6:0 got me 44 rating but 0:6 got me -72? is MMR designed to stop you gaining rating?

PVP Arenas
1

So for context today I have done

4:2 + 55
4:2 + 19
4:2 + 17
6:0 + 44
3:3 + 4
0:6 - 72

Why is MMR like this?

1 x 0:6 has countered nearly 3 games of victories? It’s going to take me 4 x 4:2 to counter my 0:6? Like you wonder why PVP is dropping off a cliff

I’ve spent like 4 hours playing where I have gotten 7 games and 3 of those games have been absolutely destroyed by one bad game against a triple caster lobby as a melee.

I’m not asking for free rating and maybe i’m not smart enough to truly work out the MMR design but it seems to be it’s designed to keep people low and is more about lotto lobbies because god help if you get 1 bad lobby, it sets you back 3+ hours.

Why isn’t it win based? Like why can’t it be simple you win a round, you gain 7 rating, you lose a round you lose 7 rating? with 3:3 granting 3 rating so you get a small boost for at least hitting 50% win ratio? Having this would not give everybody gladiator because its % based but it would at least allow people to grind out awards if they wanted too as long as they maintain that 50%+ win ratio

I just did a 5:1 game and got 18 rating back… what a joke of a system

5 Likes
2

It’s based on the elo system but tweaked for gaming, it’s never really meant to give you a free ride to the top.

Basically if your opponent is harder and the match is rated for you to lose, but you win, you gain more MMR. Inversely if you should’ve won, but you lost, then you lose more MMR because the system expects you to win.

As for why a flat rate won’t work: Imagine if a top tennisser (who uses elo systems too) were to purposefully win or lose against a bottom seed, they would absolutely cap their loss or win at 7 and no more.
Inversely, if they would lose against an opponent who trained hard to win against them, they could only gain 7. Why do all that practice if they can win against multiple lower seeds with less/no training?

In this example we see:
Match 1 is rated to lose, but you win 2 more rounds, edging out of a draw. The system still gives you a lot of points since it was a hard opponent.
Match 2 is evenly rated. It could go either way and you didn’t win overwhelmingly and gained a small amount of points.
Same for match 3.
Match 4 you won overwhelmingly, but the opponent is not rated overtly high. You’ve been granted bonus points likely for a total wipeout however.
Match 5 due a draw only a small amount of points is given. Neither managed to conclusively do something to win.
Match 6: You were wiped out against an opponent you should’ve won or atleast done something to lessen the blow and as a result you get hit very hard.

3

blizzard system telling me I should have done very well against a triple caster comp as a melee?

2 Likes
4

gains

big gain but in kinda lower mmr game

higher game, but 3-3, so u only get 4, normally would be 0 and now ur back to ur exact mmr as rating

coz u lost all games on ur exact rating and mmr

next time provide a reflex screenshot for even more exact context explanations

this is more than possible for a warrior, u just have to play defensively and not full zugzug, which most warriors dont know how to do

the same applies to all demon hunters and windwalkers

sometimes u just gotta let ur caster teammate win the game for u while u play defensively, line dmg and make sure u dont die

1 Like
5

The MMR system just sees numbers not composition

1 Like
6

the only melee which sucks in triple caster game is ret

every single other melee can pull a 6-0 with just a tiny bit more brain usage than they used in heavy melee cleave games

because almost every melee has 2 things a caster teammate wants

stuns
mortal strike effect

7

Every single post like this makes me believe people simply do not understand how the rating system works.

I guess it is not a simple Elo system but rather extended by a damper/accelerator/anti- smurf mechanism and Blizzard does not communicate the best about how it works, but god damn people do need to read up on how Elo works and think about it a bit.

Everything about the rating system and the gains/losses is pretty much a perfect design and I would not have it any other way.

1 Like
8

If you think the system is perfect then why is it deterring players from playing?

The idea behind the system is to stop players playing at levels that they should not play at?

So why has a 0:6 puts me at a lower level than rating I was winning 4:2 at comfortable? i shouldn’t have to grind back through the levels

and given I was a Ret vs Frost Mage, Destruction Warlock, Elemental shaman, Holy Priest, Rdruid, It’s a tough ask for me to win 1 round never mind 3+…

The system works for 2v2 and 3v3

NOT SOLO SHUFFLE

9

In my experience pushing 3v3 is easier and more inflated than SS.
Some ppl kept whining about SS “being easy” and so they deflated and now its not worth it to play that braket or 3s since LFG is also dead… in the end PvP is a big waste of time right now

1 Like
10

Why do you need to “understand” how it works? its a game ffs and this game is a big waste of time now and the biggest proof is almost no one plays anymore only those addicted. I dont care how it works we just need a good system which WoW currently lacks end of story.

11

Because that’s how the math works. You lost to people of a certain rating, so appropriate rating was subtracted.

Elo is a measure of your performance and assuming a constant skill level, it is normal for it to oscillate 200-300 points around a mean the long-term, based on factors like luck with comps, tiredness and so on.

Because then it would not take into account the skill level of the players. It would not be fair if Magnus Carlsen could farm chess rating off of 7 year old kids now would it. And if you wanted to queue only players within some certain delta rating of eachother, say only 1990-2010 allowed in the lobby, well that would make the queues insanely longer.

If you did not impose this restriction - imagine you get into a lobby with players 300 rating higher than you on average. Assuming the ratings are representative, you would not stand a chance, maybe sneak in one lucky win. Would you really deserve to lose 6*7 rating in such a scenario? The player experience would be much worse in such a system.

The system has evolved to the current state from the traditional elo system (introduced in TBC) because it makes it so high-level players don’t have to stomp through the low-level players on their way to the top, thereby making the experience better for the low-level players and also it makes it more difficult to exploit the system.

People keep getting mad at this system because they do not understand how MMR works. If you go 0-6 against people of a similar skill level, you lose 70 rating. Now, you lose even more MMR. So, now you have around 100 MMR less than before. BUT, given the matchmaking algorithm, it is entirely possible that you enter a lobby which is being played at even LESS MMR - maybe another 100. On average, ignoring compositions and such, you should certainly have a high win rate in such a lobby, as effectively you are playing 200 rating below your mean. It is expected that you should win most of those games, and therefore a 6-0 won’t be rewarded with a 70. Now, should you enter a lobby which is 100 MMR higher than yours, it is not expected that you should win most of those games and the reward for a 6-0 would be worth more than 70.

As for the solo shuffle format and its fairness - that is is another question. Naturally there are going to be some lobbies that are going to favor certain classes and disadvantage others. The idea is that over a large number of games, that is going to average out. Which can be annoying with such long queue times.

1 Like
12

You don’t. But seeing posts like this from people who don’t understand it irks me. There are many problems with wow, but the rating system is not one of them.

What is bad about the system, in your opinion? From my point of view, the rating system is absolutely fine and well made. The problem with solo shuffle are the queue times which are caused by a bunch of other factors.

13

Rating system is problem it need rework. Shuffle is problem it need to be removed or rating system reworked if we want to scatter playerbase to dozen different modes with this participation based system. People quit season 3 cause of this current mmr system and then it snowballed from there into even less participation.

They need to rework the rating system or write a simple code that adjusts mmr based on current participation. If they do nothing then ofc its a problem when participation is low and people are scattered in dozen modes and expansions, the whole rating system fails now.

1 Like
14

But the system works?
Because you dont understand the system you complain about
thats why its better if you understand it no?

the way mmr and cr gains and losses work are 100% fine for DPS but as
healer its for sure broken and needs to be fixed

15

If you go a session with more wins than losses you should gain MMR simple as that no one has to guess if played against lower MMR people or not because:
1- we know thst 100MMR gap has no real big effect in reality and you should not be punished harshly for it.
2- No one has to keep track of the MMR of players playing against this is the job of the “system”.
3- You have no control against who you are matched with why should you be punished harshly if the game put you on a lower mmr lobby. Makes no sense…
Above all the game is dying and a bad system is one issue this creates even more frustrations because the game relies on a certain amount of players to function properly.
WoW is already lacking compared to other competitive games when it comes to quality or time investment and its going worse and worde. The only thing going for the game is the combat system and the fantasy we are attached to but now more and more realising this alone is not the hassle and fighting the rest of the game.

16

Who said it does not work? Have evennread my reply? And please stop with the BS “you dont understand how it workd” its not rocket science…
The system is bad end of story.

17

Could you explain it to me then?

How is this system bad? every game is using it its simple and does its job?

18

I’ve gave my opinion in the previous comment and this post is also an example why its bad. If you end up with more wins than loses you should have a net gain end of story.
Not every game uses this system and even then there is a minimum number if players required to make it work. The game is almost deserted and the system then makes it worse which in turn result in less players and the cycle continues until we have almost no new players and only try hards remain who take mmr from each other abd gatekeep each other like we have no in SS

19

I dont understand what you are trying to make up here
i think you dont understand what mmr and what cr does no?

20

Yeah you keep missing the point not dure ignorance or for the sake of arguing but Im not keep wasting time with this. Yes we understand how the system works its not as hard as you think it is. The system sucks this does not contradict that the system works as implemented… if you cant grasp this simple idea I dont know what to tell you.