4 ms·
Unless of course if a team full of me would have a 70% winrate, and the system is compensating (because hidden ELO) by sticking me with teammates that each have
by bick_nyers 4y ago
Unless of course if a team full of me would have a 70% winrate, and the system is compensating (because hidden ELO) by sticking me with teammates that each have 45% winrates.
It still averages out to 50% winrate. Just because you can force a point of convergence does not mean it is the correct point of convergence.
- jrockway 4y agoYeah, I definitely feel this variance in matchmaking. play games with my friends every Saturday night and 8 hours in after 5 beers, I doubt our MMR is quite as high as it was when we started the session. (The first game probably isn't great either!) But the matchmaker doesn't really know these subtleties, so sometimes the enemies get an easier than expected game. So it goes. The competitive ladder climbing meta is really about recognizing when you shouldn't be playing and not playing then. Interesting angle to optimize.
- bick_nyers 4y agoYeah, if I want to climb a ladder I have to play first thing in the morning (with physical exercise as well as warmup games), and make sure I quit at the right time.
- mym1990 4y agoI don't think the system should even care for these externalities because they will eventually balance out across a player base and the net effect should be zero(everyone will eventually play against a team with a drunk person on it). But it creates a prolonged cycle and general frustration amongst the player base.
- bick_nyers 4y agoEventually is the key word. What eventually looks like to the player could be 10 matches, or 1000 matches, depending on how well the ELO system is implemented. Achieving an equilibrium is step 1. Allowing for upward mobility is step 2. Enabling that upward mobility to occur (correctly) over fewer and fewer games is step 3. Alternatively, you could also skip step 3, and profit off of smurfing.