253 replies to this topic

[ATX22]

git gud.

/thread.

 

/game...

[LEmental]

*why is s.c.r.u.b censored?

Because...

[Amidatelion]

Because...

More for me.

[CraftyDus]

Rip left eye

[Merl61]

lol im the culprit. haha you guys assume way too much. i bet most of you didnt even bother too look at my MMR. if you had you would have realized my alt meleefanatic has a higher mmr than 99% of the community. matchmaking is still the same trust me lol. and i made this account like 2 years ago. i know only like 2 other people will understand what its like to build up your mmr over the course of a couple months only to lose half of the work in 1 10 min game. goodbye months of playing. none of you will understand how this feels so you couldnt possibly comprehend why i would make an alt where im not FORCED to carry a team or risk having my ranking drop. i can just waddle around and have fun and not care about the score. to anyone that says well just stop caring then, to be honest thats why your not one of the best players in the game is that fuzzy bunny* mentality right there. just being honest here thats why you will never be as good as the best in this game

come at me bro


*why is s.c.r.u.b censored?

Truth.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

lol im the culprit. haha you guys assume way too much. i bet most of you didnt even bother too look at my MMR. if you had you would have realized my alt meleefanatic has a higher mmr than 99% of the community. matchmaking is still the same trust me lol. and i made this account like 2 years ago. i know only like 2 other people will understand what its like to build up your mmr over the course of a couple months only to lose half of the work in 1 10 min game. goodbye months of playing. none of you will understand how this feels so you couldnt possibly comprehend why i would make an alt where im not FORCED to carry a team or risk having my ranking drop. i can just waddle around and have fun and not care about the score. to anyone that says well just stop caring then, to be honest thats why your not one of the best players in the game is that fuzzy bunny* mentality right there. just being honest here thats why you will never be as good as the best in this game

 

come at me bro

 

 

*why is s.c.r.u.b censored?

 

 

Hest nailed it.  Not just the high-lit portion, but the whole post. 

[Nov8tr]

I ALWAYS have alt accounts in every game I've played online for over 20 yrs. I make no bones about, make it public and have posted it here several times. I've told many, many ppl in game who I am and the names of my other accounts. My MMR runs from 1600 to 1700, so what. I'm a OK middle of the road player. I've sit out when it was too unbalanced in a game. I've commended other people who did it first as well. I've tried to help other people with tactics as we play. I even tell the other player what they did wrong when they die. Even though I despise loser cheaters, I will finish the match. I just usually won't play the next match with them. I'm not a great player and never will be. I do ok for a old bugger. I play for fun. At my age and health its all I have, fun. Alts (or whatever you want to call them, smurfs, whatever) are not always bad. Not all of us who have alts are out to "stomp noobs". I'm not.

[SS396]

Also, and this isn't aimed at SS, it's hestoned.  Stop dancing around how dumb this is.  People log into smurfs to enjoy the enormous skill gulf between them and other players, and there's no shame in that, just difficulty in experiencing it in this relatively new world of matchmaking multiplayer.

 

I don't think its dumb.  Really if there is such an easy way to bypass a so called balancer, then theres no point in even trying to balance teams at all.  Might as well just dump everyone into a free for all and not try to organize sides, its just a waste of time to balance a team when skills are not accurately represented.

 

Hest nailed it.  Not just the high-lit portion, but the whole post. 

 

I don't think think so.

 

Everyone knows how it feels to lose MMR thats taken weeks or months to accrue, I don't think him or anyone else using another account as a means protect their MMR is the right thing to do here.  Which is why for a leaderboard to work correctly you should be required to maintain it, not just build it up and let it stagnate.

 

Also, having 1300 points while everyone was 500 and lower, I'd hardly call waddling around and having fun.  I get the whole you just want to play the game, but when you play the game in lower level lobbies to the same degree you do in high level matches, theres something else going on that maybe people don't want to realize or admit.

[devotion]

when you play the game in lower level lobbies to the same degree you do in high level matches, theres something else going on that maybe people don't want to realize or admit.

i think you've missed it; this is his point, exactly. he isn't actually playing to the same degree, even if it would appear so to other players. the truth of the situation is that it takes very little effort after a certain point to maintain sufficient performance for pub play.

 

a 2k mmr player can probably handle 1600 players with relative ease. similarly, a 2.4k player can probably handle a 2k player with relative ease. hestoned is nearly 3k, so what does that mean when he is playing against 2k players?

 

"waddling around" is very much a relative term here.

 

 

Everyone knows how it feels to lose MMR thats taken weeks or months to accrue

another key difference here is that mmr gains are incredibly diminishing the higher up you go. being 2k mmr and losing 10 mmr over the course of a day can feel significant, but the mathematical reality is that it's at a stage where your mmr is volatile enough that you can gain whole number amounts in a single game. at the very top of the mmr spectrum, those exact same wins count for the merest fractions of gains: we're talking about increments of .01 if even. which means that losing 20 mmr as a 2k player can be made up in 4-5 lobbies potentially, but losing even 5 mmr in a game at the high end represents literally hundreds of flawless games at .01 gain a piece where you have to top score.

Edited by devotion, 09 January 2016 - 06:08 PM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Well, the 2k player cannot find 2k MMR lobbies anymore to make up 4 MMR in a match.

 

So, Hyginos, no, you won't see me running for max MMR even if I tried, even in private servers. We need more (good) players, first.

[ticklemyiguana]

As a continuance of devo's thoughts, what maters most on accounts is consistency. You can have 9 accounts, and play the exact same way on each of them, and you're going to wind up in the exact same matches on the exact same teams, because your MMR is going to be represented the same way.

 

If you consistently play "for fun" (a term we'll use to distinguish between caring and not caring about MMR gains and losses) then your MMR, and reverse causally, your scores and how hard you hit in games are going to be consistent.

 

I have three CS GO accounts.

 

One, my "main" with several hundred dollars of merchandise on it, is my main steam account. Its for average me. A touch of tryhard, a lot of drinking, warm up play, playing with friends who only play the game casually, the whole hodgepodge of stuff that typically goes into a main account.

 

However, at a point, I started to take the game seriously, and I didn't want to be held back by continually playing with friends who were struggling to break Nova 2 (slightly below average rank). So I made another one. This one I played consistently with a team, after an hour or so of warming up. Obviously, my rank on that was/is much higher than my "main" account. Is that unfair? Hell no. I play differently on these accounts.

 

My third? Shotgun, pistol and utility only.

 

On Hawken, I have an account, (kind of defunct at this point) with an MMR waaaaaaaay above what I play at now - deep into the top 100. It's got zero friends. I don't say anything in the matches at all, I just tune into the game, and play. I don't give it out to anyone, because I play best when I know I'm anonymous, when there's no "ego" to go along with it.

 

Is my "main" account unfair now because it's only around 2200? Not really. When I play every couple games I run into someone I want to hang out with, I play it for fun.

 

I also have a litany of other accounts for drinking, for playing with just one weapon or without dodging or other variants. As long as you're playing consistently, there's not actually a risk to balance.

 

if you're just making smurf accounts every time you start dying, well, then there's a problem. That's not what anyone here does, to the best of my knowledge.

 

Relating this back to hestoned, there's a different sort of tryhard to what he does on his accounts on meleefanatic vs hestoned. "Hestoned" is for the grind. The extra tryhard mode that puts him in the top couple players in the game. It's a status account. Can you blame him? The dude has a level of skill well beyond what most of us have, and there's some legitimate validation to holding on to an account that he's earned, and plays consistently with.

 

Other accounts, that pressure isn't there. He doesn't have to absolutely crush the players on the enemy team, doesn't have to pay complete and total attention. He can just do his thing. Good for him. Really. Saying anything else is just silly.

Edited by ticklemyiguana, 09 January 2016 - 10:05 PM.

[SS396]

a 2k mmr player can probably handle 1600 players with relative ease. similarly, a 2.4k player can probably handle a 2k player with relative ease. hestoned is nearly 3k, so what does that mean when he is playing against 2k players?

Thats easy, it means that he doesn't belong in a match against 2k players, or even 2.4k players as used in your example.
 
 

another key difference here is that mmr gains are incredibly diminishing the higher up you go. being 2k mmr and losing 10 mmr over the course of a day can feel significant, but the mathematical reality is that it's at a stage where your mmr is volatile enough that you can gain whole number amounts in a single game. at the very top of the mmr spectrum, those exact same wins count for the merest fractions of gains: we're talking about increments of .01 if even. which means that losing 20 mmr as a 2k player can be made up in 4-5 lobbies potentially, but losing even 5 mmr in a game at the high end represents literally hundreds of flawless games at .01 gain a piece where you have to top score.

 
Sorry, I don't buy that explanation at all.  MMR gains and losses are based solely around the average MMR of the lobby, not total MMR of the overall playerbase.  They don't diminish the higher your MMR gets, its totally dependant on the composition of the lobby and where you relate to it. If you play in a lobby where the average is close to your MMR level and perform well, it moves up drastically than if you are 1000 MMR higher than the average of the lobby and perform well.  This is by design, its always been this way.  

The top 50 or so players MMR wise didn't get to where they are at on the leaderboards by playing in thousands of pubs against regular players, they got there by clustering with other high MMR players in TPG matches.

Heres the problem I have, for your example to be true the number 1 player would of had to play hundreds of thousands of flawless games to get from 2950 to 3000, or 500,000 flawless matches to be exact. Sorry, but we both know that didn't actually happen, it happened in a few TPG matches one night, right?

[CraftyDus]

why do you have a no foreigner slogan in your signature?

[Hyginos]

Sorry, I don't buy that explanation at all.  MMR gains and losses are based solely around the average MMR of the lobby, not total MMR of the overall playerbase.  They don't diminish the higher your MMR gets, its totally dependant on the composition of the lobby and where you relate to it. If you play in a lobby where the average is close to your MMR level and perform well, it moves up drastically than if you are 1000 MMR higher than the average of the lobby and perform well.  This is by design, its always been this way.  

The top 50 or so players MMR wise didn't get to where they are at on the leaderboards by playing in thousands of pubs against regular players, they got there by clustering with other high MMR players in TPG matches.

Heres the problem I have, for your example to be true the number 1 player would of had to play hundreds of thousands of flawless games to get from 2950 to 3000, or 500,000 flawless matches to be exact. Sorry, but we both know that didn't actually happen, it happened in a few TPG matches one night, right?

You don't have to buy it. It's been empirically shown to be the case by multiple players.

The whole "oh the MMR is so high only because they climb each other thing" kinda bugs me, not necessarily because it is entirely false, but because it presumes to diminish that, first, the players climb each other skill wise as well, and second, that these players are subsequently able to rouphly maintain their MMR after being reintroduced into the wild. It cranks the MMR, but it also makes the players much better than just pubbing would.

Edited by Hyginos, 09 January 2016 - 10:22 PM.

[Meraple]

The top 50 or so players MMR wise didn't get to where they are at on the leaderboards by playing in thousands of pubs against regular players,

A newly made smurf can get above 2500 MMR in 20h through solely pubbing, so it's not too many pubs someone has to play to get there if he/she has the capability to score well enough.

 

I forgot where the top 50 starts, but 2500 should at the very least be really close to it.

 

 

The top 50 or so players MMR wise (...) got there by clustering with other high MMR players in TPG matches.

Plainly false; not everyone in the top 50 participates in TPG.

Some people got there through pubs and still (slowly) climb the ladder that way.

Edited by (KDR) Meraple, 09 January 2016 - 10:37 PM.

[SS396]

why do you have a no foreigner slogan in your signature?

Duh, Murica.

And its not a slogan, its a U.S. government restrictive caveat.

 

You don't have to buy it. It's been empirically shown to be the case by multiple players.

The whole "oh the MMR is so high only because they climb each other thing" kinda bugs me, not necessarily because it is entirely false, but because it presumes to diminish that, first, the players climb each other skill wise as well, and second, that these players are subsequently able to rouphly maintain their MMR after being reintroduced into the wild. It cranks the MMR, but it also makes the players much better than just pubbing would.

Where has it been shown and by who?  Citations please?

 

How can it be false?  Those players gained their MMR because thats the way the math works, nothing else, it doesn't do anything differently if you are in the 1% of the population or the 50 percentile.  It rewards you for playing well in matches where the average MMR is near or above your own level, it always has.

If the high MMR players are only gaining .01 MMR a match once they start to approach the peak as Devo stated, they'd have to be playing for hundreds of thousands of matches, which means thousands of hours, just for those last 50 MMR to break 3k.   Someone else has got to see the problem with this.

 

Its a very simple process, get into a match that has an average MMR that is at or above your MMR and do well, and your MMR increases by more than .01.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[devotion]

Thats easy, it means that he doesn't belong in a match against 2k players, or even 2.4k players as used in your example.

we always seem to end up here; you aren't wrong, but matchmaking has to make concessions to deal with a small playerbase. i would like to point out, however, that if you believe that he shouldn't be playing against 2.4k players, then it should also follow that he could also be capable of sandbagging or "waddling" against those players and their lessers. that is what i was directly addressing in that particular segment of my post; it opposes and puts to rest the notion that hestoned might be deriving pleasure from going all-out 24/7 against everyone indiscriminately.

 

 

MMR gains and losses are based solely around the average MMR of the lobby, not total MMR of the overall playerbase.

the average mmr of a lobby is contingent on the total mmr of the overall playerbase though. if you analyzed all of hawken's active mmrs on a bell curve, it is probably safe to say that hestoned is several standard deviations away from what would be considered typical. when you further take that concept and place it over a small population, there probably isn't a sufficient number of total players in present population who would adequately matchmake with hestoned in the first place. you also have to consider that for how small the population is, it's further fragmented by what times relevant players are on simultaneously, and that region further separates matchmaking selection.

 

 

The top 50 or so players MMR wise didn't get to where they are at on the leaderboards by playing in thousands of pubs against regular players, they got there by clustering with other high MMR players in TPG matches.

i was personally around 2700~ before i ever began my first tpg match. it certainly helped increase my mmr afterwards, but "clustering" is by no means necessary to gain mmr. jeffmagnum is another relevant example from the na region, and i believe clusterbombman's tpg participation has been virtually nonexistent as well due to scheduling. i would also further offer up the point that there are players in the top 50 who have consistently raised alternate accounts (several, in some individuals cases) to also be in the top 50 alongside their main, without ever having played them in any kind of community-driven event.

 

 

Heres the problem I have, for your example to be true the number 1 player would of had to play hundreds of thousands of flawless games to get from 2950 to 3000, or 500,000 flawless matches to be exact. Sorry, but we both know that didn't actually happen, it happened in a few TPG matches one night, right?

firstly, i would like to extend an open invitation to you to join tpg. it's a good opportunity to find a group of people to bond with, and it would be a pretty accessible way for you to experience the event that you are referencing, so that you could have more perspective to form an opinion with.

 

with that out of the way, tpg has certainly had an impact on mmrs for certain participating players. there is no refuting that point. i would, however, like to clarify: what are you trying to build an argument for?

 

if it is the idea that hestoned shouldn't be allowed to play given his mmr, i would offer my opinion that it seems counter-intuitive to be punished for excelling; if any practices were implemented that would result in circumstances where the game could become completely exclusionary (even if only for a small subset of players), then it would actively be communicating to your community that striving for excellence is an empty accomplishment; it would set a precedence that exceptional progress will be punished rather than rewarded. none of those actions seem very desirable to me.

 

if your argument is trying to suggest that hestoned doesn't deserve his placement within the mmr system, i would argue that he has won virtually every competition-minded event that he has participated in, excepting maybe a 1v1 tournament or the occasional foray into another region altogether. his reputation alone speaks volumes on the subject; his name is commonplace in the community out of respect for his talents.

 

if your argument is that, generally speaking, mmr has inflated, then i would agree with you. nothing in my initial comment was in regards to inflation, however, so i feel like this is a strange point to stand on in context.

 

if you aren't trying to make a point, and are simply trying to air out a grievance or allude to the notion that there is no way that players are as good as people would have you believe, you are naturally free to do that as well.

Edited by devotion, 10 January 2016 - 02:05 AM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Devo,

 

firstly, i would like to extend an open invitation to you to join tpg. it's a good opportunity to find a group of people to bond with, and it would be a pretty accessible way for you to experience the event that you are referencing, so that you could have more perspective to form an opinion with.

 

I think this isn't an option for him.

 

 

i would offer my opinion that it seems counter-intuitive to be punished for excelling; if any practices were implemented that would result in circumstances where the game could become completely exclusionary (even if only for a small subset of players), then it would actively be communicating to your community that striving for excellence is an empty accomplishment; it would set a precedence that exceptional progress will be punished rather than rewarded. none of those actions seem very desirable to me.

 

This is exactly what many members of the community and playerbase do:  gush salt on good players merely for being good.  I am reasonably certain you get it, I certainly get it.  

 

What is the end game for persons who tell me I'm too good to play in the only match the MM has for me?  They drive me away and drive all the truly good players away, leaving a puddle of mediocrity.

 

Why do they want the mediocrity?  I suggest it's because they believe they are better than the average, and could be the player everyone else has to lose to, if they just got rid of those higher-MMR obstacles.

 

 

 

[Nept]

with that out of the way, tpg has certainly had an impact on mmrs for certain participating players. there is no refuting that point. i would, however, like to clarify: what are you trying to build an argument for?

 

Depends on your team and position.  If you'll recall, hestoned frequently lost MMR - even while playing for Omni.  His defensive role (on triangular maps, especially) meant that he wasn't gaining as many points as he otherwise would've.

[_incitatus]

Depends on your team and position. If you'll recall, hestoned frequently lost MMR - even while playing for Omni. His defensive role (on triangular maps, especially) meant that he wasn't gaining as many points as he otherwise would've.

I always thought that people participating in TPG lost more MMR than they gained. Simply due to the fact that practices and matches don't revolve around scoring points/kills.

On the smurf topic in general, there's two sides to it and they're both not wrong.

On the one side, there's valid reasons to play on alternate accounts. Having an account to fool around on is fine, I understand you worked hard for your status and all that.

On the other side though, I don't like losing 30 mmr per round playing against a smurf that's getting an underdog bonus on top of being 400 mmr higher than me on their main.

It's a population problem and everyone is affected by it. Just go play the fuzzy bunnyng game.

[Nept]

I always thought that people participating in TPG lost more MMR than they gained. Simply due to the fact that practices and matches don't revolve around scoring points/kills.

 

Depended on your scrim and match opponents.  If you were winning matches, and if you played a high-point position/mech, you'd quickly gain MMR - provided, of course, that your opponents had similar MMRs themselves.  Because Omni won the vast majority of our games by substantial amounts, our offensive players were almost guaranteed MMR gains.  That's the reason Xacius shot past 3000 MMR.  However, hestoned's role was typically defensive.  As a result, he often lost MMR during scrims or matches.  OmniStone found himself in a similar situation.

 

hestoned maintained an MMR in the upper 2900's while we were absent from competition and despite his defensive role on the team.  In fact, he initially hit those numbers during TPG's off-season.  It's silly to claim that his MMR results from TPG play (directed at SS, not at inci).

Edited by Nept: Ultra Lord of the God-Kings, 10 January 2016 - 01:16 PM.

[Nightfirebolt]

I don't understand why smurfs are even necessary anymore.

 

Ever since Josh changed the matchmaker code, anybody - with any MMR - can get into a match as long as they use the queue.

[Nept]

You can find the answers you seek within this thread you didn't read!

[CoshCaust]

lol im the culprit. haha you guys assume way too much. i bet most of you didnt even bother too look at my MMR. if you had you would have realized my alt meleefanatic has a higher mmr than 99% of the community. matchmaking is still the same trust me lol. and i made this account like 2 years ago. i know only like 2 other people will understand what its like to build up your mmr over the course of a couple months only to lose half of the work in 1 10 min game. goodbye months of playing. none of you will understand how this feels so you couldnt possibly comprehend why i would make an alt where im not FORCED to carry a team or risk having my ranking drop. i can just waddle around and have fun and not care about the score. to anyone that says well just stop caring then, to be honest thats why your not one of the best players in the game is that fuzzy bunny* mentality right there. just being honest here thats why you will never be as good as the best in this game

 

come at me bro

 

 

*why is s.c.r.u.b censored?

It would seem a comical number of people don't understand the difference between an alt and a smurf.

I'm with you, i know MMR is bullshifuzbun, but i still kind of like working at it on my main, using all items/internals, and then having my alt for more casual play and practice with different mechs, weapons, items, internals, etc.

A smurf account breaks the game via broken MMR.

An alt does not have broken MMR.

Edited by CoshCaust, 10 January 2016 - 11:15 PM.

[DieselCat]

It would seem a comical number of people don't understand the difference between an alt and a smurf.

I'm with you, i know MMR is bullshifuzbun, but i still kind of like working at it on my main, using all items/internals, and then having my alt for more casual play and practice with different mechs, weapons, items, internals, etc.

A smurf account breaks the game via btoken MMR.

An alt does not have broken MMR.

 

Agreed +1

 

*+

[Pleasure_Mortar]

Oh FFS, I'm a lowly 1900er and even I can see it. 

Here's my take on smurfing, or as cosh called it more correctly in this context: using and alt.

It's annoying as hell to me that either there is no server higher than 1700 or that the games are too high for me to join.

So I can either play on a low rated server and may be lucky enough to keep my MMR from dropping while my team's going all yolo diving one after another, while maybe the other team just learns how to deathball, or I can't play. Not to mention that low rated servers with at best one good player and a bunch of people wandering around cluelessly, are not really a place where I can improve my skills. But with an alt account I can at least experiment with settings, or play with handycap, without having trouble to play a decent match with my main account when enought good players are online. My alt is about 150 MMR below my main and thats just because I don't use it that much.

 

�and there are times when it's like 3 AM and I just grab a predator and try to get kills only with the EOC pred. It's fun, people don't get stomped and I don't loose a ton of MMR on my main.

Edited by ..., 10 January 2016 - 02:00 PM.

[SS396]

we always seem to end up here; you aren't wrong, but matchmaking has to make concessions to deal with a small playerbase. i would like to point out, however, that if you believe that he shouldn't be playing against 2.4k players, then it should also follow that he could also be capable of sandbagging or "waddling" against those players and their lessers. that is what i was directly addressing in that particular segment of my post; it opposes and puts to rest the notion that hestoned might be deriving pleasure from going all-out 24/7 against everyone indiscriminately.

It doesn't matter what I believe, what matters is simply what you have said previously, its easy for a 3k player to play against a 2.4k player. And its easy for a 2.4k player to play against a 2k player. And its easy for a 2k player to play against a 1.6k player. And so on. You are not the only high tier player that has ever said this.

Also, sandbagging isn't beating someones score by 2.5 times, sandbagging is just barely doing enough to get a win without ever needing to go full balls out. If you are sandbagging and still manage to get 2.5 times the score while slow playing, then you really really don't belong in that lobby at all.
 

the average mmr of a lobby is contingent on the total mmr of the overall playerbase though.

No. Again, the average MMR of a lobby has nothing to do with total MMR of the playerbase. For example, your MMR has nothing to do with any games that I may play in (that you are not directly in). The average MMR of the lobby only pertains to the individuals that are in that lobby, nothing else. There is no reliance on anyone else in the system, only the players in that chosen lobby.
 

if you analyzed all of hawken's active mmrs on a bell curve, it is probably safe to say that hestoned is several standard deviations away from what would be considered typical. when you further take that concept and place it over a small population, there probably isn't a sufficient number of total players in present population who would adequately matchmake with hestoned in the first place. you also have to consider that for how small the population is, it's further fragmented by what times relevant players are on simultaneously, and that region further separates matchmaking selection.

All of that is irrelevant to the conversation of how MMR is calculated.
 

i was personally around 2700~ before i ever began my first tpg match. it certainly helped increase my mmr afterwards, but "clustering" is by no means necessary to gain mmr. jeffmagnum is another relevant example from the na region, and i believe clusterbombman's tpg participation has been virtually nonexistent as well due to scheduling. i would also further offer up the point that there are players in the top 50 who have consistently raised alternate accounts (several, in some individuals cases) to also be in the top 50 alongside their main, without ever having played them in any kind of community-driven event.

You have just proven my entire argument. If it was the case that as MMR approaches 3k it only climbs in .01 increments, you would of not noticed much of an increase in MMR. An increase of 1 point would of taken you at least 100 games to grind out. That number of games takes a specific amount of time investment.

Clustering with other high tier players is needed to gain significant levels of MMR, why because it would take you THOUSANDS OF HOURS playing in lower lobbies in order to crawl your way .01 point at a time.

So, again simply playing with other friends that are at or near your own MMR helps to boost your own MMR should you win. It doesn't have to be some community driven event, it only has to be a simple playdate.

It is very much clustering, thats the fundamental way the system was designed.
 

firstly, i would like to extend an open invitation to you to join tpg. it's a good opportunity to find a group of people to bond with, and it would be a pretty accessible way for you to experience the event that you are referencing, so that you could have more perspective to form an opinion with.

Uh, no. You act like I don't have a clue what goes on in TPG matches because I'm not here, but I have watched them live.
 

with that out of the way, tpg has certainly had an impact on mmrs for certain participating players. there is no refuting that point. i would, however, like to clarify: what are you trying to build an argument for?

My argument this whole time has been what you quoted and ignored, and simply the MMR calculations as stated by you when you replied to me and nothing else. It seems to me that you keep searching for some ulterior motive that drives me in my post, bashing Hestoned, bashing high teir players, bashing TPG and it simply isn't there.
 

if it is the idea that hestoned shouldn't be allowed to play given his mmr, i would offer my opinion that it seems counter-intuitive to be punished for excelling; if any practices were implemented that would result in circumstances where the game could become completely exclusionary (even if only for a small subset of players), then it would actively be communicating to your community that striving for excellence is an empty accomplishment; it would set a precedence that exceptional progress will be punished rather than rewarded. none of those actions seem very desirable to me.
 
if your argument is trying to suggest that hestoned doesn't deserve his placement within the mmr system, i would argue that he has won virtually every competition-minded event that he has participated in, excepting maybe a 1v1 tournament or the occasional foray into another region altogether. his reputation alone speaks volumes on the subject; his name is commonplace in the community out of respect for his talents.
 
if your argument is that, generally speaking, mmr has inflated, then i would agree with you. nothing in my initial comment was in regards to inflation, however, so i feel like this is a strange point to stand on in context.
 
if you aren't trying to make a point, and are simply trying to air out a grievance or allude to the notion that there is no way that players are as good as people would have you believe, you are naturally free to do that as well.

Again all of that is irrelevant.

I'm here posting because you replied that as someones MMR climbs past 2500 and into 3k, that every match only increases their MMR by .01 point. I explained to you the massive amount of time needed for that situation to occur. Even Hyginos responded that "It's been empirically shown to be the case by multiple players.", but has yet to provide any citations.

Heres the simple math.

To gain 1 mmr, at a rate of .01 a match, it would take 100 matches of consecutive winning. 100 matches at 15 minutes a piece is 1500 minutes or 25 hours.

Notice the term consecutive winning, this assumes that you don't ever run into the condition where you don't win and lose any MMR. This is the BEST CASE SCENARIO. 25 hours per 1 MMR, so when you scale that up to 50 MMR you get 1250 hours. Do you start to realize the amount of time investment needed or do I need to continue?

[DieselCat]

Co-Op Team Deathmatch is also a good place to practice and experiment with settings, new mechs...etc. without having to worry about a negative impact on mmr.

 

 

*+

[Nightfirebolt]

You can find the answers you seek within this thread you didn't read!

 

After re-reading everything, I think I have found the solution:

 

STOP CARING ABOUT MMR.

 

That is all.

[SS396]

Because Omni won the vast majority of our games by substantial amounts, our offensive players were almost guaranteed MMR gains.  That's the reason Xacius shot past 3000 MMR.

And there we have it folks.

I submit to you that "shot past" cannot be mistakenly inferred to mean climbed slowly by a rate of .01 MMR a match by playing for hundreds of matches.

Does it need to be any more empirical than that? Aye Hyginos?

[Kopra]

How to win all the time: don't lose.

 

How to never lose?

 

Miraculously drop your connection if you're risking to lose MMR.

[Nept]

After re-reading everything, I think I have found the solution:

 

STOP CARING ABOUT MMR.

 

That is all.

 

Alternatively, you could stop caring about alts and/or smurfing.

[coldform]

This has become somewhat of standard practice for TDM hi tier players: using an alternative to develop skills with new mechs and loadouts that they are not familiar with, and once they feel confident in their new skills, they apply these to their mains, so that they may play at their skill level. Cultivating your main helps maintain morale.

[devotion]

My argument this whole time has been what you quoted and ignored, and simply the MMR calculations as stated by you when you replied to me and nothing else. It seems to me that you keep searching for some ulterior motive that drives me in my post, bashing Hestoned, bashing high teir players, bashing TPG and it simply isn't there.

i would like to begin slowly, by addressing the crux of your argument first. in an attempt to regain lost focus in what is quickly becoming a sprawling argument, i've chosen this point specifically because it was your direct answer to me asking you "what are you trying to build an argument for?".

 

in which case, i think we have run into a slight misunderstanding of each others intentions. i would like to reiterate my first post in the thread, where i made two points. the first being:

• hestoned is not constantly playing at his top performance in order to indiscriminately dismantle every player that he comes across. if it occurs, it should be viewed as a natural consequence of his atypical skill, rather than a choice; it is not a conscious, malicious action.

this point, dealing with his intent and thereby character, is the important point to me. judging by your content, it seems that you have shifted your arguments in that regard from "he is actively trying to stomp people" to "he does not belong in those lobbies", which is a fine conclusion that i am satisfied with. if any of my points seemed irrelevant to you, it is because i was addressing this point as my first and foremost concern. similarly, if your quoted point is the primary argument you are building towards, it should be apparent that most of the content that you replied with would have seemed sprawling and irrelevant in light of this being the argument that i was building towards. if you are satisfied with this, then my second point was:

• mmr gains are diminishing and therefore the experience of lost mmr is not equal

in which case, you seem to have focused on the former part of it in that:

 

I'm here posting because you replied that as someones MMR climbs past 2500 and into 3k, that every match only increases their MMR by .01 point. I explained to you the massive amount of time needed for that situation to occur. Even Hyginos responded that "It's been empirically shown to be the case by multiple players.", but has yet to provide any citations.

Heres the simple math.

To gain 1 mmr, at a rate of .01 a match, it would take 100 matches of consecutive winning. 100 matches at 15 minutes a piece is 1500 minutes or 25 hours.

Notice the term consecutive winning, this assumes that you don't ever run into the condition where you don't win and lose any MMR. This is the BEST CASE SCENARIO. 25 hours per 1 MMR, so when you scale that up to 50 MMR you get 1250 hours. Do you start to realize the amount of time investment needed or do I need to continue?

in which case, there are a few things that you are failing to consider.

 

the .01 has always existed to some degree, but has only recently become a consistent problem. it represents the rate of growth when you are playing lobby averages that are significantly lower than your own, but historically, this has not always been a problem. i personally tanked my mmr from 2700 to 2600 learning heat cannon, but i was able to raise it back up to 2700 in under a week's time without assistance from tpg.

 

but that was at a point where hawken's north american high level scene was thriving. all of the members of omni, crush, and sasc were in much more regular attendance, meaning that the potential for average lobby mmr was much higher; it wasn't unheard of to gain significant whole numbers of mmr then. the problem now is that virtually all of the potential players who could have contributed to a higher lobby average have folded into inactivity. virtually all members of the three listed teams are absent from the leaderboards, because they haven't played a game in 2 weeks+ time. this is not even crediting the several score of unteamed players who were significant in their own rights, who have also vanished.

 

the other thing you aren't considering is, what if the stars align and you do manage to catch someone on at a good time? what if you gain .1 or god forbid .5 mmr from a lobby for three consecutive rounds? five? ten? what if this happens every other day of the week twice a day? .01 is the mode value to see after a certain point, but it isn't the only possible value.

 

also, you don't have to win every match to gain mmr. as far as i'm aware, the requirement for gaining mmr is to be within the top half of all scores present in a lobby, regardless of win/loss, with some guidelines for kdr that i am not exactly certain of. it might seem like a stretch to win every game for a thousand consecutive games, but it's certainly far less of a stretch to imagine someone as capable as hestoned managing at least within the top half of scoring players, is it not?

 

e:/ i never stated 2500 mmr as a figure anywhere for "this is it, this is when you stop getting mmr". perhaps you are misattributing meraple's figure for top 50 cutoff to me?

Edited by devotion, 10 January 2016 - 03:53 PM.

[SS396]

This has become somewhat of standard practice for TDM hi tier players: using an alternative to develop skills with new mechs and loadouts that they are not familiar with, and once they feel confident in their new skills, they apply these to their mains, so that they may play at their skill level. Cultivating your main helps maintain morale.

Nah, thats not it at all. The majority are simply protecting their personal investment (a.k.a MMR) against any unforeseen, unexpected and unwanted losses. I mean come on, open your eyes and call a pig a pig when you see one.

Maybe if there was content coming out every month and it required us to learn new play styles to adapt, I could understand your reasoning, but there hasn't been any real significant changes in years. The players smurfing have already learned the skills they needed. At first it was they smurf just to play the game, and now they still smurf even though they don't need to.

[ticklemyiguana]

Where's thebuttsatisfier? I want one of his Hawken forum erotic fanfic pieces.

[coldform]

my POV that leaves out vital information that would otherwise change it based on logic and practical reason alone

hmm...

 

I could be Wrong.  TDM has a big playerbase,  made up of avid players from both sides of skill curve who attend almost all of TDM events, as well as a large presence in the pub scene.  the overwhelming majority of the militia cultivate their main with both of the valid points of view concerning alts: they either have an alt for fuzzy bunnyery, or an alt to learn new things.

 

what you don't know, is that TDM has very few long-term pilots that have been a part of hawken for more than 6 months to a year, meaning we don't know, the complete ins and outs of hawken.  while there are a lot of skilled players out there with alts, some of us unskilled pilots are apply their techniques in an effort to see if they improve our own overall experiences with hawken, and they do.

 

Leave it at that.

[SS396]

• mmr gains are diminishing and therefore the experience of lost mmr is not equal

I'm going to have to cut out all of the nonsense to save time and focus on this.

They are NOT diminishing. Diminishing means that as you approach a limit, the amount of gain you get is less and less. That doesn't happen in the MMR equation at all. A 1500 player can gain as much MMR per match as a 2500 MMR in one single match. It is just completely dependent on the average MMR of the lobby at that time and nothing else.

Nept said it best, Xacius "SHOT PAST" 3k. If things were diminishing, that could of never happened. Sorry man. Only one of these things can be true, they are mutually exclusive.

[Sylhiri]

Alternatively, you could stop caring about alts and/or smurfing.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but MMR was never meant to be a scoreboard, it was something the community had pulled out of thin air as a desperate attempt at a form of competition. Also that not caring about MMR does not effect as many people as smurfing or alts.

[SS396]

hmm...
 
I could be Wrong.  TDM has a big playerbase,  made up of avid players from both sides of skill curve who attend almost all of TDM events, as well as a large presence in the pub scene.  the overwhelming majority of the militia cultivate their main with both of the valid points of view concerning alts: they either have an alt for fuzzy bunnyery, or an alt to learn new things.
 
what you don't know, is that TDM has very few long-term pilots that have been a part of hawken for more than 6 months to a year, meaning we don't know, the complete ins and outs of hawken.  while there are a lot of skilled players out there with alts, some of us unskilled pilots are apply their techniques in an effort to see if they improve our own overall experiences with hawken, and they do.
 
Leave it at that.

There haven't been any new players in Hawken. They are the same old players, just hiding behind new smurfs.

Also, nice try on editing my post trying to make your post seem stronger.