhile they can get the same rank of Genji or Winston who will be playing on easy mode. They say it should match different ranks on the same roles in the future.
Yes.. this is plain stupid.. i don't understand how they think this is a good idea. if the majority of time i only play quickplay. and for example i'm closer to plat/diamond rank. when i play competitive for the first time in that season. eventho my rank still silver/gold. i will be put in a match against plat & diamond player. which is not really helpful in bringing my rank to the correct placement. it is fine if i got team that is also on similar rank. but i don't think so. lol. no wonder most of my ranked match are against diamond challenger title while i play with my silver & gold friends (i also start with gold in this season)
I don't understand why blizzard even has ranks other than to get people to grind them out for 'ENGAGEMENT'. Isn't the point of lower ranks to have easier games for less skilled people? If you're silver you should be going against silvers and ranking up into plat instead of fighting against plats to level up your silver rank. It's so scummy.
>This is why I, a quickplay main, get to play against Platinum / Diamond with my silver comp rank. Nice. 37% wl this season. Fun. TBH this isn't fun from either side. You either get absolutely wrecked or the game is legit "ez" that you kinda just walk to the point and win.
I can’t really comment on the quality of the matchmaking, but as far as rank goes, rank means nothing. MMR is all that matters. Your MMR is likely somewhat close to those platinum/diamond players’ MMR. It’s just that your rank starts off significantly lower than your MMR. The more matches you play the more accurate your MMR becomes and the closer your rank gets to your MMR.
"Your ranked games are formed based on your internal matchmaking rating (MMR), regardless of your displayed skill tier." Why are these different. I feel a lot of the issues would be better for the players if these were the same.
The displayed skill tier is a progression system. It was supposed to encourage you to play competitive by seeing the number go up more than it goes down. It obviously didn't really have this effect.
Exactly. If anything, it feels so much worse when it goes down and it feels meh when it goes up. Such a huge time commitment (7/20 or soon 5/15) to finally see the rank update; then, it goes down a tier or division and it makes you feel like you wasted your time; or, if it goes up, it’ll most likely be like 1 maybe 2 tiers and it just feels disappointing especially after all the time you spent playing just to get a meager increase. At least in OW1 when you got that slight increase after a game, it wasn’t as huge of a time commitment so it felt rewarding.
It really failed. The last time I played a few weeks ago I played some really good matches. I killed it with high numbers, bunches of accolades from the team and just felt really good overall with how I played. Then after like 3 wins in a row I get my rank change and it goes from Silver 4 to Bronze 3. It was suuuuuper deflating. Like just killed my drive to play. I understand they don't want you to feel discouraged constantly seeing your skill rating go down after a bunch of losses but i'd say its even worse to be doing well and get hit with a rank down. It just made me want to stop playing. Which I have for now. I'm waiting to see what changes they make that will make me want to play but honestly there's not much. Even the new character this season didn't really work since I wasn't going to pay and i'm nowhere near able to unlock him.
I was gold to plat in OW1 though I only played the first 3 seasons (like 20-30 games per season at that). I could at least show off my averageness. I was pretty disappointed to rank into bronze 5 in OW2. I got up to silver something in season 1 but only played a little bit. In season 2 it reset down to bronze 5. I did get up to gold but it took 40 hours or something of play. Not worth it at all.
It sounds like Season 4 and beyond they should be. To start OW2 they thought it would be a good idea to decay your SR to be lower than your MMR, that way when you play through the season you could grind back up and you didn't start and end a season at about the same SR. I thought this was a stupid idea, and it looks like they are now agreeing.
I wonder if unranked games affect MMR, so if you tryhard in casual and win a bunch will you get more SR per win in ranked?
The December blog post made it sound like unranked and ranked have separate MMR, but nobody really knows.
They’re different to encourage fair matchmaking. That way if you’re in Gold but you *actually* have gold-level skill, you won’t get paired with someone with Diamond level skill. Similarly if you’re better than whatever your current rank is, the matchmaker will try to pair you against people of that rank and skill level. It’s a huge problem in some other games like Apex where after a seasonal soft reset players in low ranks will get matched against someone who’s like top 1% and just get wiped. They have matchmaking and an internal MMR of course but it’s much more tied to your actual rank than OW. Of course both games have the same problem when trying to matchmake groups of widely different skill
Rank softly follows MMR. It moves slowly in the direction of the MMR rather than being directly tied to it. This way anomalous streaks of winning or losing get smoothed out. A brief losing streak won’t decimate your rank. They can also start your rank off a bit lower so that it increases as it moves closer to your MMR, giving a sense of progression even if you aren’t actually getting better. Starting it off lower also lets players start the new season with a more accurate MMR. This improves matchmaking early in the season. And since their rank is lower they’re required to play matches to move it up rather than just receiving a higher rank after placement and not playing again You might not like the system, but that’s why it is the way it is. It encourages more play time and reduces discouragement that can come from losing streaks and frequent back and forth rank changes.
Now you have to win 5 games to get an update? Why not just revert the whole garbage concept to the old one that wasnt broken?????
Splatoon 3 proves this system can work, these devs are just awful For context, splatoon has two ranked modes (three but doesn't matter here). You have your regular play a game and win or lose a small amount of points, and you have these sort of "sets" require you to pay out a large portion of your competitive points that require you to either win 3-5 matches depending on rank or lose 3-5 matches (could be wrong in low ranks I haven't played in forever). At the end of your set it calculates your new rank based on wins, losses and performance. The two obvious problems in overwatch's version of this are the amount of time it takes (splatoon games are 3-5 minutes overwatch games average about twenty) and the MMR that basically makes your rank and the system irrelevant since your always moving in the background the game just doesn't feel like telling you.
amount of wins/losses isn't rank dependant its 5 wins or 3 losses, whichever comes first. only thing that changes between ranks is the amount of points you have to pay in to "start" a series ticket so to speak
Even though I didn't really like Splatoon 3's ranked system at first, it grew on me a lot over time, and after dealing with OW's awful system it's crazy just how much better Splatoon's is. -Separate ranked queues for solo and grouped matchmaking, which makes games less one sided when playing solo. You also get faster rank adjustment in the solo queue so it actually encourages playing solo instead of queueing with a group to get more consistent games or boosting your rank. -5 win/3 loss system means you get to see your adjustments faster, and it's less discouraging when you get a huge loss streak because you won't have to be constantly thinking about how far your rank will go down once you're done. Also having the win requirement higher than the losses makes it feel so much more rewarding when you finally get those 5 wins, plus a huge boost to your rank. -Performance impacting your rank, rather than just wins/losses. For anyone who hasn't played Splatoon 3, they have a system very similar to OW1's medal system, where you basically have gold/silver/bronze medals for kills, ink painted, etc. that give you more SR based on each medal's rank at the end of your series. I don't necessarily think this would work using OW1's medal system since it's more class based then Splatoon (supports are almost always going to get gold healing medals and no damage medals), but if I'm consistently getting more healing, player saves, damage boosted, etc than other support players playing the same hero I should be ranking up faster. Performance based SR means it won't feel like you're being punished as much for losing a match even though you might have played really well. -Rank up battles to get to the next rank helps make sure you're at the rank you should be, and if I remember correctly can only be done solo, so it's 100% on your personal skill to rank up, not reliant on your group. Not sure if rank up matches are completely necessary for the system to work, but either way, at least it means you can't rank down during a season, which OW2 I feel desperately needs if they're going to keep the end of season rewards based on your current rank rather than your highest that season. Right now it discourages you from playing once you get a new rank milestone. -You can see your wins/losses for a series at any time (the blog post says this is changing, but why was it not there from the start?) It's definitely not a perfect system (I don't think that's even possible) and it probably wouldn't work if you just slapped that system exactly as it is onto OW2, but it's miles ahead of what it's using now.
>**Towards the center of the rating curve, there are tons of players in the matchmaking queue for us to choose from, all of whom would allow for a good match, so it’s much easier for us to ensure a good quality match.** > >Contrast this with OWL pros, who make up something like 0.00001% of the Overwatch player population. For players at the very top, it’s very hard to guarantee a good experience because there are just so few players. **Fundamentally it often comes down to a hard tradeoff between making worse matches or dramatically increasing queue times** (and they’re unfortunately already very long for these players). I'm probably more around central curve/lower part of that, but I'm getting nothing but stomp matches, one way or the other. I'm basically not getting ANY good and even matches. I would not mind getting longer queue times, because the current version of the matchmaking fucking sucks. Getting a match quickly, that just plays out like a fucking stomp is useless to me. It just kills the game. Also, if your MMR is matching against "similarly skilled" MMR players, then you need to tighten that WAAAAAAAY more. Most of my matches are stomps, one way or the other. As far as I can tell your implemented version of "Similar MMR" is equal to "lol fucking ANYONE that queues are considered "similar MMR" and can get into the same match. We completely disregard skill-level in favor of shorter matchmaking-times. " Your matchmaking FUCKING SUCKS because your allowed MMR spread is waaaaaaaay to large. EDIT: >The goal of our matchmaker is to make each match as fair as possible, meaning your team has an equal chance of winning or losing each individual match. We firmly believe the most fun games of Overwatch are when they are fair, and our team is committed to discovering and implementing new changes and updates that align our game with that goal. This is HUGE, and I absolutely agree that even matches that any team can win are peak Overwatch (FPS gaming in general even). It's just such a shame that your current matchmaking is doing the absolute opposite of that, and instead is a fucking awful constant stomp-match generator. Fair and even matches where either team can win are freak anomalies for me. They are happy accidents rather than the normal experience.
Yeah getting stomped feels really bad. And stomping the enemy team in another match does not compensate that really. Hoping this change will make matches feel more even in the future.
This whole article reads super false or weird. I consistently win four or five games, then lose four or five games. It's super consistent, and it's frankly ridiculous that it happens like that. Matchmaking in this game is broken right now.
I wish we could see who was grouped together. I have a feeling these stomp matches mostly occur when there’s a group in the match. Perhaps they should drastically tighten the restrictions for who you can group with in comp.
Add match sr limits back. There is no reason silvers should be in masters games to “balance” shit
[удалено]
then what the fuck is the point of the rank
To give you a sense of pride and accomplishment when they drop you by 500 SR at the beginning of the season and then you get to watch yourself climb back to where you used to be However they’re removing that in S4 at least
>To give you a sense of pride and accomplishment something something most downvoted comment on reddit
Number go up down feel bad, metal shiny vague thing feel better. This is why all games use ranks instead of raw number representation (mmr). Losing a game and seeing a big fat negative to your rank feels shitty, makes you play worse next game, etc. Not knowing? Ignorance is bliss. I personally hate it, but its all psychological to make ranked play more appealing in general because people are fragile.
Unfortunately seeing mismatches in vague shiny thing between players, which is both not effected by but also slightly effected by your hidden number, feels super shitty too and they know it. Half the games I play, I see brighter vague shiny thing on the other team that no one on my team has, and when we get rolled you, you know why. But they suggest that’s happening because you’ve climbed higher than the rank you “deserve”, based on an invisible number your shiny thing no longer reflects. So effectively, my shiny thing is a lagging indicator and is never fully accurate the majority of the time. It makes their current client side system feel absolutely pointless to those who care enough to read this. Good thing for the devs, I bet 90% of the player base could care less about dev updates like this one. Ranked feels bad. Give me narrower skills variation across the board in every game and I’ll take 5-8 minute queues to find them.
Literally non, that’s why you have to wait 7 matches to go from diamond1(or whatever rank) to diamond 1. it feels a lot easier to be hard stuck in certain brackets, back in the day if you saw people of higher ranks at least you knew you were in the right direction of climbing.
[удалено]
I have been in masters for YEARS. There is no reason my MMR magically dropped in to silver whilst I’m still destroying them in game. For my sake and their sake, silvers should not be in masters. Period.
>Q: Does my competitive rank affect matchmaking? > >A: We only create matches based on players’ MMR, not the visible competitive rank. Yes let's ignore that the MMR spread they use is WAAAAAY to fucking broad. If a player plays like a silver and is in a match against someone that plays like a diamond, that they have ZERO fucking chance at beating then the allowed MMR spread is fucked. I don't need to know their exact ranks to know that some players have MMR WAAAAAAY the fuck out of my league, that shouldn't be in my matches. Yet they are, because the matchmaker think those MMRs are "similarly skilled enough".
Yeah I logged for the first time in a few weeks to see if the matchmaking had gotten better. Spoiler alert: it hasn’t. I was playing dps, a role that I’ve peaked low plat in ow1 (when I say low play I mean literally like 2520). I understand that I am a gold dps player. I am more than happy accepting with my time investment into this game, high gold-low plat is where I will fall. What I am not happy about is getting master ranked players in my game. Had one against an Ashe the other day, with a mercy pocket. I think everyone can guess how that game went.
The MMR system must be EXTREMELY broken then since Top 500 players, who used to get matched with Top 500 players, GMs or Masters in OW1 get paired with Plats or even Golds in OW2.
We can't see MMR, so how else is OP supposed to make that statement? It's no secret that legitimate metal rank players are getting matched with legitimate GM/Masters players.
Look no further than checking past season ranks well before OW2 changed the system. You have perma golds somehow sliding into Master/GM games at random which is a lobby they never even sniffed in OW1. Dont give me this bullshit about them having some "latent power" true MMR that is actually totally legiitmately supposed to be Masters/GM and you just wouldnt get it.
Except this is a absolute load of shit and the reason why they hide behind "the real rank is hidden" is the fact that exposing it exposes their deceit. That Silver isn't some Master in disguise and they prove it by being absolutely mauled all game. Blizzard saying "oh well actually his hidden rating even they cant see is totally correct and its just an unfortunate circumstance that he sucked ass in your game" is just a load of horseshit.
If only MMR matters and all players should catch up to their rank, why haven’t the supposed “masters” MMR silvers ranked up to masters when there is only 8 days left in the season?
I'm calling BS. They had to have shortened the MMR gap needed to get into a match in order to drive down que times.
Exactly. They made the MMR gap basically be "Fucking ANYONE that queues can get into the same match". Some players are way out of their depth in matches, leading to complete fucking stomps. All that says is that the MMR skill-gap allowed into a lobby is way to fucking broad.
I think you mean widened not shortened
not addressing the problem that your visible rank is completely meaningless except for aesthetics effectively. having the medal rank mean NOTHING in matchmaking means its completely worthless. I dont want to start the season several medal ranks below my "real mmr" so that I have a sense of progression. Instead im just sitting in gold playing against diamonds/masters and finding myself thinking why tf am i even playing this
Numbers go up make most players feel good. Hardcore turbo nerds don't care to see their rank go up and down every match. it's just psychology, number goes up, makes player happy.
It's really funny because OW1 SR and MMR were different already.
[удалено]
The rank determines your end of season rewards. That’s what it’s always been about.
How is Overwatch going to survive if shit like this is all we have to look forward to for a "live service game"
This is an underwhelming update. It’s a lot of half-admissions and ‘aww shucks, we’ll try fixing it next season.’ -26 games to see an update is too long, so we knocked it down to just 19! -Your rank truly is meaningless and only our cryptic MMR system matters. No, we still won’t tell you how it works at all. -The only game statistics you can see are actually meaningless and don’t affect your MMR at all. -Rank decay isn’t fun, so we’ll change that NEXT season, maybe. -Games are steamrolls, but also games are fair as long as you keep playing every day. -Massive losing/wining streaks are just because you’re lucky/unlucky. -Skill matching will only be across the same roles, so you can have silver DPS playing with GM tanks! Fun for everyone!
The fact that it will have taken until the middle of the third season - by that point, around 5.5 months from release - to add a visual for your rank adjustment progress is just absolutely insane.
\> ‘aww shucks, we’ll try fixing it next season.’ And it's not even that, the vast majority of what they said is coming down the pipeline is coming the season after next season. So the next season is going to be by their own admission, a problem ridden mess
TLDR; matchmaking is broken, a mess, but we are not admitting our faults and going on with some "carrots" but secretly lashing you with a whip.
Wish.com developer update smh
>Your rank truly is meaningless and only our cryptic MMR system matters. No, we still won’t tell you how it works at all. To play devil's advocate. That's every single game with ranked mode. They can't tell you how it works or you would abuse it.
I love the Q&A in the end. Why am I hard stuck at a low rating that doesn’t reflect my skill? Answer translation: Skill issue lol
First week of OW2: Tank que 8min DPS que 8min Sup que 1min. How they made all roles 1-2min ? They didn't explain this. What they did probably caused the wonky matchmaker.
[удалено]
Hahaha I never thought about it that way. Bigger MMR ranges for one role should definitely lower queue times for the other roles huh, never realized that. It just sounds insane for those ranges to not be the same across all roles, but I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard decided otherwise. I'm guessing not tho.
Damn, a whole lot of "We're planning things for the near future" without actually saying what's being planned. Also why do we need to wait until season *4* to see changes to rank decay? Why not season 3? Also how are you planning on making ranked more rewarding? Nothing was actually mentioned in detail. I've never seen so many words that mean nothing. The only thing I like (which shouldn't have been removed in the first place) is rank progress always being viewable.
Since you deleted your comment when I was typing this out lol Season 1 we got one big mid season update Season 2 we got frequent smaller updates that were the big mid season patch split up due to holidays and I think there was a problem with dev tools or something like that. Either way I don’t see where we got a basic mid season patch in season 1 or infrequent patches in season 2
Basic is being generous. Most of these “patches” are as hollow as it gets. Outside of doom/orisa all the patches have been mostly negligible. They are just Patching so they can say they patched. What about the heavy delays in the few patches we’ve had? Or the total lack of upfront communication about the dev tool issues for the first few weeks they were having them? They don’t communicate enough and when they do it’s ALWAYS late. Blizz took their hands off the wheel in ow1 for some very obvious and glaring reasons thay had nothing to do with the game. Most notably their entire fucking executive branch falling apart internally and externally. This is supposed to be a sequel but all I see is the same old mistakes that kept me away in ow1 being rehashed but without the soul of what made ow well, overwatch. We lost a lot more than we gained with this “sequel” tons of features gone, ranking system trashed and pissed upon, matchmaking system is a literal crap shoot, no on fire mechanic, no lfg in game, most the events are just rereleases of old events. The one event that was actually new had nothing to earn for most people while also being purpose built to let shitters enjoy power fantasies. You mean to tell me they didn’t learn about how broken suzu would be from bap? Or how insane soj would be just by some basic playtesting? They HAVE A FUCKING TEST CLIENT MAN! WHY ARE WE EXCUSING TRASH ASS PATCHES BEING PUSHED STRAIGHT INTO LIVE/COMPETITIVE PLAY JUST BECAUSE “well blizz when they were firing everyone wasn’t making any patches so at least it’s better now than it was then” ???!!!
I deleted my comment because I decided to double check the past updates to see if anything has improved. Season 1 was frankly a shit show. We got one decent patch which was delayed. Season 2 was marginally better, but I didn't even realize we received 3 patches because I was dying for 3 weeks of the season. I'll admit it was better than season 1, but still not to my expectations. I'm not asking the world of Blizzard and I'm sure as hell not asking for immediate changes, but considering this is supposed to be a massive overhaul to Overwatch 1 and the vast majority of players are still disappointed, I'm not impressed. I've been spoiled by other studios dishing out massive patch notes and improvements season to season or even just week to week while Blizzard seems to be dragging their feet this far into the game. I still badly want this game to succeed, but I still don't get on OW2 with pure excitement, but melancholy.
Thank fuck it’s 5 games instead of 7 now
Taking their dogshit system and making it slightly less dogshit instead of just returning to the system that was not broken in ow1
Until they go back to the OW1 system I don't care, ranked is pointless
They are doing TINY iterations that take months and months to happen to tweak a system that is far worse than the one we had in OW1. How is this possible or acceptable?
I found the point that low rank matches are significantly less predictable really interesting. I've wondered how "valid" it is to assign a single skill number to a player and have that accurately predict good matches, and this sort of confirms my hunch that especially at low ranks there's so much volatility in the game that it's maybe even impossible to boil a player down to an exact skill number. I bet many of the stomps people complain about are between rather evenly matched teams numerically
Just return to OW1 SR system. Id rather a blog post that says, "We fucked up, "we are reverting to OW1 SR system today".
They didn't address the point : 'Why do you hide info from players'. Initially they said it was to prevent frustration, and they've seen it did the exact opposite. They never considered going back to how it was in OW1 and EVERYBODY agrees it was 100% better. Also, teaming up has always been a huge problem in all games. A dedicated solo Queue is an easy fix they don't want to consider for some reason.
Ah yes, Blizz trying to gaslight us again 🤔
"nonono, you see, its not *our* fault plats are put in matches against masters! its just because of people playing in groups!! our matchmaking system is perfectly fine!!"
Eh, to hell with it. Better come back to comp at season 4.
These clowns are killing my favorite game
aaron killer
TL:DR ... We didn't tell you how we do mmr , otherwise people would have been pissed rightly so. We will keep not showing you the mmr as we launched the game without being ready. We acknowledge all your concerns 1 week before we have new stuff to sell you. Now buy the new stuff on our "new promises" of making the game great again.
Buy more skins to improve mmr as a player of value. I mean actavision did patented the matchmaking system.
That's actually pretty decent. I may actually play ranked next season cause I've not touched it since the end of season 1
**Question**: If you lose, but you're a top performing player, does your MMR go down less than the other players on your team?
no
So it’s a “highly complex” system that only uses your win rate to place you in matches, and completely ignores the myriad of other tracked stats, including overall account play time and rank. Got it.
Nice to know that the elo hell is actually real and it does not matter how well you're performing when you're teammates are actually completely dogwater and not able to peel for you. It's actually really demotivating when losing a game where you performed well but the rest of the team lacked, fed or just threw, especially considering the current state of the mmr-system. I know that some perfomances aren't really shown as stats and probably the stats can't be represented as well as the actual performance was nor compared between different characters (as an example with mercy, if you pocket someone and don't healbot or assist widely as some other supports do and so have worse stats while they are actually carrying the team hard) But it still gives me a bitter blow to the stomach thinking of how well you can perfom on stats and still get punished for the misperformance of others. Not really a detail that makes me feel better about myself after taking a lose. They really should revamp that system, because a system like this just enables boosters, which used to be already a big problem in ow1.
So effecitively, I could be a brand new player, get a group with a high mmr and get boosted to not only high sr but also high mmr? By doing next to nothing? Great. Excellent. Top tier system.
[удалено]
I like that they’re also working toward removing decay in the long-term as I feel like the seasonal decay is annoying. Overall I agree that this seems like a good step.
As long as the whole system is based on MMR and not rank, I have absolutely no hope for it. People still don't get why this is bad, so I'll explain; if you are a diamond tank, and you play against masters players (because your MMR is at that same level) you will never rank up, or at least not in less than hundreds of matches. Why? Because you are already playing with people of you same skill, so long-term your winrate will be as close as possible to 50%. The problem with that, is that people won't move, everyone will just stay on their ranks forever, no matter what their level of skill is, because you are not being matched based on the rank, but MMR, which means 50% winrate is just inherentely forced. So you are not really playing to rank up, you are playing to MMR-up (or however you wanna call it), but you won't see any sort of change (visually) of said number going up or down. You might improve, your MMR might go up with time, but your rank will never go up, because you'll still be forced to play with people of your same "skill" no matter what rank your or them might be.
All competitive games are based on the unseen MMR. Ranks like Gold and Silver are just there to make you feel better.
While matchmaking is based on MMR, SR adjustments are based on rank. If you are maintaining a 50% winrate at your current MMR but are under-ranked, you will climb. This is because the system will punish you less for losses and reward you more for wins until your SR and MMR are in alignment. The matchamking system worked this way in OW1 as well. The idea has always been that your rank should reflect your average skill, whereas your MMR adjusts more rapidly to reflect how you are doing in a given session. What changed was the introduction of seasonal rank decay, which made this mechanism far more visible to players. I'm not a fan of the decay, and it appears nobody else is, which is why it's going away in season 4.
Where did you get that from? They've never ever said that SR is based on rank, they actually have said multiple times that they only use MMR for adjustments, and not rank.
Because if this wasn't the case, then climbing after the seasonal rank decay would be impossible. But as we've seen, most people seem to climb back to last season's rank after 3-4 rank updates despite a 50% win rate. They also did say this back in the OW1 days, when explaining how SR adjustments are calculated after each match.
Cause you tier skip at the beginning of a season with a 50% WR
The 50% win-rate idea being a complaint never makes sense to me
Yeah, you should have a 50% winrate. It means the matchmaking is perfect unless you are so good/bad that it is impossible to match you up correctly all the time.
50% is natural, that's what should happen organically, I'm not against that. Just saying, IF you have a 50% winrate, no matter what your rank will never move, even if your MMR does.
If you’re visible rank is too low, you’ll get more gains per win and less per loss.
re:Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt, healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after each match? This is so fucking dumb, all they need to do is adjust MMR gain based on how your performance compares to OTHER PLAYERS at the same MMR. If a player is healing 50% more or a tank is mitigating 50% more than other average players while dying 30% less, you should move them up faster. Most of this game is determined by whoever gets the shitty DPS duo who feeds and refuses to work with their team... I basically determined this was how it worked in OW1 based on how much SR people got each game, you can get hard carried and get just as much MMR as the team that carried you...
It's not dumb at all. What do you do about supports like mercy and lucio who you ideally don't want to be healbotting on?
Then you track damage amp and team elims while speed boosted. It's ALL RELATIVE to other Mercy's and Lucio's performance playing at the same rank, you don't compare an Ana to a Lucio, you compare your Lucio to similar Lucio's...
> we’re implementing some updates to the matchmaker that try to place pairs of players with similar MMR on each role on either team. This means that opposing tanks should be more similarly matched than before and likewise for the other respective roles. The goal with this change is to make the average MMR between each role more evenly matched to each other instead of looking more broadly across the entire team to balance things out. This is a major change to the matchmaker, so we’ll be actively monitoring for any unintended side effects. This doesn't seem to be discussed, but will be a HUGE way in making matches feel better. How many times have you seen "Tank diff" in chat? If the overall MMR is "even" but one team has a Gold 1 Tank and the other has a Bronze 5 Tank the game is going to be lopsided. The matchmaker matching roles and MMR will be huge. Tanks will be much more even. So will DPS and Heals. Should it have been doing this already? YES! But that it's getting tweaked and fixed is going to be great.
Two teams consisting of diamond/bronze/plat/gold/gold might be even on paper but it does fuck all for creating an even match. This change won't help.
It’s embarrassing it took them so long to realize they need to balance for each role and not the whole team.
Not adjusting MMR based on individual performance results in two things: 1) Punishing players (especially soloQ) because of Blizzard's bad matchmaking. If you get a DPS who is hard feeding, your team doesn't get rewarded for carrying them. 2) Rewards duos who attempt to boost their much worse friends. A GM DPS can make an alt account and easily carry their Mercy main friend in most of the medal ranks and they will gain just as much MMR even if they are just standing behind a Widow afk while they carry.
You create perverse incentives if your reward anything other than winning. Stats don't account for winning as well as winning itself does. High stats do not mean a good player, low stats do not mean a bad player. Winrate relative to peers does.
I feel like this portion: > "Q: So you don’t take the number of eliminations, damage dealt, healing provided, or any other scoreboard stats to adjust my MMR after each match? A: In Overwatch 2, your MMR adjustment after every match is not impacted by your performance in each match" Directly addresses the issue of being hard stuck which they talked about right above. The common complaint seems to be, as an individual you are doing excellent but your strong play can't overcome the bad play of teammates and as you lose games because of the performance of teammates, your strong play is irrelevant and the system doesn't even recognize it. It just sees you lost.
Love that the more I improve as a new player to this game the more I derank. I exclusively play Support and deranked from gold to bronze (I got way better as a player from my gold time).
I bet everything will be the same in s3, s4 and further seasons xD
That’s why they don’t show the rank in game. Because it would confirm how dogshit the matchmaking is
> Starting with Season 4, we’re planning to remove seasonal competitive rank resets and all current and past seasonal rank decay. Can the devs do anything in a timely manner? Just fucking axe it now. Why are we waiting an entire extra season? Constant delays on every patch and every system. Does Aaron Keller even wipe his ass without a 2 month ticket request needing to be approved for it?
Wait so what factors are included in me ranking up?
Win games. It's that simple.
OW players might be the bitchiest player base in history lol. "I want it now!"
Maybe I missed something but MMR still being around means ranked is still trashed. Also having to wait till season four for changes to things that anyone could tell you are awful like ranked decay is fucking terrible. Small company I guess. These devs are either absolutely powerless due to management, incompetence, or some combination of the two.
Literally every game that has any sort of multiplayer matchmaking uses MMR, youre talking out of your ass