|
Please remember that while this thread is for QQ and venting about the game, racism is not tolerated here on LD. |
Why does Valve and the player base treat MMR like it's something that should be rewarded to them or earned as opposed to just something that is?
If you win games you'll have a higher MMR, if you lose games it'll be lower.
Why does Valve add in other variables like behavior score, doubling down, and mutes?
All those things do is further muddle what MMR actually is an make it less of an actual indicator of ability to win games.
I'd be willing to wager that a team of 3k players with 1k behavior scores (granted they actually try to win) could beat a team of 4k players with high behavior scores. Or any player with around 500-1000 (with 1k being the extreme) MMR deficit but with low behavior score are better than their higher counterparts.
|
Holy fuckballs I got seriously spoiled with the seasonal ranked games. Maybe people who buy the battlepass are just people that care about Dota more? I don't fucking know.
I gained 700 mmr with seasonal ranked. Since it's ended I've lost 4 games and won 1. In every single one of those 4 games there were feeders and flamers and people who just didn't know how to play fucking Dota.
gg Valve bring back season plz.
EDIT: Another game, another Storm Spirit who throws away a massive 20k lead by jumping into 5 enemies 10 fucking times. Why do people at 2.5k mmr even pick Storm? No one can fucking play him at that level. We were playing against an AM who had a 25 minute battlefury and WE STILL LOST.
|
On September 21 2017 07:59 harodihg wrote:
Why does Valve and the player base treat MMR like it's something that should be rewarded to them or earned as opposed to just something that is?
If you win games you'll have a higher MMR, if you lose games it'll be lower.
Why does Valve add in other variables like behavior score, doubling down, and mutes?
All those things do is further muddle what MMR actually is an make it less of an actual indicator of ability to win games.
I'd be willing to wager that a team of 3k players with 1k behavior scores (granted they actually try to win) could beat a team of 4k players with high behavior scores. Or any player with around 500-1000 (with 1k being the extreme) MMR deficit but with low behavior score are better than their higher counterparts.
This smells like bait, Mr. Haro.
...by which I mean it makes zero fucking sense.
|
On September 24 2017 03:48 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2017 07:59 harodihg wrote:
Why does Valve and the player base treat MMR like it's something that should be rewarded to them or earned as opposed to just something that is?
If you win games you'll have a higher MMR, if you lose games it'll be lower.
Why does Valve add in other variables like behavior score, doubling down, and mutes?
All those things do is further muddle what MMR actually is an make it less of an actual indicator of ability to win games.
I'd be willing to wager that a team of 3k players with 1k behavior scores (granted they actually try to win) could beat a team of 4k players with high behavior scores. Or any player with around 500-1000 (with 1k being the extreme) MMR deficit but with low behavior score are better than their higher counterparts.
This smells like bait, Mr. Haro. ...by which I mean it makes zero fucking sense.
False
|
On September 21 2017 07:59 harodihg wrote:
Why does Valve and the player base treat MMR like it's something that should be rewarded to them or earned as opposed to just something that is?
If you win games you'll have a higher MMR, if you lose games it'll be lower.
Why does Valve add in other variables like behavior score, doubling down, and mutes?
All those things do is further muddle what MMR actually is an make it less of an actual indicator of ability to win games.
I'd be willing to wager that a team of 3k players with 1k behavior scores (granted they actually try to win) could beat a team of 4k players with high behavior scores. Or any player with around 500-1000 (with 1k being the extreme) MMR deficit but with low behavior score are better than their higher counterparts.
MMR is still an indicator of ability to win games. Low behaviour score just pretty much show that you don't actually want to win games. So all things considered your MMR still displays your ability to win games.
But your post may be a troll post, if that is the case, disregard my post!
|
MMR is *supposed* to be an indicator of skill that is calculated through winning and losing games.
That gets muddled when the metric used to place teams together no longer becomes just MMR and other variables such as behavior score start getting included as well.
Do you think your MMR would remain the same if you all of your teammates were always muted?
|
What I don't understand is how this, in your mind, translates to "People that aren't cancerous fucks and actually communicate effectively are actually shittier at dota than their MMR suggests"
...or is the argument that people with low behavior scores have -deflated- mmr because they get placed with people who also have lower behavior scores, meaning their teammates are more likely to tilt or be muted?
In either case, it isn't like valve has branded anyone with a behavior score they don't deserve. Your behavior score is earned, just like your MMR is. And I've had a number of games where I started the game by muting my entire team, it honestly doesn't feel like it makes that much of a difference, because sometimes you get well-intentioned good mannered people who are actually idiots, and sometimes you get fucking cancerous dingbats that actually know the game. There's no real telling either way.
|
On September 26 2017 05:57 harodihg wrote:
MMR is *supposed* to be an indicator of skill that is calculated through winning and losing games.
That gets muddled when the metric used to place teams together no longer becomes just MMR and other variables such as behavior score start getting included as well.
Do you think your MMR would remain the same if you all of your teammates were always muted?
Where do you get this notion that MMR is "supposed" to be an indicator of skill? Seen alot of people on reddit also whine about this. MMR isn't "supposed" to be anything. It's just a number that goes up if you win games and down if you lose them.
|
My behavior score is 1700. I'm not a saint.
I don't think you could possibly understand my frustration without being in my shoes and dealing with the kinds of games I have to.
I would gladly document the sheer number of games that I play that get ruined to prove a point, but I feel like you'd just brush that off by saying some games will always get ruined, or that it's deserved. And no, by ruined I don't mean someone just skilling in a silly way, buying weird items, or not playing with the team, I mean people suiciding intentionally going 0-30 or destroying their items.
I encountered that 3 times just last night playing.
|
As a side note, nowadays I never (within the last 2 years) break items or suicide down mid. I get snippy and say mean things (read as verbally abuse) my teammates and am currently muted (again) and will own up to my behavior. But Valve's response to me calling people mean names is making me lose games in an indirect way
|
I'd basically instantly quit dota if that was the case. Like 1/10 games for me is a shitty wash where someone does something stupid or can't play their role at all, and that's not near games where people intentionally go 0/30 or anything.
Good luck man! Do whats fun, and if shitting on people you think deserve it is more fun to you than winning dota, then carry on. I don't mean that in a condescending "you should feel bad" way either. That's basically how I got enjoyment out of SC2 when I played it.
|
After rereading I honestly don't think I'm being fair to myself. I don't randomly berate people in games and in most games I don't even speak. But when someone is being annoying, e.g. yelling at others on their mic, ranting about how they hate black people using the N word, or acting similarly I generally have no qualms speaking my mind.
I only said that part before about deserving my behavior score because I'm trying to be as unbiased, fair, and putting as much information on the table as I can.
For instance, after just speaking with friends I think I also have a higher turnover rate on reports and longer queue times than others.
I am currently 4.2k mmr and my queues take normally 6-10 minutes. 4.2k isn't a high mmr and I queue us east and us west, so why is it taking so long?
My theory is that low behavior score players get forced into longer queues so that they can be placed with one another, because the mmr spreads on my team are often pretty skewed as well, and I often see familiar players (most of them utterly detestable)
That guy that bought 30 couriers on my team the day before? Back on my team again. The average mmr? 4600 with the highest being 5.3k
As for why I believe my report rate turnover is higher? Well I just report the people who outright ruin the games, and since I'm more likely to get them on my team (valve stated that they do this) my reports on them go through, they get muted or low priority, I get my report back, then tomorrow they're back on my team.
|
As for why low behavior score players are "better" than higher mmr high behavior score people I'll posit this:
Wasn't it just said that mmr isn't a measure of skill? If so then why would the previous assertion bug you?
If someone is able to run down mid in a percentage of their games without even trying then still have a 50% winrate to maintain their mmr with their remaining games would it not be fair to say that if they actually tried in the games they're ruining that they'd have a winrate over 50% and thus gain mmr?
|
On September 26 2017 08:46 harodihg wrote:
As for why low behavior score players are "better" than higher mmr high behavior score people I'll posit this:
Wasn't it just said that mmr isn't a measure of skill? If so then why would the previous assertion bug you?
If someone is able to run down mid in a percentage of their games without even trying then still have a 50% winrate to maintain their mmr with their remaining games would it not be fair to say that if they actually tried in the games they're ruining that they'd have a winrate over 50% and thus gain mmr?
Your previous assertion bugs me because it's wrong. There's a correlation between skill and mmr, but as you said, it isn't the only determining factor for you winning a game.
MMR is *supposed* to be an indicator of skill that is calculated through winning and losing games.
That gets muddled when the metric used to place teams together no longer becomes just MMR and other variables such as behavior score start getting included as well.
All I am saying is that mmr isn't "supposed" to be anything, it just shows you your ability to win or lose games. Being a dick ingame just makes games harder for you to win and behaviour score is there to put similar minded people togheter. Of course tilting and shit makes you go to a lower mmr, since that means you are probably not trying as hard to win. And I mean, I don't see anything wrong with Valve matching people that rage/feed etc togheter, just makes the game more enjoyable for those who don't
This wouldn't even be a problem for you if you just PMA.
|
|
|
On September 26 2017 09:47 harodihg wrote:https://dota2.gamepedia.com/Matchmaking_RatingMatchmaking Rating, or MMR is a value that determines the skill level of each player. http://blog.dota2.com/2013/12/matchmaking/Dota 2 uses standard techniques to quantify and track player skill. We assign each player an MMR, which is a summary metric that quantifies your skill at Dota 2. edit: this is pretty purely arguing semantics, but you're still wrong on this point lol
Like regardless of what that says. You win games= gain mmr. You lose games= lose mmr. There is nothing more to it. Raging/flaming/feeding makes you lose more games while also simultainously making you lose behavious score. Behaviour score is just to pool people of similar behaviour patterns with eachother.
|
Regardless of what the creator of it says, it's intended function isn't what they say it is?
Also, behavior score isn't directly about similar behavior patterns, it's about being reported.
|
Prettty much (except for calibration games). You don't get more mmr from winning a game by playing well (or lose less when you play well and lose) and vice versa.
Even if it isn't directly that, the end result is something close to it. Anyway, I am done with this now, don't think we can get anywhere with arguing this anymore.
|
erm....okay
here's what I mean
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/JgIT3xF.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/ZAvfpKI.png)
I've been muted for the last 24 hours. The singular furion game I jungled because someone else took mid who was nearly 1k MMR lower than me. I still almost won us that game. I don't spam ping people, or ironically GGWP them after they die or anything like that. I simply play the game and this kind of shit happens.
(Note: I don't know what I was even reported for most games, minus the furion one since I jungled. Our mid QoP that was low 3k got demolished and blamed me and said he was going to report me.)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/8L3Yah2.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/nLc7oga.png)
I was highest MMR, had my silhouette mid first, picked a mid hero first, and I still wound up having someone dual lane mid with me. Sick.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/6nuQ9AA.png)
|
Care to guess which and how many of those games I had people do one of the following:
1) fight over a lane (beyond just arguing at pick screen, like actually pick 2 carries or 2 mids and sit there fighting for CS)
2) break their items
3) run down mid suiciding
(there's other things like flat out abandoning but that didn't happen in my last few games or so)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
