Darwi works a part time job defending this terrible SBMM system on these forums. No point debating him.
4 Likes
It looks one of my first replies to you this morning has been “referred to moderators for approval”. That’s weird? I guess someone has been reporting my posts in other threads (that’s what you get for having a positive spin on things).
Apologies if that’s derailed our convo.
From a team point of view it’s the balancing of the MMR’s vs each other. With a weighting applied for squads (and others for form etc).
The problem with MMR is that it’s a curve (not a number). The system just says that your actual skill is somewhere on that curve. The starting point for the CSR is 3 standard deviations below the mean (very conservative). But if the curve is wide then your skill could be much higher.
When balancing matches the maths is based on the curves. The system tries to balance out the curves. The odds to assess the potential winner, for example, are based on the curve left over after averaging out all the other curves.
If a lot of the curves are wide - then there is still a chance that the player (or players) are better than thought.
So yes, you may be “Diamond 2” - but if your MMR curve is still very wide it may be considering you as a potential Onyx player.
With time though, the curves narrow, and the system gets better at predicting good match ups. It takes just over 40 games to be super confident. But even then, it’s still at the mercy, however, of how those players gel together as a team.
1 Like
It feels like a part time job sometimes.
Wish I got paid for it.
But sometimes you just have to fight for what is right.
1 Like
In the space of a few hours you’ve told me (and others) what I’m thinking, referenced H3’s ranking, bragged about how long you’ve been playing games, shown you lack empathy for the experience of players being beaten badly, and called me a clown.
And yet I’m the one who is “no point debating”.
I know some people genuinely advocate for less SBMM because they want a better connection - or a misguided feeling it will make it better when playing with the lesser ranked friends.
And then there are those who just want it because they know that random players from a normal distribution just feed them easy kills. Game after game that plumps their K/D and/or gives them content to stream. They love being on the right hand tail of the curve… and couldn’t care less about those to the left… get gud or get out.
Sadly I couldn’t find a dinosaur or caveman emoji to reply with.
And for reference, there is good chance I’ve been playing video games as long, if not longer, than you. Whatever that means.
1 Like
Unless you play with your friends who are lower than you… then you get straight dumped on all the time and have a disparity between two ranks.
You know what would be a more simple way of matching, expressing and sharing ranks… by using one for each playlist. Just one.
I’d say for each ranked playlist but thats on another thread of mine where i point out the complete horse doo doo of an idea that its impossible to have more than 1 ranked playlist.
Any ranking system is going to have trouble with wide ranging squads.
There are just too many variables about what makes a “team”.
If I take two teams of randomly selected Diamond 2’s (for example). What happens if I put 4 specialist snipers together on a map that doesn’t even have a sniper? Or four players who prefer close quarters combat on a wide open map?
If you add in a wide range of skill ranks to the mix you just amplify the potential discrepancy. Especially if their top end is better than your top end and your bottom end is worse than theirs.
I feel your pain. I do. My group varies from Onyx down to low Gold. We have to be careful about what we play as a group. And I know that one of the Onyx players is much more valuable to us in these scenarios because he is more of a communicator and less of a lone wolf type operator. I’ll happily take the Gold player into ranked when he’s playing… and not so much if it’s the other one.
Agree to disagree.
It still doesnt change that if I get placed in diamond 2 yet facing top tier competition in onyx where im “suppose to be”… how can i get there? Ideally with their match making I’d be a 50% win rate. Instead of working my way through CSR, ill get plateau’d. I wont play enough legit diamond 2s to rank up to where i should be… ill be playing similar skill at a lower CSR. Does that make sense?
If you are playing in a squad it’s harder to make that assumption.
If you are going in solo and playing against higher ranked players then you can assume the system thinks you should be ranking up.
But as a squad - you are facing other squads or mixes of squads that come as close to your team’s average MMR as it can. Matchmaking tries to put squads together. Check on HaloTracker - I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the Onyx players you are regularly coming across are paired up with a silver mate.
So you’ll probably find that the average MMR/CSR of the two teams match pretty well (or as close as match-making can piece together). Plus any weightings for the squad break up.
To be honest I don’t think it’s ever going to work properly. There are just too many variables on team-work. The potential errors are amplified across larger ranges of rank.
You only have to look at how much damage a well organised / structured squad can do. They can manipulate the match ups in their favour and farm CSR for their Onyx players.
It’s not so hard to imagine that you could similarly structure a squad to disadvantage. And maybe that’s what you and your mates have done serendipitously.
1 Like
Okay, but you got to promise not to argue because it’s facts. Huge majority of players win more games with friends, it’s just correlating data. As such you and your friends are gonna have inflated MMRs because you play together because for most people that’s what occurs. In your case, clearly it doesn’t so you lose disproportionately.
If you played most games with Trashman and other less skilled friends everyone’s MMR would even out over time as you lose and players do bad they you can play together and win 50% of games at a reduced MMR/CSR state. But all of you are doing better as individuals increasing MMR then getting panned as a team because the lack of teamwork is making your opponents too hard for you, where in a huge majority of cases this is not expected. The system is set up for the majority, not the few unfortunately.
1 Like
So now if i go to play alone as suggested. Ill be diamond 2 playing against onyx. How am I supposed to get up where im supposed to be in CSR if im being paired against those people in even matches for MMR? I’d have to win more, thus raising my mmr thus making it more difficult.
There’s too many variables in general because they’re using two ranking systems.
It would also help if there was a max cap at like 2000. Similiar to H3 where 50s would get paired against 50s.
Well have to agree to disagree for sure.
If you actually have only been playing with a set team… your rank is reflecting your proportion of effort of your team’s rank. In a way, it’s kind of how the system would like to work. It’s a romantic notion.
I don’t know what this means when you venture out solo. If you have a relatively mature D2 (ie closer to 40 games than not) then you should be matched against D2 type players. You’ll soon find out if you are better or worse.
The question of whether Trashie is holding you up or down will be answered quite quickly. 
Match making systems are aware that if they are too accurate in matching teams then they artificially trap a player. There is no scope for earning a step up. So they add in a bit of wriggle room for regular mis-matches (but not huge ones).
But yes, if you outplay the better teams, your MMR (and CSR) go up… and you attract better opponents.
I imagine it’s harder for the system to make those judgement calls if you are in a wide ranged squad and being matched against other, often wider, ranging squads.
And yes, if you rank up it may make it harder for your squad as your higher MMR would boost your team’s average MMR.
One system. TrueSkill2. Your MMR.
Just think of your CSR as a friendly approximation. A conservative one early… but after 40+ games, it should be a very close one.
The rank distributions are on a normal curve 0-1800. And each division (Bronze to Gold) is one standard deviation from the mean. But the system, by nature, has to be a little open ended.
I agree that they should “cap” the CSR. Just make Onyx 1 to 6 like the other Divs. Anyone 1750+ is Onyx 6 (they could even call them Champs).
H3 was in a unique position. Because everyone 1300 and above was a ‘50’. The top 20 or so levels were “hidden” and just called a ‘50’. Add in the number of sold accounts (ranked locked to ‘50’) and you had a HUGE matchmaking pool of ‘50’ to work with.
But the skill range inside that ‘50’ ranged from a D3 (MMR 1300) all the way up to Onyx 2000+. Plus whatever Silver / Gold saps who simply bought an account off the internet.
I think it’s hilarious that there are only two people on this forum that defend the terrible SBMM.
Every week or so there’s new threads pointing out how garbage it is, and how it ruins the ranked mode to have a single global MMR, and how CSR is meaningless, and in each of those threads it’s the same two people parroting 343 GDC talk talking points.
Spot the incognito 343 employee.
4 Likes
Party matching for both ranked and social will solve the issue immediately even with season resets and the current sbmm. It’s a very simple fix.
1 Like
The whole thing could be solved easily if you just matched against your emblem/division rank. That would make sense, ya? Instead of some “hidden” rank. It’s a turnoff for people to grind against that your whole way to get to the supposed rank the system thinks you are. If it had a +/- for what you could play based off of the actual rank people can see & what you’re playing for, the game would be more enjoyable. Even COD has a limit system on what you can play with or match against.
1 Like
i agree this game is trash and why change the rules of King of the Hill when it was great before ever heard of if it ain’t broke it don’t need fixing why make those changes without any community input? i cant believe we had to wait for 6 MONTHS for this update that made things even worse IMO
1 Like
The whole “hidden rank” thing is blown out of proportion.
Your MMR is a curve (not a number). Your rank is somewhere on that curve. If the system is unsure of your rank (eg. early / placement) your curve is wide. As you play consistently the curve narrows (the system is more confident).
So the game needs a number (CSR) to represent your curve. People don’t want to see a range of rank probabilities. They want a simple value.
To be conservative it uses the left hand edge of your curve (3 standard deviations below the mean) for your CSR. The system is 98% sure your rank is higher than this - but it treads lightly as it’s better to gain rank over time than have it taken away from you.
So, yes. Your MMR is kind of “hidden” when your account is new. But after 30 games or so (and definitely by 50) your MMR curve is narrow enough (very low standard deviation) that your MMR and CSR are pretty well matched. It’s no longer “hidden”.
Your CSR can drift up on wins vs teams lower than you. But it snaps back on the next loss (which infuriates some people). But the bottom line is that we’re only talking about your MMR and CSR drifting apart by 12 to 15 pts.
So after a short period the values of your MMR mean, the value of 3 standard deviations below the mean, and your CSR - are all pretty much the same.
Agree. Squads with a big range of rank are not fun to play against - and some teams are abusing the set up to farm MMR.
1 Like
Stop defending the system, 343 plant.
I don’t want to know how it works. I’m here to complain, not to learn.
1 Like
Yep. My bad. I better get back to playing on our latest build of Forge and planning which skill jump to remove next.
2 Likes
There is no forge build, we both know that. That’s why we are pushing it back to season 4.
1 Like
Lol that’s some doo doo and the same could be said if you only use CSR. Start off low, play more games and the rank is an accurate reflection.
You know what would make it more transparent as 343 claims to strive for… just using the CSR. Seriously… you still havent given one GOOD reason against just using CSR. Would the game explode? Or would matching appear to make more sense to everyone. Instead if trying to get 2 numbers to correlate perfectly, simplify it to one for each ranked playlist. Boom. What if someone is good at swat but is worse at other playlists? They get stomped for a long time.
I dont think you’ve realized yet that 343 goes by the philosophy of “if it aint broke, smash it to bits”. They’ve done it to just about every aspect of multiplayer.
Most want 1-50 ranks
Most dont want mmr
Most want more ranked playlists
Most want more maps - specifically some good classic ones that they literally have the blue print for.
343 has done the opposite… hence why the player count is generally low.
2 Likes