Solo rating reward!

yes i think nobody knows that i saw a statement from steam i believe and they say if everbody knows that you could manipulate it to easy

what is actually the best rate for normal arena to rise cr without getting your personal mmr to high? do you get cr for 1-1?

What matters for the amount you win or lose from a round, is the opposite teams’ MMR relative to your CR.

That’s because you had a losing streak going like that, and also lost against players with MMR lower than what you used to lose to before the initial rise of rating. Then you’ll typically end up lower than where you started.

Honestly, there’s a lot to explain about rating systems, but I have to go afk so I’ll just leave with the statement that the current rating system design they use in shuffle is unviable. :laughing:

Depends on the small differences in rating vs. opponents’ MMRs. You can get it, but it’s not guaranteed. Best way to do it slowly is just 2 wins, 1 loss, 2 wins, 1 loss, in that order.

1 Like

thank you :smiling_face_with_three_hearts: i learned in 1 hour more then i was trying to find out on my own for few years

yes pls fix blizzard or no more sub xD

what would actually happen if your mmr could not rise more then lets say 100 above your cr? would that not be much beter? even if it means slower cr gain?

its MUCH more fun ,blizzard needs to add solo queued rated bgs.

so u rather sit 30min in que then 30min in lfg?

Also its an MMO its really not that hard to find fixed mates for 2s and if ur 2 its easy to find a 3rd

the solution is easy

nerf demonhunter

heals keep gain +0 from 3/6 because there is constant 1 player dieing each round

dps gains lil something from 4/6 because there is consatnt 1 player dieing each round

both dps and heal drop alot constant because there is random matchmaking of different mmr mixed and random things happen and -80 for all who were higher

matchmaking streches to match what ever mmr against each other if there is no other which results in wild games with no gain for the ones being higher

h ttps://ibb.co/KDWGd55 3x 0cr dps 2x 1530 heal

h ttps://ibb.co/C8V2tyv 0cr heal 1330cr heal, higher gain nothing for 4/6 lower gains +200 for 2/6

just some examples of wild matchmakings because of blizzard making it stretch to what ever in order to increase que time problem when the problem is lack of healers

everyone talking about this matchmaking need to understand that for 2s/3s u optimize play with ur own mmr so u climb most and drop least when the inevitable loss comes, u dont just go play with 0cr if ure on 2.1 example u will lose alot and gain nothing if win

now soloq is not this it matches wild mix of ratings and people yo-yo all the time and it is frustrating for all

I hope they find a way to fix soloq soon, and if not, the choice is very simple for me.

I just watched 0cr hunter get into 2x 1500 heal and rest dps 1300-1400 lobby

the hunter runs in without camo and press turtle as his first ability each round, then when his engaged he presses S whole game till his killed and both heals go 3/6

I tought he was bot till he left on round 6 when he got tilt :slight_smile:

Some of the dps had waited 30min que for this :slight_smile:

I had instant as im heal but good example of stupid system

this guy will never climb from 0cr like this so it makes no sense 2x heals from 1500 higher is put to trade 3/6 with ppl like these no matter what rating we ever climb

the matchmaking just puts these to torpedo everyones game for no reason :joy:

I think after 1.8 in shuffle it should be done way 2 many que shuffle and leave the resl brackets

I only q shuffle when my mates are not available. For me shuffle is a good option outside of 3s or 2s.

Still there is to much melee mobility for the current caster survivability. Yes even for SP and Warlock it is to much mobility.

Not gonna comment on if mobility is too high or not, but just for the record, you’re a caster. Just stick to the triangle formation in the open (please note that I’m not saying opening, just in the open as in open space on the map) and you’ll manage better than you’re doing now. In shuffle with people who doesn’t know how, just putting a bit more effort into kiting and shutting down their bursts can go a long way, but you’re meant to be in the open when you want to go on the offensive as a caster.

A lot of people are complaining about melee mobility, i think they mean especially warrior, Monk, DH and rogue.

And yes it is absurd what those classes have, if warlock would be on that LvL, the forum would get 1000 threads about that in 5 seconds…

I play lock because i love the class, but they need to reduce the selfheal and mobility of those classes. This should have happened before the season started…

Do you know what the game looked like when the mobility wasn’t as high as it is? It was a pure waiting game behind pillars. A melee was not allowed to go out if they weren’t gonna burst, pretty much. Could sneak in a few attacks here and there, but overall, you just couldn’t step out. Because wizards would be killing you before you’d make it to them.

That’s what this yoyo of mobility keeps going back and forth between. Either melee hides 75% of the matches, and never ever leave the pillar without a way to escape, or they stand out in the open. Personally, I blame PvE for this whole mess. PvP-centric designs from the ground up would have so much potential in a game like this, when :poop: isn’t so locked down by lore and PvE encounters.

1 Like

I’m totally with, i also think the 50% nerf to warlock survivability was purely done for PvE!

I think for pvp a 25% overall nerf to the survivability would be enough. Which would give warlock enough survivability against double melee but not to much of other setups.

Except Affliction which should be nerfed with some talents in the spec tree

I kinda meant more about how there always needs to be a certain balance maintained to mobility, because in the end it’s designed first for PvE and then PvP as an after-thought. And the burst-centric gameplay design instead of dominance-centric gameplay design is because it makes PvE more exciting for the player base, they’d just get bored if their bursts wouldn’t hit for way more than their sustained.
And the way hard-casting works, the main reason why you can’t move while hard-casting is because PvE is way more about ground-targeted AoE mechanisms than PvP is.
That’s why it’s always been so limited, what you can cast while moving.

The entire shape of the PvP gameplay could get rid of so many frustrating elements that only breeds division, like the “healer vs. DPS” or “ranged vs. melee” and so on, by doing the designs entirely for PvP.

What should matter most in class designs for PvP, is skill expressions. And that’s always limited because of PvE.

1 Like

I know what you ment, the game design is for PvE. They just need to adjust it to pvp properly. That’s why i said increase the survivability for all non mobility classes to match the mobility of those with the highest amount of mobility.

But they need to be careful, some classes need more buffs than others. Like a hunter need more than a warlock.

You’ll never get the player base as a whole to agree with you on that one. Because nobody trusts Blizzard to tune that kind of stuff properly. Too much history of when they’ve failed completely through the years, and they’ve rarely if ever learned anything from it.

Personally, I’d argue the damage output designs have to be changed instead of survivability. It’s much better overall to tune damage stuff instead of tuning survivability stuff. Because survivability stuff affects the role of healers and can cause other kinds of domino effects which would just make it even worse overall.

For example, can you imagine a lock paired with a healer in 2s if the lock’s survivability goes up? That’s why it’s better to tune damage output instead.

I don’t trust them, too. They failed so often over the years.

Great nerf dmg from all high mobility classes by 30% because high uptime should end in mid tier sustain dmg. With burst spikes ending in high sustain dmg. Every melee will cry not only a river you could made a world out of water.

That’s a good point, but 2s is already bad.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.