An overwatch system that rewards players based on skill instead of win loss

Competitive Discussion
61

no. physics and system design are not the same thing. like not even close. the comparison is so far fetched that it makes you look bad.
just stop.

and thats what it does. regardless of their mindset.

those rules are defined by the game the system is being used in, not the system itself.

it can and evidentially does. do you think ow is the only game that uses an elo system and has casual players? youre silly dude.

the purpose of the ranked mode is to rank people. thats it. and thats exactly what it does. its not there to judge if people are playing to the best of their abilities. you are trying to project your feelings towards casual players through statements that make me question your knowledge on the very thing you are trying to argue about.
do you have any experience working with competitive games? what about system design? can you point me to a single paper, in fact no, can you point me to literally any piece of evidence that supports the claim of 'for a competitive system to be considered competitive, casual players must not exist"?

the competitive attitude is something that varies from person to person. give me a definition.

its literally the entire point of the argument. but I’m the one using strawman arguments? come on now.

you call me out for using strawman arguments, proceed to do the same and when I respond with something that is actually related to the topic instead of continuing the strawman, I am the one that doesn’t understand? dude, you just keep digging.

notoriously is a strong word for someone that doesn’t really use this forum my man.

tell me where I said that.

what was that about notoriously coming to nonsensical conclusions?

the purpose of the system changes per individual. it clearly doesn’t mean the same thing to me as it does to you. that alone should be enough of an example.

defined by design means they aren’t defined.

they cant enforce rules that have literally never been defined.
tell me the rules. I’m genuinely curious. point me to the design docs that make you think that your head cannon is reality.

not familiar with wow but comparing an economy of an mmr to the ranking system of a dying game seems like a stretch.
do you want to expand on it?

so you think that because non-competitive players exist in ranked the system loses all value but you don’t think that casual players shouldn’t be ranked?
not being ranked is the same thing as not playing the mode my man…

not really. casuals being ranked and non competitive players existing in ranked is the exact same thing.

death of the author my man.

obviously I’m cherry picking, this is a two way debate and I compared both parities. do you want me to seek out data to use as an example?

oh god no. my mechanics are my weak point. you can even look at my stats if the career page you can get to from here has any useful stats (kinda doubt it though).
im going to be 100% honest with you. I was hardstuck plat for a solid few seasons back when I actually cared about my rank. do you know when I started to climb? when I stopped caring about losing. my competitive mindset was literally holding me back.

im not ignoring that in the slightest. I’m saying that mindset is just another factor that goes into rank. and therefore players are ranked accurately regardless of mindset. that alone mitigates any problem a casual player can cause.

and what? they lose more games that if they did care? what happens then? their sr falls and they play with people of similar skill.
its really a non issue.

stop wasting mine with nonsensical analogies, made up rules and design philosophies you cant prove.

most competitive players are an overall net negative dude, this community is horrible.

it is fine though. the people that get mad are the people that are scared their skill wont get them back the sr they might lose.

this seems slightly hypocritical. I wonder why.

how so? im not the one complaining my man, thats all you.

that’s neither a double standard or a hypocritical thing to do. if i were to go and make my own thread about how stupid it is that the devs gave up on what should be a colossal success for the sake of a redefined sequel without a release date, then that would be hypocritical. engaging with someone that decided to complain is not.

counterproductive how? if anything they boost the average ‘competitive player’ up a little bit. you could argue that they inflate rank but nah, you’re arguing that their existence ruins the mode.

im gonna be completely honest. I hate playing the the hardcore competitive players.
they are always the first to tilt, first to throw blame and the first to give up. how is that less counterproductive that someone playing the game and not caring about the outcome?

look man, you look just as stupid as I look to you. there’s a clear difference in opinion and neither one of us can properly convey it.

so new rules. they are different rules, which if we are to believe that this game was created with the intention of being competitive, would have come after the creation of the competitive ruleset. aka new rules.

  1. stamina.
  2. general formatting rules. its been 5 years and I still don’t really know what the parameters are for a team to only need to cap 1 tick on 2cp. im not even sure that’s a thing on payload but it might be.
  3. an actual place for people to practice in the same environment they will be playing in during a ranked game.
    like its all well and good to say that casuals shouldn’t play ranked but we literally don’t have a transitionary mode for them. you either enter comp a casual or don’t enter.

and that’s how it should be.

you said no one. no one implies people. thought I made that pretty clear.

I think you just dont understand the language used in games. it happened before when I brought up scrims and you brought up custom games like they aren’t the same thing.

aight dude, no you dont.

my vague implications are still waiting for your defined by design ruleset to be made known.

no you really didnt dude. that was my entire point.

do you really want to throw insults when there are numerous examples of you being equally as clueless? come on now.
speaking of insults, didnt you call me out for insulting you when I did no such thing? oh right but I’m the hypocrite here.

my bad for assuming you could read between the lines there.
ill make it clearer for you.
you claim I am losing but you have yet to provide any evidence to even the existence of these rules.
you’re not winning.

62

yes you did.

20 characters

63

I think you all are forgeting the main reason i made this post and what i wrote, casuals are allowed to play compedetive just like compedetive players are allowed to play, the main reason i made this post was because you dont get rewarded for skills, it is a luck based system and winning is based on which team you get.
Also you only get sr boost on 4 games after first account placment, you used to get 70+sr if you played good when this system was a thing it was a thing before season 8

ATM you get 15 - 30 sr for winning

64

I like when people say you don’t get rewarded for skill.

I guess everyone in GM is just luckier than me…

65

I didn’t say it does, but then enemy is actively trying to stop you from gaining SR, so they actually do matter in whether you gain or lose SR :slight_smile:

Nope, the max SR gain and loss is calculated from the average difference between average SR of team A and team B. It doesn’t matter how much you carry you won’t go above the max. average between two teams.

The only extra SR gain or loss is from a backup balancing system which corrects initial rank placement, so if you carry hard often the balancing system detects that your average performance is higher than other players in the game and effectivly boosts your ranking with extra SR to place you with people who are more on your skill level.

This kind of vague dumped down statement makes sense in 1v1 games, NOT in group based games where other players heavily affect whether you will gain or lose game.

Rules are the same, if you create something then it has function and purpose, and it doesn’t matter if it’s a physical object in the real world, or creation in virtual space.

So yes, stop blindly disagreeing, and pretending that your disagreement proves that something is wrong. It doesn’t.
In fact, all you are proving with such answers is your own failure to prove that the other person is wrong.

It does do calculations, but the results are falsified by the massive data shift caused by casual players who because of their behavior sabotage games and cause people to drop ranking when they shouldn’t.

You do realize that game, and in-game system is the same thing? Right? Or you are just (again) utterly clueless about the subjected you are arguing about?

No, it’s not. The end purpose of the ranking system is to rank people as accurately as it’s possible, and it’s not being done because casuals playing competitive provide ranging system with tones of false data, so results re falsified/inaccurate.

False. Ranking which ranks people just to give them an arbitrary rank is useless because it doesn’t provide any substantial value in terms of any form of performance measurements. Whatever rank someone gets in such system is worthless in relation to other ranks.

That why the actual purpose of the ranking system is to use valid objective data to rank people ACCURATELY against each other. It can’t be done with all the casuals skewing data which leads to the system being feed false data, and result being falsified.

I don’t see the point of this since no one argues about what is the competitive attitude, but whether casual players should play the competitive considering the fact that they effectively sabotage the competitive mode by not playing seriously.

I mean, you literally don’t know how to answer to my argument, so you are trying to redirect into beside the point topic :man_facepalming:

It’s the entire point of the argument that you are making nonsensical conclusions? :man_facepalming:

I mean, either you are some kind of masochist who’s trying to make himself look like a complete fool, or you are just stupid, and can’t read and respond with a basic understand of a language you are using.

OMGEALUL :man_facepalming:

ĴnN was talking about casuals ruining comp, and you responded to that with beside the point comment, so I called you out for this and reminded that ĴnN (and other people) is arguing that casual ruin comp.
You choose to challenge our argument ya silly muffin, so don’t pretend I am the one arguing the wrong point.

I can be here once a year, and you still will be as bad at making conclusion :man_facepalming:

There ya go:

Clearly you are stating that ranking has no value because smurf account can be bought.
The difference between me and you and Rodimus is that when I say that someone said something I can actually prove it where you two are just clowning around by lying about what I said.

You know, if you want to be seen as someone who isn’t stupid, you should actually explain why what you said is true. Otherwise, you are just making worthless comments which hold no water.

Only if it was designed to do it, and in OW comp there is no such system.

How does exactly defined means not defined? :sweat_smile:
What kind of dumpster logic did you use to come up with it?

But they are, by the design :slight_smile:
Not to mention that there is official rule that prohibits gameplay sabotage, and many casuals with their casual “i don’t care” behavior effectively sabotage competitive gameplay.

So not only casuals should come to competitive because this mode wasn’t designed for them, but also there are official rules which punish behavior for which casuals are known :slight_smile:

No, I don’t because the point is that Blizzard already kicked people like you to the curb and sided with us who had an actual rational argument with logical explanation :slight_smile:

…what?XD

If someone asserts that casual players shouldn’t play in competitive mode then by defaults it’s implied that they shouldn’t be ranked in the ranking system.

Besides, I didn’t say ALL value, but simply value, so don’t put words in my mouth.

Yes, really. First one asserts that comp/ranking losses value because casual players constantly compete in it. The second asserts that value is lost simply because someone got rank.
If you forgot, you can get rank, and compete constantly, or get rank, and stop playing. In both cases players are ranked, but in the first the damage caused by the player is ongoing and adding up, and in the second damage was minimal, and doesn’t continue.

Seems like you fail to understand what your words imply, and why thinking before writing is crucial :man_facepalming:

You do realize that cherry-picking for w/e reason is a false way of proving anything? :man_facepalming:

Here, read… maybe you will finally learn something:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking

I’m not talking about your skills ya dumdum
I’m using hypothetical to explain to you why cherry-picking is a false way of proving anything.

Yes, you do, by arguing that casuals in comp are fine because some casuals are highly ranked.
That’s literally cherry-picking, ergo suppression of evidence, and the evidence you are trying to suppress is the fact that there is way more low ranked, and bad casuals, so the fact that some casuals are high ranked doesn’t prove that casuals in comp are fine.

lol amazing ingorance
Are you that goddamn clueless that casuals tanking games drag down other player in their team who doesn’t deserve to lose SR/rank?

A lot of denial from your side, and yet you failt to prove that what you say is true.
For someone who things that you are right you have hard time to prove anything.
In fact, you keep posting more and more opinions based on fallacies.

If that was true, the overall rank distribution would be skewe toward bottom, and since it isn’t then it’s a traith up proof that you are wrong.

No, it’s not. The more casual players join the competetive the more competetive exprience is ruined and made worthless when it comes to ranking system.
Your argument apelaing to emotions not only doesn’t prove anything but it also one of fallacies :man_facepalming:

Criticizing people for voicing their opinion on a given subject while you yourself are voicing your opinion on the same subject. That’s literally a textbook example of double standard, and hypocrisy.

No, they don’t. Casuals offten don’t even care for teamplay, and to win the game.
If anything most of them drag people down and casue a lot of negative interactions which overall ruins the competetive experience.

You are missunderstanding toxic people with good teamplayers who care for comp.

That’s not what happening tho. You challanged argument and you failed to prove anything so now you are trying to pretend that we are somehow equal and it’s a draw.
It’s not, you lost the argument in first few days, and now you just keep playing word ping-pong becasue you can’t admit defaet.

You are not creating new rules bur removing some rules from existing set of rules especially when that set of reduced rules already exist in the game in different place.
You fail at logic. Just stop.

LoL no. It doesn’t matter if payload is mirrored or you just play 2 games in a row. its literally same gametime.

That’s a failure to research the game, not the problem with game modes.

Casuals modes teach pretty much everything you need to know + there is general research which can be done by anyone about the game. There is literally no reason to have middle ground between casual and comp modes since casual modes are the unranked comp games.

So it’s -1 point for you stupid idea to make unrakned XD

No it doesn’t becasue if you care to god-damn READ you would find out that I am constntly refereing to the ranking system.

Nah, you just fail to understand that name of the game mode means nothing.
You can call QP the “only for top 500 pogchamp” and it’s still a casual mode.
If QP and other modes function like comp, just without ranking, then they are the undraked equivalent of the comp, and making another mode called “Unraked” is pointless.

Listen, you can say I didn’t but then anyone who will read this can easily see that I am the only who actually explains things in a rational and logical fashion, and you are just disagreeing, and not even explainig why your disagreement even matter.

But sure keep living in denial.

You engaged with ĴnN who argued that casual screw up comp, and when I called you out for making beside the point responde to his argument, and explainin you what he is arging about you engaged with that argument ya dumdum.

You don’t even know what your are arguing :man_facepalming:

Except those “examples” hold no water becasue you fail to actually explain and prove anything.

You throwed you first insult pretty early, and long before I called you out for saying stupid things so take a hike :slight_smile:

Oh there it is…

It’s kinda funny to watch you complaining about insults when you the one who were throwing insults around in the first place.

Mate, I can’t find any point in this discussion where you didn’t lost due to being either factually wrong, using fallacy, or just being confused about what ur even arguing.

When it comes to ruels dictated by the design it’s quite simple. Competetive is designed for people who want to seriously compete, not for people who want to play casualy, so casuals shouldn’t play in comp to not interfere and sabotage the competetive experience.

Right, Rodimus failed to prove it, and so do you so both of your claims can be throwed into the trash, and not the one for recycling :rofl:

66

Average of A and B what?

So how did I just get 80sr for a win… Did I take all that off the enemy.

I think you have the system mistake for something far more complex. Which would explain a lot. The over thinking things would get anyone annoyed eventually.

(Sorry, correction it was 82sr)

67

You are getting extra SR because the system thinks you are too low in ranking, so it’s trying to boost you higher.
The opposite happens for people who boost their ACC and then when they play on their own and loose miserably they lose a lot of SRs per one game.

Blizzard scrapped their PB SR system some time ago, and they replaced it with a modified ELO system. The PB SR was modified as well and placed in game as a balancing backup system to account for bad luck/boosting during rank placement games.

If you play for rank and get noobs who will tank your games you can actually get a lot of ranking back because of that system. If you boost, that system will drag you down :slight_smile:

68

I already said it in the main post but didnt feel like going over this, i will reach Gm at one point but the more games i loss because this is a luck based game the more games i ruin for other people and personally i dont enjoy that somtimes i do feel bad for plats, its not only me by the way its every player ranking up accounts, Even if i lose a game enemy will still feel frustated because they died a lot but won by luck, and for last it frustates me having games with 30k dmg per 10 and 62 kills but i still loss because i had some funky teammates. Before you get defensive again i have no problem with funky reins charging or flanking bastions those people are funny as heck, no players tho should be punished because of them tho.

Old system btw did not let you boost players who are not good, there is nothing worse playing in high elo and seeing someone who got the game sense of a gold and the aim of a trackpad mercy player on your team

1 Like
69

The more games you play with the mentality it is luck based, the more you’ll lose.

Doesn’t matter your rank, if you think you can climb and want to climb, then you have to put in the work on improving what you bring to the table.

What did I do wrong
What could I have done better

The basic questions and performing any activity should be constantly asking themselves to improve.

70

Alright, I had a whole thing written out but then I read this.

The conclusion you came to is so far off that I genuinely don’t think you are worth the miniscule amount of lifespan you take from the keys I press responding.

1 Like
71

its funny how youre saying that the more i think its luck based the more ill lose even tho i littarly rank up accounts to master for fun on twitch, so believe me i know its luck based because if i finished with hanzo and 30+ solo kills there is nothing i could have done more.

Also not talking about me, there are a lot of plat players with the mechanical skills of diamonds even some silver players that can play in diamond but as someone who plays so much in those ranks if they dont carry completely its not winnable most of the time, maybe they will reach their rank in a few seasons but its BS to think its right for a silver player that is trying for a few seasons constantly to reach their true rank after so long. No player would try for that long because they are not rewarded or their rewards for their hard work is too slow.

I dont know why are you trying to justify blizzard removing this system, the reason it got removed is because people who abused new charachters they released climb high but couldnt keep that rank and were about to go back to their original ranks, so people cried about losing 80sr. all the causals you are talking about finally reached master and then didnt want to drop

1 Like
72

That’s probably because that’s your level.

No luck in that, you are a skilled player.

They only removed it past 3k. And even then it wasn’t a full removal as their is still small elements of it to help adjust people accordingly.

73

I play DPS role mainly and from my experience, it’s not really about how many kills you do and how high damage you do, it’s about doing the right thing in given situation.

I played a year ago and I was at 2600 rating, I came back recently after a year of having a break and I started at 2000 rating, now 1900. I had 20 games lost streak and I went down to 1700 rating and then I had 20 games win streak. Well, not really in a row but it was more wins than loses.

It happened because I started doing things differently in game.
This is how statistics were for me:

1st game, I have all gold medals - lost.
2nd game, I have all silver medals - lost
3rd game, I have all bronze medals - lost.
4th game, its balanced - lost or win.
5th game, I have all gold medals - win.
6th game, I have all silver medals - win
7th game, I have all bronze medals - win.

Stats like this don’t tell you anything at all and therefore, I don’t think you should be focusing on stats. Because you could be doing lots of damage and still do wrong things.

For example, if you forget to keep yourself safe or make moves without a backup plan.

For me, this was difficult because I could not put a finger on what is different.
Have I done something differently? Did I have luck with my team? What is going on?!?!

I say it’s difficult for me because when people say stuff like “watch replays” I don’t know what I am supposed to watch.

Yesterday, I went with my brother to quickplay and I told him, shortly after match started, “Check this out, I am going to pick Sombra and I will have low damage and low kills and we will win this”.

And we did. I don’t believe it’s a lucky guess because I told him that after I had that winning streak in competitive.

That’s just some of my experience. Repeating things that are not supposed to work can lead you to tons of lost games.

74

(didn’t read everything, just OP)

Been saying this for years… the way how I can climb ranking is to play games in non-role que ranking until I lose like 3 games in a row. Then I play role que ranked and I am more likely to get a better team just because the rank system is focussed on 50/50 win/loss rate.

Probably management of blizzard pressured employees saying the ranked system wasn’t good enough so they forced this system to give their boss the numbers 50/50. This way it seems balanced and the boss is satisfied I guess. (it sounds stupid but this is how I imagine this came to be.) Or they just tried to make a system that keeps most people happy and 50/50 would be the best way for that I guess…

I fully aggree that if you take avarage stats per type of hero and compare performance to the average, it would be a better rank system. Fully agree with what OP said.

75

If you have 2 equally matched teams, you should have a 50/50 chance of winning.

This isn’t forcing a win rate, this is the match maker finding 12 players of similar skill.

This is why solo pop off potential is so important.

76

it is very obvious that at a given ranking there are people of different skill levels… Gap is huge at times. If rank system would actually work, you’d have much more games that draw or close to it… Now in too many situation, one team just runs down the other.

77

I’m not sure the skill gaps are there that you think.

You might have someone playing exceptionally well vs someone playing badly… Which might give the impression of a skill gap.

Or someone having same level of skill on certain heroes, but those heroes are bad on a map.

Silly little quirks like that, that make overwatch interesting to play.

78

You are correct, however there is times when you are up against for example a Widow in the enemy team that don’t know how to miss vs yours that can’t hit the broadside of a barn, from the inside.

One a side note i find very interesting: I’ve taken a long break from OW, with just the occasional game or two with my friends, but recently got back to playing it.

Warmed up by playing a lot of S76 in QP, then when i felt confident i started doing Comp Placement. I lost 4, tie 1 but i still got Masters rank from it. I get the feeling Placement matches is more about your individual skill rather than win/losses, but i’d love to see a hybrid of the two.

79

100%

It is more a confirmation that where you finished last season was about right.

Which is why placements are a little pointless, with no gap in the seasons.

I’d rather see seasons worked around events, so there is a week gap where there is no ranked and you have to play QP or the event modes. But that idea wouldn’t be popular. People hated the 2/3 day gap.

80

Yeah, probably, i’ve bounced back and forth between 3400 SR to 3950 SR in my previous comp games. I was so near 4000 SR at one point, but strangely it was a reoccuring theme that i’d win a game that was very close and balanced, followed by a loosing a game that was extremly one sided.