120 replies to this topic

[SS396]

Not when the rate at which mmr is gained directly impacts the experience of new players...

 

New players don't give a flying fuzzy bunny about MMR, the majority of the new players don't even know it exists.  

 

Its funny because you seem to think that if their MMR goes up, they'll have a better experience in the game?  I remind you the average new player doesn't understand theres a MMR.  So, really the major thing affecting their experience is winning and losing and the bigger the difference in losing vs winning has a huge impact on game experience and enjoyment.

 

Also as their MMR increases they should be pitted against better players, making their experience a bit tougher in reality.  Some enjoy that challenge, and some don't.

 

 

What the new player wants is to be placed with other new players of similar skill and experience, which is exactly the opposite of what you are doing with your so called "testing".  I love how you both excuse your behavior as you are helping the situation.  The fact is you are playing against players of much lower skill and experience than you.  No matter how much you try to handicap yourself, it isn't a positive thing, you still have a huge advantage.

 

So while you experiment, they see something wrong with the fact that one player is very difficult to be killed, and has 4 or 5 times the points of the nearest player.  I also don't understand the need to continually experiment since no changes have been made, so in effect your results should reach the same conclusions until there are other major changes.  Kind of pointless if you ask me to expect a different result, unless you enjoy helping prolong that new player experience reach all time lows.

Edited by SS396, 14 June 2015 - 04:55 PM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

What the new player wants is to be placed with other new players of similar skill and experience, which is exactly the opposite of what you are doing with your so called "testing".  I love how you both excuse your behavior as you are helping the situation.

 

FWIW, LittleDeuceCoupe is playing 1800+ lobbies with 'known gun' names (top-20 leaderboard) today, not 1600 lobbies.  I have him at about 1650 now, and four more games will get him over 1800.  You'll be thrilled to know I recognize many known alts in these games (proving your point, but also making one of mine: these matches are not 'newbs').

 

Me love you longtime, you madly-skilled player you. 

[ticklemyiguana]

 

New players don't give a flying fuzzy bunny about MMR, the majority of the new players don't even know it exists.  

 

Its funny because you seem to think that if their MMR goes up, they'll have a better experience in the game?  I remind you the average new player doesn't understand theres a MMR.  So, really the major thing affecting their experience is winning and losing and the bigger the difference in losing vs winning has a huge impact on game experience and enjoyment.

 

Two things need to be taken into account.

 

1. It doesn't matter if they know what MMR is or not. Seriously, not at all.

 

2. For every win, someone else loses. Ideally most players receive a 50% win/loss ratio. This is achieved best by placing them in games with players of comparable skill. This means improving the flexibility with which MMR is given to new players - which is precisely what the concerns in this thread are over - that the game may have taken the exact opposite route of where it ought to go.

 

 

 

What the new player wants is to be placed with other new players of similar skill and experience, which is exactly the opposite of what you are doing with your so called "testing".  I love how you both excuse your behavior as you are helping the situation.  The fact is you are playing against players of much lower skill and experience than you.  No matter how much you try to handicap yourself, it isn't a positive thing, you still have a huge advantage.

 

You should try it sometime. Maybe ask them how they're liking the game, what they're having trouble with, stuff like that. Friendly interaction. My assumption is that you haven't.

 

New players most commonly complain about the grind. Roughly 80% of complaints I hear when I ask reference it.

 

Do you know what they actually want to do?

 

GET. BETTER.

 

Assert your personal opinions all you want, but since I typically open up low tier games as a human being, asking how things are going and how they're liking the game, typically players respond to my scores and their attempts to kill me by making a game out of it and asking for pointers.

 

Have some people quit? Called hacks? Yeah, they have - but that number pales in comparison to the people who do the exact opposite. They play the game.

 

Also, I don't handicap myself. Once players believe that I'm not hacking, they want to know how to get to that point. Handicapping myself is something a lot of players find insulting if they find I'm doing it.

 

That's right. New players have thoughts and feelings like real human beings and aren't 100% reactionary, egocentric baboons that require everyone's defense going "oh poor noobs lets yell at the big bad people who are continually involved in improving the experience of the game for other players by I don't know maybe hosting events that cater to all skill levels and maybe perhaps interacting with players at all skill levels helps this person maybe possibly understand the mentalities and frustrations of some of the people he interacts with on a pretty large scale or setting up question and answer sessions with the developers and helping to express these opinions to the people that matter."

 

I mean goddamn. It's like, you just want to assume the worst.

 

 

 

So while you experiment, they see something wrong with the fact that one player is very difficult to be killed, and has 4 or 5 times the points of the nearest player.  I also don't understand the need to continually experiment since no changes have been made, so in effect your results should reach the same conclusions until there are other major changes.  Kind of pointless if you ask me to expect a different result, unless you enjoy helping prolong that new player experience reach all time lows.

 

It's kind of redundant to answer this, but in short, until you actually go in to these lobbies and interact with these players and try and find out what it is they're having trouble with, what they're not finding fun, how they'd like to play the game, you genuinely cannot speak for them.

 

The reactions I receive are largely positive ones that help people stick around. Name one other game where prominent community members, event hosts, clan leaders, and others actually check into the lobbies of newer players and ask them for their opinion.

 

We're talking about new player experience here, and that's not always about how often they win.

Edited by ticklemyiguana, 14 June 2015 - 05:45 PM.

[SS396]

FWIW, LittleDeuceCoupe is playing 1800+ lobbies with 'known gun' names (top-20 leaderboard) today, not 1600 lobbies.  I have him at about 1650 now, and four more games will get him over 1800.  You'll be thrilled to know I recognize many known alts in these games (proving your point, but also making one of mine: these matches are not 'newbs').
 
Me love you longtime, you madly-skilled player you.

Now, yes, but what about before now?

Okay, brand-new acct, 1250 start.
 
1 match, 1310 server, top score, mmr went to 1296, a 46pt gain.  This is more than I expected.  Will check next server (for Science!)
2nd match, 1380 server, top score, mmr climbed to 1340, a 54pt gain.  Also more than expected, but don't yet believe MMR changed...
3rd match, 1350 server (only one available), top score, mmr now at 1372.  Will use server browser from here.
5th match, 1420 server, top score, mmr at 1449, moving upward at about 33/match.
 
After the 6th match, MMR gain is back to 34 (expected) when I play over my 'level'. 
 
I don't think MMR changed.

How many of those players were "well known"? How would you say their experience was?

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

I will share they were top 20 on the leaderboard.  I won't call them out specifically, sorry.

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, 14 June 2015 - 06:03 PM.

[SS396]

Two things need to be taken into account.
 
1. It doesn't matter if they know what MMR is or not. Seriously, not at all.

It does matter, why? Because they don't care/know about it. Their MMR gain or loss does not conclude if they had a good experience or not. Those two variables are completely isolated from each other. P does not imply Q as you have stated before in your earlier statement I quoted. So, you say it matters to their experience, and then say it doesn't matter if they know what it is or not? I said the only thing that matters to a new player is winning or losing, MMR gain is unimportant, especially since they don't even know it exists in the first place.

You should try it sometime. Maybe ask them how they're liking the game, what they're having trouble with, stuff like that. Friendly interaction. My assumption is that you haven't.

Yeah, I never go to new players streams and try to assist them learn things like radar, items, or internals. Perhaps you shouldn't assume, when you know very little of what I do on my own time, when you are not able to visibly see it.

 

New players most commonly complain about the grind. Roughly 80% of complaints I hear when I ask reference it.

Completely different issue.

  

Assert your personal opinions all you want, but since I typically open up low tier games as a human being, asking how things are going and how they're liking the game, typically players respond to my scores and their attempts to kill me by making a game out of it and asking for pointers.
 
Have some people quit? Called hacks? Yeah, they have - but that number pales in comparison to the people who do the exact opposite. They play the game.

Its not a personal opinion, its me at least recognizing when someone is unsatisfied and quits for a specific reason. The question is how would their experience be if you were not there doing what you were doing and they could just learn on their own and experience the game on their own?

   

Also, I don't handicap myself. Once players believe that I'm not hacking, they want to know how to get to that point. Handicapping myself is something a lot of players find insulting if they find I'm doing it.
 
That's right. New players have thoughts and feelings like real human beings and aren't 100% reactionary, egocentric baboons that require everyone's defense going "oh poor noobs lets yell at the big bad people who are continually involved in improving the experience of the game for other players by I don't know maybe hosting events that cater to all skill levels and maybe perhaps interacting with players at all skill levels helps this person maybe possibly understand the mentalities and frustrations of some of the people he interacts with on a pretty large scale or setting up question and answer sessions with the developers and helping to express these opinions to the people that matter."
 
I mean goddamn. It's like, you just want to assume the worst.

Or perhaps you just want to assume I am assuming the worst.

 

It's kind of redundant to answer this, but in short, until you actually go in to these lobbies and interact with these players and try and find out what it is they're having trouble with, what they're not finding fun, how they'd like to play the game, you genuinely cannot speak for them.

Again, lets not assume, cause you are uninformed again.

The reactions I receive are largely positive ones that help people stick around. Name one other game where prominent community members, event hosts, clan leaders, and others actually check into the lobbies of newer players and ask them for their opinion.


 
We're talking about new player experience here, and that's not always about how often they win.

Yeah, it has ZERO to do with MMR gain and loss as you have explained earlier. I tried to point that out, but you failed to recognize that.

[SS396]

I will share they were top 20 on the leaderboard.  I won't call them out specifically, sorry.

Well, if thats the case then either there was a hell of a spread, or they were on a brand new smurf in the game with you, and I might add, in order for you to place 1st in all 6 of those rounds, you outplayed them.

Interesting.

[ticklemyiguana]

Let's be clear. You are not recognizing that MMR has a function. Please revise your argument.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Underdawg bonus, SS. I think I held my own, per usual.

 

 

I have never really tried to get to the top of the leaderboard.  No one - including me - really knows where I rank.

[SS396]

Let's be clear. You are not recognizing that MMR has a function. Please revise your argument.

 


I know the function of MMR, and so do you. I don't understand how you can assume I don't know what its function is, that alone is laughable.

My argument is exactly the same as before, it has not changed. Also by starting a fresh new account, your MMR is invalid when comparing it to others, especially to new players than can never achieve that sort of accelerated growth. Your ingame experience is the major difference here.

Underdawg bonus, SS. I think I held my own, per usual.
 
 
I have never really tried to get to the top of the leaderboard.  No one - including me - really knows where I rank.

Another interesting tidbit, 1400 average servers with players who all have a higher pilot ranking than you.

SMH

[ticklemyiguana]

 


I know the function of MMR, and so do you. I don't understand how you can assume I don't know what its function is, that alone is laughable.

My argument is exactly the same as before, it has not changed. Also by starting a fresh new account, your MMR is invalid when comparing it to others, especially to new players than can never achieve that sort of accelerated growth. Your ingame experience is the major difference here.

 

You are arguing that MMR doesn't matter to new players. I really didn't think I needed to explain this to you, but fine.

 

If a new player's MMR is going up that slowly, then matchmaking is going to continually fail to balance matches due to inaccurate numerical representations of their skill. This contributes directly to the experience of new players as well as their image of Hawken as an unbalanced game.

 

Chew some gum or something - at least something in your head will get some use.

Edited by ticklemyiguana, 14 June 2015 - 07:06 PM.

[6ixxer]

...

Edit:  the system WILL penalize you for playing over your head and not scoring in the top half.

 

Oh really. I thought if you played against higher level then you weren't necessarily penalised.

I might have to just join 3 star matches and always try for MVP rather than 1-2 star and not making the top 3.

 

I'm aiming to increase my MMR just so I can play in in matches I used to be able to get into before the ADH devs split.

Now the matches full of people I like playing against say i'm out of fitness range because of all the time I spent mucking around with my brother.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

 
Another interesting tidbit, 1400 average servers with players who all have a higher pilot ranking than you.

SMH

 

 

Shake it all you want, Chevelle, hon.   And do try to not put words into my mouth, it's not becoming of you.  The last two matches I played in this acct today had some players with higher ranks than I - it's how I topped (one of the top-20), by underdog bonus in one of them.

[SS396]

You are arguing that MMR doesn't matter to new players. I really didn't think I needed to explain this to you, but fine.
 
If a new player's MMR is going up that slowly, then matchmaking is going to continually fail to balance matches due to inaccurate numerical representations of their skill. This contributes directly to the experience of new players as well as their image of Hawken as an unbalanced game.
 
Chew some gum or something - at least something in your head will get some use.

No, I said MMR increase or decrease does not matter to a new players EXPERIENCE IN HAWKEN. Please follow along.  

 

You are the one that said it did, not me.

MMR IS already an inaccurate numerical representation of ones skill in Hawken.  Why, because its just a number that grows if you do good, and shrinks if you do poorly.  It doesn't rate anyones skill.

Thats funny cause I think what causes a major unbalance is veterans masquerading around in smurfs upsetting the balance because they are in lobbies that they don't belong.  Not your idea that one players MMR isn't climbing fast enough initially.  Luna already provided the proof of how fast it rises, once you get higher and there are no more matches at or above your MMR, it ends up down at a net gain of 1 or 2 points a round.

 

 

 

Shake it all you want, Chevelle, hon.   And do try to not put words into my mouth, it's not becoming of you.  The last two matches I played in this acct today had some players with higher ranks than I - it's how I topped (one of the top-20), by underdog bonus in one of them.

 

Just pointing out how "new" these accounts you were fighting were, since they at least had enough playtime to have a +5 higher pilot rank.

[ticklemyiguana]

No, I said MMR increase or decrease does not matter to a new players EXPERIENCE IN HAWKEN. Please follow along.  

 

You are the one that said it did, not me.

MMR IS already an inaccurate numerical representation of ones skill in Hawken.  Why, because its just a number that grows if you do good, and shrinks if you do poorly.  It doesn't rate anyones skill.

Thats funny cause I think what causes a major unbalance is veterans masquerading around in smurfs upsetting the balance because they are in lobbies that they don't belong.  Not your idea that one players MMR isn't climbing fast enough initially.  Luna already provided the proof of how fast it rises, once you get higher and there are no more matches at or above your MMR, it ends up down at a net gain of 1 or 2 points a round.

I just... I just... This is functionally over. You've fully disregarded causality, and as such, I cannot in any known way form an argument that will change your opinion, as that would entail stepping fully outside the realm of logic - a situation for which I am ill equipped.

 

Have a good day.

[SS396]

I just... I just... This is functionally over. You've fully disregarded causality, and as such, I cannot in any known way form an argument that will change your opinion, as that would entail stepping fully outside the realm of logic - a situation for which I am ill equipped.

 

Have a good day.

 

I just have never seen a new player ever fuzzy bunny about their MMR not growing fast enough leading them to be placed in lower ranked games that are too EASY for them and ruining their experience.  Seriously, by all means if you can find one post on the forums, go for it.  I'll wait.  I can however find hundreds that complain about about actual problems that actually exist.

 

You also shouldn't be finding a way to change ones opinion, you should be backing up yours.

[ticklemyiguana]

I just have never seen a new player ever fuzzy bunny about their MMR not growing fast enough leading them to be placed in lower ranked games that are too EASY for them and ruining their experience.  Seriously, by all means if you can find one post on the forums, go for it.  I'll wait.  I can however find hundreds that complain about about actual problems that actually exist.

 

You also shouldn't be finding a way to change ones opinion, you should be backing up yours.

Dude, are you kidding? MMR is like white blood cell count. Not everyone knows what it is or what it does or that it exists, but it sure as hell has an effect on your experience. I literally do not understand what you are saying.

[JeffMagnum]

Are you implying there are even other reasons to play Hawken except to grind MMR?

[SS396]

Dude, are you kidding? MMR is like white blood cell count. Not everyone knows what it is or what it does or that it exists, but it sure as hell has an effect on your experience. I literally do not understand what you are saying.

 

I suggest you think.

 

How many new users come to the forums complaining that the MMR isn't representing their true skill (fast enough) and that it upsets the balance of the game?

 

You said it does, and I asked you for proof.  I said I'll wait.  I can see how you could be confused.

[ticklemyiguana]

I suggest you think.

 

How many new users come to the forums complaining that the MMR isn't representing their true skill (fast enough) and that it upsets the balance of the game?

 

You said it does, and I asked you for proof.  I said I'll wait.  I can see how you could be confused.

alright. no. I'm done. I can't connect the dots for you.

[GalaxyRadio]

Not when the rate at which mmr is gained directly impacts the experience of new players...

 

I already told the devs about this fact, so they need to change the mmr gain in the first hours drastically, so smurfs can be already after just 2-3 games around 2000 mmrs and after that its more finetuning with 5-20 mmr steps with another 4-5 games to nail them where they are belong too.

 

For Example

 

Game 1: 1250 MMR -> Highest MMR on server is 1700 and he beats him double his points, so he get instantly on 1800

Game 2: 1800 MMR -> Highest MMR on server is 2000 and he beats him with half more points, so he get instantly on 2000

Game 3: 2000 MMR -> Highest MMR on server is 2400 and he got beaten by him double his points, so gains only 50 mmr

Game 4 2050 MMR -> Highest MMR on server is 2200 and he go beaten by almost the same point first to first place, so he gains 100 more MMR

Game 5 2150 MMR -> Highest MMR on server is 2300 and he got beaten by 1/3 more points first to first place and he gains only 20 points

 

After that he is almost where he belongs too, but only if there is any "playerpool" around his level. 

 

Every smart player here knows a little bit what to do, but its not our part to do the dev works, we can only give some advice and hope they will fix the game.

 

But even with that, our playerbase is way too small to get better gameplayexperience. Almost in every game you are playing with a gap around 500 or more, so 1 may stomps, 1 maybe get stomped by almost all players, so he is "feeding" and the rest to the best they can to deal with it. And if you play missle assault or siege mode this can ruin the whole game until the very end and its getting more frusted if 2 people join the game and the first one is a weak player and joins the weak team, because he came first and the second player joins the already stronger one and its getting pretty much one sided.

 

The actual matchmaking/balancing program dosn't work at all. 80% of all my games are pretty much one sided, not very enjoyable.

 

And then you have sometimes people who are sitting out to make the actual game more enjoyable for everyone, matchmaking thinks he isn't that good and put that guy to the team, which has more firepower with him, if he plays at full capacity....

 

Galaxy Radio

Edited by GalaxyRadio, 15 June 2015 - 06:35 AM.

[PoopSlinger]

alright. no. I'm done. I can't connect the dots for you.

We know you can't connect the dots.  You're just making stuff up.  SS ftw.

 

Also:  My MMR has been flying as wildly as ever.  It seems to be working just fine.

[Panzermanathod]

Back when I first started, I had no idea match making was a thing. And when people say MMR for a bit of time I simply had no idea what they were talking about.

 

As a new player, no, MMR didn't matter in my experience. It does what it does, but as a new player MMR has no "real" bearing on experiences, at least most times. I mean, it's not like your MMR would effect how many smurfs you see or parties that come in.

[cavefishes]

While MMR isn't something new players really look at or consider, it certainly has an effect on them. MMR directly influences matchmaking, and if players aren't being placed with players of similar skill, they'll tend to have a worse time. 

 

If a smurf who's wrecking new players isn't quickly bumped up and out of the low MMR ranges, they'll get matchmade with much newer players, and newer players can be matchmade with them. This results in unbalanced matches and a negative user experience for the new players. If someone is pub stomping right off the bat, it's crucial they don't stick around in servers with newer players. While playing much better players is good for learning, a new player most likely doesn't want to see someone constantly topping the scoreboard and making matches one-sided(a team of new players versus a team of new players with an extremely skilled player tends to go one way).

[Panzermanathod]

For a new player, there is no MMR, there is no smurf. There is only this...

 

https://www.youtube....qfcvlM#t=12m12s

[SS396]

While MMR isn't something new players really look at or consider, it certainly has an effect on them. MMR directly influences matchmaking, and if players aren't being placed with players of similar skill, they'll tend to have a worse time. 

 

If a smurf who's wrecking new players isn't quickly bumped up and out of the low MMR ranges, they'll get matchmade with much newer players, and newer players can be matchmade with them. This results in unbalanced matches and a negative user experience for the new players. If someone is pub stomping right off the bat, it's crucial they don't stick around in servers with newer players. While playing much better players is good for learning, a new player most likely doesn't want to see someone constantly topping the scoreboard and making matches one-sided(a team of new players versus a team of new players with an extremely skilled player tends to go one way).

 

I agree that new players not being matched with players of a similar skill are not enjoying the game, however the question is how much of a MMR differential is enough to make a noticeable difference?  Can a new player detect a 50 or 100 MMR difference or does it take a much higher spread differential to make it obviously noticeable.

 

Also, the problem I have with your second paragraph is the use of smurf.  Smurfs are not new players.  So I identify that the problem is the smurf being in a match that they don't belong where their previous game experience gives them a significant advantage.  If you remove the smurf from the equation in your example is there a problem with the way MMR works for new players?  Is it not fast enough as stated previously and does one player gaining 10 or 30 in one round cause a severe imbalance on the next match?

 

So creating a system that bumps anyone up quickly for doing well in one match, could move a new player (not smurf) into a group that they are unqualified for, making their experience even worse.  (the game got extremely hard way too fast)  I myself think its easier to detect the smurf by (CPU ID, IP Address, hardware profiling, accuracy) and accelerate them individually and artificially rather than forcing a large skip for everyone that places first in the round as suggested above.

 

So yes, I do agree we need to keep veterans out of new players games at all costs and let the new players experience it for themselves.  Also at the same time those new players need much more instruction and guidance.

[M4st0d0n]

 

2. For every win, someone else loses. Ideally most players receive a 50% win/loss ratio. This is achieved best by placing them in games with players of comparable skill. This means improving the flexibility with which MMR is given to new players - which is precisely what the concerns in this thread are over - that the game may have taken the exact opposite route of where it ought to go.

 

It's kind of a common misconception. A 50% W/L ratio distribution is achieved best by doing nothing at all. With or without matchmaker, with an homogeneous population, you get this kind of distribution. A fecking gaussian around 50. Matchmaker is meant to give interesting matches, not a half chance to win.

 

On the opposite side. A 25% W/L ratio for new players means they are systematically opposed to more skilled player. You shouldnt just assume the worst. You should assume a totally useless matchmaker, a game that was "launched" three times already, systematic smurfes and a population... Well just look at heroku.

 

So yeah. Testing a broken stat. For science. Awesome.

[ticklemyiguana]

It's kind of a common misconception. A 50% W/L ratio distribution is achieved best by doing nothing at all. With or without matchmaker, with an homogeneous population, you get this kind of distribution. A fecking gaussian around 50.

 

Your math assumes that the statistical average is equivalent to every player's experience. A player in the nth percentile will have a win/loss ratio equal to n/100 if there is no matchmaker (assuming infinite time). MM is supposed to keep players in roughly equivalent percentiles playing each other.

 

 

On the opposite side. A 25% W/L ratio for new players means they are systematically opposed to more skilled player. You shouldnt just assume the worst. You should assume a totally useless matchmaker, a game that was "launched" three times already, systematic smurfes and a population... Well just look at heroku.

 

The only assumptions I'm willing to make in this study is that math, hawken, and people exist. Don't be a douche.

 

 

So yeah. Testing a broken stat. For science. Awesome.

 

This is also not what I'm testing. As stated previously, I've been testing the experience of new players primarily related to the feel of "grind" since the last pricing update. This thread is the result of concern over an unrelated observation.

Edited by ticklemyiguana, 15 June 2015 - 01:41 PM.

[T3CHM3CH]

 Also at the same time those new players need much more instruction and guidance.

 

 

 

new players don't need guidance and instructions, they only need practice ,and most of all they need to practice against players at their level, 

 

smurfs and high mmr persons playing on server way outside their skill are ruining the game for the rest,

no matter what they say (playing lightly, guiding  ....) it's just bogus argument to try to excuse their presence on the server.

when you play against someone that kill you in 2 seconds, there is nothing to learn from this,

but playing against a opponent your size is fun and instructive, because the fight last much longer and you actually have time to see what he did to kill you. and learn from this.

 

also increasing mmr rapidly for smurf, will not solve anything, because they will just create a new account.

the reason for creating smurf account is to be able to join server below your mmr

 

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

also increasing mmr rapidly for smurf, will not solve anything, because they will just create a new account.

the reason for creating smurf account is to be able to join server below your mmr

 

Right reason, wrong conclusion.

 

It'll bring more semi-skilled players into mid-tier MMRs, thus more players into servers I can reach without creating a new account.  Same result: newer players see their smoking ruins within 2 seconds.

 

 

playing against a opponent your size is fun and instructive, because the fight last much longer and you actually have time to see what he did to kill you. and learn from this.

 

It'll lead to a big skill gap and MMR runaway, IMO. 

 

I believe the problem is twofold (and a search on this topic in these forums will show you so...):  higher-skilled players place a ceiling/cap on lower-skilled, a gap they cannot cross; and that higher-skilled players playing in lower-skilled matches are oppressively keeping lower-skilled players from crossing that gap.

 

Smurf accounts, with their lower MMR, are actually kinder than a 2700-level making it into a 1600-level server.  A smurf with 2700-level skill in a 1600-level 6-man server, full of true 1600 players will shift the average MMR of the server not at all.  A 2700-level main account player in that same server would shift it 91pts to 1691; when the smurf/main scores top position, the 1600 players who scored in positions 2-5 will have less MMR increase, while positions 6-12 will lose that much MORE (playing over their head).

 

I think the problem with new-player experience is actually the frequency/number of matches with semi-skilled players (who are sufficient to stomp newbs, but would themselves be stomped by anyone 2300+).

 

The quick test I did with the 'LittleDeuceCoupe' account showed that if I were intent on reaching 1900-2100 level servers, I'd only stomp on newbies for 9 games, max, before this level of server became selectable for me in the Match Browser.  I consider this to be VERY atypical; I think maybe 40 active players in the game today can do this this quickly.

 

When I was actually a newer/poorer player (think about 1.5 years ago) and first created alt accounts out of frustration with crossing the 1900-2200 level gap, thinking I needed a fresh start, it would take me about 60 games to reach this level.  Even last December, with my Lawyer_Daggett charting experiment, it took me about 18 games.

 

So, I'll submit this hypothesis (which I would need a lot of data showing MMR increases after matches by pilot by server average to prove):  it's not your most-skilled smurfs that are the problem.  They move through the lower ranks like a precise scalpel.  It's the population stuck at about 1900-2000 who are creating alt accounts to 'try again' and 'build momentum' who are the main source of newb dream crushing.

 

I would like to see smurf accounts promoted quickly (and natural aptitude rewarded).  I would like to see the penalty for playing over one's head reduced dramatically (an algorithm change).  I don't think it takes a complete reset of MMR to 1250 across the board to do that. 

 

I also think the system must be restored to a natural logistic curve if/when the playerbase grows by 10x (or people will game the very mechanisms we're talking about putting in).

[ticklemyiguana]

 

The quick test I did with the 'LittleDeuceCoupe' account showed that if I were intent on reaching 1900-2100 level servers, I'd only stomp on newbies for 9 games, max, before this level of server became selectable for me in the Match Browser.  I consider this to be VERY atypical; I think maybe 40 active players in the game today can do this this quickly.

 

 

Just going to point this out here, this is my usual experience, and it taking (significantly) longer is the reason for this entire thread.

Edited by ticklemyiguana, 15 June 2015 - 02:38 PM.

[americanbrit14]

Are you implying there are even other reasons to play Hawken except to grind MMR?

yes, we are implying that hawken is a game, that is played for fun, and is also free.

[SS396]

The quick test I did with the 'LittleDeuceCoupe' account showed that if I were intent on reaching 1900-2100 level servers, I'd only stomp on newbies for 9 games, max, before this level of server became selectable for me in the Match Browser.  I consider this to be VERY atypical; I think maybe 40 active players in the game today can do this this quickly.
 
When I was actually a newer/poorer player (think about 1.5 years ago) and first created alt accounts out of frustration with crossing the 1900-2200 level gap, thinking I needed a fresh start, it would take me about 60 games to reach this level.  Even last December, with my Lawyer_Daggett charting experiment, it took me about 18 games.

Heres the issue I have with your testing, your goal the whole time was to get to higher rank lobbies as fast as possible, what if the goal of these people who are doing this sort of destruction is to NOT get into higher ranked lobbies? Hrmmmm?    

 

So, I'll submit this hypothesis (which I would need a lot of data showing MMR increases after matches by pilot by server average to prove):  it's not your most-skilled smurfs that are the problem.  They move through the lower ranks like a precise scalpel.  It's the population stuck at about 1900-2000 who are creating alt accounts to 'try again' and 'build momentum' who are the main source of newb dream crushing.
 
I would like to see smurf accounts promoted quickly (and natural aptitude rewarded).  I would like to see the penalty for playing over one's head reduced dramatically (an algorithm change).  I don't think it takes a complete reset of MMR to 1250 across the board to do that.

Its ironic that you've identified smurfs as crushing the hopes and dreams of the new player, but yet you've actually participated in the very same act, and even worse upwards of 20 times. How many people do you think you've affected while doing that?

How about everyone just agrees that smurfing is bad altogether, instead of saying its ok for a 2700 to smurf, and not ok for a 2000 to smurf. They both are accomplishing the same end result, as I've said a few hundred times before. The problem is not the WHO, its the ACT.

#nomoresmurfing even for "testing" purposes. Let CapnJosh get his own data thats pure without any falsified data to skew it.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Let CapnJosh get his own data thats pure without any falsified data to skew it.

 

GFY.   Prove any data I have is impure or falsified, and think VERY carefully about who you're slandering with the impugnation that it is falsified or impure.  Consider what data sources I might have.

 

You really haven't been paying attention very much, and I have now concluded you're not worth wasting further time on. 

[SS396]

GFY.   Prove any data I have is impure or falsified, and think VERY carefully about who you're slandering with the impugnation that it is falsified or impure.  Consider what data sources I might have.
 
You really haven't been paying attention very much, and I have now concluded you're not worth wasting further time on.

 

Ok, I'm game.

Lets start with the accelerated growth of MMR between a brand new player, and a veteran (of any mmr) in a smurf. You know as well as anyone else, the MMR growth of a player with zero experience in Hawken is not remotely close to that of a veteran with any in game experience.  Your results in your testing is unachievable by any brand new player in Hawken.

 

I don't care about your "sources".  If your data of new player experiences has a smurf in it, its NOT NEW PLAYER DATA.  And yes, you (or any other veteran) being in that match does invalidate it.

 

Heres another fun one, your MMR across all your accounts. Even you said you have never tried hard enough to accurately represent your MMR and you don't know where you would be.
 

I have never really tried to get to the top of the leaderboard.  No one - including me - really knows where I rank.

Lemme know if you need more.  This is fun.

 

 

[TheButtSatisfier]

Edit: removed unnecessary content

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 16 June 2015 - 03:04 PM.

[Hyginos]

Oh really. I thought if you played against higher level then you weren't necessarily penalised.

I might have to just join 3 star matches and always try for MVP rather than 1-2 star and not making the top 3.

 

I'm aiming to increase my MMR just so I can play in in matches I used to be able to get into before the ADH devs split.

Now the matches full of people I like playing against say i'm out of fitness range because of all the time I spent mucking around with my brother.

 

I believe there is a point at which the penalty is zero. I know when I dueled dave a while back (just me and him in a fight club for 15 min, which would put the server average about 300 MMR above mine) I scored zero points to his 200 or so, and my MMR did not move.

[StubbornPuppet]

My personal observation has been that if I play in a match where the avg MMR is lower than my own, my MMR either sits or goes down, even if I'm top of the boards on every match.

 

When I play in a match where the avg MMR is higher than my own, my MMR goes up, even if I'm doing poorly.

 

This was not the case in the past, so I'd say they've changed something.  I'd say it's likely that this change has been the symptom of two separate changes: an attempt to keep high ranked players from intentionally tanking their MMR to be able to get into lower ranked matches combined with an an attempt to tighten up the avg MMR for matchmaking.

 

Unfortunately, this has backfired where smurf accounts are concerned.

Edited by StubbornPuppet, 16 June 2015 - 12:32 PM.

[IareDave]

Word of advice: When you make a thread title try to omit the word 'MMR'.

Else you'll have Ss396 swoop in and attempt to persuade everyone to see his view whilst ignoring your own view point through massive text walls that no one has the motivation to read.

[M4st0d0n]

Your math assumes that the statistical average is equivalent to every player's experience. A player in the nth percentile will have a win/loss ratio equal to n/100 if there is no matchmaker (assuming infinite time). MM is supposed to keep players in roughly equivalent percentiles playing each other.

 

 

 

The only assumptions I'm willing to make in this study is that math, hawken, and people exist. Don't be a douche.

 

 

 

This is also not what I'm testing. As stated previously, I've been testing the experience of new players primarily related to the feel of "grind" since the last pricing update. This thread is the result of concern over an unrelated observation.

 

If, like you suggest, your MM matches people with 60% win rate, in time they'll get normed to 50%. If like worldt of tank, you team 60% with 40%, in time you'll get 50% for everyone. 50% is meaningless. W/L ratio is not like the age distribution amongst a population. It's only two states, win or lose, and one create the other, so it's symetrical. So assuming infinite time, like you said, everyones W/L ratio would tend to 50%. With or without any matchmaker.

 

So what's the purpose of matchmaker? It's to provide interesting matches for everyone. Multiple criteria. Team composition, number of players, repartition of skill/experience, number of parties, even language.

 

I'm not a douche, I'm kind enough to explain that to you. I point out that Hawken's playerbase has been heavily modified at least three time with three events, the worst being steam launch. It's situational awareness in the real world. Whatever you're testing, MMR is a useless stat, so broken that the core playerbase farmed it to the point they're not even able to play the game. You're not a new player, you cant recreate a new user experience. You cant monitor your experience yourself. You're just trying to be a brainy smurf.