Is this what they call "MMR Hell"?

Ronfar

I used a team of Featured Character/Original Black Widow/Astonishing Wolverine in a bunch of PvP events, and won a lot of fights against people using similar 2-star teams. I then started to get paired against players with 3 star characters as well. So I went and beat up a lot of players with level 90-ish Spider-Man, Hulk, and Punisher. Then I started to get paired against players with teams like Level 102 Psylocke (Featured) / Level 100 Spiderman / Level 141 Patch. Which kind of scared me. I actually did manage to win some matches against teams like those - I boosted a lot - but by then I had enough points to just put up a shield and ride it to a top 5 finish.

So did I finally experience this "MMR Hell" that other people are complaining about getting stuck in?

Nemek

No. ''MMR Hell" refers to when you only see the same 5-6 people, even after beating them 10+ times.

Spencer75

Nemek wrote:

No. ''MMR Hell" refers to when you only see the same 5-6 people, even after beating them 10+ times.

I always understood it as facing teams far stronger than yours, consistently.

Unknown

I think any undesirable MMR can fit in the description. 90 three stars are actually weaker than 85 2'. At least for health and match damage. Those are pretty much even matches for you. If you see a lot of fights you can't win though, you need to tank. Boosting to beat higher teams will just keep raising your MMR if make a habit of it.

Unknown

To me, MMR hell,is seeing the same 5-6 people whenever you hit skip. Often they have less points then you or they can retaliate faster than you can. Sometimes it just feels **** to attack the same guy 3 times in a row because he was the easiest choice of the 6. But you have to do it.

So,when it's crunch time and your trying to make a move, you get stuck in the mud and unable to make any movement while everyone else is passing you by.

Ronfar

Nemek wrote:

No. ''MMR Hell" refers to when you only see the same 5-6 people, even after beating them 10+ times.

That's only a problem if I can't get a reasonable number of points from them...

Impulse wrote:

90 three stars are actually weaker than 85 2'. At least for health and match damage.

Yeah, L90 three star guys generally aren't so rough. Unless they're Spider-man with maxed blue covers. Then they're very annoying and I kill them first. Or Hulk. Hulk is also a pain in the neck, but I kill him last rather than first, so his teammates can't take advantage of Anger triggering off of both tile damage and Espionage. Everyone else I don't worry about very much unless they're very high level. High level Patch is definitely dangerous. He hits really hard if Berserker Rage gets to fire, and his Healing Factor means that you probably have to kill him last because tile match damage just gets healed.

Unknown

Killing Patch last can be dangerous because if he gets 14 red, he's definitely gonna kill a guy. I'll direct tile damage to someone else and store AP until I can oneshot him. If you have stuns patch is a joke, no healing factor active.

over_clocked

Ronfar wrote:

Nemek wrote:

No. ''MMR Hell" refers to when you only see the same 5-6 people, even after beating them 10+ times.

That's only a problem if I can't get a reasonable number of points from them...

Impulse wrote:

90 three stars are actually weaker than 85 2'. At least for health and match damage.

Yeah, L90 three star guys generally aren't so rough. Unless they're Spider-man with maxed blue covers. Then they're very annoying and I kill them first. Or Hulk. Hulk is also a pain in the neck, but I kill him last rather than first, so his teammates can't take advantage of Anger triggering off of both tile damage and Espionage. Everyone else I don't worry about very much unless they're very high level. High level Patch is definitely dangerous. He hits really hard if Berserker Rage gets to fire, and his Healing Factor means that you probably have to kill him last because tile match damage just gets healed.

You don't want to kill Patch last unless you can 100% reliably deny him red, or are prepared to sacrifice a healthpack if Patch does get 14 red. If Patch is the last man standing, pretty much anyone will fall to The Best There Is. I run oBW and can reliably deny Patch his red, but I still choose not to leave him for last. His Berserker rage quite helps in killing himself and any weakest third wheel character.

Unknown

Assuming no stunlocks, you can't really attack Patch until you can do at least 3000 damage in one round or it just gets negated, and that number goes up the higher level Patch is.

Using 200 damage per red/green AP, that means you need about 29 combined red and green to kill Patch in one round (5800 HP at level 141). Obviously there's more ways to do damage than just red/green, but that's the most straightforward way to estimate.

Polares

Toxicadam wrote:

To me, MMR hell,is seeing the same 5-6 people whenever you hit skip. Often they have less points then you or they can retaliate faster than you can. Sometimes it just feels **** to attack the same guy 3 times in a row because he was the easiest choice of the 6. But you have to do it.

So,when it's crunch time and your trying to make a move, you get stuck in the mud and unable to make any movement while everyone else is passing you by.

And now, a part from this, you have to pay iso to skip!!! Yesterday in the BP fight it happenened to me all the time. Until I got to the 600 range everything worked more or less fine, but when I was in the 600 point range this stupid MMR began to assign me players with 550- points, so I had to skip until the same 2-3 players with more than 600 points appeared (losing more than 100 iso each time until I found one of these players). Of course these players were in my same point range so after I attacked them they retaliated and lost the points I won.

I think this happens beacuse allmost everybody in the 600+ range was shielded. There is not too many people playing in the 600+ range when the time is finishing...

WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO FIGHT SHIELDED PLAYERS. THIS IS A MUST.

Unknown

Phantron wrote:

Assuming no stunlocks, you can't really attack Patch until you can do at least 3000 damage in one round or it just gets negated, and that number goes up the higher level Patch is.

Using 200 damage per red/green AP, that means you need about 29 combined red and green to kill Patch in one round (5800 HP at level 141). Obviously there's more ways to do damage than just red/green, but that's the most straightforward way to estimate.

I'm using 5/5/3 Thor on my team, so when I see a Patch (yes, even L141), I save up 12 yellow AP while denying Red. The moment Patch throws down Berserker Rage, it's gg for the whole team as I can remove most if not all of this strike tiles with yellow while hitting extremely hard back for every match.

Unknown

Yeah, at the end of every PvP event, the entire top 15 is very often shielded. The only way to stay alive at those levels without shielding is to somehow have managed to confuse the MMR system so much that you are not even visible against a real team.

While this is probably better than some previous incarnations of PvP, it sure seems to me that the system just can't be ideal. If we still want to care about defense, and not just offense, maybe the best bet would be to remove point losses for getting attacked, but keep the point gains?

Polares

hibikir wrote:

Yeah, at the end of every PvP event, the entire top 15 is very often shielded. The only way to stay alive at those levels without shielding is to somehow have managed to confuse the MMR system so much that you are not even visible against a real team.

While this is probably better than some previous incarnations of PvP, it sure seems to me that the system just can't be ideal. If we still want to care about defense, and not just offense, maybe the best bet would be to remove point losses for getting attacked, but keep the point gains?

I think there are just two solutions, or we eliminate retaliation/shields or we let attack people with shields (I think this is the best and easier to implement option).

Unknown

Ronfar wrote:

That's only a problem if I can't get a reasonable number of points from them...

Yes, that is the entire point of it being MMR Hell. If they all netted 30+ points and you ran through them, congrats, you just won your bracket However, that is not what happens. They're all 8-12 point matches and harder lineups than higher point value teams. That is what constitutes MMR Hell.

Unknown

The easiest way out of any bad MMR situation is to go to the shield simulator in prologue and retreat a whole bunch of times. Like take 3 teams of your 3 worst guys and retreat them to death. If you do this every play session or every other play session (if you have 9 guys who are just warming the bench) your MMR will plummet and you'll only see teams you can easily beat and have no prayer of retaliating. Whether or not you want to keep pummeling the same **** teams for 15-20 points and never getting retaliated is up to you.

Unknown

ApolloAndy wrote:

The easiest way out of any bad MMR situation is to go to the shield simulator in prologue and retreat a whole bunch of times. Like take 3 teams of your 3 worst guys and retreat them to death. If you do this every play session or every other play session (if you have 9 guys who are just warming the bench) your MMR will plummet and you'll only see teams you can easily beat and have no prayer of retaliating. Whether or not you want to keep pummeling the same **** teams for 15-20 points and never getting retaliated is up to you.

Pretty sure retreating to tank PvP was removed from the game

Moral

Polares wrote:

hibikir wrote:

Yeah, at the end of every PvP event, the entire top 15 is very often shielded. The only way to stay alive at those levels without shielding is to somehow have managed to confuse the MMR system so much that you are not even visible against a real team.

While this is probably better than some previous incarnations of PvP, it sure seems to me that the system just can't be ideal. If we still want to care about defense, and not just offense, maybe the best bet would be to remove point losses for getting attacked, but keep the point gains?

I think there are just two solutions, or we eliminate retaliation/shields or we let attack people with shields (I think this is the best and easier to implement option).

The original implementation of shields allowed people to be attacked. Bracket leaders were over 3000 points by the end.

The developers are satisfied with the average bracket winner in the 700s. You'll never see point farming of shielded players ever again.

Unknown

gobstopper wrote:

Pretty sure retreating to tank PvP was removed from the game

The team you retreat with is no longer the one you defend with, but retreating counts as a loss and slightly lowers your MMR. Repeatedly retreating will do the trick eventually.

Polares

Moral wrote:

Polares wrote:

hibikir wrote:

Yeah, at the end of every PvP event, the entire top 15 is very often shielded. The only way to stay alive at those levels without shielding is to somehow have managed to confuse the MMR system so much that you are not even visible against a real team.

While this is probably better than some previous incarnations of PvP, it sure seems to me that the system just can't be ideal. If we still want to care about defense, and not just offense, maybe the best bet would be to remove point losses for getting attacked, but keep the point gains?

I think there are just two solutions, or we eliminate retaliation/shields or we let attack people with shields (I think this is the best and easier to implement option).

The original implementation of shields allowed people to be attacked. Bracket leaders were over 3000 points by the end.

The developers are satisfied with the average bracket winner in the 700s. You'll never see point farming of shielded players ever again.

I remember (I think it was more in the 1200-1700 range, I don't remember seeing anybody with such a high score as 3000), but in the end this is great, because this way someone was able to get the max awards, you have more incentives to keep playing. Now, the most you see is around 1200, and not very often. But if the problem is that they want to give less rewards they could just move the rewards up.

With the system we have now, I don't play as much as I would want. I play until I get to 600 or 700 depending on the rewards (I don't care for thr 4*, they are not good enough, at least for now) and then I shield and I stop playing. I don't see any incentive to keep playing. To get to 700+ points you have to play A LOT and be very lucky with retaliations, so it is not worth the effort.

kensterr

Polares wrote:

With the system we have now, I don't play as much as I would want. I play until I get to 600 or 700 depending on the rewards (I don't care for thr 4*, they are not good enough, at least for now) and then I shield and I stop playing. I don't see any incentive to keep playing. To get to 700+ points you have to play A LOT and be very lucky with retaliations, so it is not worth the effort.

Just out of curiousity do you use boosts or do people in the top 30 usually use boosts? I'm contemplating on this cos I really want the IM covers.

Polares

kensterr wrote:

Polares wrote:

With the system we have now, I don't play as much as I would want. I play until I get to 600 or 700 depending on the rewards (I don't care for thr 4*, they are not good enough, at least for now) and then I shield and I stop playing. I don't see any incentive to keep playing. To get to 700+ points you have to play A LOT and be very lucky with retaliations, so it is not worth the effort.

Just out of curiousity do you use boosts or do people in the top 30 usually use boosts? I'm contemplating on this cos I really want the IM covers.

I don't usually use boosts, but when I am in the 500+ range, if I get retaliated a lot, sometimes I use them so I can win them faster and get where I want before someone attacks me. I only use boosts sometimes in the 230 level fights if there are two difficult enemies in the same team (Ares and Juggernaut for example). I dare to say that people in my MMR range don't use boosts either.

I used them in the past, now I don't need them to win (I have Patch, Punisher, spidey and Magneto in respectable levels 100+).

And, I have to say that now boosts are VERY expensive, so you have to think carefully when to use them.