So you missed the point… again. It doesn’t matter if it’s 800, 600 or 300. It’s an example. The point is, that there will always be outliers on both ends of the matchmaking system. What are you going to do with these outliers? Tell them “sorry, your mmr is too low/high, you won’t be getting games anymore because we can’t match you with anyone”?
Not to mention that better mmr spread on matched players would mean longer queues on every bracket. It’s already 5+ minutes for dps on mediocre mmr like 1800-2100. On 2400+ it’s 8-9 minutes. And that’s with MMR that’s all over the place. You are very naive if you think they can tweak the system without making queues a lot longer. Or maybe you are ok with it, but I don’t think that’s a very popular take (or that it’s shared by blizzard).
So yes, games with big disparency will happen. And when they do, the system needs to protect the player who would lose rating when matched with very low mmr player who goes 0-6.
What are you not understanding? It won’t prevent them getting matched, it’ll just take longer time for them to be matched. It’s the same way the matchmaking parameters are set to in the normal ladder. How often do you face opponents in the normal ladder that you gain no rating from when you win? Hm? Come on, share with the class.
What part of this didn’t you understand now?:
^ That again, can’t be done. It goes against the purpose of a rating system in the first place. This is why I said you’re ignorant of the subject matter, as you’ve shown over and over again in this thread.
And you miss the point (again, thats strike 3 now).
You can’t compare this to normal ladder, because in normal ladder you will never be in a situation where you techincally win and lose rating. So this whole point is an illogical nonsense.
As for the part where you “think queue times wouldn’t be much longer” it’s just your guess work and without data that neither you nor I have, it’s just a speculation.
That’s why I compared it to winning against an opponent you don’t win rating from, as it’s the closest analogy.
The reason you LOST rating, is because you’re technically playing 6 matches per shuffle. So winning those 4 didn’t outweigh the rating lost from those 2 losses. Get it yet?
Without official Blizzard matchmaking data, that can’t be said “with proof”. It’s an estimate, because it doesn’t require a genius to figure out if they don’t get slotted with people in other rating ranges as fast as they are right now, then they’ll stick around a little longer near their own rating range, and so they fill the empty spots others left in their rating range, and that goes for the bulk of the ladder.
This is why you need to understand how rating systems work.
Oh right, that reminds me, since it seems you need the deep-dive as to HOW your suggestion reeks of ignorance:
When nobody lose any rating except for the player with 6 losses, every time there’s such a shuffle, despite the fact that there should be rating losses due to the wide MMR spread as explained earlier.
What do you think happens?
What happens is a domino effect of increased inflation. Do you need the explanation as to why increased inflation is bad?
And this “closest analogy” is completely irrelevant because the situation is different. The worst outcome in constructed arena is 0 rating change if mmr disparity between teams is too high. This is exactly how it should be in rated solo shuffle. You can’t look at 6 matches of shuffle as seperate games, because if someone goes 0-6 then it means it wasn’t possible to carry such person and you are getting punished with cr loss despite the fact that there was nothing you could do to prevent it.
That’s literally how it’s working right now, it counts each round as a match. The system is, it’s not me saying it.
As for why you need to be punished, there will be differences in people who can carry that person, while others can’t, and so on. So the rating system will separate you from those who can, by causing rating loss for you while rating gains for them.
It’ll occur in other shuffles if that person got 0/6, sure, but the point remains the same.
Yes, that’s the whole point. It works like that but it shouldn’t in the very scenario I presented. That’s literally the point of this thread, that you completely missed. Good job!
No, all you’ve been saying is that you want it to give free passes to people who can’t carry. Which isn’t feasible.
I’ve explained to you a feasible way to solve it, but you’re just saying no to say no, because you’re concerned about the ones at the absolute bottom of the ladder and those at the absolute top of the ladder.
I’m saying no because I’m not convinced that mmr can be tweaked in such a way that this kind of wide mmr spread wouldn’t happen. If it can be done, then sure, my solution isn’t needed, I agree. But if it can’t be done (or can’t be done without making queues too long) then I’d rather have small rating inflation than scenarios in which you get into matches where you lose CR no matter what you do.
Due to the highly unstable nature of inflation occurring every time there’d be someone with 0/6 in a shuffle, you’d be more likely to end up with a season like SL s2 in that case.
If you’re talking about the meaning behind the rating changes that occurs, and why Blizzard got such a system as quoted in the blue text, then it’s because its sole purpose is to quantify ability.
So if you’re subjected to a shuffle where it’s so simple to win that you win those 4, but it being so hard to win with that one common denominator that you lose 2, then the rating changes will reflect that because of the MMR spread in the shuffle.
Meanwhile, that same common denominator plays another shuffle, this time another player is able to carry him so he doesn’t end up with 0/6 and instead there’s a player who wins 6/6 rounds thus that denominator player winning 2.
This player then did what you couldn’t. So the rating system will naturally get you two closer, the one who won 6/6, and you who couldn’t carry that player, because he essentially did what you couldn’t.
So the meaning behind you losing rating, might be mean for you, but it’s natural. It’s a natural part of the rating system.
The issue is that the MMR spread is too wide. That’s all.
And yes, your suggestion would be another point of inflation where before there is none.
Yes, but given better mmr spread this scenario would be rare enough that this tiny inflation would be meaningless on a grand scale, and benefits of not having matches where you lose rating no matter what you do outweigh its cons.
Meaning you have no basis to say that it’s a rare enough occurrence for it to not have wide consequences. You’d need data from Blizzard’s own servers to be able to say something like that with certainty.
Yeah I don’t deal with absolutes and have no problem admitting it’s my guess. But if it’s a wrong guess, and it would happen a lot (or they wouldn’t fix mmr spread at all going into DF) then I would take my solution of not losing cr if there is an uncarriable person in shuffle that goes 0-6 rather than have it stay the way it is.
I mean what’s the alternative in this case? Have it stay the way it is so we “dont inflate the rating”?
I will take “no salty matches” over “slightly inflated rating” any day.
For the record, I’m hoping they tune the MMR spread better in time for DF s1. But only time will tell, because they for sure won’t communicate that with the players, going by their history.
But if they fix that, then your problem solves itself. It’ll become rare enough for people to lose rating with 4 wins.
Well I don’t mind a discussion. The only problem is this person decided to be very arrogant with his insults like “ignorant”, “fool” then posting his opinions as facts , memes and childish things like “you don’t get it???”.
Big words from someone who started it because you didn’t even understand when ignorant is an insult and when it isn’t. Even a simple google search can tell you that much.