I agree completely. There’s a way to fix the rating gains & losses as well, to slow it down.
Thanks, that’s exactly my point. Welcome to the forum, buddy. You’ll fit right in.
Bro, this is rated mode. We should reduce impact of “getting lucky” to the minimum, not freaking nurture it.
There’s always a factor of luck in matchups, especially in solo queues. The design stretched out that factor of luck by making it into this shuffle mode, but the luck never disappeared.
I’d agree that the k-factor is probably a bit too high BUT if you make it lower then people would complain that it’s impossible to grind rating since you don’t get enough points etc… They just can’t win here.
Sure I get that, luck will always play a big role in a mode like solo shuffle and that’s fine. Doesn’t mean we have to make it even more prevalent with stupid systems like this leaver changes.
It’s just something that doesn’t matter at all. You are overthinking it.
Yes, it does. It very much does. Because now people can trust in the system to count every round. Before, they couldn’t.
Oh there is a VERY easy fix.
If someone leaves the game, count all the rounds as if he lost every one of them. Simple. Leaver goes 0-6. Others go 4-2, 3-3 or 6-0.
It’s that simple.
Yeah what about no. No one deserves free wins.
It’ts not a free win. You beat the leaver by staying in the game.
Not to mention no one deserves a free lose either. And that’s what current system can do.
1 Like
Not exactly the k-factor to blame here, you know. It’s not the elo system being used either. Go look up the glicko systems instead, if you’re interested in the math of it. Blizzard did their own adaption of it.
It’s the instability factors and expanding parameters causing the issues, but that can be mitigated in other ways.
It’s a played round. What you’re suggesting would make people lose rounds they didn’t even get to play. How about you stop contradicting yourself?
With what I’m suggesting you would never get a negative win-lose ratio. Worst outcome is 3-3 which is a tie.
With what we have currently can potentially end up with 0-3.
It’s not a tie. A shuffle is not just one match. It’s 6 matches, one round is one match, and that’s how the rating system counts it.
Also, you’ve played those rounds. Don’t conveniently forget that. What you’re suggesting would make people win and lose rounds they didn’t even get to play. Which contradicts your earlier statement:
and also why
is wrong.
It’s a tie because in even MMR scenario it will result in 0 rating change.
Doesn’t matter how the other games went if there is a leaver. System should never punish you for not having your chance to beat him. So my soultion is the only reasonable one.
So instead of making me look up you could’ve said the constant is τ in glicko. I mean no one knows their implementation and talking about semantics is meaningless.
That’s why I told you it’s the instability and expanding parameters in the matchmaking causing the issues. I just told you it isn’t the k-factor to blame, because it’s not that simple, and then told you about the glicko systems if you were curious about the math of it, but that’s not really material to the convo.
It’s not punishing you. It’s just counting the rounds played, good and bad. You can’t have the good without the bad. And without both, it made people distrust the system and hate the game mode entirely.
But ok, if you want to talk about “punishments”, so you want to punish the people who won their rounds, by forcing them to forfeit the rest of their rounds?
There must be trust in the rounds played to count. That’s essential.
Sorry I made my point clear enough and I’m not going to bother replying with same stuff again and again. I don’t have the energy to argue with someone lacking basic reading comprehension skills, have a nice day.
What the hell are you talking about. It’s not magic, it’s just math :d Where do you get these ideas. You can just pull up the paper and take a look.