|
On March 20 2015 13:25 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2015 13:15 Excalibur_Z wrote:
And of course then you will want to know the enemy team's average MMR so that you can be assured the overall match is relatively even. This is the one I don't understand. I don't see how knowing whether your match is more or less mismatched actually makes your game better. Like sure, there's the "lingering question", but I don't see how not knowing how even your game is changes anything about your game.
I can't speak for everyone, but two days ago I was queuing unranked with 4 friends and we happened to get captains mode. We weren't taking it super seriously and our lowest mmr player (about 2k lower than our highest mmr) spam clicked and managed to snag captain. We all contributed a little to the draft, but he wasted bans on heroes like riki and faceless while the other team picked and banned very typical heroes of the current meta (sf, troll, axe, venge). This probably should have warned us but we fed two kills at top rune at the beginning of the game, had our first ward dewarded instantly and got stomped 48 - 1. I can't be certain since it was unranked, but looking at the other teams profiles that weren't private, it's pretty safe to assume that we were heavily outmatched.
We queued again straight away and after ~5 mins came up against the same team. This time we let our highest mmr player draft and were much more careful throughout the game. Of course we still got stomped but we put up a much better fight and it wasn't quite so one sided.
Obviously unranked is different to ranked, in that most players are going to take it much more seriously and try their best regardless, but I think that knowing that the other team is better or worse than you definitely can have an effect on the way you play. For example I might be more likely to pick heroes that I am more experienced with if the other team is higher rated, since I will be more comfortable with the nuances of the hero or more familiar with situational item builds etc. Or as someone else suggested, you might take larger risks or be more aggressive as the lower rated team because you feel that the other team will likely be more efficient at farming in the long term.
To your original question, does this make your game better? In my opinion yes, but that is definitely an opinion not a fact.
|
The "lingering question" is answered at the end of the game anyway, so it's not like Valve are doing this to prove anything about the system.
I agree with Yango, it doesn't seem clear what their intention is in showing the enemy. Most of the time the two teams are going to be similar, and if it turns out yours is significantly weaker, can you really capitalize on that?
I suppose if one team has a 6k and a 4k average while yours is like a 5.5k with a 5k average you could use that information somehow, but that seems pretty specific. I'm also not sure it'sa strategic element I want, considering the gameplan will just be "camp the 6k dude" most of the time.
I don't really follow the reasoning. I'm hoping the whole thing is a bit of a thought bubble and they'll hotfix it to be team-only.
|
Solid change, although I think it ought to be slightly corrected to only take effect when there's a huge MMR disparity between the top and mean (of, say, 500+ points). It realistically shouldn't even trigger if all the involved players are below 5.5k. This is literally just a feature to make ladder more bearable for pros and semi-pros, and I'm not looking forward to a few idiots thinking they're God's gift to the mid lane because they're a hundred points ahead of the rest of their team.
|
I think having it visible serves an important purpose toward possibly making less toxic games. Having the highest mmr puts you in the spotlight. There's more pressure on that player to perform above average. It also pressures the enemy team into prioritizing shutting down that player. Because of this, the highest rated player dies a lot.
Typical toxic moba reaction to this is to flame the living hell out of that player for "feeding," reporting, etc. Highest rated player feels like shit because he's dying a lot and getting flamed. It's even more significant since everyone in the game knows he's the highest rated. However, since everyone has a chance to be in that same situation of being the highest rated and 24/7 ganked, people might think twice before flaming someone because they've already felt how shitty it feels.
|
When i played HoN MMR was shown pregame, and 98% of pregame chat was MMR related piss contest and flame, so i m not sure that s a good idea, but at least lowest mmr doesnt show
|
On March 20 2015 16:02 Acritter wrote:
Solid change, although I think it ought to be slightly corrected to only take effect when there's a huge MMR disparity between the top and mean (of, say, 500+ points). It realistically shouldn't even trigger if all the involved players are below 5.5k. This is literally just a feature to make ladder more bearable for pros and semi-pros, and I'm not looking forward to a few idiots thinking they're God's gift to the mid lane because they're a hundred points ahead of the rest of their team.
I don't know about that, I still think it can be useful for everyone, even if the skill disparity isn't huge. I'd probably rather pick support than carry if I'm 400 or so lower than the average.
Also I have a couple of friends on the lower end of MMR (~1500) who say that they have large MMR disparities fairly regularly, (which is probably a bigger deal on smaller servers like Australia). I mean players at this level might not be able to capitalize on knowing this, but it's still useful information imo.
|
United States47024 Posts
On March 20 2015 15:44 Myrddraal wrote:
Obviously unranked is different to ranked, in that most players are going to take it much more seriously and try their best regardless, but I think that knowing that the other team is better or worse than you definitely can have an effect on the way you play. For example I might be more likely to pick heroes that I am more experienced with if the other team is higher rated, since I will be more comfortable with the nuances of the hero or more familiar with situational item builds etc. Or as someone else suggested, you might take larger risks or be more aggressive as the lower rated team because you feel that the other team will likely be more efficient at farming in the long term.
While I think the effect you mention is legitimate, you have to remember that it goes the other way too. There are going to be just as many people that will give up more easily because they're against a higher-rated team as there are people who will try harder because of it.
It's really not likely to make games "better" when you consider that it goes both ways.
|
Pointless change if stacks of 2 people are still allowed to play with solo queuers.
|
On March 20 2015 16:35 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2015 15:44 Myrddraal wrote:
Obviously unranked is different to ranked, in that most players are going to take it much more seriously and try their best regardless, but I think that knowing that the other team is better or worse than you definitely can have an effect on the way you play. For example I might be more likely to pick heroes that I am more experienced with if the other team is higher rated, since I will be more comfortable with the nuances of the hero or more familiar with situational item builds etc. Or as someone else suggested, you might take larger risks or be more aggressive as the lower rated team because you feel that the other team will likely be more efficient at farming in the long term.
While I think the effect you mention is legitimate, you have to remember that it goes the other way too. There are going to be just as many people that will give up more easily because they're against a higher-rated team as there are people who will try harder because of it. It's really not likely to make games "better" when you consider that it goes both ways.
Well that is true to some extent, but that depends who you are playing with, so if you play with a stack that is determined to try to win, then you are more likely to have better games.
I don't generally see many people giving up easily in ranked, but I don't play a whole lot of ranked so I'm not the best to judge. I was more thinking "better" as in closer games, as both teams have more information about what they are up against, not so much about people not giving up hope.
|
Average rating in solo queue games is going to be pretty similar most of the time.
One thing about this change that a lot of people don't seem to realize: lots of players were already identified as the 6k or 7k on the team and given tons of attention. Anyone who has watched much of Dendi's stream knows this happens to him all the time in pubs, at least when he's streaming. So high profile players are being singled out, especially if they are streaming - something all involved parties want them to do - but lesser-known pubstompers, or less-stalked pros going incognito, can get away with not being targets.
Meanwhile the star player getting camped might not have gotten the cooperation from their team they should have. All this does is make this piece of information equally available across pubs. And just like lots of stupid behaviors that become prominent after a change, if camping the highest MMR player is not really an effective strategy it's going to become an uncommon practice.
|
On March 20 2015 16:02 Acritter wrote:
Solid change, although I think it ought to be slightly corrected to only take effect when there's a huge MMR disparity between the top and mean (of, say, 500+ points). It realistically shouldn't even trigger if all the involved players are below 5.5k. This is literally just a feature to make ladder more bearable for pros and semi-pros, and I'm not looking forward to a few idiots thinking they're God's gift to the mid lane because they're a hundred points ahead of the rest of their team.
It's relevant for way more than just the pros. I do agree it's pretty silly when it shows the 4300 in an average 4200 game, but it's definitely still useful below 5.5k. Any party with a big MMR difference creates games where this is a factor, and it's helpful for everyone to see the guy who's stacking down.
I mean heck, any 5+ minute queue probably creates a 500+ MMR disparity in soloqueue. I get those pretty regularly on the Australian server even at a fairly standard MMR, and it's always awkward because you never know whether you've been bumped up or down. One game I'm probably the best guy there but I picked dazzle or something, and the next I instalock mid and end up feeding because it's gone the other way. I can see this being helpful quite regularly.
|
This should make it possible to figure out how much points you get more than the usual +25 from a disparity of lets say 100/200/300 average mmr (if you stack with other high mmrs) etc.
|
This change is good if you manage to mute toxic guys at your team in the beginning. Mostly I play supports and it'll give me an indication on whom should I pressure.
I am on the same boat with lumi, it'll also create more toxic content on who should lane with what, who is super bad(-30 mmr!) and "has to" support etc...
|
Like it. Generally wont affect me but when queuing at odd times I'd sometimes end up being much higher than my team average, and its good to know about those times. I dont mind supporting or offlaning (quite the opposite) but the occasions when I have to support a -700 MMR player compared to myself should be less.
Showing enemy highest MMR is questionable. Variations such as "only show highest MMR when its X above the average/the 2nd highest" are also reasonable. But i'll take it either way for the average MMR to be shown.
|
Am I the only one that thinks support is the hardest hole overall? And that it may be a good idea to let one of the better players be the support rather than the scrub that will feed and keep the map dark?
|
Just have some weird experience with this new system. My inflated mmr from half a year ago ended up highest on the team (3K bracket), and they insisted me going mid although I told them I barely touch dota for the past month. Picked Tide go offlane instead, and when the mid feed the team flame me for not going mid XD
But on the topic itself, I think showing mmr will probably have a more positive effect overall. And I do agree that it's quite pointless to show enemy mmr. I mean so what if one team decides to put a lot of pressure on enemy highest mmr player? If other players are not trash tier bad they can capitalize on the space pretty well and the ganking tactics may backfire, and I can see some stubborn tryhard people will repeatedly try their fail gank until whenever. That alone is quite big in skewing the mentality and team tactics of the team and may lead to even more flaming
|
I've already seen one glitch with this system. I saw that the highest MMR for one team was TBD, and then the team's average MMR was 3515. So, either they were all TBD, and there was no average MMR, so they just displayed a random one, or...the TBD was just a visual glitch.
|
Northern Ireland22213 Posts
On March 20 2015 21:57 qadassa wrote:
I've already seen one glitch with this system. I saw that the highest MMR for one team was TBD, and then the team's average MMR was 3515. So, either they were all TBD, and there was no average MMR, so they just displayed a random one, or...the TBD was just a visual glitch.
it's not a glitch. just because a player is calibrating doesn't mean they don't have a rating.
|
On March 20 2015 21:46 Jotoco wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks support is the hardest hole overall? And that it may be a good idea to let one of the better players be the support rather than the scrub that will feed and keep the map dark?
Support is a hard role to play, but you also don't want a huge MMR disparity in your mid lane. If there is 1000 MMR between the mids, one of them is going to lose hard. And that happens in some of the higher level games.
It goes both ways. I play support and lot and I would always want my best player in mid so I don't need to worry about that lane as much.
|
On March 20 2015 21:57 qadassa wrote:
I've already seen one glitch with this system. I saw that the highest MMR for one team was TBD, and then the team's average MMR was 3515. So, either they were all TBD, and there was no average MMR, so they just displayed a random one, or...the TBD was just a visual glitch.
Probably a smurf wrecking the MMR system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
