MMR needs balancing

Skrofa

While I understand that the system in place helps lower rosters place higher, it feels like it is a bit... counterintuitive...

What do I mean?
Let's assume a 5x5* champs player. How much time, energy and/or money has this guy put in the game?

Why should he compete with... me for example? I don't even have all the 3* guys champed. My highest covered 4* is at 9 covers I think. Either pvp or pve I normally only aim for t50.
But! Based on the mmr system, I can only fight against guys with a similar roster to mine thus gaining points and by some real grinding to actually place higher than the 5* guy.
Same goes for pve. My scaling permits me to put in less effort since it is not particularly hellish.
Scl was supposed to fix this ckmpeting for the same prizes thing. Scl7 hit the nail on the head. Scl8 on the other hand, hit the thumb, dropped the hammer, squashed a toe, and then punched the wall to break a hand.

FIX SCLs!!!!!!!

Polares

I still think a player with max champs should not see players with a team around the 350 level max when buffed, this would affect all levels of play, and make the game much harder for newer players. I think though that the MMR range might need to be expanded a little, but just a little.

Shield Ranks was basically the answer to all these problems, but Devs blow this solution up, by releasing it in different steps (higher SCLs are still unreleased), and also by letting players farm/buy experience. Now Shield Rank is just a measure of how much you play and spend, not how strong is your roster. As an example, there are members on my alliance with higher rank than me with 0 champed 5s, and I have 6 champed 5s (just because they buy many more 40packs than me).

I don't see any perfect solution to this problem now. SCL was the best and easier solution but now is broken. When SCL9 and 10 are released some problems might improve, but it will still be perfectly possible for someone soft-capping his 5s to have enough rank for SCL9 or 10 so he is still invisible to stronger players because MMR determines so. I guess now the best solution is still SCL replacing MMR and those people will be force to chose lower SCLs so they don't get stomped on.

Mr_Sinister

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Mr_Sinister wrote:

acescracked wrote:

Mr_Sinister wrote:

So it needs a rebalance for you to find high value, easy victory matches....ok

Whoa, you just completely missed the whole point. Not what Fight is remotely asking for.

He wants to play for placement. There is a player with 1229 points in 2nd place in a bracket he is in. This is slice 5 where scores are not that high. The game's MMR will not let him q that player.

Should there be a point threshold where everyone can be q'd by everyone?

No.

And he clearly stated in his post he was trying to q that player, so i don't see how I missed the point. The player was not shielded, FightmasterMPQ feels he should be able to q him despite the fact he's hundreds of levels higher and an entire tier above that player.

You are so far off base it isn't even funny. I clearly stated that I spent tons of ISO skipping and THEN went to check his roster.....actually expecting to see a first page filled with 500+ toons, only to then discover that I was searching for a seal. I rarely seek out seals as I have no problem taking down 500s these days, and it doesn't matter what tier we are on since we are competing for the same rewards.

Mr_Sinister wrote:

He wanted to club a seal for high points for easy t5 and is whining it didn't happen. Too bad. If he wants to play for placement maybe he should start sooner than 14 hours out instead of trying to bank on easy mode climbing with 5* roster in an easy slice and either in scl 6/7, or attempting to snipe 8.

PvP is what it is. There's a million complaint threads about it and the mantra around these parts boils down to "deal with it". Not sure why he's looking for exception here.

I climbed early to hit my 1200 but didn't want to waste any HP on shields for 2 days so I dropped back down. At 14h out I decided to start climbing again for placement when this happened, and it struck me as being imbalanced. I found some other targets, kept climbing, and ended up taking 1st in CL8, so I'm not even whining - just pointing out how broken 5* MMR can be at times.

Also, we would LOVE for you to come to S5 and see how easy it really is here.

Judging from the scores, extremely. I've played S5 before, I don't recall it being murderers row. I also very rarely go past 1k because it's not worth the effort. See below.

5* MMR is no more broken than 4* MMR but the difference is you can continue grinding down weaker rosters to keep climbing, as you probably did. 4* rosters see champed 4* worth single digit points after a certain threshold. Can't q 5* grilles, can't q 5* champed players (even if you can win), can't q 3* teams at the same point level (same problem as this, different tier)... It's not a 5* issue, it's an MMR issue. Getting to 1200 is legit work and that's with using slice room and being able to hunt known high value targets about to shield.

I agree with the idea it's not fair that you couldn't q that player when you are competing for placement rewards. At the same time though, many in your position of roster strength would, they'd hit that target until they were worth less than the other people that they can q, which is really avoiding competition. I think I've been hit 6 times by someone doing this. Is that competition? Two sides to the coin.

The issue I take away from this is such disparity in roster strength shouldn't competing for placement in the same bracket, for the same crummy prizes. It's not fair to the 4* players that get clobbered for easy points by 5* players and drop hundreds of points out of a tier because of it (has happened to me) but it's also not fair for a 5* could lose out of decent placement to someone with a weaker roster. Both arguments are valid.

Fightmastermpq

Evilgenius_9 wrote:

And yet your suggested fix is not to add scl 9 and 10 already and split the levels up, it's to change the broken system to let you beat up on somebody who has little chance of beating you back in return. Still sounds very bully-ish.

Unlocking SCL9/10 would be great, but ultimately doesn't solve the problem as there will still be 4* rosters in those SCLs.

Would opening up MMR increase "bullying"? Perhaps, but that's why shields exist.

grunth13

Judging from the scores, extremely. I've played S5 before, I don't recall it being murderers row. I also very rarely go past 1k because it's not worth the effort. See below.

5* MMR is no more broken than 4* MMR but the difference is you can continue grinding down weaker rosters to keep climbing, as you probably did. 4* rosters see champed 4* worth single digit points after a certain threshold. Can't q 5* grilles, can't q 5* champed players (even if you can win), can't q 3* teams at the same point level (same problem as this, different tier)... It's not a 5* issue, it's an MMR issue. Getting to 1200 is legit work and that's with using slice room and being able to hunt known high value targets about to shield.

I agree with the idea it's not fair that you couldn't q that player when you are competing for placement rewards. At the same time though, many in your position of roster strength would, they'd hit that target until they were worth less than the other people that they can q, which is really avoiding competition. I think I've been hit 6 times by someone doing this. Is that competition? Two sides to the coin.

The issue I take away from this is such disparity in roster strength shouldn't competing for placement in the same bracket, for the same crummy prizes. It's not fair to the 4* players that get clobbered for easy points by 5* players and drop hundreds of points out of a tier because of it (has happened to me) but it's also not fair for a 5* could lose out of decent placement to someone with a weaker roster. Both arguments are valid.[/quote]



Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Skygazing

I have the opposite concern. On multiple occasions as of late I've been hit by teams ridiculously beyond what should be possible. Have a look at my roster and then these two screenshots to illustrate my point:



At the time of those hits I was maybe rank 15-20 at absolute best, probably closer to 25-30. Doesn't seem at all reasonable that I can be found by people with not only multiple champed 5*s, but completely maxed 5*s when my best is a 2/4/2 Surfer at level 265. It isn't happening enough to deeply concern me, but it's certainly aggravating when it does.

Mr_Sinister

Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Sign me up. I thought that's what scl in PvP were going to do from the start.

Fightmastermpq

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Sign me up. I thought that's what scl in PvP were going to do from the start.

No, this would never work - there aren't enough 5* players. Even SCL8 brackets fill with mostly 3* and 4* players. Not to mention you'd have to have far greater rewards to ever justify even going to the 5* tier. It would completely segregate the players. No, there is just no way this kind of split would work.

You might as well just kill off the 5* tier at this point since no one would ever have any desire to progress to there.

Mr_Sinister

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Sign me up. I thought that's what scl in PvP were going to do from the start.

No, this would never work - there aren't enough 5* players. Even SCL8 brackets fill with mostly 3* and 4* players. Not to mention you'd have to have far greater rewards to ever justify even going to the 5* tier. It would completely segregate the players. No, there is just no way this kind of split would work.

You might as well just kill off the 5* tier at this point since no one would ever have any desire to progress to there.

How many are there? I keep seeing this said but no number to back it up.

You are talking as if you have hard numbers with the definity with which you are stating it. I am not saying you're wrong but I'd like some numbers before writing it off as impossible.

And scl 8 doesn't fill with only 4/3* rosters. Multiple times I've been in brackets where 5* champed players with 1200 scores extended down 70 or 80th place. Going off the screens you posted you seem to be playing in the mushroom cup so maybe that's why you see 3/4* at the top.

I dunno... you seem against every measure that would address the issue you are upset about except the one that allows you to smash JV teams.

grunth13

How many are there? I keep seeing this said but no number to back it up.

You are talking as if you have hard numbers with the definity with which you are stating it. I am not saying you're wrong but I'd like some numbers before writing it off as impossible.

And scl 8 doesn't fill with only 4/3* rosters. Multiple times I've been in brackets where 5* champed players with 1200 scores extended down 70 or 80th place. Going off the screens you posted you seem to be playing in the mushroom cup so maybe that's why you see 3/4* at the top.

I dunno... you seem against every measure that would address the issue you are upset about except the one that allows you to smash JV teams.[/quote]

In S3, the 5th bracket for cl8 doesn't fill until about 12 to 18 hours left in the event. Everyone in the room I share seems to get top 20 or so while being dispersed in cl6/7/8. That room has about 185 players with another 5-10 "snipers" who are trying to bring us down. There maybe a few others, so roughly 200, maybe 250 players at the MAX. That is not even a full brackets worth...think of the blood shed.

spectator

Part of the problem is your alliance mates floating with champed 5 stars. Only way to avoid being in queue hell in that situation is for you to either hit them or for them to shield or put out lower teams

Mr_Sinister

In S3, the 5th bracket for cl8 doesn't fill until about 12 to 18 hours left in the event. Everyone in the room I share seems to get top 20 or so while being dispersed in cl6/7/8. That room has about 185 players with another 5-10 "snipers" who are trying to bring us down. There maybe a few others, so roughly 200, maybe 250 players at the MAX. That is not even a full brackets worth...think of the blood shed.

I ended up taking a few minutes to check it out. I stopped at 260 and wasn't out of the top 20 PvP alliances.

With "retired" players and the other 5* players headlining their own alliances, I bet there is more than is assumed.

But yep, it would certainly be competitive.

SnowcaTT

I often cannot find the highest 5*/5* teams (not that I'd want to) - they are invisible to my MMR no matter how much I skip. I can be at 1400 and often not find an 1800 5* heavy team.

But if they...for some reason...put out a 5*/3*/3* I can find them all the way down to about 400.

And since I'm -always- running 5*/4*/3* (my best team)....I can almost always be found by people from a really low score. If I'm running below 1K I'll be found by double 5*'s the entire time ("close enough?") and creamed, and when I break that 1K I'll be found by everyone and smoked over and over again.

I'd say one of the "unfair" parts of 5* MMR is sometimes even when you are at incredibly high points you are hidden to view, and you can get to those incredibly high points by taking MUCH longer hops than is possible without double 5*'s. Conversely, it is also likely "unfair" that you can't see many teams, you can only see similar size teams, you can't see very far down when you get to high points, but others can see you WAY far down if you happen to have your not-ideal team out there.

I understand (and agree with) OP problem, if we're going to have best rewards be based on placement, those rosters need to be visible to everyone. I get really frustrated around 800 when I see lots of 3*->4* transitioners unshielded around my points but can't see any of them, same sort of deal.

I've long said MMR is basically the "Rules" of the game, and the Devs should -explain- the rules of the game to the players.....
(And more rewards on Progression over Placement wouldn't hurt in PVP, just like in PVE!)

fmftint

Mr_Sinister wrote:

In S3, the 5th bracket for cl8 doesn't fill until about 12 to 18 hours left in the event. Everyone in the room I share seems to get top 20 or so while being dispersed in cl6/7/8. That room has about 185 players with another 5-10 "snipers" who are trying to bring us down. There maybe a few others, so roughly 200, maybe 250 players at the MAX. That is not even a full brackets worth...think of the blood shed.

I ended up taking a few minutes to check it out. I stopped at 260 and wasn't out of the top 20 PvP alliances.

With "retired" players and the other 5* players headlining their own alliances, I bet there is more than is assumed.

But yep, it would certainly be competitive.

Those T20 alliances are spread between 5 slices...

Fightmastermpq

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Sign me up. I thought that's what scl in PvP were going to do from the start.

No, this would never work - there aren't enough 5* players. Even SCL8 brackets fill with mostly 3* and 4* players. Not to mention you'd have to have far greater rewards to ever justify even going to the 5* tier. It would completely segregate the players. No, there is just no way this kind of split would work.

You might as well just kill off the 5* tier at this point since no one would ever have any desire to progress to there.

How many are there? I keep seeing this said but no number to back it up.

You are talking as if you have hard numbers with the definity with which you are stating it. I am not saying you're wrong but I'd like some numbers before writing it off as impossible.

And scl 8 doesn't fill with only 4/3* rosters. Multiple times I've been in brackets where 5* champed players with 1200 scores extended down 70 or 80th place. Going off the screens you posted you seem to be playing in the mushroom cup so maybe that's why you see 3/4* at the top.

I dunno... you seem against every measure that would address the issue you are upset about except the one that allows you to smash JV teams.

D3 doesn't share this data, but my alliance intentionally splits up into different brackets in S5 and we keep pretty good tabs on the numbers. Not a single 500 player bracket would fill if you put all the 5* rosters together.

My goal is not to seal club, that would be boring as ****. I just want to be able to compete against the players I'm competing against, and I'm not sure why that is so unreasonable. In fact a completely open MMR where I could actually see every single player in my bracket and/or slice would be awful. I'd spend probably 50x as much ISO skipping to find ANY targets of value. But the system as it currently works is too restrictive. I should be able to queue anyone that can queue me. The game shouldn't try to protect me from matches that it thinks I can't possibly win - I'm a big boy, if I want to try a challenging fight, please let me. And I should be able to queue people in my T10 if I am anywhere even remotely close to them.

cyineedsn

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Fightmastermpq wrote:

Mr_Sinister wrote:

Then the only answer is base scl on roster strength and you are automatically placed into it. Meaning no 4's in 5 scl trying to get higher rewards and no 5's playing in lower scl. If you don't want to be beaten down by the big guys, then you have to play for lesser rewards.

Sign me up. I thought that's what scl in PvP were going to do from the start.

No, this would never work - there aren't enough 5* players. Even SCL8 brackets fill with mostly 3* and 4* players. Not to mention you'd have to have far greater rewards to ever justify even going to the 5* tier. It would completely segregate the players. No, there is just no way this kind of split would work.

You might as well just kill off the 5* tier at this point since no one would ever have any desire to progress to there.

How many are there? I keep seeing this said but no number to back it up.

You are talking as if you have hard numbers with the definity with which you are stating it. I am not saying you're wrong but I'd like some numbers before writing it off as impossible.

And scl 8 doesn't fill with only 4/3* rosters. Multiple times I've been in brackets where 5* champed players with 1200 scores extended down 70 or 80th place. Going off the screens you posted you seem to be playing in the mushroom cup so maybe that's why you see 3/4* at the top.

I dunno... you seem against every measure that would address the issue you are upset about except the one that allows you to smash JV teams.

Despite the tone on the forum, the amount of points that those 5* rosters who are scoring 1200+ gain from beating down 4* or weaker teams, really isn't much. 95% of their matches and points still come from fighting other people with leveled up 5*, there is no conspiracy where 5* players are trying to fight change so they can climb to 1200 from just picking on the little guy, because LOL I wish I didn't have to fight endless waves of oml/phx/bolt

Mr_Sinister

D3 doesn't share this data, but my alliance intentionally splits up into different brackets in S5 and we keep pretty good tabs on the numbers. Not a single 500 player bracket would fill if you put all the 5* rosters together.

My goal is not to seal club, that would be boring as tinykitty. I just want to be able to compete against the players I'm competing against, and I'm not sure why that is so unreasonable. In fact a completely open MMR where I could actually see every single player in my bracket and/or slice would be awful. I'd spend probably 50x as much ISO skipping to find ANY targets of value. But the system as it currently works is too restrictive. I should be able to queue anyone that can queue me. The game shouldn't try to protect me from matches that it thinks I can't possibly win - I'm a big boy, if I want to try a challenging fight, please let me. And I should be able to queue people in my T10 if I am anywhere even remotely close to them.

Where I'm coming from is... You want to "compete" against the players you are competing against for placement, in this case an early 4* roster, when the direct competition is non competitive. You'll win, every time, unless you use your face to play.
I totally understand your frustration that the players in that position are shielded from you when you are all competing in placement, but at the same time to queue them is simply free points for you and a headache for them because there is no recourse.
Both situations are not great.

grunth13

Mr_Sinister wrote:

D3 doesn't share this data, but my alliance intentionally splits up into different brackets in S5 and we keep pretty good tabs on the numbers. Not a single 500 player bracket would fill if you put all the 5* rosters together.

My goal is not to seal club, that would be boring as tinykitty. I just want to be able to compete against the players I'm competing against, and I'm not sure why that is so unreasonable. In fact a completely open MMR where I could actually see every single player in my bracket and/or slice would be awful. I'd spend probably 50x as much ISO skipping to find ANY targets of value. But the system as it currently works is too restrictive. I should be able to queue anyone that can queue me. The game shouldn't try to protect me from matches that it thinks I can't possibly win - I'm a big boy, if I want to try a challenging fight, please let me. And I should be able to queue people in my T10 if I am anywhere even remotely close to them.

Where I'm coming from is... You want to "compete" against the players you are competing against for placement, in this case an early 4* roster, when the direct competition is non competitive. You'll win, every time, unless you use your face to play.
I totally understand your frustration that the players in that position are shielded from you when you are all competing in placement, but at the same time to queue them is simply free points for you and a headache for them because there is no recourse.
Both situations are not great.

That is called competition. You know...PvP...player versus player. I'm all for making all the rewards progression (might stop all the crazy sniping and enforcing), but until then, if we are to compete, then let's have competition. The worst team in the nba, nfl, nhl still had to compete against the other teams in the league if it wants to win the championship...they don't mice them into the college playoffs and if they win against them give them the same championship as the regular winners.

keitterman

IMO PvP is so broken that only a complete overhaul will fix it.

The frustration that OP is showing is because the people you're grouped with for prizes are not grouped on the same algorithm that determines who you play against. It makes some sense why, but once you understand it there is a VERY obvious question "Then why did you group me in to a competitive bracket that I won't be competing against?!"

I'm sure everyone has an opinion on how to "fix" it, but in the mean time I find PvP unplayable. I only spend enough time on it to get the non-rank rewards I want and then let people knock me back down to the 400's.


The PvE ranked reward system is fairly horrible too, but that's a separate conversation.

Mr_Sinister

That is called competition. You know...PvP...player versus player. I'm all for making all the rewards progression (might stop all the crazy sniping and enforcing), but until then, if we are to compete, then let's have competition. The worst team in the nba, nfl, nhl still had to compete against the other teams in the league if it wants to win the championship...they don't mice them into the college playoffs and if they win against them give them the same championship as the regular winners.

Well, let's debunk that it's "PvP", because it's not. We are all playing against an ai that uses the characters select. We have zero control over the defensive matches.
How would the worst human NBA team do against the best, but controlled by a simple AI? I believe it would go much like it does with us, they'd roll them.
But that assumes the teams are in the same league. The BEST college players are more often than not average, at best, NBA players. This is more in line with our 4* vs 5* tier comparison. Would the best college team beat the worst NBA team? No, absolutely not they'd get destroyed. They probably couldn't come close to beating the bench team.
Is it even really called competition putting a college team vs a professional team?

A champed 4* team is a college team compared to a champed 5* team. To call it competition is disingenuous. If it was truly competitive, people wouldn't be spending thousands of dollars to get 5* champed because 4* could get them to the same level. The disparity is real, and quantifiable.