• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dota 2 |OT3| #BetterThenEllenPudge

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Razzer

Member
ElyrionX said:
So assuming that I then lost the next game with the same party against the same enemy team, my MMR would fall by -22? That is just a net gain of +6 when I was clearly playing against people with substantially higher average MMR. So to chase my MMR up from 3100 to 3400, I would need 100 of such games played, assuming a 50% win rate? That seems like an exceptionally flawed system to me.

And based on my reading of the dev forums, it seems like you will always lose MMR for losing and gain when winning.
Click to expand...

If you have a 50% winrate then the MMR has got you in roughly the right place for your skill. So such a gradual increase is fine as you are only gradually going to get better. If for some reason you should be a higher MMR than you are then you will have the winrate to prove it.
 
E

ElyrionX

Member
Pureauthor said:
What sounds so flawed about it? Not fast enough? That's all relative to just how large the ladder is anyway.
Click to expand...

It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
 
A

Artanisix

Member
ElyrionX said:
It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
Click to expand...

Feels like you're getting hung up on a number. How are the quality of your games? Do you find them relatively even? Are you stomping most games? Losing?
 
R

Razzer

Member
Satch said:
i wasnt paying attention and bought an mkb instead of the basher but god damnit i skipped that battlefury like you said (until i got some kills and had extra farm to spare)

the stuff for my satanic was sitting on the courier at the end but

http://dotabuff.com/matches/445619673

thanks for the help <3

i even got "gg wp pa" at the end and ive never had that happen before
Click to expand...

Nice! Incidentally if you went for the fighting build you should probably ignore Battlefury altogether. It is really a farming item so unless you get it first it isn't worth it. The only exception is against PL or if you have an enigma or magnus or someone who can clump them up for the cleave. Late game PA is versatile so you should experiment with what items to get. Abyssal is pretty core, MKB is decent as you showed in that game, Butterfly is a valid choice now that it stacks if they don't have a natural MKB builder. If you desperately need to tank nukes then a heart is not bad. Just mess around and see what you enjoy the most.
 
K

ksan

Member
ElyrionX said:
It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
Click to expand...

Practically zero emphasis on number of games except reducing the std. err. of your rating, thus being a better approximation of your actual rating together with the rating you gain/lose. Having a high win rate and the same rating as someone else probably means that relatively you've won a lot of games were your team has been slightly advantaged according to the algorithm, due to stacking or something.

How many games do you have? Maybe you recently improved, and started to win against slightly favored opponents, raising the variance and your rating, giving you harder games. Until it finds a suitable rating again you will probably gain more from wins than what you lose from losses, and then it will normalize to +25/-25.

Seems you're complaining at something that stems from your own ignorance, rather than the mmr algorithm (which is fair, it's not completely straightforward)
 
E

ElyrionX

Member
Artanisix said:
Feels like you're getting hung up on a number. How are the quality of your games? Do you find them relatively even? Are you stomping most games? Losing?
Click to expand...

Hmmm, good question. Pub MM games have felt really stompy and easy since RMM came into the picture. My solo calibration games (left with 4 now) have been quite easy for the most part while party ranked MM have been all over the place. Those 4 games after my party ranked calibration games were done have felt relatively even though I was always queueing with people who had substantially higher MMR than me.
 
E

ElyrionX

Member
ksan said:
Practically zero emphasis on number of games except reducing the std. err. of your rating, thus being a better approximation of your actual rating together with the rating you gain/lose. Having a high win rate and the same rating as someone else probably means that relatively you've won a lot of games were your team has been slightly advantaged according to the algorithm, due to stacking or something.

How many games do you have? Maybe you recently improved, and started to win against slightly favored opponents, raising the variance and your rating, giving you harder games. Until it finds a suitable rating again you will probably gain more from wins than what you lose from losses, and then it will normalize to +25/-25.

Seems you're complaining at something that stems from your own ignorance, rather than the mmr algorithm (which is fair, it's not completely straightforward)
Click to expand...

Need to sleep now but you raise a few fair points. Will reply tomorrow.
 
F

fiore

Banned
ElyrionX said:
It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
Click to expand...
Keep on winning bro you will meet the trench soon. And statistics of proper matchmaking can only improve with increased number of games.

And you should read the valve blog about the MMR if you feel if its flawed
 
H

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
MMR is a measure of your skill relative to the rest of the community, not some bar you simply fill with games.

Everyone's trying to climb the ladder at the same time, so you're going to need a better win rate than 50% if you want to see fast gains. If you can't break 50% then you're probably where you should be in terms of skill.
 
S

Sibylus

Banned
Yeah, you're not ending up tops in an ELO-derived ranking scheme unless you're legitimately beating the top. S'how it works by design.
 
S

Swig_

Member
Did they remove the "no teams when queuing solo" option?

I just got put in a team on US West where no one on my team spoke English, no one played Support (Random draft, I was first pick, no control over that), and they were just awful players.. no missing, no courier, no wards.

The other team was a group of four players who were together and, surprisingly, speak English.

What the FUCK, DOTA? :|


I can't find the no groups option anywhere now..
 
D

Detox

Member
Haly said:
MMR is a measure of your skill relative to the rest of the community, not some bar you simply fill with games.

Everyone's trying to climb the ladder at the same time, so you're going to need a better win rate than 50% if you want to see fast gains. If you can't break 50% then you're probably where you should be in terms of skill.
Click to expand...
I wish Valve put this in the searching screen. So many people don't seem to understand that it isn't an xp bar that keeps going up. They get butthurt over a minus 25 here and there. At the end of the day your MMR is going to hover around it's original number unless you noticeably improve at the game.
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
I've gone on a 10-win streak in ranked since finishing my calibration matches. Clearly I was ranked too low.
 
J

Jebusman

Banned
Kod1ak said:
Did they remove the "no teams when queuing solo" option?

I just got put in a team on US West where no one on my team spoke English, no one played Support (Random draft, I was first pick, no control over that), and they were just awful players.. no missing, no courier, no wards.

The other team was a group of four players who were together and, surprisingly, speak English.

What the FUCK, DOTA? :|


I can't find the no groups option anywhere now..
Click to expand...

It's gone. Most likely theory was Valve not wanting to split matchmaking even further after creating the ranked queue.
 
S

Shorty11857

Member
ElyrionX said:
It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
Click to expand...


If you have a 50% win rate your MMR will remain stable, if you have a >50% winrate your MMR will slowly (or quickly depending on winrate) increase. If you're much better than your current level then your MMR will go up quickly. A 60% winrate on average gets you 50 MMR over 10 games.

If your MMR goes up/down by a number other than 25 that most likely means the game wasn't fully balanced.

For example if you go up by 27 that would mean the other team was slightly favoured against you, so if they won they'd get 23 and you'd lose 23 and if you win you get 27 and they lose 27. Not sure if the entire team gets the same MMR gain or not

If you're better than your MMR you'll win more than you lose and should fairly quickly go up
 
H

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
A better Invoker than anbokr's will ever be.
 
R

Razzer

Member
http://dotabuff.com/matches/445777563

Dota is weird today. Once again I picked a support, was told to go mid, and crushed. Mind you, it was vs an Earth Spirit that clearly had no idea how to play him well. Hazaro would have fainted at the sight of it. Still, getting a bloodstone into bkb into agh's on lesh is hella fun. Press R, pop BKB and they can't come near you. Toward the end when we had way more farm Void got a good 5 man chrono, but he had to stand at a distance staring at us because if he came near my ult would kill him as I had already turned it on. Things might have been different if they actually bothered to focus me before I got bkb but it's fine by me haha.
 
C

Cathcart

Member
ElyrionX said:
I'm not sure I understand this MMR thing.
Click to expand...
You might be expecting a little too much right off the bat. I think you need to play a whole lot more than 14 games before you can count on the mmr to start placing you in decent matchups. It's way too small a sample size in a game that has hundreds of thousands of players, especially since it's a team game instead of 1v1s where it's a lot easier to make sense of wins and losses.
 
S

Shorty11857

Member
Cathcart said:
You might be expecting a little too much right off the bat. I think you need to play a whole lot more than 14 games before you can count on the mmr to start placing you in decent matchups. It's way too small a sample size in a game that has hundreds of thousands of players, especially since it's a team game instead of 1v1s where it's a lot easier to make sense of wins and losses.
Click to expand...

Your ranked MMR is based off your normal MMR, it doesn't reset to the starting point for ranked
 
P

Prophet Steve

Member
Yay, I got this in my Wraith Night Tribute.

62FYd.jpg


No clue why it says large, but only got a rare bloodseeker blade out of it, meh.
 
G

Green Biker Dude

Banned
yesterday i had my team throw like 5 games in a row and they were all those 60-80 minute games too. i don't ever (ever) throw games if my team makes me mad so i don't know why such a thing would ever happen to me

at this point i feel like i should get a free pass to commit any crime i want
 
H

Hazaro

relies on auto-aim
ElyrionX said:
It's flawed because it seems to place a heavy emphasis on the number of games played than your actual skill level. If I am correct in my assumption of my skill level, then why do I need 100 more games to "catch up"?

Hazaro has slightly less games played than me and he has one of the most insane win-loss (169-128) that I have ever seen. And yet his MMR is only 3.6k. That seems really low considering how high his win-rate is. Again, it seems as if the emphasis is on the number of games played than the player's actual skill.

I'm not sure if RMM has fundamentally changed the mechanics of matchmaking but my win-rate has shot up since RMM was introduced. I went from 50% to 52%. My win-loss was 150-150 and now it's 175-160. And I don't feel like I have done anything different except for just being a bit more tryhard.
Click to expand...
My MMR is probably lower than it could be because I tried a lot of heroes out in AR/SD and didn't really start trying to elevate my solo queue games until about 125 wins-ish.

I went into MMR calibration at 3300, won some games and now am at 3550. All I have to do is win more than I lose and I'll go up if I get better. Like yourself, in the past say, 50 or so games my WR is 75%. That's a much better reflection on your current play than moving from 50 to 52%, you went from 50% to 75%.

ES is incredible solo queue because you can be any lane, position 2-5 (1 if you go Veil/Dagon5/E.Blade). With escape, solo kill, gank, initiation, and not reliant on farm to do your job.

If there's anything I've learned from usually losing in a party it's that solo queue is insanely different from playing party matches and places value on different things. It's a different dota. I am finding people are much better at laning now and there are a lot more ganking heroes in the solo queue pool.
 
H

Hazaro

relies on auto-aim
Just had a ton of ridiculous saves in a game, should have streamed it, oh well.
ES + Silencer bait combo. Slark didn't play enough games to know you need items to kill apparently.

Decided to upload four ES clips anyway, first one probably shouldn't even be in there, but w/e. Slark got greedy on the second, but I'm proud I didn't panic (even though I should have stunned sooner).
 
A

abunai

Member
Just had a game where my ping spiked to 4000 early on and I couldn't see anything on the map, and fed 8 kills to a riki who was being a mouth running cunt and unpausing the whole time.

Feels pretty good to come back and win. Was surprising because I was queueing with 4 friends who are new to the game. CROW.
 
D

Drkirby

Corporate Apologist
Interesting, I'm getting ads for strife on my phone (it is apparently a second generation moba), isn't it a bit early for ads, I thought that the game was still dev only.
 
G

G.ZZZ

Member
I really don't like that you get -points if someone disconnect before FB, or even before picks. It's the stupidest shit.

EDIT: granted u lose like 2 points but just make the game void. Why i have to get a free loss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Since January 2024, Apex Legend’s lost over 50% of players.
4
2K
Gaiff replied
[PC Gamer] I've seen enough: No more forcing singleplayer studios to make mediocre live service games
Opinion
48
3K
Thebonehead replied
The Verge: We played Valve’s secret new shooter: Deadlock
Opinion News 2 3 4
199
14K
near replied
Valve and Gabe Newell: When innovation keeps time with silence (a quick analysis of the studio)
Analysis Game Dev
23
1K
Sebastian1295 replied
Which games studios have a diverse catalogue of game genres/styles?
12
1K
Robb replied
Top Bottom