Ladder Deflation and MMR Decay - Page 20

On December 07 2013 19:06 Firkraag8 wrote:
Does a team game count as being active overall to stop decaying of 1v1 and vice versa?

On December 08 2013 11:59 Mintograde wrote:

It was said somewhere (in this thread?) that playing random teams by yourself will stop 1v1 inactivity, but I haven't personally tried this.

Does this mean that if I play an unranked 1v1 game every two weeks, my ranked 1v1 MMR won't decay? I know they have a separate MMR, but are they treated as the same "queue" for decay purposes?

@EverAfteR: Yes and yes.

On December 20 2013 02:21 Malhavoc wrote:
It seems they are confirming everything we have acknowledged, except two things:

- they say that the mmr decays, at maximum (after 4 weeks), is the equivalent of "justa few game losses".. but it seems many have lost even a couple of leagues instead. Still, it may be related with the mess concerning the amount of players in each league (something else they say they are working on)

- they say this is affecting only very few players (6%).. but we have a LOT of people talking about this and talking about huge amounts of ex masters playing against them in gold and such..

On December 20 2013 08:13 Excalibur_Z wrote:


We know that MMR changes 16 for a same-skill match, so at maximum decay (315 rating) that's about 20 same-skill games behind. That's more than a few, I would say.

They said that this affects 6% of games, not players. That's a big difference because it means we're talking about different things. If you want to see how many players are affected as of today, I just wrote up a new article about it here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=438802

Starcraft 2 and League of Legends. Both games have tried very hard to innovate in the world of Ranking Players. They've created entirely new and interesting systems that provide players with short and long term goals beyond the normal Elo number. However, I think these attempts to innovate are ultimately a failure, marred by obfuscation, confusion and negative contextualization. That said, I do believe in what Blizzard and Riot are trying to do and they deserve tons of credit for trying to solve an insanely hard design problem and trying to innovate in a field that almost no one tries to innovate in. So let's talk about what's right, what's wrong and where to keep moving forward.

Both games also put you in small groups of players, where you can see up to 100 players who have the same medal and division as you. You're supposed to be interested in how these players are performing, but the game never actually gives you any real incentive to care.

Although the short-term and long-term goals both companies create are really innovative and probably compel players to play more often than they otherwise would, they also create a larger and more subtle negative context for competitive play. This negative context is summed up in one phrase that players use all the time: "Climbing the ladder".

On December 28 2013 07:38 wUndertUnge wrote:
So hopefully this isn't too far off topic. I am one of those players who took a 3-month hiatus from SC2 due to burnout. Of course, I came back and was placed into gold, where I absolutely stomped. When I left, I was in diamond.

Now, with all of this talk regarding MMR and leagues and how the matchmaking can be fixed, what if there was a way that Blizz could overhaul the system completely. That's where this Gamasutra blog post comes in called Creating a Better Context for Competitive Play and Mastery

Intro:



Here's a tidbit:



Here's another tidbit:



Anyways, just some food for thought that I didn't think warranted a full thread...

On December 28 2013 12:40 Mantaza wrote:
also in gm how can it be that someone with 1-67 is in grandmaster ?

On December 29 2013 09:46 Fakie wrote:
I'm not sure if someone asked/answered this. but. If someone only plays unranked, will that decay MMR? also, what if someone plays only teamgames? will that decay the MMR of the 1v1??

Thanks

On December 30 2013 01:33 ImperialFist wrote:
the mmr decay does not seem to be that huge, I only played one game last season to be placed (in masters), played my placement for this season just now and got masters again, after all I've been hearing I thought I would get plat or something.

On December 30 2013 06:17 lachy89 wrote:
The MMR decay is way too extreme and places you in a position that makes it take so long to get out of.

I was in diamond and I have gone 15-0 in bronze and am still in Bronze. There is another in my league that is 26-0 and he can't get out either...