Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] MATCHMAKING FEEDBACK UPDATE – November 5

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 21
  4. 22
  5. 23
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. ...
  9. 27
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
Chimera30 wrote:
qlimm wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
GameI was partied up with the other Onyx player, then we got a Plat 6 and a Diamond.

Surely the other squad, comprised of three champs and an Onyx, had a higher MMR than us. I am also inclined to believe it was a squad of four because of how they spawn trapped us.

I go an even 7-7 and the rest of my team got destroyed. The Diamond player eventually gave up and went AFK.

I lose 30 CSR. This is the max, right? Why?

This is the kind of result that makes people stop playing ranked.
Your team had a 1518 MMR, the other team 1516.

A 1660 losing to a 1516 will generally drop 30 like you did.

Your post-game MMR was 1410, so losing -30 is definitely the right step to get your CSR down to where it should be after that performance (you played like a 1389 or Diamond 4).
How could their team's average be 1516 when three of them were Champion which is 1800s for CSR? Maybe I am wrong about this and the Champion threshold is lower at the moment? Did the champions have a MUCH lower MMR than their CSR would otherwise indicate? They'd have to have Diamond MMR levels to get an average of 1516.

This sounds retaliatory, childish, and I'd be just plain venting...but I can't not say it: if the system put a Diamond 4 (apparently how I played) in that match instead of me they sure as heck wouldn't break even.
Champs are just the top 200 Onyx players. So the top 200 players with CSR above 1500 will be Champs. They don't need CSR >1800 to be Champs. If that enemy team's average MMR was 1516, then they could have all just had MMRs around the Onyx threshold; none of them would have had to have Diamond MMR for that average to be possible. It is possible, though, that they had inflated CSRs.
I suppose the fact that my MMR dropped 250 points for one game and is now 210 points below my CSR happened to the other team their previous game? That is the only explanation because to have an average MMR of 1516 you must have players on the team below this value.

Currently Champ #140 has a CSR of 1880 so an estimate of the Champ CSR being 1800 is somewhat reasonable. There were three >1800 CSR players on the enemy team and their MMR somehow found its way down 300 points or more? Is MMR supposed to be this volatile?
Depending on the playlist and player, MMR can be quite volatile. SWAT tends to be one of those because of the large swings you can have game to game despite similar teams.

You were 1466 pre-game, so you were probably dropping recently and CSR is catching up.

Your opponents ranged 1455 -1619 in MMR, so are probably in similar situations.

The 1516 is also pre-game.

Since your opponents also had CSRs above their MMRs, most of them only got 1 CSR for the win. One did get 8.
This makes me wonder...I am a "safe" player in SWAT in that I rarely go negative (probably less than 5 times this season, definitely less than 10) and this is reflected somewhat in my 1.748 K/D, but in order to preserve this I may get fewer kills per game so I never "lose" the game but I don't necessarily win it. Is this playstyle stagnating my progression because while I have teammates who go 6-20 or 0-12 I should be killing the enemies faster before my teammates die that many times?
Low population is a killer, more often than not, I can look at a team and tell if I'll win or lose.
Why were getting so many quitters.
qlimm wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
Chimera30 wrote:
qlimm wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
GameI was partied up with the other Onyx player, then we got a Plat 6 and a Diamond.

Surely the other squad, comprised of three champs and an Onyx, had a higher MMR than us. I am also inclined to believe it was a squad of four because of how they spawn trapped us.

I go an even 7-7 and the rest of my team got destroyed. The Diamond player eventually gave up and went AFK.

I lose 30 CSR. This is the max, right? Why?

This is the kind of result that makes people stop playing ranked.
Your team had a 1518 MMR, the other team 1516.

A 1660 losing to a 1516 will generally drop 30 like you did.

Your post-game MMR was 1410, so losing -30 is definitely the right step to get your CSR down to where it should be after that performance (you played like a 1389 or Diamond 4).
How could their team's average be 1516 when three of them were Champion which is 1800s for CSR? Maybe I am wrong about this and the Champion threshold is lower at the moment? Did the champions have a MUCH lower MMR than their CSR would otherwise indicate? They'd have to have Diamond MMR levels to get an average of 1516.

This sounds retaliatory, childish, and I'd be just plain venting...but I can't not say it: if the system put a Diamond 4 (apparently how I played) in that match instead of me they sure as heck wouldn't break even.
Champs are just the top 200 Onyx players. So the top 200 players with CSR above 1500 will be Champs. They don't need CSR >1800 to be Champs. If that enemy team's average MMR was 1516, then they could have all just had MMRs around the Onyx threshold; none of them would have had to have Diamond MMR for that average to be possible. It is possible, though, that they had inflated CSRs.
I suppose the fact that my MMR dropped 250 points for one game and is now 210 points below my CSR happened to the other team their previous game? That is the only explanation because to have an average MMR of 1516 you must have players on the team below this value.

Currently Champ #140 has a CSR of 1880 so an estimate of the Champ CSR being 1800 is somewhat reasonable. There were three >1800 CSR players on the enemy team and their MMR somehow found its way down 300 points or more? Is MMR supposed to be this volatile?
Depending on the playlist and player, MMR can be quite volatile. SWAT tends to be one of those because of the large swings you can have game to game despite similar teams.

You were 1466 pre-game, so you were probably dropping recently and CSR is catching up.

Your opponents ranged 1455 -1619 in MMR, so are probably in similar situations.

The 1516 is also pre-game.

Since your opponents also had CSRs above their MMRs, most of them only got 1 CSR for the win. One did get 8.
This makes me wonder...I am a "safe" player in SWAT in that I rarely go negative (probably less than 5 times this season, definitely less than 10) and this is reflected somewhat in my 1.748 K/D, but in order to preserve this I may get fewer kills per game so I never "lose" the game but I don't necessarily win it. Is this playstyle stagnating my progression because while I have teammates who go 6-20 or 0-12 I should be killing the enemies faster before my teammates die that many times?
Well, kpm leads to more wins in the data than K/D ironically enough, so if you can increase your kpm against the same difficulty of opponents, you should see more wins and hence a higher CSR.

Though if you increase kpm but end up against worse opponents, it won't change anything.
Hey DR Menke, may I have both my Slayer and FFA MMRs? Thanks!
TraadeMerK wrote:
Hey DR Menke, may I have both my Slayer and FFA MMRs? Thanks!
1916. 1987.
ZaedynFel wrote:
TraadeMerK wrote:
Hey DR Menke, may I have both my Slayer and FFA MMRs? Thanks!
1916. 1987.
can you tell me my slayer mmr?
can you tell me my slayer mmr?
1661.
ZaedynFel wrote:
The reason your CSR is higher than MMR is the swings up are recent enough.

asfdasdfasdf
Chimera30 wrote:
can you tell me my slayer mmr?
1661.
ZaedynFel wrote:
The reason your CSR is higher than MMR is the swings up are recent enough.

i think that was my swat mmr
i think that was my swat mmr
Could be. The graph says Slayer, but Swat is considered a subtype of Slayer.
Warzone is has bad as its ever been matchmaking wise.
Can I have my Slayer MMR?
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
Chimera30 wrote:
qlimm wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
qlimm wrote:
GameI was partied up with the other Onyx player, then we got a Plat 6 and a Diamond.

Surely the other squad, comprised of three champs and an Onyx, had a higher MMR than us. I am also inclined to believe it was a squad of four because of how they spawn trapped us.

I go an even 7-7 and the rest of my team got destroyed. The Diamond player eventually gave up and went AFK.

I lose 30 CSR. This is the max, right? Why?

This is the kind of result that makes people stop playing ranked.
Your team had a 1518 MMR, the other team 1516.

A 1660 losing to a 1516 will generally drop 30 like you did.

Your post-game MMR was 1410, so losing -30 is definitely the right step to get your CSR down to where it should be after that performance (you played like a 1389 or Diamond 4).
How could their team's average be 1516 when three of them were Champion which is 1800s for CSR? Maybe I am wrong about this and the Champion threshold is lower at the moment? Did the champions have a MUCH lower MMR than their CSR would otherwise indicate? They'd have to have Diamond MMR levels to get an average of 1516.

This sounds retaliatory, childish, and I'd be just plain venting...but I can't not say it: if the system put a Diamond 4 (apparently how I played) in that match instead of me they sure as heck wouldn't break even.
Champs are just the top 200 Onyx players. So the top 200 players with CSR above 1500 will be Champs. They don't need CSR >1800 to be Champs. If that enemy team's average MMR was 1516, then they could have all just had MMRs around the Onyx threshold; none of them would have had to have Diamond MMR for that average to be possible. It is possible, though, that they had inflated CSRs.
I suppose the fact that my MMR dropped 250 points for one game and is now 210 points below my CSR happened to the other team their previous game? That is the only explanation because to have an average MMR of 1516 you must have players on the team below this value.

Currently Champ #140 has a CSR of 1880 so an estimate of the Champ CSR being 1800 is somewhat reasonable. There were three >1800 CSR players on the enemy team and their MMR somehow found its way down 300 points or more? Is MMR supposed to be this volatile?
Depending on the playlist and player, MMR can be quite volatile. SWAT tends to be one of those because of the large swings you can have game to game despite similar teams.

You were 1466 pre-game, so you were probably dropping recently and CSR is catching up.

Your opponents ranged 1455 -1619 in MMR, so are probably in similar situations.

The 1516 is also pre-game.

Since your opponents also had CSRs above their MMRs, most of them only got 1 CSR for the win. One did get 8.
This makes me wonder...I am a "safe" player in SWAT in that I rarely go negative (probably less than 5 times this season, definitely less than 10) and this is reflected somewhat in my 1.748 K/D, but in order to preserve this I may get fewer kills per game so I never "lose" the game but I don't necessarily win it. Is this playstyle stagnating my progression because while I have teammates who go 6-20 or 0-12 I should be killing the enemies faster before my teammates die that many times?
Well, kpm leads to more wins in the data than K/D ironically enough, so if you can increase your kpm against the same difficulty of opponents, you should see more wins and hence a higher CSR.

Though if you increase kpm but end up against worse opponents, it won't change anything.
Does k/d lead to more wins than dpm? Are you using kpm vs raw k/d data or do you filter out the unreliable k/d numbers? If so, what do you use?
Would you be able to find the MMR rating for “MGE Desire” in the playlist: Head to Head?
Why if i win don’t go up, and if i lose i go to the hell?
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not repost content a moderator has removed, edit posts previously edited by a moderator, repost a topic that has been locked, or post about forum moderation decisions. If you have a question or concern about a forum moderation decision, please private message the applicable moderator.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
ZaedynFel wrote:
Also, again, suggesting "switch to HCS settings" has never been helpful. It goes to show there's a gap between a small group of enthusiasts and the core. Every list we've introduced HCS settings into has shrunk significantly.
Does this mean you'll revert Team Arena back to how it was before? Pretty please??
Boomy EU wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
we keep Elimination up because it’s the only way to finish the Breakout Commendations.
Please remove extermination it requires a completely different game style and therefore doesn't suit the playlist. It also can be very frustrating in a competitive game because of the spawns.
I don't understand why not just send it to Social...
D M4N8 wrote:
Boomy EU wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
we keep Elimination up because it’s the only way to finish the Breakout Commendations.
Please remove extermination it requires a completely different game style and therefore doesn't suit the playlist. It also can be very frustrating in a competitive game because of the spawns.
I don't understand why not just send it to Social...
I’d rather see the seasonal seasons of Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall get split further; at least, for the ranked “Elimination” playlist. I’d like to see each season get split into three fairly monthly-like, and mode-specific, seasons while still falling under the seasonal season. In other words, under that seasonal playlist banner (Elimination) each mode (Breakout v1, Breakout v2, Extermination) essentially gets its own moment to bare the brunt of the [banner] playlist’s seasonal rank influence. The “moment” would be appropriately 4 weeks long for:
  • Elimination: Breakout - I believe the neutral flag (secondary objective) should be replaced with the “Extraction” custom mode’s objective. The rest of the settings essentially remains Breakout v1.
  • Elimination: One Flag - It’s essentially Breakout v2.
  • Elimination: Exterminate - It’s essentially Extermination.
People have the chance, on a monthly cycle, to allow their seasonal rank to best be determined by what the invested playing the most between the three. Plus, if they really want to know their mode specific ranks they only have to ask Josh. The specific mode MMRs would be quite interesting to analysis given how the modes are essentially featured as mini-seasons. And to perhaps witness any shifts based on how players become more capable of advancing the modes’s online Meta. I say “more” because with this setup players are presented with an opportunity (in MMing) to focus on it exclusively; at least, for approximately 4-weeks (~monthly).
okay, why in the bleepin love of all that is Halo was this match even made? like, what MMR ratio/mapping from whatever thought this was "fair"?

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/mode/arena/matches/3c2b5cd9-6054-40c7-b755-015512cce240/players/radar3301enigma

and then, why was i matched with him again?

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/mode/arena/matches/d95bb413-8ac2-444d-abbd-a8945a61247c/players/radar3301enigma

and then after QUITTING out of that one, matched the same player a third time?

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/mode/arena/matches/c4d53c21-3087-467d-a5a2-688ca0f20411/players/radar3301enigma

at this point, i started messaging the guy, and this insanity happened:

https://xboxdvr.com/gamer/radar3301enigma/video/68677360

(the parts where there isnt any sound is when i was measaging him)

he was even telling me he's been matching the #5 champion, who he then messaged me 10 minutes later, was now the #3 champ...

---

ZaedynFel wrote:
Also, again, suggesting "switch to HCS settings" has never been helpful. It goes to show there's a gap between a small group of enthusiasts and the core. Every list we've introduced HCS settings into has shrunk significantly.
Does this mean you'll revert Team Arena back to how it was before? Pretty please??
It's too little, too late. They're not going to see any significant bump in playlist popularity at this point.
The only thing I can't get my head around yet is the extremely variable MMR results per match.

Conventional, just experience with playing I guess, means it doesn't ring true to me that someone can play like a 2000mmr player and in the very next game play like a 1300mmr player, I think these results vastly overrepresent any outside factors such as 'leaning forwards' or tiredness, synergy with teammates or synergy of enemy team. I consider myself a pretty inconsistent player but even then I don't think I perform too much different match to match as the graphs seem to represent.

Am I just misunderstanding the calculation of your MMR performance? Is 'played like a 2000mmr player' the wrong way to state it? Perhaps it represents that H5 is inherently pretty random in the way the game flows (what's the metric for measuring how much randomness a game has?) I vaguely remember a statement about mmr, it was 100mmr difference is where one player will beat another player 7 times out of 10 or something?

I wonder if the peaks and troughs are caused by a 66% prediction rate? I'm curious about what the graphs might like with a 99% prediction rate, or would they not change too much?

A lot of questions! Just curious I guess.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 21
  4. 22
  5. 23
  6. 24
  7. 25
  8. ...
  9. 27