I did not suggest to get rid of the ladder. I only suggested to change the way one acquires mounts and cosmetics via rating. Rating and MMR are still to be used to judge the quality of a player, and to decide matchmaking.
The problem with PvP is that there are not enough people playing it. You want more people right? Not just glads, but across all brackets. More healers in SS, more dps, and more attention from Blizz.
You have 1 dude that posted that he is frustrated with the SS rating system because he wants to increase the ilvl of PvP gear to raid with it. Who cares if its orders of magnitude easier to just farm PvE for 405 ilvl versa gear? Point is that its 1 player less in the general PvP comunityâŠ
No, youâve been suggesting to get rid of its meaning. Itâd be like getting mythic drops just by killing the LFR boss 10 times. Go ahead, go suggest that in general. PvEers will surely have people who agrees with you. But you understand nothing about competition.
This place in the forum is about what appeals to PvPers. Not to you, since youâre a PvEer. Youâre basically the wrong target audience for this entire part of the game.
Donât misunderstand me though, Iâm not saying PvP doesnât need fresh blood. But you canât bring in fresh blood by appealing to people that doesnât even want to PvP. The trick is to get people that wants to PvP, and how to make the game enjoyable for them. Not for PvEers like you, who wants to bring more of PvE into PvP.
Also, for the record, that isnât the point the OP was making. The OP was complaining about the rating system, and how the recent change made it so he dropped 800(!) rating even when getting decent scores in w/l. The part about his ilvl was just a thing he mentioned on the side, how it affected him as another consequence.
all blurred,
some underlying theory suggests that people do not like to play healers in pvp for some reasons
any mmr tweaks are not helping with that
than with little healers playing some services can also have good business, adding to OPâs issue
Is disgusting. I entered my first solo shuffle with my blue geared as Demon Hunter on Saturday; for no reason at 1.9K mmr.
I won only one round or two, then I dropped to 1.8k, 1.6k. and so on.
When I hit 1300 I thought I could get fast wins, gearing up, insteadâŠnothing: I spent 6-7 hours on matches at 1.3kmmr most of time winning 3matches- 4 matches but getting 2 -4 rating points. Is depressing
I disagree with you. So I got sick of PvE in SL and now I only play PvP. Call me a casual if you want. But calling me âPvErâ with that negative connotation as if it was an insult makes no sense.
And here we agree. And there is nothing more frustrating than having a huge barrier to entry, then loosing and getting severely punished for it.
Im not citing PvE because I want PvP to become like PvE. Iâm just saying that some of the PvE solutions to get more people to feel fulfilled with the PvE content can actually be used to get more people to feel fulfilled with PvP content. At its core, its the same player base. We donât have to re-invent the wheel here.
Part of that solution is not to frustrate your casual player base by loosing 60 rating if you loose, and winning 7 rating if you win.
And the solution is complicated because the rating/MMR system actually does a very good job in pairing up people with similar skill.
But if you tie the rewards to that system you generate frustration. That is why so many people donât understand the MMR system. Because for 99% of the player base think that rating is just a progress bar, not a matchmaking algorithm.
The PvE devs understood that frustration, and they did something about it.
And now I ask you. What type of reward incentives would you propose that do not change the rating/mmr system (because it works)?
Thereâs reason behind it, so why doesnât it make sense? It refers to how you want to transfer the reward scheme from PvE over to PvP, and devalue the competitive aspect of PvP while turning it into a grind.
See, thereâs reason behind it. Youâre a PvEer.
Yes, you do.
While also diminishing the competitive aspect, which goes against the core of PvP. Which you donât understand, as youâve shown over and over again.
You need to read other suggestions than your own, because what you came up with is not the only suggestion out there.
No, thatâs PvP. The rating system itself is what is wrong. You just donât understand the value of PvP, so you suggest to bring more PvE into it.
Are you joking? Youâre claiming IT WORKS? Its design is purely incompetent. And you claim that works? Mhm, ok. Enough said here I guess.
rating is secondary, all that matters really is MMR, if you MMR is too low after losing streak you are not gonna get rating. Fix your MMR, you will get rating, itâs there to trail MMR and smooth out sudden jumps. If it wouldnt be there and MMR = Rating then your lowest 1280 CR would most likely be around 1000. Would that make you happier?
Whatâs not enjoyable is something else. If you fell from 2064 to 1280 (while actually MMR range was probably way higher) it means your skill had fairly low impact. Which gets me to main point: Balance between classes and compositions is absurdly bad. You either got lucky on your way up on unlucky on your way down, your skill is neither 1280 nor 2k+. You can apparently smooth sail to 2000k rating while at same time not actually being able to hold even 1300 rating? While composition you play match with is ofc completely random. These would, most likely, smooth out over large amount of matches but thatâs where q time hits.
Only way how to âfixâ this is shorter queue over which blizzard has relatively low impact over, unless they decide for something drastic like removing snowflake status from healers and stop making them mandatory for balanced, reasonable games (which is hard no go zone created by rogues and mages⊠and potentionally, with those gone, to certain degree by warlocks and warriors).
And secondly, remove randomness by certain classes being countered by specific compositions. I know this wouldnt help q time (but imho wouldnât make it so worse either) but I believe forcing even number of melees / ranges would help A LOT (no more 3x range + 1 melee, no more 3x melee + range⊠either of those situations becomes hell for one of them with very few exceptions)
ânote: for any purpose all three hunter specs are considered meleeâ
what you dont understand is that when you give the same rewards for everyone no matter what rating anyone has then you are basically taking alot of motivation and reward for people to push rating, improve and climb the ladder which results in less participation overall.
You basically want all the rewards but to put zero effort in getting them.
besides the fact that literally every spec in the game is able to EASILY get the 1800 set i just dont think you understand how a competetive gamemode works. Its a competition. Compare it to the national football league or Champions League. Not everyone gets the cup at the end of the year, only the winner.
thats actually in the game in form of the mount and the saddles that you can farm. Also all your basic conquest gear is a reward for just playing the game.
But there need to be more difficult content so people are motivated to play this content.
It just seems that rated or any COMPETETIVE content is not for you which is fine.
the barrier to entry is really low this season it actually was never this low in the history of the game.
thats not blizzards fault. Matchmaking works in WoW Arena like in every other competetive PvP Game. There is no guarantee to success or progression.
This issue is pretty much the only one that seems to have everyone on these forums in agreement. The ss rating system is scuffed. It can sometimes put you in games where you have literally 0 chance to gain anything, yet losing such a game tanks your rating.
Seems to me that if winning would gain you nothing, losing should take nothing away either. Otherwise it is just a scam.
âMeaning if you played a team with 1700 average MMR, and won that, then itâll try to match you up with something slightly higher, letâs say 1725 average team MMR, but your own average team MMR also increased by 25.â
From the post you linked to. This is simply not true for SS. Many times Iâve won in lobbies where I was slightly lower than the average mmr, only to get put into games right afterward where I was 100+ above average mmr. Winning the first kind of game say 4/6 might get me +12 rating, while going 2/6 in the other kind ends up with -40-50 rating.
Thatâs an example intended to illustrate the effect streaks has on ratings. Or should I say if a team with 1 rating faces a team with 2 rating? The point of that example remains the same. Itâs just meant to be easier to understand. As itâs just an example of what the effect can look like.
You need to read it a bit more thoroughly.
Also, just to clarify, itâs an example of the way it looks like in the normal ladders as pointed out in that post, and the effect streaks has is similar in shuffle. Because itâs all based on glicko.
Seems I need to explain this too.
Youâre talking about just one match after having won or lost an unspecified amount. This is what it looks like in the context I wrote it in, which you skipped entirely:
It always tries to get to the average
If youâve got, letâs say 1800 personal MMR, but youâre teamed up with two players on 1600 personal MMR, then it uses that initial MMR to determine your teamâs MMR which in turn decides the opponentsâ average team MMR. This is how it works in the normal ladder, we all know that, yeah?
So with it working like that, it keeps matching you up with opponents to increase the certainty of your rating as a team. Meaning if you played a team with 1700 average MMR, and won that, then itâll try to match you up with something slightly higher, letâs say 1725 average team MMR, but your own average team MMR also increased by 25. If you win that too, then itâll try to increase the MMR even more, even though the difference in the MMR between your team and the opponentsâ didnât change.
This effect is from the GlickoRD systems, because it tries to place people âwhere they belongâ faster and faster if the win/loss rate shows you really donât belong where itâs matching you.
In the Elo system this wouldnât change from streaks, but the Glicko systems are all about stabilized ratings and destabilized ratings, to ultimately increase the theoretical accuracy of the system compared to the Elo system.
Anyway, so this rating deviation function is very unclear about how it works in the shuffle system, since it doesnât give out wins and losses rating-wise until the shuffle has ended and then it gives 'em out all at once, so itâs kinda weird.
But anyway, so going back to the example, thatâs what it normally does in the normal ladder. Itâll keep throwing opponents your way as a team, MMR being affected by your wins and losses, with the ultimate goal of making all of your ratings equal. With every win, the ones lower rated than you win more than you do, and with every loss, you lose more than they do, and eventually you all end up on the same rating.
Fun, right?
Anyway, so that part about winning and losing more, is 100% present in shuffleâs system as well. Itâs trying to do the same thing there, the lower rated ones wins more than the higher rated ones, because itâs designed that way, which serves more of a purpose in the normal ladder than in the shuffle ladder.
To summarize it for you: You need to read the wall of text to understand the wall of text. Just reading a part of an example while skipping the context (and the rest of the example), will only lead to you misunderstanding the way that you did.
Oh right, and if you want the context for why I explained all that in that wall, itâs that itâs what would be fixed with a maximum & minimum amount won & lost from each round, and that it illustrates that Blizzard copypasted more of the functionality of their normal laddersâ rating system than they should have.
Which you would learn, if you would read the entire post in that link. That quote is just a part of the wall.
I understood it. My point is simply that there doesnât seem to be any kind of direction to the mmr. After 600 rounds played that is blatantly obvious. You get matched with ppl who are roughly at your mmr. And if they are lower you lose hard if you go 2/6 and barely win anything if you go 4/6.
I donât know why it is as it is, but I am inclined to think that its because of lack of available players. With the queue times being as they are, if you were to be matched with higher mmr players after a win trend, queues would last for hours.
And so the game just heaps you together with ones that almost match.
Or so it seems, at least.
But as for the rest of it, I agree that slowing it down might be beneficial. I am 100% on board with 3/3 giving no rating change.
Another fix, though probably a much harder one to implement, would be some contextual modifiers. If you gained 12 rating from a 4/6, then that should modify the rating loss of the 2/6 on the next game. Especially in lower ratings (where I play). There are simply so many factors deciding wins and losses you have absolutely no control over. Palas not bubbling, dps losâing the healer, breaking cc or resto druids spam cycloning kill target⊠just so much chaos lol.
^ Itâs that, but also a lot of other small âcogs in the machineâ. For example, there are priorities programmed into it, all of which can affect the queue times, and changing anything always carries with it its own set of ripple effects.
So with a lack of healers, theyâve apparently decided to increase the scope of matchmaking parameters from the get-go for other roles than the one you play, in an attempt to even out the average queue times for more rating ranges.
For example, prior to the change that people have been talking about, different rating ranges could have very different queue times, even though Blizzardâs âaverage queue timeâ-display was showing the same for everyone regardless of the rating range.
But the lack of healers hasnât changed. The lack of prot palas (although they can all go missing for all I care), also hasnât changed. But thatâs of course in comparison to the amount of DPSers and non-prot pala tanks thatâs queuing at any one time.
So the way they brought queue times down with these changes, ever so slightly, was because they spread out the ranges for what you get matched up with from other roles, so while there arenât more healers and prot palas to bring the queues down, Blizzard made it so the system puts a much higher priority on time spent in queue for who will get matched up next for DPSers.
And the ripple effects from that, have been disastrous. Because they tried to treat just one symptom of deeper problems, instead of treating the problems themselves.
There are already contextual modifiers in that suggestion. The MMR wouldnât really change, but the way it impacts the rating gains & losses would change.
To make it clear, Iâll use more impossible numbers this time:
Letâs say you gain a minimum of 1 rating per won round, and a maximum of 3 rating per won round. And you lose a minimum of 1 rating per lost round, and a maximum of 3 rating per lost round.
But what decides if youâll gain or lose 1, 2 or 3 rating per round won or lost, would be those MMR differences that wouldnât really need to be changed for the sake of these changes (although theyâll need to be changed back if they ever solve the problem with lack of healers), and the matchmaking system would still be doing its thing.
The difference would lie in what people gain and lose per round, and there needs to be those MMR differences because theyâre extremely valuable for inflation events as well as deflation events. And the rating system absolutely still needs those kinds of events to occur.
So you would still be able to gain +1 or -1 and so on, depending on those MMR differences in each round, even if you end up with 3-3 in w/l. But when I wrote that suggestion, they hadnât made these wild changes to the matchmaking parameters yet, so the reason why I said that itâll more often than not end up with âRating unchangedâ with 3-3 in w/l, was because the chances were higher than now for people to still face people closer to their own MMR so those differences wouldnât be as big back then. Now however, is a different story.
SS mechanics aside, the biggest issue by far is this bursty meta. Things wouldnât be nearly as bad if we didnât have this plethora of random unhealable burst out of nowhere⊠Itâs borrowed powers all over again.
Such a shame, Dragonflight PVP had so much potential, really sad to see it squandered on poor mechanics and shoddy class balance.
Maybe the intention is very short sighted? There is a strong possibility imo, that MMR always takes your whole match history way too much into consideration for the whole season instead of maybe the last 30 games
but even more scenarios where you can be the deciding factor because every single round your enemies are trolling too. If you are the constant that doesnt troll you can climb really fast in solo shuffle.
probably because you was playing a overtuned spec which has now been nerfed. Youâre negative win loss at 1.3 in 2âs so youâre probably playing at the right rating now hope this helps
