+/- 16 mmr per match?

[rwolf.9571]

Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

[Fortus.6175]

> @"rwolf.9571" said:

> Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

> Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

 

Consider yourself lucky then:

 

I would LOVE it if I were to get the same amount of points in loses and wins.

Notice that even though most loses we would get above 250 points, I would still lose -20 rating.... I dont even want to imagine what it would look like otherwise ( i have had games where I lost -28).

In my case is lose 15-20, win 8-13:

 

 






 

 

 

 

 

At some point I stopped taking so many screenshots because my screenshot folder was starting to get uncomfortably large.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

I **wish** it was as stable as +16/-16. No matter what I always seem to lose more for losses than I gain for winning. Sometimes by as much as half like @"Fortus.6175" showed, 10 for a win then -20 for a loss shortly after that.

 

There's less people playing now and the people left playing get punished for it. It's not very healthy. This whole one step forward, two steps back system has to go eventually.

[rwolf.9571]

> @"Fortus.6175" said:

> > @"rwolf.9571" said:

> > Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

> > Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

>

> Consider yourself lucky then:

>

> I would LOVE it if I were to get the same amount of points in loses and wins.

> Notice that even though most loses we would get above 250 points, I would still lose -20 rating.... I dont even want to imagine what it would look like otherwise ( i have had games where I lost -28).

> In my case is lose 15-20, win 8-13:

>

>

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>  

>  

>  

>  

>  

> At some point I stopped taking so many screenshots because my screenshot folder was starting to get uncomfortably large.

 

Well I reckon P1/P2 is the new "elite" player range with this low pop. Thus more carry volatility of a person that was of P3 or L1 of previous seasons. I usually stroll into P1 fairly easily previous seasons. But I'm hard stuck between G2/G3 this season before I gave up.

[Fortus.6175]

> @"rwolf.9571" said:

> > @"Fortus.6175" said:

> > > @"rwolf.9571" said:

> > > Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

> > > Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

> >

> > Consider yourself lucky then:

> >

> > I would LOVE it if I were to get the same amount of points in loses and wins.

> > Notice that even though most loses we would get above 250 points, I would still lose -20 rating.... I dont even want to imagine what it would look like otherwise ( i have had games where I lost -28).

> > In my case is lose 15-20, win 8-13:

> >

> >

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> >  

> >  

> >  

> >  

> >  

> > At some point I stopped taking so many screenshots because my screenshot folder was starting to get uncomfortably large.

>

> Well I reckon P1/P2 is the new "elite" player range with this low pop. Thus more carry volatility of a person that was of P3 or L1 of previous seasons. I usually stroll into P1 fairly easily previous seasons. But I'm hard stuck between G2/G3 this season before I gave up.

 

Hmm, at least based on my rank, I have always hovered on the 1500-1550 or so, for the past 4 or so seasons, so as far as I can tell the population has remained the same based on the "shift" of the ranks. There is also a possibility that the population playing now is not the same you played agaisnt when you were rating higher; for example, if there was an outflow of people with lower skills than you, but there was an equal inflow of better players, it could also somewhat explain this anomaly. Without actual data from Anet, all we can do is guess. I honestly hope we had access to more data, clarity is something I rejoice on, and being in the dark is pretty frustrating when I'm trying to make sense of whats going on.

[Dantheman.3589]

My matches are about +8 per win and -25 for losses

[Firebeard.1746]

> @"rwolf.9571" said:

> Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

> Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

 

It seems to depend match to match for me. I had a really bad loss streak at the beginning of the season, but then a huge win streak. It feels like the mmr has dr the higher my rank climbs. I think my rank may be stabilizing as i've had a few losses lately.

 

[Firebeard.1746]

> @"Fortus.6175" said:

> > @"rwolf.9571" said:

> > > @"Fortus.6175" said:

> > > > @"rwolf.9571" said:

> > > > Anybody else now getting around +/- 16 mmr per match as the new norm, rather than the more stable 11-13?

> > > > Guess match volatility is only going to get worse as the population nosedives into oblivion.

> > >

> > > Consider yourself lucky then:

> > >

> > > I would LOVE it if I were to get the same amount of points in loses and wins.

> > > Notice that even though most loses we would get above 250 points, I would still lose -20 rating.... I dont even want to imagine what it would look like otherwise ( i have had games where I lost -28).

> > > In my case is lose 15-20, win 8-13:

> > >

> > >

> > > 

> > > 

> > > 

> > > 

> > > 

> > >  

> > >  

> > >  

> > >  

> > >  

> > > At some point I stopped taking so many screenshots because my screenshot folder was starting to get uncomfortably large.

> >

> > Well I reckon P1/P2 is the new "elite" player range with this low pop. Thus more carry volatility of a person that was of P3 or L1 of previous seasons. I usually stroll into P1 fairly easily previous seasons. But I'm hard stuck between G2/G3 this season before I gave up.

>

> Hmm, at least based on my rank, I have always hovered on the 1500-1550 or so, for the past 4 or so seasons, so as far as I can tell the population has remained the same based on the "shift" of the ranks. There is also a possibility that the population playing now is not the same you played agaisnt when you were rating higher; for example, if there was an outflow of people with lower skills than you, but there was an equal inflow of better players, it could also somewhat explain this anomaly. Without actual data from Anet, all we can do is guess. I honestly hope we had access to more data, clarity is something I rejoice on, and being in the dark is pretty frustrating when I'm trying to make sense of whats going on.

 

I'm just going to stress using meta builds. I used to a run mirage build i enjoyed, was having terrible luck with it (20-40% win rate depending on season), found a build on meta battle, ran with it and my rank/win rate shot up.

 

The performance of individual professions is so varied that you really shouldn't dedicate to a main, and never queue as what you're actually playing as people like to switch to hard counters in the beginning of the match before it starts. The good news is sPvP has really no barrier to entry, so just roll a different character if you don't have one that's meta.

 

Really even if you don't plan playing what you're queuing as, the matchmaker should force you to choose what you're playing and associated build when you queue so it can try to even out the matches. This has already been said but anet i don't think is listening, but i really hope the pvp team takes a good look at some of the holes in the current system. Fixing the matchmaker would be a necessary step in revitalizing this game mode.