Explain please...MMR

OneLastGambit

We've heard the term and I know what it refers to but exactly what is MMR?

I checked tips and guides and couldn't find it so if anyone can answer the following questions it would help many people.

1. How is MMR determined?

2. Does MMR change mid event ?

3. Does your score affect MMR?



I've seen vague info about how your covers and levels determine mmr but nowhere does it say how?

fmftint

MMR formula

carrion_pigeons

As far as I know, the formula for MMR is not public.

That said, MMR is how matchmaking is decided for PvP events, and it seems to be based entirely on the strength of the top X leveled characters in your roster, counting buffed characters, at the time you join an event. It is not performance based and it does not change over the course of a single event, to my knowledge. Additionally, you're restricted to fighting players in your slice who are within a certain range of points from you. However, what is performance-based is whether you're placed in a vet bracket or a newb bracket, which seems to be a function of your score in X previous events.

This is my understanding; I could be wrong, but what it boils down to is that there isn't much texture to it. If you want to fight favorable matches you have an outlet to do that in spending thousands of Iso on the skip tax. The existence of this feature means that at every level, more people who have stronger rosters than you will have an opportunity to beat your team than you will have opportunities (sans skip tax) to beat teams weaker than yours. Therefore success in PvP is largely dependent on how much Iso you're willing to spend skipping.

Vhailorx

MMR is (I think) an abbreviation for "MatchMaking Rating."

As I understand it, the game has a hidden metric it uses to determine what opponents are available to populate your PVP nodes. So each player is assigned a rating based upon some secret fomula. And you can only see/attack players that have a similar MMR in your slice.

There are a few things we know from various statements demi has made in the past. So we know that visibility changes at 1k, and we think that visibility changes at 800 as well. We can also infer that MMR is heavily, if not entirely, based upon roster strength. It may also have a performance aspect. Beyond that, most information you will get from players is pretty speculative or anecdotal.

As used on these forums, MMR effectively means 'the type of teams that I am forced to fight in PVP.' So as a player with 4* champions, but not 5*s above 255, I tend to get boosted 3*s up to 500 or 600, and then mixed 3*/4* teams until 800 or so, and then lots of boosted 4* champ + a 5* teams the rest of the way. But I very rarely see paired 5* teams, or any 5*s leveled above 380 or so. By contrast, I think SnowcaTT reported that when he/she leveled OML and Phoenix above 400, his/her PVP opponents changed significantly, becoming mostly paired 5* teams, especially above 800. That disparity is because we have different MMRs based upon (mostly) our different rosters.

OneLastGambit

Thanks for the responses. It seems that this is a piece of info that we might all benefit from having.

I'm not expecting to get the full algorithm or anything but some enlightenment as to what specific factors create the MMR

Thanks for the responses peeps.

tanis3303

Here's what I know about it. I have a fully covered Phoenix, an 11 cover Logan and Surfer, none of whom are leveled past 360. I have about 2 dozen 4* champions. My PvP matches range from Xforce/Fury/Featured teams with the rare exception of Cage or Fist or other top tier 3*s to champed/boosted 4*s with mid-leveled 5*s. This works for me. Matches are challenging (mostly, depends on who's boosted for the week) and I get to use a large part of my 4* roster.

Conversely, my friend & alliance mate rolled the RNG luck of getting 2 covered 5*s and champed them both. He sees the same 5 people throughout every single event, running maxed 5* teams, and is forced to use those 2 characters exclusively as a result. He's retiring, because, well...because that's boring.

Moral of the story (IMO anyway) is don't level your 5*s. Solid system D3.

mpqr7

MMR means that the better you level your characters, the harder and more boring and monotonous the game becomes.

So instead of feeling excited and rewarded after leveling up your 5*s, you actually quickly get burned out, matches start lasting forever, and your characters die much more often. Which doesn't make an iota of sense.



Fighting dudes with 10,000 hit points is not soooo bad... but fighting matches where your opponents have 30,000 to 50,000 hit points and take away 10,000 hit points with their special attacks can be a bit soul crushing, especially when you're competing for the same exact prizes and placement as the n00bs.

Just won a 5-minute battle that decimated your team, requiring 3 health packs? Have 70 ISO.

LordXberk

tanis3303 wrote:

Here's what I know about it. I have a fully covered Phoenix, an 11 cover Logan and Surfer, none of whom are leveled past 360. I have about 2 dozen 4* champions. My PvP matches range from Xforce/Fury/Featured teams with the rare exception of Cage or Fist or other top tier 3*s to champed/boosted 4*s with mid-leveled 5*s. This works for me. Matches are challenging (mostly, depends on who's boosted for the week) and I get to use a large part of my 4* roster.

Conversely, my friend & alliance mate rolled the RNG luck of getting 2 covered 5*s and champed them both. He sees the same 5 people throughout every single event, running maxed 5* teams, and is forced to use those 2 characters exclusively as a result. He's retiring, because, well...because that's boring.

Moral of the story (IMO anyway) is don't level your 5*s. Solid system D3.

Thanks for the post. I hate this so much. So torn between wanting to level my 5*s bcs they're awesome and knowing that if I do, I'll get stuck in the same situation. I have heard conflicting reports from alliance mates and from forum users (Snowcatt being one) that have either encouraged or discouraged me from leveling my max-covered OML. Sitting at 410 now and just had my best PVP, yet. However, have bumped him 30 levels in the past 3 PVP events, so when does MMR take hold? So far, so good, but I fear that I'll start fighting OML + PHX in the 400-450 range soon and then be forced to bump my own to compete (have an 11-cover PHX at 260) and then be stuck.

Can't wait for 6*s!!!!

SnowcaTT

Here is what happened to me as I went from 300-400:
viewtopic.php?t=44648&p=524396
Here is what happened to me as I hit 450:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=45391

SnowcaTT

LordXberk wrote:

Thanks for the post. I hate this so much. So torn between wanting to level my 5*s bcs they're awesome and knowing that if I do, I'll get stuck in the same situation. I have heard conflicting reports from alliance mates and from forum users (Snowcatt being one) that have either encouraged or discouraged me from leveling my max-covered OML. Sitting at 410 now and just had my best PVP, yet. However, have bumped him 30 levels in the past 3 PVP events, so when does MMR take hold? So far, so good, but I fear that I'll start fighting OML + PHX in the 400-450 range soon and then be forced to bump my own to compete (have an 11-cover PHX at 260) and then be stuck.

When I started leveling the MMR seemed to go up with characters right away. If you are ok at 410 you should be ok at 430-440, I didn't notice a big change from 375-(about 440). I would think a Max OML + super high level Phx would basically compete with anything...but I don't have a 2nd good 5* and I'll be watching here to hear about MMR when that 2nd 5* gets going. I know I never, ever see some of the mega whales (those that have two 550's).

The big downside is what mpqr7 says above - the game gets INCREDIBLY monotonous and boring. You will see the same characters (and pretty much only those characters) over and over, matches get long and health-packy. If you are going to get bored not seeing any variety, don't head up.

The big upside is it's the way to continue into 5* land - there aren't a ton of players in that MMR yet and so as everyone gets high points (thanks slice seeders!) it has been much less time-intensive; often one (or maybe two) shields near the end is all I need to hit 1300, and I hit that basically every event now [sidebar - you'll need another "good" 5* or a good max/boosted 4* each event or you will be toast].

Vhailorx

tanis3303 wrote:

Here's what I know about it. I have a fully covered Phoenix, an 11 cover Logan and Surfer, none of whom are leveled past 360. I have about 2 dozen 4* champions. My PvP matches range from Xforce/Fury/Featured teams with the rare exception of Cage or Fist or other top tier 3*s to champed/boosted 4*s with mid-leveled 5*s. This works for me. Matches are challenging (mostly, depends on who's boosted for the week) and I get to use a large part of my 4* roster.

Conversely, my friend & alliance mate rolled the RNG luck of getting 2 covered 5*s and champed them both. He sees the same 5 people throughout every single event, running maxed 5* teams, and is forced to use those 2 characters exclusively as a result. He's retiring, because, well...because that's boring.

Moral of the story (IMO anyway) is don't level your 5*s. Solid system D3.

I think this has always been true (i.e. pushing a few characters up into a new tier of play locks you into using only those characters in the short term). Its just exacerbated by the rarity and rng nature of 5*s. There are so few 5* players, and building 5*s is so slow, that as you said there are only a handful of targets and very little character diversity. It wouldn't be as much of a problem if there were more 5*s and more 5* players. So I think you have made the right choice tanis: keep your 5*s underleveled and enjoy added diversity at the 4* level.

SnowcaTT

Vhailorx wrote:

tanis3303 wrote:

Here's what I know about it. I have a fully covered Phoenix, an 11 cover Logan and Surfer, none of whom are leveled past 360. I have about 2 dozen 4* champions. My PvP matches range from Xforce/Fury/Featured teams with the rare exception of Cage or Fist or other top tier 3*s to champed/boosted 4*s with mid-leveled 5*s. This works for me. Matches are challenging (mostly, depends on who's boosted for the week) and I get to use a large part of my 4* roster.

Conversely, my friend & alliance mate rolled the RNG luck of getting 2 covered 5*s and champed them both. He sees the same 5 people throughout every single event, running maxed 5* teams, and is forced to use those 2 characters exclusively as a result. He's retiring, because, well...because that's boring.

Moral of the story (IMO anyway) is don't level your 5*s. Solid system D3.

I think this has always been true (i.e. pushing a few characters up into a new tier of play locks you into using only those characters in the short term). Its just exacerbated by the rarity and rng nature of 5*s. There are so few 5* players, and building 5*s is so slow, that as you said. There are only a handful of targets. Its wouldn't be as much of a problem if there were more 5*s and more 5* players. So I think yoylu have made the right choice tanis: keep your 5*s underleveled and enjoy added diversity at the 4* level.

I think 375 might be the sweet spot, I have lots of team-mates that leave them either 360 or 375.

PVP (MMR) and PVE (scaling) both - why does D3 punish you for progression? But I think Vhailorx is right (it's pretty much always been that way) when it comes to PVE, scaling complaints with high level 4*'s have been an issue since they started making more than two 4*'s. But PVP you used to be able to have a few good 4*'s and not have this terrible MMR.

I'm an advocate of giving a much wider MMR: and multiple PVP's. Let the 550's see me! Because I'm in the 5* PVP, I've chosen to take that tier of play! Let me see 3*'s! Because I'm in the PVP that 5*'s are banned in, I've chosen to take that tier of play!

Polares

SnowcaTT wrote:

Vhailorx wrote:

tanis3303 wrote:

Here's what I know about it. I have a fully covered Phoenix, an 11 cover Logan and Surfer, none of whom are leveled past 360. I have about 2 dozen 4* champions. My PvP matches range from Xforce/Fury/Featured teams with the rare exception of Cage or Fist or other top tier 3*s to champed/boosted 4*s with mid-leveled 5*s. This works for me. Matches are challenging (mostly, depends on who's boosted for the week) and I get to use a large part of my 4* roster.

Conversely, my friend & alliance mate rolled the RNG luck of getting 2 covered 5*s and champed them both. He sees the same 5 people throughout every single event, running maxed 5* teams, and is forced to use those 2 characters exclusively as a result. He's retiring, because, well...because that's boring.

Moral of the story (IMO anyway) is don't level your 5*s. Solid system D3.

I think this has always been true (i.e. pushing a few characters up into a new tier of play locks you into using only those characters in the short term). Its just exacerbated by the rarity and rng nature of 5*s. There are so few 5* players, and building 5*s is so slow, that as you said. There are only a handful of targets. Its wouldn't be as much of a problem if there were more 5*s and more 5* players. So I think yoylu have made the right choice tanis: keep your 5*s underleveled and enjoy added diversity at the 4* level.

I think 375 might be the sweet spot, I have lots of team-mates that leave them either 360 or 375.

PVP (MMR) and PVE (scaling) both - why does D3 punish you for progression? But I think Vhailorx is right (it's pretty much always been that way) when it comes to PVE, scaling complaints with high level 4*'s have been an issue since they started making more than two 4*'s. But PVP you used to be able to have a few good 4*'s and not have this terrible MMR.

I'm an advocate of giving a much wider MMR: and multiple PVP's. Let the 550's see me! Because I'm in the 5* PVP, I've chosen to take that tier of play! Let me see 3*'s! Because I'm in the PVP that 5*'s are banned in, I've chosen to take that tier of play!

I agree with Vhailorx too, it has always been like that, and I have been always an advocate of levelling your first 3s to 166 in groups of 3 or 4, and the same for 4s. The problem is that this is very difficult to do for 5s. It is more or less doable to max cover one or two 5s of the first batch of 5s (OML,PH,SS) but I think we are going to need a longer time to max cover the rest.

I also agree with SnowcaTT that Devs need to widen a bit the scope of people you see in your MMR (maybe also reduce a little bit the points you lose when hit), and maybe this is why they have buffed 4s a bit more (370+), teams will be probably in range of 450 teams. Also a 380 level Iceman (12-15k AoE and 17k blue) destroys a 380 level OML or PH, so now people should start using 5s after the 400 level.

I don't want to wait 4-8 months more until I can get the covers for Spidey, GG or IM to level my second 5 to max. So I am going to level my second 5 to 450 in a couple of days (I still need 50k more iso), then I will see how the new MMR goes. If my PvP gets worse than now, and my PvE fights get too difficult, I will just stop playing, and move to another game. It will be a pity after almost 3 years, but why keep playing if I can't level my best chars?????.

Phumade

What's missing from this discussion is that everyone looks at mmr from the P.o.V. of how the AI selects YOUR opponent.

The focus should be on manipulating the MMR so that you are being presented as a viable target for the rest of the community.

There is actually a very nice intersection of how the modified ELO points interact with the MMR that can be manipulated to generate

1. positive points with easier opponents.


Let me establish these discussion points. (these are educated guesses)

1. Below 1K pts. matches are not zero sum. i.e. The total points between any two players go up after a match.
2. your opponent is selected on three criteria
--- Your current score, their current score, and the relative difference between the AVG score of entire slice.
--- Your top 3 characters in your entire roster.
--- Your current defensive team.

3. The exchange of points between a winner and loser alters the value of other established targets.
--- This point is CRUCIAL. because situation arises where:
a. 70 pt donation to one player, will increase the value of several other stored retaliations. (specifically, if you have 5 saved retals. you can lose 70 points to 1 player, but actually gain pts because the 5 retals increased 10pts in value, and the retals themselves also kept climbing in value)

So with that said, I think there are several ways to use the mmr to build point/iso farms that net more pts off easier matches. At this point, I don't want to tell the developer how exactly i game the MMR, because those strategies will be nullfied in a stealth mmr change. However, I did want to encourage people to consider and look at MMR from the perspective of understanding when it might be to your advantage to be an available target to the widest audience possible.

Personally, I don't think the components of mmr should ever be published or remain static because at the end of the day, at that point it just becomes candy crush.

OneLastGambit

Just an observation based on everyone else's experience...

The problem is not levelling 5*s


The problem IS levelling them at the wrong time. I don't hear any of the whales complaining about how levelling their 5* characters ruined their experience. This is because (due to resources ) they were always ready to level...the rest of us were not.

*conjecture* wait until you have at least 3 decently covered 5* before maxing and when you do max all your 5* at once.

Phumade

OneLastGambit wrote:

Just an observation based on everyone else's experience...

The problem is not levelling 5*s


The problem IS levelling them at the wrong time. I don't hear any of the whales complaining about how levelling their 5* characters ruined their experience. This is because (due to resources ) they were always ready to level...the rest of us were not.

*conjecture* wait until you have at least 3 decently covered 5* before maxing and when you do max all your 5* at once.

very valid observation. you can get by with just 2 5* (min 10 covers). The third 5* guaranteed that you can rotate and tank (min 2/3 colors ) for your middle loaner. A 4th 5* guarantees that the 3* featured is always protected by a 5*.


This ensures that a champed 3* (potential 4* when 4* pvp arrives) can fire any power unmolested and that all color matches are done under 5* damages values.

WelcomeDeath

So close...but nobody's hit it quite yet.

MMR (match-making ranking) is determined by 3 factors.
1) The average level of the top 3 characters in your roster, including boosts.
2) Your current score vs the average scores of people with similar rosters in your shard.
3) The amount of people shielded or unshielded that have equal or higher scores than you in your shard.

Roster is the biggest factor when climbing if its an event thats already ongoing. If theres lots of points out there, you HAVE to climb on people with similar rosters. This is not true in the first few hours of pvp. Very few climb then, so only scores matter after about 400 points. I can q up 3* and even 2* teams at 400 at the very start of pvp, even with maxed 5*.
Score matters later on. Many believe that mmr "breaks at 800-1000 points, but its not always the case. MMR breakpoint mid to late pvp depends on a few things. First, roster level. If youre running maxed 5*, you wont be able to find 3* or even 4* teams until youre above the average points of people unshielded in the shard. If its a high scoring event and there are many unshielded, you may have to hit 1500 or even 2k before you see those teams. Its different with 4* or 3* teams because theres less of a gap between tiers there. In the same event, a 4* team may see low level teams at 1k+ and a 3* team may see them at 800+. Your mmr grows broader the higher you climb relative to the shard. The number unshielded is a big factor, too. If there are a lot of floaters (which happens a lot in 5* land), theyll clog your qs and be all you can find. If there are less or almost none, youll find those 3* teams at 1k, no issue.
Defensive mmr follows the same rules, but is totally dependent on the last team you won a match with. If you win with a 3* team, only they will find you, same with 4*,5*,etc (again, dependent on their score and whether or not theyve broadened mmr by scoring high enough to view you.
Points per match: As far as climbing goes, its slower the lower your roster is. Mmr is set up so that you can q thise higher than you, but not usually too much higher. Since there are more 2* and 3* teams out there, youre more likely to q up the 37-50 point matches during your climb. Similar story with 4* rosters. 5* rosters, different story. Since there are so few in the game as a whole, its easy to find someone at 1k or above, even if your score is 0. Since there are so many less with similar rosters, the game just gives you the same targets, regardless of their relative score. Usually 5-7 people....over and over and over. Bright side is your matches will be 75 points if yoh have a late start,since most 5* users will have climbed already. Downside....its the same damn teams....over and over. Hopefully that covers everything. If I missed anything, feel free to quote me and post an angry reply. Or, just post a correction.

Phumade

Welcome Death wrote:

So close...but nobody's hit it quite yet.

MMR (match-making ranking) is determined by 3 factors.
1) The average level of the top 3 characters in your roster, including boosts.
2) Your current score vs the average scores of people with similar rosters in your shard.
3) The amount of people shielded or unshielded that have equal or higher scores than you in your shard.

Roster is the biggest factor when climbing if its an event thats already ongoing. If theres lots of points out there, you HAVE to climb on people with similar rosters. This is not true in the first few hours of pvp. Very few climb then, so only scores matter after about 400 points. I can q up 3* and even 2* teams at 400 at the very start of pvp, even with maxed 5*.
Score matters later on. Many believe that mmr "breaks at 800-1000 points, but its not always the case. MMR breakpoint mid to late pvp depends on a few things. First, roster level. If youre running maxed 5*, you wont be able to find 3* or even 4* teams until youre above the average points of people unshielded in the shard. If its a high scoring event and there are many unshielded, you may have to hit 1500 or even 2k before you see those teams. Its different with 4* or 3* teams because theres less of a gap between tiers there. In the same event, a 4* team may see low level teams at 1k+ and a 3* team may see them at 800+. Your mmr grows broader the higher you climb relative to the shard. The number unshielded is a big factor, too. If there are a lot of floaters (which happens a lot in 5* land), theyll clog your qs and be all you can find. If there are less or almost none, youll find those 3* teams at 1k, no issue.
Defensive mmr follows the same rules, but is totally dependent on the last team you won a match with. If you win with a 3* team, only they will find you, same with 4*,5*,etc (again, dependent on their score and whether or not theyve broadened mmr by scoring high enough to view you.
Points per match: As far as climbing goes, its slower the lower your roster is. Mmr is set up so that you can q thise higher than you, but not usually too much higher. Since there are more 2* and 3* teams out there, youre more likely to q up the 37-50 point matches during your climb. Similar story with 4* rosters. 5* rosters, different story. Since there are so few in the game as a whole, its easy to find someone at 1k or above, even if your score is 0. Since there are so many less with similar rosters, the game just gives you the same targets, regardless of their relative score. Usually 5-7 people....over and over and over. Bright side is your matches will be 75 points if yoh have a late start,since most 5* users will have climbed already. Downside....its the same damn teams....over and over. Hopefully that covers everything. If I missed anything, feel free to quote me and post an angry reply. Or, just post a correction.

thoughtful post. Let me highlight a few sentences.

Defensive mmr follows the same rules, but is totally dependent on the last team you won a match with. If you win with a 3* team, only they will find you, same with 4*,5*,etc (again, dependent on their score and whether or not theyve broadened mmr by scoring high enough to view you.

Since there are so many less with similar rosters, the game just gives you the same targets, regardless of their relative score. Usually 5-7 people....over and over and over.

So the rhetorical question is whether 5* mmr player climb without having to play other 5* characters? (i.e. can we mitigate the effects of que hell and how?) I think we know that the answer is a qualified YES! a 5* roster can get to 600pts without having to play a match against another 5* character at any level.

SnowcaTT

Welcome Death wrote:

So close...but nobody's hit it quite yet.

MMR (match-making ranking) is determined by 3 factors.
1) The average level of the top 3 characters in your roster, including boosts.
2) Your current score vs the average scores of people with similar rosters in your shard.
3) The amount of people shielded or unshielded that have equal or higher scores than you in your shard.

While I've seen #1 bandied about many times (did devs ever actually say that?), have #2 and #3 ever been confirmed? If so they should be immediately stricken from the formula - this is why so many people run the PVP's like LR's. Many of the dual 5*'s just start in the last 8 (if not last 3!) hours and easily hit 1300, it's ridiculous to have a 2.5 day event and make 2.2 of those days not matter.

I understand why they don't come out and say what MMR is I guess (abusers will abuse), but in my first couple months of play I came in here and wondered why. It is basically the -rules- of the game....here, come play the game, guess what is happening in the background!

HaywireII

Here's the actual MMR formula:

1. Take the average level of your useful team for that Versus Event.
2. Take your current score in the current PvP event and divide it by 7.
3. Add that number to your average level and find teams with that average level to put up against you.

It was true when I was championing my 2*'s, it was true when I was championing my 3*'s and now that I'm working on my 4*'s I'm getting hit by teams with levels 360 or higher. 21 point retaliation against 383 Jean Grey and 375 Iceman? Where can my 271 Hulkbuster and 240 Iceman sign up?

Vhailorx

SnowcaTT wrote:

Welcome Death wrote:

So close...but nobody's hit it quite yet.

MMR (match-making ranking) is determined by 3 factors.
1) The average level of the top 3 characters in your roster, including boosts.
2) Your current score vs the average scores of people with similar rosters in your shard.
3) The amount of people shielded or unshielded that have equal or higher scores than you in your shard.

While I've seen #1 bandied about many times (did devs ever actually say that?), have #2 and #3 ever been confirmed? If so they should be immediately stricken from the formula - this is why so many people run the PVP's like LR's. Many of the dual 5*'s just start in the last 8 (if not last 3!) hours and easily hit 1300, it's ridiculous to have a 2.5 day event and make 2.2 of those days not matter.

I understand why they don't come out and say what MMR is I guess (abusers will abuse), but in my first couple months of play I came in here and wondered why. It is basically the -rules- of the game....here, come play the game, guess what is happening in the background!

To my knowledge:

The devs have expressly said that the levels of of the top few characters on your roster matter ("said" in the sense that they have made statements, usually when announcing PVP scoring changes, that can reasonably be inferred to mean this). The 'top 3 on your roster' bit is something that I think can from customer service. They occasionally include info like this when responding to tickets.

I don't think I have ever seen confirmation of #2 or #3. It seems reasonable to me that #3 is at least an indirect factor in that the matchmaking algorithm behaves differently when 'valid' targets are plentiful versus when they are scarce.