/v/ - Video Games

3. Some Links

Statiscical Education and 15 years of work experience Tests the heartstone matchmaking algorithm. it is not random

https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/general-discussion/213502-mathematical-proof-that-standard-ladder-is-rigged

Why do you often see so much negative posting against threads that start about theese subjects on blizzards/leagues/dotas etc.. Forums? Shills are very cheep indeed.

https://www.infoworld.com/article/2618833/cyber-shill-business-is-booming.html

Put in your searchengine: "where do companies buy shills" and you will find great information.

Some truth but mostly lying

https://dotesports.com/overwatch/news/win-loss-streak-overwatch-multiplier-14084

they claim your "elo" goes up, what actually happends is that you get a negative adjustment for your team and enemy gets a higher % change to win ( but that gives a higher "match score" according to their patent anyhow) !, you should still have same elo on your teammates as the enemy team has in ranked games. Top ranked players have created new accounts and been almost unable to rank

after "x" elo since they get poor teams ( if you read the patent you can safely asume that some of those " bad teams" were filled with NPCs) . Often they want to give the top of the ladder to affiliated players. Some game companies such as world of tanks even cooperate with cheating Clans ( giving money to their friends).

Yes nigger, every matchmaking system is rigged.

Streamers would shriek and moan otherwise, and that's the primary means of –forced advertising– completely legitimate community support comes from.

>>16899676

>Ever noticed how you get counterdecks in hearthstone when you play a certain Deck and when you change deck, or just put in a card that counter your counter you suddenly get different opponents?

No? I don't play shitty games like that.

OP here, the picture is from a most likely riot bot account, i have peaked d2 in league of legends on my own account, that is 0.2% of the region i belive.

>>16899742

OP's a faggot, but this is true with virtually all games with matchmaking systems.

>>16899749

Either rigged in favor of streamers, or good goys who spend ludicrous amounts of money on either pay 2 win items or cash shop items in general.

>>16899749

i dont know about rigged but matchmaking has always been terrible in any game its been in.

ive consistently had better times joining random servers. And if theres one or 2 guys wreking everyone on that server then i can always join a different one at any point without getting some abandon matchmaking penalty or ruining the game for anyone else.

The only right way to do matchmaking is to let players choose their own tiers and keep a blacklist for tier-dipping abusers. Even then it shouldn't replace server browsing.

Is it just me, or is it worst in fighting games? I swear to god, all you ever get, and I mean ever, are people that either suck ass and have seemingly never played a video game before, or people that clearly play fighting games all day every day and you have no chance at all. There's never an in-between.

It's like this every single time I try to play a fighting game. Unless you're playing against friends, it's impossible to enjoy because the other player either sucks ass or impregnates your fucking ass hole. It doesn't even seem to change when your rank changes. It's always this way no matter what. I don't understand it.

>>16899676

>Put some experience of the riggind against you or some friends in the thread please !

Haven't played anything from Blizzard since 2009. You will need several iterations to prove a closed source matchmaking system to be fair or unfair, which will be a lot of time spent. Play a competitive, free & open source game (including online infrastructure) instead.

So the best way is to rotate what kind of "class" you play?

I'm playing Robocraft because I have autism for absolute customization of MyGuy and I noticed that I always meet flak users since I always play as a flying bot.

>it's another "matchmaking is the reason I keep losing, I don't actually suck!" thread

Hearthstone is the only actual case where this is true and only because it stacks whales that buy decks against grinding players that don't have the latest OP cards yet, giving extra fun for the whales at the expense of everyone that doesn't pay.

However for games that do not feature something like this, that's not the case. Dota vs LoL for instance.

Dota gives you all characters to play with, there's no advantage that the devs would benefit from exploiting by stacking games.

LoL instead requires that you buy champions that they release periodically, giving a first week of a completely broken character for anyone that buys it and fixes it afterwards when all the plebs saved enough currency to adquire it otherwise.

Other than this, every complaint about matchmaking stems strictly from a severe grade of autism and egocentrism.

Somehow, in some manner, when playing against equally skilled opponents, you're supposed to still have an higher winrate than 50%. Even though this doesn't make any logical or mathematical sense. All because you don't understand that to get an higher winrate would mean that your oponent, that's equally skilled, would get a worse winrate than 50% and that's also silly.

What I see most of the time is bad players that learned how to cheese the lower brackets or saw some EPIC STRAT in an youtube video and manage to rank up a lot with that alone. But once they get to play against semi-competent characters where cheese doesn't work and you need to actually know what the fuck you're doing, not just copying your favorite youtuber, they lose. Hard. And then they complain because they aren't noobstomping as much anymore.

Then there's the fuckwits that actually buy their way to higher ranks and complain they aren't as good as the players there. There's the idiots that expect to win 100% of the time when that'd mean they'd be in the 1% top outlier and that's really not likely, just self-induced delusions of grandeur.

And there's even the idiots that smurf because they just want to play on easy mode, not an actual challenge.

Every game I've seen WITHOUT matchmaking eventually died because the lower brackets are just stacks of high level players against newer ones, the medium brackets are full of tryhards that can only have fun by winning, not from playing the game and are completely unable to play as a team while the top brackets are full of actual scrubs that play in some of the most effective but unfun ways.

Meanwhile every game with matchmaking I've tried always fucks up at the beginning of a season but eventually fixes it's shit and you can actually see the game recognizing your skill in how tough your opponents start to play. I actually love losing games against really good players, it lets me learn a lot from them and see some top plays, it feels a lot better than stomping easy players that aren't any better than bots.

But since you're obviously one of the best players in whatever game you're playing and you deserve your 120% win-rate, it's obvious that your oponent couldn't actually be that good and the whole game is rigged against you. That's more comfortable than confronting your fuck ups and improve.

>>16899847

Oh cork it you DONG mongler.

>>16899850

>>16899850

Damn son, that's some top notch argumentation. Fuck me, why did I wrote all that stupid shit when I was this wrong?

Totally changed my mind, champ. Chalk that one up as a victory, maybe that will help your winrate. :)

Complain all you want, it changes nothing.

You know I'm right about all I wrote, you're just upset that it accurately describes you.

Enjoy your dead games that nobody wants to play with you, enjoy being a srub that refuses to improve, enjoy being a dumbass that plays for the carrot and not the game.

I'll be staying on my upper brackets along with other decent players having fun playing the game instead of worrying so much about winning and doing it for fun, not to grind shit that whales get for money.

op again, a few shills checked by, and last one said a common thing, accusing the ones pointing at the hidden matchmaking as whiners or "unskilled"but keep in mind that it is the skilled ( up to the absolute top of the ladder that notes these things). it is not so much as a complaint that the system is that way, rather that it is so hidden and so obviously shilled HEAVILY surpressed on the game forums.

then claiming in Dota has no reason to do it, well they force loose and win streaks for sure, and that is matchrigging( ie. matches are not made to have 50/50 chanche, rather one of the teams are heavily favored often due to more than 1 factor).

Anyhow Interesting to read about fighting games being that way online, could have not imagined it ^^, but forcing 50% winrate is quite common.

Check out

EOMM : Engagement Optimized Matchmaking Framework

https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.06820

( they did the testing with collaboration with EA games)

SBMM Skill based matchmaking ( probably what is happening in those fighting games)

What the papers have noted is that matching people according to "skill" ( elo) is not allways favorable if you want people to play more ( interesting!).

also i find it strange that after season reset one account i got to stomp "lower bracket" ( i had to even win games that was 4v5, never happened to enemy team in a single game) players while having bots on my team in LoL, forcing close to 50% winrate ( over 100 games). While logging on the other one (exactly same rank) i got normal games where i still have 100% winrate over almost 20 games( and everone is able to chat unlike the bots). i am not eloboosting nor am i smurfing, but people trying to mindread of the internet won't stop i guess :P, having bots/trolls on the first account stoped directly after buying something in the store for IRL cash. So i have tested a few different things :)

Don't get me wrong i know not to argue with shills/trolls. On the other hand i would not like to see people like a friend of mine who tried to go from plat 1 to diamond 5 for like a year being unable to due to having bad teams every promotion game, it was a bit funny tbh, but don't if you're truly a "average" player that tries to get that next tier keep in mind that you are in a skinner box and if you're not number 1 the system can force you to stay in a certain rank.

The only reasons this bullshit actually matters is

>New multiplayer games do not have dedicated server options and instead opt for shitty matchmaking

>This in turn with progression systems puts a massive focus on "winning" matches instead of enjoying the game.

>>16899676

>matchmaking

We had a thread on this two months ago. Maybe 3.

Matchmaking is designed to make the game more accessible to cattlefags, which means it plays to the concept "you win some, you lose some"

In other words, it's gambling.

Matchmaking isn't about skill, it's about money and luck.

>>16899871

>it is the skilled ( up to the absolute top of the ladder that notes these things)

Outliers will always have this problem and you could say the same thing applies to the bottom of the barrel too because that's the statistical nature of being an outlier.

The less players of your skill level there are, the harder it will be for matchmaking to come up with a balanced match, a quick look at a Bell curve will show you that.

>rather that it is so hidden and so obviously shilled HEAVILY surpressed on the game forums

And yet you're the genius that manages to crack it. Remember that point about self-delusion of grandeur where you vastly overestimate your own worth?

> well they force loose and win streaks for sure, and that is matchrigging( ie. matches are not made to have 50/50 chanche, rather one of the teams are heavily favored often due to more than 1 factor).

Of which you provide no examples or explain what those "more than 1 factor" could possibly be. Keep in mind that this would not even be possible in actual professional championships since they work by brackets and they have no incentive to screw their players since they want player retention.

>look at this study made by chinese bugmen about an EA game and how to squeeze more cash out of players

You're an idiot that only skimmed through it and didn't read the actual study you're quoting. Here's some funny bullet points for you.

The study is centered around "churn risk", the likelihood that someone stops playing the game, with the goal of player retention above fairness.

They reach interesting conclusions like "the skill of the opponent matters very little when compared to the player churn risk" or that "fairness doesn't translate into less churn risk, the opposite actually".

In other words, EOMM is a matchmaking system based around appeasing all the terrible players that might quit playing because they aren't good enough by giving them easier matches at the expense of other players that are better at the game but less likely to drop out.

Great study you found there, for someone complaining about lack of fairness in traditional matchmaking when that's exactly what they manage to prove with it.

>here's some anecdotal evidence about LoL, a game the "shill" explained exactly why they might fudge the matchmaking for profit

>this proves ALL matchmaking is rigged, lol!

What a retard. There's so many variables here to explain the difference between both accounts and it doesn't even matter since it's LoL we're talking about here.

>On the other hand i would not like to see people like a friend of mine who tried to go from plat 1 to diamond 5 for like a year being unable to due to having bad teams every promotion game

Except that doesn't make any sense. There's no financial incentive for the devs to keep someone in lower brackets on competitive. They'll fuck up the balance to sell their latest champion\skins, that's obvious. But other than that, it's more likely your friend kept meeting enemy teams with boosters (something quite infamous in LoL) or he just isn't as good as he thinks he is. Blaming your team is a recurring theme with such players after all.

>>16899904

I'd say the competitive nature of these games is what begets the matchmaking, not the other way around. Plenty of players don't want to play outside their skill level, neither up nor down, and they most certainly want teammates on the same level as they are.

Winning a match doesn't feel satisfying unless you feel you earned it, just like losing isn't as frustrating if you feel it's fair.

There's a bit of a disconnect though since a lot of players don't want that competitive nature and just want to fuck around, as if they were on a GMod server or similar and that kinda player should have a place, but they ARE detrimental to actual competition and shouldn't coexist in that environment.

It's not fair to complain about matchmaking when it's competition that bothers you and you can have the last without the first.

Just hop into any TF2 map where players are just killing each other and spot the few players that actually try to steal Intel, cap points or push carts because that's how you're supposed to win the game.

Or any deathmatch game where everyone is just having fun and then a tryhard goes all meta, using only the best weapons and strategies to win the game as fast as possible.

Progression systems are pure cancer though, that's just carrot dangling and too many faggots play games they don't even like just for the progression rewards. Might as well play auto-clickers at that point.

>>16899910

Matchmaking is a tool. It can be used to give you fair games or it can be used to make more money.

Like I said, LoL and Hearthstone are good examples of the second, using the free players to pad the ego of whales.

Dota 2 and even Overwatch had little to no reason to push for this since there's no advantage that can be bought in a shop and no direct correlation the player might make between buying a cosmetic and suddenly starting to win more games.

>>16900069

>Dedicated server era (Quake, Half Life, etc)

>CS maps on 2 examples.

AH

>implying wacky gamers don't ruin the game for everyone else because they refuse to actually play the damn thing while taking space in your team, annoying a lot more people

>implying stoners that want chill games actually play anything competitive

>implying stoners can't actually be good players, rise in ranking and play how they want because they are good at it

>implying hardcore gamers care more about cussing than playing the game

>implying "hardcore gamers" that constantly blame their team should be allowed oxygen

>implying normal gamers don't just improve in rank and leave the bottom feeders behind

>implying is dumb, stupid and unskilled, unable to progress beyond the bottom of the barrel

>implying despite that, that everyone deserves more than 50/50

>implying without matchmaking that any of those groups would suddenly win more than 50/50

This pic gets both funnier and dumber the more it's posted. It's the romanticized idea of what players used to be, made by someone too young to even have been alive then, that excuses all the shitty behavior some players have by shifting the blame towards matchmaking.

You ever tried Garena for some Dota, before LoL was even a thing? No matchmaking there back then and you still had more of your games ending up with people complaining that they can't play how they want or that everyone else is terrible. Almost like the problem isn't matchmaking but rather terrible players excusing themselves by blaming whatever scapegoat they can find. And since blaming your team is the mark of a terrible player, the matchmaking it is now!

>>16900074

>You ever tried Garena for some Dota, before LoL was even a thing?

I played W3 maps extensively on garena (now on gameranger), it's not without problems but it's a lot better than fucking matchmaking that lumps everyone together and hardly solves any problems, not even letting you decide who you're playing with. Games w. matchmaking even punish you for leaving the queue if you get matched with retards so utter that it's visible before the game even starts. Nowhere I met more idiots blaming their team than on matchmaked games. On a server with competent administration, a community can form organically while the undesirables are weeded out sooner or later.

>>16900079

Don't bother anon, he's a retard that actually defends modern matchmaking and keeps saying anyone criticising it is just; "mad because bad".

>>16900079

>it's a lot better than fucking matchmaking

Your mileage might vary then, because I've had better games with matchmaking than without. Not many more, it's roughly the same, but it certainly did not change things that much when it comes to finding decent people to play with.

>lumps everyone together and hardly solves any problems

It separates by skill level, the exact oposite, and it solves noobstomping, team stacking, and plenty of other issues related to players with widely different skill levels being "lumped together" in the same server.

>not even letting you decide who you're playing with.

How is that any different from games with server browsers when the people you find there are also entirely random? If you mean playing with friends, plenty of matchmaking allows you to group together with other people, so it's the same shit anyway except with less fuss about having enough slots in the server for everyone.

>Games w. matchmaking even punish you for leaving the queue if you get matched with retards so utter that it's visible before the game even starts.

Oh, you're one of those "I play to win, fuck ya'll for not being on my level" types.

>Nowhere I met more idiots blaming their team than on matchmaked games.

Anedotal evidence. I can just say the same about non-matchmaking games, because that is actually my experience with them and it proves the exact same thing: nothing.

Except, with an algorythm pulling players together, you have some form of garantee that players are not too differently skilled and therefore it's often due to the retard not knowing how to play as a team than different skill levels. Without matchmaking, you can get the same situation but with someone that is actually much worse than you.

You're looking at this in the worst possible light, of course you're only going to see the worst possible aspects of matchmaking. Want some more to add to the list?

There's retards that FARM rank, like Heroes of Newerth where players set up lobbys to play against higher ranked players only so they risk less MMR and win more.

There's idiots that think being carried to high ranks means they are hot shit when they are just shit.

There's morons that break friendships because they lose rank while playing with friends.

There's groups of friends that can't play together because the system doesn't let such a different rank level to play together (looking at you, Overwatch).

It's not hard to point problems at something you dislike, but it's not so easy to point it at something you do like.

I liked the server browser and the funky servers in TF2 and they do have a place in the videogame universe. But not for competitive environments. Those require an actual form of rank to gauge players against each other on a table and pit them against similarly skilled players. That's something entirely different, the 5v5 serious game of meta and skill, not the 32v32 clusterfuck of fun and merriment. Both need to exist and both need entirely different systems, each having their advantages and disadvantages.

What you CAN'T have however is a serious competitive game with no ranking or matchmaking to prevent unfair games, just like you CAN'T have a fun laid back game without an actual server browser.

Dystopia and that one SCP game have server browsers still, are plenty of fun and wouldn't really work with matchmaking. Meanwhile every MOBA or recent multiplayer shooter is not gonna be fair most of the time unless you actually have matchmaking implemented.

>>16900079

>Don't bother anon

You can fuck right off and stop telling anyone else if he should or not talk with someone else just because you dislike the other guy.

If you're that annoyed because you can't argue back, either let someone else do it for you or admit, at least to yourself, that maybe you're not right this time.

>>16900118

Ignore this man.

>>16900123

Don't mind this person.

>>16899847

>Dota gives you all characters to play with, there's no advantage that the devs would benefit from exploiting by stacking games.

Why are you assuming they have to be doing it intentionally? It could just be some fluke of rankings in games of more than two people.

>Somehow, in some manner, when playing against equally skilled opponents, you're supposed to still have an higher winrate than 50%

Problem here is you're assuming that you're always playing against equally skilled opponents. The claim is that games often give easy wins or near impossible wins to ensure close to a 50/50 win rate. You even admit this happens later on

>I actually love losing games against really good players, it lets me learn a lot from them and see some top plays, it feels a lot better than stomping easy players that aren't any better than bots.

Clearly the game is putting you against people well below or above your skill level. Small point, but you don't learn much from getting steamrolled compared to someone equally skilled.

>brackets without matchmaking

How does this even work?

>medium is tryhards

>top is scrubs who play really well

Scrubs who play well is a contradiction, but it seems like you're bitching like you claim others do. git gud faggot

>>16900058

>guys finds a study that supports his argument

>you acknowledge this

>Great study retard

>>16900074

>This pic gets both funnier and dumber the more it's posted.

>wacky gamers ruin the game for everyone else

>I hate hardcore gamers

>>16900066

>There's a bit of a disconnect though since a lot of players don't want that competitive nature and just want to fuck around… they ARE detrimental to actual competition and shouldn't coexist in that environment.

I think you might be the retarded one. The image doesn't even imply what you claim it does it just says different people want different things and which you agree with, saying there are people you do not wish to play with, but somehow that picture is dumb.

>>16900107

>What you CAN'T have however is a serious competitive game with no ranking or matchmaking to prevent unfair games, just like you CAN'T have a fun laid back game without an actual server browser.

Both MBII and Warband manage to be competitive, as per examples I have given you. I can concede the point that matchmaking might be a necessary step to manage the hordes of normalfags that got into gaming in the past decade. People too dumb and having too low attention span to find what they like in a game, people who compulsively hoard games in their "library", who want to press "play" and play without learning anything beforehand. One of the reasons gaming became so dumbed down in previous decade. People who want to report others for being called a bad name or behavior they dislike. Normally, the solution would be to swap servers. Same if you had the unfortunate occurence of meeting a power-tripping admin. With matchmaking, you cannot. You say nigger or insult someone for being bad, you get reported and get banned from the game entirely, instead from just one server.

>>16900107

>Oh, you're one of those "I play to win, fuck ya'll for not being on my level" types.

>ya'll

I just realized you said this while you also say

>>16900066

>There's a bit of a disconnect though since a lot of players don't want that competitive nature and just want to fuck around…they ARE detrimental to actual competition and shouldn't coexist in that environment.

You sound like a kike, is it fine for people to not want to play with others only if it happens to exclude people you do not like?

>>16900112

What arguments? Assumptions and personal opinions are not arguments, faggot.

>>16900118

>You can fuck right off and stop telling anyone else if he should or not talk with someone else just because you dislike the other guy

I'm telling him not to waste his time arguing with you.

>>16899676

Welcome to retarded conspiracy theories

In any action game like LoL or Overwatch (does not apply to turn based games like Hearthstone), making convincing bots is hard. Making a bot that can throw your games without being obvious as being a bot to both teams immediately is nearly impossible. If they COULD make a bot like that, they could make massive improvements to the game in general. It would probably be cheaper and easier for them to hire some chinks to actually play (and throw) the game.

Fuck have you ever played the actual vs bot modes in those games, or any game? Your conspiracy basically says that they deliberately make those modes garbage in order to cover the fact that they actually have good bots playing in your normal games. It's absurd.

I actually appreciate the level of depth you've done into researching this and I think that information is valuable, but unfortunately I also think you've chosen the wrong board to discuss this, if for no other reason than most people here do not like mainstream competitive matchmade games. I can barely stand them myself, just due to the queue times and other overhead that comes with playing the damn game. Just let me play the game. I only play them occasionally when I want to spend time with a friend.

I am of the opinion that matchmaking is utter garbage in any case. If being ranked higher than your peers really chokes your chicken, then there isn't any reason that a game can have both matchmaking and dedicated servers – CS:GO does it just fine. I'd much rather play a game immediately and with settings that I prefer and know will be consistent, though.

By the way, I can't remember which game it was, but there's already a patent (which was implemented) for at least one major game that intentionally matches people without paid cosmetics against people who do have them, in order to entice them to buy skins. I think there's also one for matching people who just bought some pay-to-win advantage against shitters so they get an assured win and feel-good chemicals about spending money on their advantage.

>>16907617

That was Actiblizzard, I'm pretty sure. It was a system pretty much guaranteed to match you up against a whale, then show you the P2W shit he had after he mopped the floor with you and offer to sell it to you.

The truth is the majority of matchmaking complaints come from Dunning-Kruger, with a spattering of incompetence from the devs as well. People think they are better than they are, get matched with players just as shit as they are and blame everyone but themselves. There might be some counterexamples in especially controlled game environments (hearthstone possibly), but it's mostly just a "you" problem.

A few random points. Accuracy is not the be all end all of skill. You can get carried to a high rank. You can play well at a high rank and have fuck all adaptability, making you shit at low rank. Everything is different in low rank play, adapt or die. Your salty ass might be the reason people are throwing your games, interpersonal skills are every bit as important.

Sounds like someone has a sever case of GIT GOOD.

The problem is smurfs. Until someone comes up with a mostly fool proof solution against smurfs you will always have bad matchmaking.

>>16907637

Competitive matchmaking is not the true test of one's skill anyways. It's just a playground. The real test comes in the form of scrims/ladder or tournament matches. I see so many people in CSGO at my rank (which granted is low but still) who make all sorts of stupid mistakes, but their aim is relatively good so they bruteforced their way there. They would never make it in a clan vs clan scenario, at least of the olden days when even low tier teams would still emphasize all the other skills besides having good aim.

>>16911542

You probably wouldn't do any better though, unless maybe you have experience in teams which has no impact on your ability in matchmaking. Tournament matches are basically for people who've already "beaten" matchmaking.

>>16911562

No they're not. If you think that then you never played in a team. MM can have cohesive teamwork, but it also can be a clusterfuck. Even when randoms click and practice teamwork in a MM match, they will still make mistakes and trust too much or too little. There's no positioning, it's just "at this skill level we do this to win" but you're not really applying strategy or making sure everybody is doing what their role is supposed to be doing, you can even not have roles if the rank is sufficiently low and it's just a coordinated DM.

>>16911574

>>16911562

Also I am talking about players who make the most basic mistakes or/and have no map awareness whatsoever and some you'd swear are playing without sound.

You fags are crazy. Git Gud.

>>16911635

There was serious research about this for dota2, but valve forbid them from publishing their findings. Someone else might know what I'm talking about.

>>16900074

>>implying wacky gamers don't ruin the game for everyone else because they refuse to actually play the damn thing while taking space in your team, annoying a lot more people

The whole point of the image is that "wacky gamers" could just join "wacky servers" instead of taking up space in teams that care about winning. With matchmaking they can't.

>>implying stoners that want chill games actually play anything competitive

>>implying stoners can't actually be good players, rise in ranking and play how they want because they are good at it

<stoners don't want competitive, but if they do they better play how i want them to

Those statements directly contradict each other, and being forced onto some random team with other people who want to win to feed into some stupid progression system usually is not "playing how they want" since they may just want to point and shoot at the red men without having to care about what their team is doing.

>>implying hardcore gamers care more about cussing than playing the game

<wanting to find a server that doesn't try to police your speech is bad somehow

>>implying "hardcore gamers" that constantly blame their team should be allowed oxygen

"hardcore gamers" shouldn't blame their team, but you also think that "wacky gamers ruin the game for everyone else because they refuse to actually play the damn thing while taking space in your team"? In a game that lumps these people together "hardcore gamer" are quite justified blaming their teams.

>>16911812

Valve can't forbid shit. You're full of it.

It would be very easy to implement. If spend money, even on skins, throw a hidden modifier on your MMR. So you are at 1900, buy some skins for $50, maybe it gives you a -200 to MMR hidden modifier for 10 games. Then you will be given opponents as if you were a 1700MMR despite actually being 1900MMR and get to suddenly stomp on players for next 10 games WHILE USING UR PHAT NEW SKINZ, releasing dopamine cuz you look sweet while doing it.

I would be surprised if something like this does not occur.

>>16912025

wacky troll players could just play unranked. Basically every game has a separate outranked matchmaking. They won't though, they join ranked matchmaking games just to fuck with other people, and they do exactly the same thing in server browsers. Same goes for "stoners". If you aren't playing seriously, just play unranked, problem solved. Better for both of them, at least as long as they aren't specifically trying to fuck up other people's games, because it's easier to push that unranked queue button than find a non-serious server by trial and error.

>In a game that lumps these people together "hardcore gamer" are quite justified blaming their teams.

Even if the trolls and stoners do play in ranked, that's exactly what the ranking is supposed to deal with. If they play like shit, they get matched with shit players. Just git gud and it won't be a problem. Far preferable to the fact that the trolls and stoners can simply jump on any server they like and fuck up your games even after you've gotten good and found the perfect server.

>>16899676

This is actually one of the reasons why Heroes of the Storm is so good; you hop in quick match and there is no ladder bullshit. In games like Hearthstone I am convinced that Blizzard uses bots, but Heroes of the Storm development has been cut back so much that blizzard doesn't have manpower to implement these Jewish matchmaking processes,