👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀 good shit go౦ԁ sHit👌 thats ✔ some good👌👌shit right👌👌there👌👌👌 right✔there ✔✔if i do ƽaү so my self 💯 i say so 💯 thats what im talking about right there right there (chorus: ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ) mMMMMᎷМ💯 👌👌 👌НO0ОଠOOOOOОଠଠOoooᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒ👌 👌👌 👌 💯 👌 👀 👀 👀 👌👌Good shit
Says the guy with a justin bieber picture.
However what you say is utterly retarded because that would mean a lot of players would get matched vs a 4 man stack who plays like a team vs getting 2 2 man stacks who both might feed.
MMR is fine if you cant progress and carry a game 1 v 5 you belong in normal skill.
Because at very high skill youd get destroyed every game.
Also this is ranked we are talking about.
Wanna learn the game do it in normal matchmaking.
Man you are in normal skill because you belong there.
Get good enough to win 1 v 5 and you progress to higher skill.
You arent stuck because of retarded teammates but because you cant carry them.
Only good point you made was that someone with 16/6/20 or 20/6/20 should loose less mmr than rest of the team if no one on his team comes close to him in skill.
However making the ones with bad kdas farm and game impact loose more accordingly will create a new super low trench.
"However making the ones with bad kdas farm and game impact loose more accordingly will create a new super low trench."
Err as opposed to the old super low trench? Jajaja I'm normal skill therefore I am not entitiled to have or discuss my opinions (inb4)
Idk... I mean I guess the thing for me is that HS and VHS are specific brackets. Apart from 2k scrubs who smurf their way there, you can only really get there if you belong. And as a result the playerbase consistently playing in HS and VHS is.. well, consistent. That and the playerpool of people at this level is small compared to the overall playerbase.
Normal skill can mean many things. First and most important is that if you're NS, you're not good enough to be anything but. And until you reach HS then this will always be true. However, that's not to just say that everyone in NS is equally bad. With a huge percentage of the playerbase there are bound to be huge ability range within NS, from those players almost at the level where they can play some HS games and see how they get on, to full potato sub 1k.
What I'm saying is maybe it would be helpful to have more of a breakdown in NS instead of blanketing us all.
But then again, I am NS. I know nothing. I am scrub. Git gud. Bla bla bla etc etc etc.
1: Destroy solo ranked - People are leaving lol because of this, do you think valve will do it.
2: MMR ganed/lost in a match is based on your current MMR vs everyone else's in the game - So you can easily get MMR, but lose very fast,in not rewarding enough, the community will not accept
3: Hide MMRs, replace with either "Ranks" which cover MMR "brackets" - Litterally LOL, why its makes a diference, my number is begger to yours is not different than my rank is better than yours;
4: If someone on the team has a small proportion of deaths to kills or assists, their MMR either goes up slightly more if they win or goes down slightly less if they lose - This would be good, but them to calculate this they will need to rework the API, with takes time, and to balance all its is just almost impossible, plus supports that tend to die to save the carry, or even in general sups are not famous for getting kills, it will result in a very bad state to calculate mmr.
5: winning/losing multiple games in a row (say 4+) multiplies MMR change - Nope, it will need to rework the API, and matchmaking, plus you get inflation, partys will be better of than people that solo, a 5 party would be better of than 2 or 3 guys togheter.
6: Not really a ranked MM issue, but I feel like the MMR spread in normal MM should be bigger - There is no way this is implemented, because there are to much variables, the mm time would triple, or would extend even more, how would they balance the mm, a team can have 3 1k, 1 2k an 1 4k, =9k mmr, the other team might have 3 2k, 2 1k = 9k mmr, but the first would have the advantage as to having the best player of the game, the mm is good as it is, people are matched on brackets.
#2. So if a higher mmr player with higher skills carries their team to victory, why should they receive the least amount of mmr gain from the victory? This would just piss people off. I can see if the lowest mmr person on the team performed the best they should gain more mmr, but most often it will just piss off the higher mmr players on the team.
"3: Hide MMRs, replace with either "Ranks" which cover MMR "brackets" proportional to the highest and lowest MMRs or a "You are the 750'000th best dota player" rating. This will prevent the tendency for Dota's MMR to depreciate in value, whereas currently every new player that calibrates adds more MMR to a pool where MMR doesn't vanish- meaning 2500MMR a year ago was worth more than it is now."
actually i can confirm that this is not true, 2500 MMR is exactly as worthless as it was one year ago
There is not a technology that exists, or a change valve can make, that will have a significant enough impact on the accuracy, speed of progression, or the complaints of Dunning Kruger morons for Valve to waste their time messing with the current system. Lets pretend Valve comes up with a PERFECT algorithm, that can detect and analyze every single skill factor that exists in Dota 2, and can accurately determine a players MMR in a single game. This does not solve the single BIGGEST "problem" with ranked MM; The morons who think they are better than they truly are. Even under that perfect system, you would have retarded fucking 3K's thinking they are so much better than everyone in their bracket and they only lose games because of team mates.
At every bracket you will have vastly differing performances from the same individual players, on a game to game basis, and you will have vastly different outcomes between two equally skilled teams. That is the nature of a game like Dota 2, where you snowball. So when people see these inconsistency's and they have a player on their team who feeds, they blame the MM system, without being able to step back and realize that is just the nature of the game, and that the current MM system works with a large sample size of games.
There really isn't much valve can do to improve MM, it works very well.
league just implemented a "dynamic queue" which got rid of its "solo ranked." A huge number of people left the game over this. You should not be employed by any videogame company. you are not good at this game. I'm 99% sure that i'm signifcantly better than you at this game, and i am not good at this game. changing ranking systems doesn't magically make you better. It makes you suck just as much in a different ranking language.
1. There is an advantage when players know each other. The ranks may not have to be calibrated seporatly, but they need to make parties face parties so that advantage doesn't inflate your mmr.
2. I don't believe I should get extra mmr for doing well in an mmr average above me or lose extra for losing in an mmr average below me. Dota may consider you better or worse then your team mates, but the game is over all balanced without this.
3. Or make this another option to put on your profile. Seems like a good idea.
4. Tbh. This would still be abused. Have you met phantom riki? I vote remove any mmr changing facters other then winning.
5. Sure. Dota needs something to adjust faster to those who gain skill faster then how often they play ranked. And it would make smurfs useless.
6. I agree. It's surprising how bad people can be at Dota.
Does anyone thinks matching people with bad behaviour together in a separated queue would solve the problem?
Чтобы оставить комментарий, пожалуйста, войдите в систему.
Given as valve took all pick out of ranked MM temporarily a month or two ago, and now they've added the "International ranked" mode which lets you re-calibrate your MMR... It sounds as though they might be experimenting for changed to ranked MM.
However, this is valve we're talking about, they added Techies into the game. They will probably miss what is truly broken in the game's ranked MM system and not change what needs to be changed. For the sake of a little rant, I'll say what I think should be changed:
1: Destroy solo ranked- "No dota player is an island, entire of itself" This is a team game, I find solo ranked to be a bit redundant (unlike in games such as StarCraft2 where tournaments are most commonly held 1v1) This would also reduce wait times for MM as solo and party can merge, and will remove the restriction on 4-person party ranked.
2: MMR ganed/lost in a match is based on your current MMR vs everyone else's in the game. Example: a team made of 2500, 2200, 1850, 2100, 2250 mmr players wins a game against a similar team. The 1850 player wins more but loses less MMR than the 2500 player. Similarly, if the 2500MMR player got matched with a team where they were the lowest MMR they would be in the same situation.
3: Hide MMRs, replace with either "Ranks" which cover MMR "brackets" proportional to the highest and lowest MMRs or a "You are the 750'000th best dota player" rating. This will prevent the tendency for Dota's MMR to depreciate in value, whereas currently every new player that calibrates adds more MMR to a pool where MMR doesn't vanish- meaning 2500MMR a year ago was worth more than it is now.
4: If someone on the team has a small proportion of deaths to kills or assists, their MMR either goes up slightly more if they win or goes down slightly less if they lose. I feel this could be a pretty good addition with not too much abuse possible as it is always better to win, but it means that people who feed and throw a game or even feed intentionally will get hit harder than the people who did well. Doesn't discriminate against supports, either since it treats assists like kills (and boy do i know how assists can rack up on support heroes...)
5: winning/losing multiple games in a row (say 4+) multiplies MMR change. Not so sure about this one, but I feel like changing MMR bracket in dota is hideously slow, with only 25+-10MMR out of 7000+ being changed each game. Contrast this to counter strike, where I managed to get from the lowest rank (silver 1) to master guardian (about half way) in about 3 months from starting to play the game! I didn't even play that many games or win a huge proportion of them, but it adjusted to my rapidly changing skill far quicker than dota can right now.
6: Not really a ranked MM issue, but I feel like the MMR spread in normal MM should be bigger- allow a solo queue at 2500 hidden normal MMR to be matched with 1000 and 4000 hidden MMRs. Why? I've learned by doing normal MM with much much higher ranked friends, you learn the tricks and play styles of the higher ranked players. The teams can still be balanced, and match-ups with less variance could still be found depending on the matchmaker's requirements but I think that would be a good learning tool.
What do you guys think?