132 replies to this topic

[BaronSaturday]

So this is a brief write up of what MMR means. Most people who use MMR as a gauge have it publically listed and we can derive a lot of information from looking at their herokuapp profile.

There seems to be two types of players when it comes to MMR. The specialist and the all arounder. The following will explain what to look for to tell which is which.

-The Specialist
This player has the bulk of hours spent in 1-3 mechs.
Typically we find that those mechs are the mechs that they hold a possitive K/D ratio.
(Technician not withstanding)
These players tend to have most of their time spent in a single match type.
These players "know their role". They tend to do one thing per match type very well. (Collecting/Delivering, Killing, Capping etc.)

-All Arounder
These players play 4+ mechs, usually of heavily varying roles and weapon types.
They tend to play all game modes equally with minor favoritism shown to one type.
They tend to do many things either reliably or very well or are able to do one thing very well and other things reliably.

Mostly this kind of information is necessary for comp players and teams, but can be useful across the board. So when we talk about MMR, it's important to consider where someone's MMR is placed.

Not sure what my real point is, just interesting notes I've gathered.

Edited by BaronSaturday, 25 May 2015 - 01:00 AM.

[Elite_is_salty]

Elite wipes a monkey's ass with MMR ...

[reVelske]

You've described what should be taken into consideration (not really though?) when regarding MMR, this by no means described "what MMR means".

 

I'm confuzzled. Much false advertising.

Edited by reVelske, 25 May 2015 - 12:08 AM.

[BaronSaturday]

I suppose it's more relevant when we say, "my mmr is ----" or "their mmr is ----". In what context is said mmr at that number? It's valuable information to take into consideration.

Note: These were listed as trends and not as definitions.

[Meraple]

Shouldn't the role of the mechs take part in which category the player is placed?

For example:

I main 4 mechs, but with the weaponry I use on them, they're all somewhat the same role - close- to medium-range frontliners.

I'd say that'd make me a specialist, instead of an all-rounder.

[Sp3ctrr]

mmr is an indication of how utterly bollocks you are, or how little of a life you have.

[reVelske]

MMR is a decent evaluation of one's competence in the game, nothing more, nothing less. It's by no means perfect but it's good enough. I don't see why it has to be any more complicated than that? Are people measuring epeens with it? People measure epeen with everything so who cares?

[EM1O]

or how crappy a player you are. my posting MMR makes the whole thing look as ludicrous as it really is.

after all, if faced with a choice between Hawken and the consequences of caressing a firm, round, boob....

"Kicked from server due to Idling"

 

:D

Edited by em1o, 25 May 2015 - 01:36 AM.

[reVelske]

I read firm round boob and lost track of whatever point you are trying to make, repeated attempts yield same result and I've yet to get past that hurdle, halp.

Edited by reVelske, 25 May 2015 - 01:38 AM.

[LaurenEmily]

I think a player of, say 2000 mmr for example who only plays 1 mech 99% of the time is not as good as a 2000 mmr player who plays several ones. It takes way more skill & devotion to be able to consistently perform well with more than one playstyle because the time and effort reguired for the same result is different.

 

I am myself an extreme 'specialist' i suppose, a die-hard predator player & one hit wonder. That's just what feels the best imo and trying to play anything else feels like time wasted.

 

 

[Kopra]

Specialist type players that solely play "niche" mechs such as the Reaper or Infiltrator, tend to punch harder than their MMR shows out otherwise. Because MMR is mostly about consistency at higher levels, and playing niche mechs consistently well in all maps is unlikely, they can't "build" it up as well.

[Lioot]

Specialist? Yes. Scout for life? Yes

[EM1O]

"Thats a Vanguard in first place! Nobody plays a C-class in DM!"

specialist.

heh.

[Dawn_of_Ash]

Specialist? Yes. Scout for life? Yes

 

A Mini Flak Scout? Yes. I have no idea how you play that, Lioot.

 

"Is that a Predator dominating the good players?" - that's...me. ^ ^; Also I'm Mr Whinealot, because I just am.

[Dr_Freeze001]

'What should MMR mean when it is discussed?'

 

Sort or turned into rant:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Well, MMR is a rough estimation of a player's skill, used by MM to try and balance games. To discuss it for anything else than that is, in my opinion, a waste of time. Very easily influenced, manipulated and, like already discussed above, doesn't keep track of gamemodes, choice of Axe or preferred play-style. 

 

The only way MMR can validly be discussed is in the balancing of teams for clans and events, and even that is very untrustworthy. I've heard stories of people MMR farming, using console commands to leave games without mmr loss, switching to smurf accounts because 'oh noes my precious mmr'. Straight up refusing to join a game for anything other than raising MMR.

 

 It's disappointing, really. People using MMR to win an imaginary 'my number is higher than your number' contest.

 

 

What I'm trying to say is: Don't trust MMR for anything more than a rough estimation and don't trust MMR above certain levels. Use your personal experience with the player, gamemode and Axe. When you discuss MMR remember that you are discussing a dynamic system based on estimations, not the end-all indicator of skill.

Edited by (KDR) Dr_Freeze001, 25 May 2015 - 03:22 AM.

[Aregon]

As I have said before, MMR should never have been shown to anyone except the game devs (and maybe some of the absolutely most trustworthy members of the community).

[reVelske]

#downwithscrimbot

 

And it's all or nothing, I don't see why some special individuals should have access to MMR and others shouldn't.

[MomOw]

 

What should MMR mean when it is discussed.

 

 

huhuhu, French is a bioutiful language, you'd never expect the TRUE MEANING of M�M�Re !

 

[BaronSaturday]

I actually think the point was missed here. I'm talking about trends found in mmr

[LaurenEmily]

Trends ? anyone below 2000 is a Nub skrub, anyone above 2500 an elitist pig. And also every Hawken player is in either of these groups. No exceptions. 

Spoiler

Not my personal opinion btw.

[reVelske]

anyone below 2000 is a Nub skrub

 

My feefees are hurt, BRB making thread to complain about the overall unfriendliness of this community.

Edited by reVelske, 25 May 2015 - 06:27 AM.

[Xacius]

MMR is a decent evaluation of one's competence in the game, nothing more, nothing less. It's by no means perfect but it's good enough. I don't see why it has to be any more complicated than that? Are people measuring epeens with it? People measure epeen with everything so who cares?

^

 

Definitely this.  I'd say the formula starts to become inaccurate around the 2700 level.  It's a decent means of calculating one's skill level relative to other players.  I can certainly see a difference between 2800 and 2500 players, for example.  There's also the matter of what mechs they regularly use.  A 2500 tech player may not necessarily perform at a 2500 level in other mechs.  That's the main mech that really throws off the formula, and it's due to the nature of how technician's gain XP in matches.  It's really fuzzy bunnyng hard to not get at least top 3 as a Technician, unless teams are heavily imbalanced.  

Edited by Xacius, 26 May 2015 - 11:06 PM.

[Dawn_of_Ash]

^

 

Definitely this.  I'd say the formula starts to become inaccurate around the 2700 level.  It's a decent means of calculating one's skill level relative to other players.  I can certainly see a difference between 2800 and 2500 players, for example.  There's also the matter of what mechs they regularly use.  A 2500 tech player may not necessarily perform at a 2500 level in other mechs.  That's the main mech that really throws off the formula, and it's due to the nature of how technician's gain XP in matches.  It's really fuzzy bunnyng hard to not get at least top 3 as a Technician, unless teams are heavily imbalanced.  

 

I disagree with that first statement. I had recently when into a massive roll of loses where my MMR fell from 1950 to 1800. Once you get to the 1815 range, it is hard to get out. Reason being because that is where the most people are at, other than around the 2000 ranges.  When I was in that 1800 MMR range, I could easily see the difference on how inaccurate MMR truly is. Maybe it was only in Australia, but I was seeing 1850 MMR - "Nub Skrubs" as was first mentioned - were actually doing alright. I normally went into lobbies where there was at least one really good player (I know them all by name since the AU community is so small) who wouldn't do all that really good. I'm out of that slum now, and I feel that I am better with my massive 1900 MMR. Thing is that I am actually able to topple people who are 200 MMR above me. Gosh, I was able to get an MMR of 1950 WITH 350+ ping. Does that make me a 1900 player or 1950? I was also able to face off against players a year ago who were around 2000 ping in USA.

 

My point? Well, my point is that MMR get's fuzzy when you move to different regions. You can see it if you were to go to Australia, or Japan, or Singapore - places that are secluded and do not want to deal with 250+ ping to play a game, you would find that 1800 MMR is not the same as the US which is flooding with players - well, last time I checked anyways. Also, Japanese players are just plain amazing.

 

On a second point though, I guess I'm also saying that the MMR also gets fuzzy when are in that range that everyone seems to be in. Example: 1800 MMR, and 2000-2100 MMR. If you are in the 2500+ club, congrats on you, but I think that the larger variety of numbers gives you a more accurate determination of your MMR, instead of going up in 0.1s or 0.5s. 

Edited by Dawn_of_Ash, 26 May 2015 - 11:53 PM.

[crockrocket]

Something I've recently noticed looking at the leaderboard: the VERY top has more kills than assists (top 10 in hawken more or less). Everyone else has more assists than kills.

 

Other thing: some people are good duelists, others are good at team play. I have seen situations where players will lose a 1 v 1 to a player at least 200 mmr below them, consistently, yet the higher player is not undeserving of their mmr. 

 

Additionally: Dawn makes a valid point about regions. IMO dawn is a better player than me, yet I have the better mmr. Another weird observation is that there are players hundreds lower than me in mmr that have a much better K/D. Conversly, I've noted that I have a better K/D than one or two 2500+ players (tech mains).

Edited by (TDM)crockrocket, 27 May 2015 - 02:02 AM.

[CraftyDus]

Something I've recently noticed looking at the leaderboard: the VERY top has more kills than assists (top 10 in hawken more or less). Everyone else has more assists than kills.

 

Other thing: some people are good duelists, others are good at team play. I have seen situations where players will lose a 1 v 1 to a player at least 200 mmr below them, consistently, yet the higher player is not undeserving of their mmr. 

 

Additionally: Dawn makes a valid point about regions. IMO dawn is a better player than me, yet I have the better mmr. Another weird observation is that there are players hundreds lower than me in mmr that have a much better K/D. Conversly, I've noted that I have a better K/D than one or two 2500+ players (tech mains).

 

I blow chode at dueling!

It makes me ugly, and I consider it akin to sheep****ing.

 

I get shat on everyday by any number of players with less mmr than I.

 

However I've managed to spend over 1500 hours ignoring the mmr system for any practical purpose.

 

I've never stayed on an account long enough to know what mmr I am.

 

I use server browser and join on friends.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

I've never stayed on an account long enough to know what mmr I am.

 

FWIW, I feel your pain, bro.  Also FWIW, your MMR is less than mine, whatever it really is.  Jus' sayin' :).

 

MMR is a measure of how much you, an individual, can typically 'bring' to a match.  If you're likely to figure in the top half of the particular match, or not.  It's intended to be used by the Matchmaker... not intended to be a measure of your epeen.

 

Nonetheless, it's the only epeen ruler we have.  And mine, most likely, if I knew for sure what it is, is bigger than yours.  The rest of you can console yourselves by telling yourselves you use the MMR you have better than the other guy.

 

 

Edit:  I'm not really this competitive.  Just more competitive than you (whoever you are reading this).  And I'm feeling a bit... feisty this morning.  I'll leave this, though, hoping everyone takes it lightheartedly, which is more or less how I meant it.  Sorta.  Kinda.  Really.

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, 27 May 2015 - 04:37 AM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Okay,  a more-serious post:

 

I'm a specialist, but I fill all roles on a team, play all modes.  You can tell my accounts because they, after about Feb of 2013, they all have better than 2:1 KDR and 1.8:1 (or better) K/A.  One of my accounts has 3.24 KDR, and it has several hundred hours in three-star/high-MMR lobby play.

 

I don't know that I fit the mold as described, Saturday.  I main Scout, but play other mechs as needed, or as my mood strikes.

 

I'll probably create a technical post about MMR later tonight.  I have a few spreadsheets I can modify to show the calculation.

[TangledMantis]

SRD range is always useful for me. Helps me know whether I should tighten my belt or have a good pubstomping round. Speaking of which, lately ive been playing with more friends of higher MMR and experience. I usually put up a fight but end up scrap metal. Then I go back to playing on random servers and my MMR is down around 1700. "Really Hawken? Ok, if you really think you want to place me back in matches like this... I could use some 500 pt TDMs.. sure ok." People harass me and say I shouldnt be in the game. "Dont blame me, the game thinks this is a 3 star match for my skill."  

 

After playing with some veterans for a few hours, I auto-queue and end up feeling like billy madison in the classroom. 

 

MMR is not reflective (enough) of competancy.

[PoopSlinger]

The original post didn't make a lot of sense to me.  Sorry

[TheButtSatisfier]

When I was in that 1800 MMR range, I could easily see the difference on how inaccurate MMR truly is. Maybe it was only in Australia, but I was seeing 1850 MMR - "Nub Skrubs" as was first mentioned - were actually doing alright.

 

This may not be as prevalent in regions with lower populations, but sometimes that 1850 MMR person is a newborn smurf still wet and screaming from being birthed. Other times it's a legitimately good new player (not a smurf) that happened to have a good game. Occasionally you can tell by looking at the pilot level compared to how they are playing - if a level 23 pilot is wrecking 2200+ MMR players then I usually think something's up. Other times it's not as easy to discern.

 

This has probably been discussed already elsewhere, but I imagine there's a way to determine which account is a smurf by looking at MMR change over time. I'd expect to see a high MMR acceleration for the first 10-20 hours from account creation and then the gain would hold steady at a high velocity for another 30-50 hours. If the devs wanted to check this out by looking at the backend data (if historic MMR data is stored in some way) then we could PM tiggs/josh our smurfs to give them an idea of what MMR patterns to look out for if they were so interested.

[Hyginos]

I'm not sure that MMR actually breaks down at a certain level so much as its resolution degrades as the number gets further from the mean.

 

What I mean is, the further away you get from average the larger the gap between two values needs to be before it is meaningful.  The difference between a player at 2500 and one at 2600 may be much smaller than the difference between players at 1500 and 1600. 

[Sylhiri]

I can see DM giving out more MMR then other gamemodes simply because your constantly in battle.

[comic_sans]

I can see DM giving out more MMR then other gamemodes simply because your constantly in battle.

 

And 1/10 players wins rather than 1/2.

[ticklemyiguana]

I'm not sure that MMR actually breaks down at a certain level so much as its resolution degrades as the number gets further from the mean.
 
What I mean is, the further away you get from average the larger the gap between two values needs to be before it is meaningful.  The difference between a player at 2500 and one at 2600 may be much smaller than the difference between players at 1500 and 1600.

I liked this because that's an excellent way of wording that.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

 

This has probably been discussed already elsewhere, but I imagine there's a way to determine which account is a smurf by looking at MMR change over time. I'd expect to see a high MMR acceleration for the first 10-20 hours from account creation and then the gain would hold steady at a high velocity for another 30-50 hours. If the devs wanted to check this out by looking at the backend data (if historic MMR data is stored in some way) then we could PM tiggs/josh our smurfs to give them an idea of what MMR patterns to look out for if they were so interested.

 

Yes, I believe this is true.  I would like to ask Ash/Shadeness if we (they) could put in such a tracking mechanism.  But before I did, I would want to ask Josh what we would DO about identified Smurfs. 

 

I'm one who would be flagged this way.

[BaronSaturday]

Hold on a second please. There still seems to be confussion a-foot. This post defines nothing. It's simply a view of trends that occur. So, someone has ---- mmr. What does that value mean? Where is their mmr? For me, it is pretty well in my Tech and nearly nothing else. What does that mean? It means that I am a specialist. What does that mean? It could mean a great number of things. However, it TENDS to mean that I main a Tech. This most likely infers that I would be better at the Tech than someone in my MMR range that doesn't main a Tech but am vastly lacking in every other mech. I.E. my skills in the Tech replace someone's versatility, but does not make me a better player than them. This isn't always the case, of course, but it is something to consider when building a team. Hopefully this clears up some confusion.

[CraftyDus]

FWIW, I feel your pain, bro.  Also FWIW, your MMR is less than mine, whatever it really is.  Jus' sayin' :).

 

 

http://hawken.heroku.../lunatic_fringe

 

NOPE

I don't even play a scout, I certainly wouldn't top out sub 2200 after 20,000k kills in one.

 

 

http://hawken.heroku...call_me_ishmael

 

Jeez Louize! I can't believe how negative you go in a reaper, or that you talk smack about being a better player than anybody.

Edited by Crafty, 17 June 2015 - 05:33 AM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

When was the last time I logged in as ish, crafty?

I think its been close to two years ago those reaper stats were earned. There's no question I sucked when I started.

Luna I used for a tpg set against omni and got hammered hard.

But just to give you something I guess I'll play luna this week. Should be fun.

[CraftyDus]

Luna I used for a tpg set against omni and got hammered hard.
 

 

 

Ya, who hasn't. That's definitely not it.

You'd have to have logged in this past year since you named a mech public mmr in light of Shadeness's app, nice try though.

Not that IGAF because you came cocka doodle diddlin', but here's no fixing the mmr on your main, it's 20,000 kills and really accurate.

Come at me in a scout and you might take damage from my eyes rolling.

Did you get cut from B team the day you made this boast post?

[TheButtSatisfier]

1v1 come at each other bros

 

Kirk and I can be match commentators and make it fun for everyone!

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 17 June 2015 - 07:07 AM.