Choosing Battles - MMR

tempestuousfury

I just had a quick question about MMRs and how to decide which battles to choose. The question is, if I have two fights that add up to the same score as a single one (e.g. 25 and 25 or one 50 point battle), is it better to choose the two battles or one? I know that health and all that come into play as well, but if that is the only variable to consider, which is the best choice?

Thanks in advance!

Unknown

tempestuousfury wrote:

I just had a quick question about MMRs and how to decide which battles to choose. The question is, if I have two fights that add up to the same score as a single one (e.g. 25 and 25 or one 50 point battle), is it better to choose the two battles or one? I know that health and all that come into play as well, but if that is the only variable to consider, which is the best choice?

Thanks in advance!

Well one thing to look at is that if you attack two people, you would probably get two retaliations. So all things being equal, I would take the one battle.

OnesOwnGrief

The closer you get to those scores the lower their value will be. Attacking one of the 25s would reduce the value of the other 25 and possibly the 50. Attacking the 50 would reduce both the 25s.

Unknown

If you attack a 50 the retaliation will be worth around zero points, so they won't retaliate. If you attack two 25s, the retaliations will both be worth around 25 points (probably 26-27), so they're much more likely to retaliate.

If you have winnable nodes above 30 points, your best bet is to stay above 30, since the retaliations generally won't be worth much. The only exception is if you think someone can't win a retaliation - then you might want them to retaliate. But you'll be wrong occasionally.

GuntherBlobel

I think the OP might be asking whether MMR increases with # of wins or with points earned, which hasn't been answered. I have no idea, but maybe someone else does.

tempestuousfury

GuntherBlobel wrote:

I think the OP might be asking whether MMR increases with # of wins or with points earned, which hasn't been answered. I have no idea, but maybe someone else does.

Thanks. That's still true.

I do understand the logical behind the retaliations, so I would think that overall, the change in mmr would not be worth the retaliations on the lower point nodes.

Thanks all for your help.

Unknown

GuntherBlobel wrote:

I think the OP might be asking whether MMR increases with # of wins or with points earned, which hasn't been answered. I have no idea, but maybe someone else does.

Gotcha. Not sure anyone knows; MMR is still pretty mysterious. But my guess is - all other things being equal - winning two matches, regardless of point value, would raise your mmr more than winning one match. But - since you can only very indirectly figure out where your mmr is - it would probably be virtually impossible to determine without developer input.

DecoyDuck

Ben Grimm wrote:

GuntherBlobel wrote:

I think the OP might be asking whether MMR increases with # of wins or with points earned, which hasn't been answered. I have no idea, but maybe someone else does.

Gotcha. Not sure anyone knows; MMR is still pretty mysterious. But my guess is - all other things being equal - winning two matches, regardless of point value, would raise your mmr more than winning one match. But - since you can only very indirectly figure out where your mmr is - it would probably be virtually impossible to determine without developer input.

Agreed that MMR is mysterious. The idea regarding MMR is that you should be matched with opponents in your MMR range. Let's say you got 3 nodes, and two are worth 25 and one is worth 50. Since they should all be in your proximate MMR range (regardless of their score/points), attacking the single 50 point node should have a smaller impact on MMR.

Caveat: There is range where you escape the MMR impact. Some say it's after 800 points. Some say it's after 900 points. There are legendary stories of seed teams showing up after 1800 points or something like that.