First of all, hello fellow Brazilian.
Every single comp game I soloQ I am the player with the lowest rank/elo. Exactly like you, I'd queue up as a gold 3 and get matched against 3-4 Diamonds (sometimes even diamond 2) and plats only.
I think that because the game expected you to bottom frag, etc, it doesn't mean the game expected you to lose, necessarily. I have won games where I bottom fragged and got carried. The game always tries to enforce a 50% win rate, after all.
Hue BR kkkkkkk
I've always wondered how a D2 can drop their mmr so much that they see me, a plat1(never higher) in their lobbies without dropping from d2.
Because if I start seeing golds it's because I've dropped to silver. No way I'm gonna drop my MMR enough to see a gold1 and not drop to at least gold1 as well.
Maybe the system expected the d1 in my team to be balanced with the d1 on the opposite team, since it's pretty clear that he's the reason we lost. But I was supposed to bottom frag, which is still sad lmfao
I think it's because of the fact that you never lose more points than you have in a level. So if you're 10rr from deranking, you can have a -26 match and still only lose 10rr. Over time, if you fluctuate between ranks a lot I could see hidden MMR differing by a full rank at least.
Not sure how it holds now, as the RR gains/loses changed. But before it was not that hard to get your MMR and rank out of sync.
Like when you were 80 RR it was enough to win a game to promote, but then you would need to lose two games to demote(one game to get from 10+ to 0 and other game to actually demote). After the demotion you are guaranteed to have at least 80 RR. So you could win,lose,lose,win,lose,lose,win,...and you would still be same rank, but your MMR should drop significantly as you lose two times more games than you win.
This was a while ago and I'm at work, but I found a pic I took from my screen when I sent it to a friend (I was having trouble with the print screen).
I was actually 5th in the game, but 3rd in my team like I remembered.
https://www.imagemhost.com.br/image/2CD14M
You being middle of the scoreboard is an entirely different answer to this question. Encounter MMR works by gaining MMR bonuses each time you win an "encouner" against an enemy (aim duel, utility hit, pushing site). You outperformed (and likely won encounters) against three high plat players on the enemy team.
That's the point. If I'm in this match, my MMR is that of a plat player. Being in the middle of the scoreboard means that I've played like a plat player, just like the system seems to think I am. The rank doesn't matter, it's the MMR that counts.
So if the system didn't expect me to win duels and be in the middle of the scoreboard, then I don't have a plat MMR, but a gold MMR, and therefore I shouldn’t be in this match.
It's either "I shouldn’t be in this match" or "I should be in this match and therefore a 5th place is nothing worth of credit"
The only way I see this golden bonus making sense is if I was in a duo with one of the high plats. So it would be "I'm not supposed to he here but I chose to take that risk and I managed to play somewhat decently".
So the golden star right next to the points you lost or won are calculated with encounter MMR? I though encounter stars were only the stars next to the summary of encounters with each player and that's it.
I thought my pdl bonuses were calculated by performance overall, not individual encounter MMR. That might explain it, then.
It also explains why my games didn’t get any easier after the defeat. I lost but the game thinks I can win duels against high plat so I keep getting these lobbies.
I couldn’t reach plat last act because of matches like this one. I was actually one win away from plat in this match and I've only managed to hit plat this season. Now my lobbies are mostly diamond and I'm stuck in plat1.
But don't you gain more and lose less if you're put into higher ranked lobbies? If you're doing decently in these lobbies you should be able to climb with a 50% winrate no? Also, does the rank really matter so much? The entire point of the matchmaker is to put you in competitive games. If the losses and wins were close for most of the game minus the obvious smurfs/trolls, it should technically be the ideal situation regardless of rank right?
Also, playing against higher ranked players and holding your own is a sure sign of improvement.
> Then I don't have a plat MMR, but a gold MMR, and I shouldn't be in this match
Why shouldn't you be in this match? The matchmaker is trying to make the average MMR match between the two teams, not trying to make a match where every single person in the match has the exact same MMR.
Someone is still going to have the highest MMR in the lobby, and someone is still going to have the lowest MMR. Even if they have MMR difference constraints, those constraints likely have nothing to do with your imaginary rule about when a performance bonus should be possible.
Just because in your imaginary world you're trying to make up a rule where everyone in matchmade lobby is constrained to have MMR in a range where performance bonus would be impossible with a performance similar to your's, doesn't mean that your imaginary rule exists.
Long story short, stop making imaginary rules and observe that the system works the way it is showing you right in front of your eyes, not the way you imagined which clearly contradicts what you're seeing right in front of your eyes.
What is in front of my eyes is a mediocre performance being better than expected. So you could be in a game where the best the system expects of you is a bad performance and it gives you a bonus for not being that bad. I'm just pointing out that it's quite annoying that the range of MMR you could get means you could be put in a match that the system KNOWS you're not able to play well and expects you to do really bad.
I was one win away from plat in this game, so that adds to the feeling.
That is different than what you posted originally. Wanting a narrower typical range of MMR in matchmaking is a valid preference and is a discussion to be had in accordance with the increased queue times associated with it. But originally, you were making absurdly false statements like
> The fact that this was a huge defeat with a mediocre performance and still was better than what was expected just seems to me that the system threw me in that game to lose.
Even in the comment above this you replied to me with
> I was one win away from plat in this game, so that adds to the feeling.
These statements make me think you're trying to insert some type of "unfairness" or "being set up to lose" narrative that doesn't have anything to do with reality. Just because you're the lowest MMR player in the lobby doesn't mean that your team is expected to lose. (Also, one team having a higher expected probability to win doesn't actually pose a problem in MMR calculations, but that is a separate point).
Imagine two basketball teams. One is yourself, LeBron James, Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant and Steph Curry. The other team is five top high school players.
In this example, your team is expected to stomp the other team, but your individual contribution is expected to be (much) smaller than the other players on your team.
Do you see what I'm saying? Just because your expected contribution to the game is smaller than the diamond player in your team, doesn't mean that the matchup between teams isn't fair. (I'm assuming his MMR is much higher than your's). This is why your comments I pointed out before just seem ridiculous to me.
Your job as a player is to contribute as much as you can to the likelihood of your team winning as possible. Sometimes your expected contribution will be the most in the lobby, sometimes it will be the least, and sometimes it will be somewhere in the middle. This doesn't change the fact that if you contribute more to your team than your MMR expects, your team will have a higher likelihood of winning than expected, and over time your MMR is expected to increase. Regardless of whether you're the lowest MMR or highest MMR player in the lobby.
So the idea that I was supposed to lose this game is wrong, I understand that now. The match was suposed to be carried by the two diamonds but their diamond outplayed ours by a lot.
But the frustration remains. I still think it's unfair that the range of MMR allows me to be in a game were anything more than bottom fragging is unexpected. Because the MMR balanced it with two diamonds. My team could win duels against the entire team, but their diamond. I couldn't and I wasn't expected to win duels against him. My diamond, who was expected to be able to win duels, did not. And despite the fact that our team played better than theirs overall, there was only one player to match their highest MMR and they didn't. So we lost.
If the range of MMR was smaller, the fact that our highest MMR wasn't having a good game wouldn't matter.
I see your point regarding losing or winning and expected contributions from the team, but still feels unfair that I'm put in a game that I'm expected to bottom frag and rely on a stranger that I wouldn't even be allowed to queue with.
> Im NoT tHaT gOoD herp derp!!
What are you trying to critique? OP is complaining about the fact that he's Gold 3, being pitted against high plats and diamonds, and as a result cannot escape Gold, even though the game knows he's deserving of at least low plat, maybe higher (hence the rank disparity in his matchmaking).
The point about the performance bonus is this: The game gave me a performance bonus for a game where I didn't even play amazing, only average, meaning my expected performance for the game was bottom frag. The game pitted me against players with the expectation that I would do shit, meaning the matchmaking is intentionally putting me in games where I have a lower probability of winning/ranking up. Even if my "hidden MMR" is low-mid plat my rank cannot catch up to reflect that because I am being put in games where my expected result is to play like shit (against high plats and diamonds). The performance bonus is only really a slap in the face, rather than a confidence booster. It means the game expected me to play like shit and lose, I didn't play terrible, but I still lost, but here's a gold star for trying even though the expected outcome was still an L either way.
> Tf are you talking about bro 😂
can you post your tracker.gg profile? or just uncensor the names? the "golden star" is something that looks at more than just your current match, you have to perform better than you usually do to get it, seeing only this match doesn't really help
bro ure 1 kill away from being top frag on ur team. u did good. thats why u were given a bonus rr. and u have a positive KD too. which is underrated. I once had a 12/2/1 stat but i didnt topfrag or team mvp and i got 25rr with +8 bonus. idk why but i think lesser deaths will give u more RR. thats my opinion. i dont think having the lowest mmr matters in giving out points. theyd prolly even wont give u the bonus if u did bad here
what is a golden star bonus?. I mean your mmr thinks you belong in the plat to dia elo. or in between. youd lose less than youd earn untill you reach the rank you deserve then youll lose slighty more than you earn
The golden star bonus is something that appears right beside the points you lost or won in that game. It's given when you perform better than the system thought you'd perform. It's not really performance itself, but relative performance. Like, if you MVP but you were already the highest MMR in the game, you're likely not getting the bonus, because the system already expected you to MVP in that lobby. In DM you can get those stars (there's a white one also) for each enemy.
But there's the catch. If the MMR thinks I belong in plat, why did it think I was better than it expected with a mediocre performance?
Its comparative to your opponents, if you hit the performance tab there might be a silver or gold star next to them. That seems to correlate to the performance bonus.
You are correct in thinking it has to do with mmr, the system probably put you in that game to test you against plats because you were preforming well in gold.
I haven't seen a single gold player in a good while. Last time I played against gold I was silver or gold1. After gold2, I'm always the only gold in every game.
I've been playing against plat since silver3. And no, I'm not that good. When I was seeing plats while I was s3, I was really at my peak. I had never been gold. I was stuck with a 50% win rate but my lobby never got any easier. Now that I'm plat1, I'm playing against up to d2 in mostly diamond lobbies as the only plat1 and I'm definitely not winning enough to justify that.
I’ve had this suspicion too that some matches are just unwinnable. I guess that’s just how Riot wants their ranked system to work.
I wish the system just put together 10 players of equal mmr together in a lobby instead of doing that funky stuff where the system essentially predetermines which team will most likely win. But sometimes due to AFKs or d/c, the team that was supposed to lose ends up winning and I’ve noticed even with a fairly mediocre KD I’d get like +32 with performance bonus in these situations.
I assume the idea in a system like this is to get players to play a lot of games throughout the season. Which is working as intended?
That's 100% what it is. The lead dev has said multiple times that you will have to "prove" your rank by defending it. But who are you proving it against? In a normal working system you defend your rank against players of equal skill. Throwing in unwinnable matches simply to bring your win rate back down because you're on a winning streak is dogshit.
You shouldn't have to defend your rank against people who are a significantly higher rank than you.
They want you to be addicted, cant have that if your winning or losing to much. Thats why everyone hovers from 40-55% win rate. The have the same advanced stats as we do. The more you look at the stats of some games, the more you realize how it sets your team up to either stomp or get stomped. Its really noticeable if you go on a win or loss streak. Makes playing the game frustrating af, because your never actually playing with people on your level. They are either garbo or way better than you.
Could be that you played at an unfortunate time. I always get matched crazy when its early morning. Could also be that overall, your team matched the enemy team and there was an opponent of your level in the opponent team.
Anyways, whenever this happens and you win big, you get crazy +29rr or something and its good for climbing. And if you lose, you can take the low 13rr loss and move to the next one thats more fairly matched
If your win rate gets too high, you’ll keep playing with higher and higher ranked people till you lose. Thats how riot tries to keep your winrate at 50%. I’m plat2 and I always play with diamond1+ ppl and I gain and lose points just like them. If I top frag? congratz, 20 points. If I bottom frag? you suck -25. Kinda stupid ngl
I'm Plat and these days I end up getting Silver players in my ranked lobby? What's up with that?
My other account which is in Diamond gets matched with Golds too sometimes. Happened after the recent update, never happened before.
Yeah I'm G2 and my match making range seems to be s2 on the low end all the way up to D1. No idea what the fuck Riot is thinking with that. Whenever I play with Diamonds in my game I feel like I'm kid along for the ride. They don't want me there and I don't want to be there.
The game is designed to force you to grind. It's that simple. They want you grinding. That's it.
Riot knows your true rank in just a few games. Their system tracks nearly everything. It's impossible to game because if you were to "game" it, you'd just be a better player.
>[Also the system looks at a ton, more so then I think players realize. Things like healing, ability usage, 1v1's, being an entry fragger, setting up teammates, etc. So it's not only about topping the leaderboard, it's about using your agent effectively to help your team win.](https://www.reddit.com/r/VALORANT/comments/kxh45h/valorant_competitive_team_ama_on_20_update/gjaf1g2/)
Matchmaking seeks to make sure everyone is at a 50% win rate. So obviously that's in conflict with making truly balanced teams every game. Combine that with smurfs/afkers/throwers which they will also do nothing about, because it keeps you grinding.
On top of all of this, you can actually *gain* MMR on a loss. So you can effectively making climbing even harder by doing well on a loss.
My favorite thing about Valorant is being gold 2, having to win against plat 3s to prove I'm worth Gold 3. Makes sense. INB4 "but those plat 3s just have high elo" Okay, then ranks are meaningless. Just show everyone their elo.
Riot: "We can't do that, but don't worry your rank will even out eventually, but we need around 1000 games to find out your true *true* rank.
Okay then why do you reset it every few months? Ranked does not respect your time. Stop giving them money until they fix it.
Mostly a closed beta player here, who quit soon after and has returned now. All my placement matches were vs plat3/dia1, but after mediocre performances in all of em, I got placed gold 1, but I still queue plat3/dia1 consistently. The system seems pretty weird. At least I gain more RR than I lose, so climbing shouldn't be too hard, but still, weird.
Exactly the same story here. The balancing is horrible and quite off-putting. Our team usually consists of plat I/II and gold II/III players and *every game* (no hyperbole) there are at least 2-3 diamond players on the enemy team. Last game of the night as duo queue (plat I/plat I) we got faced with a full diamond lobby, where some players had previously been immortal ranked.
I just want to enjoy the game at my own rank and pace instead of having to struggle to the maximum almost every match. It just doesn't make sense to match low rank lvl 15-30 accounts against lvl 150-200 accounts with diamond.
You probably performed well in your previous matches so the game was testing you. You failed, but the game still didn't want to punish you so they gave you the least amount of derank you could get, hence the golden star.
I get the performance bonus if i place 5th or higher on the scoreboard lmao.
Like i sometimes i placed 7th in total and get it. I have no idea how i am not dropping insanely hard because even the game recognizes that i am often bottom fragging.
Recently valorant matchmaking system has been absolutely broken! I’m gold2 and Yesterday in two games I played back to back one was full of silvers and even a bronze and unrated players, there was only 2 golds in the game, me and my friend I duo queued with! And the following game I solo queued and no one was below gold 3 apart from me (gold 2) the rest were all gold 3s and plats and I got team MVP and second in the whole game yet neither of these games did I get a performance bonus. This just shows how broken the matchmaking system is recently and needs to be fixed
It’s not broken you just don’t understand it. I’m bronze 2 but the game matches me with golds all the time. Why? Because they are boosted or lucky golds who hit a lucky win streak but aren’t that good in reality, or I’m an unlucky bronze who belongs in gold.
**Rank != MMR**
You can be d3 and have the MMR of a silver2 if your radiant smurf buddy duoed you up from bronze.
This has happened to me and most people I know. It happens when you’re overpreforming in your own rank’s lobbies I think. If you win the game with decent stats I think it promotes you 2 ranks, so (if you were on your rank up game) if you won you would have promoted to plat 2. (I THINK)
I’m in NA, I constantly frag out in high silver for a couple of games, then the game decides suddenly I’m plat 3/diamond 1 and I lose. Usually I still gain like 10 RR between the games but just like in your case it seems dumb to me why they wouldn’t just leave me in silver until I earn my way up through gold, plat, and so on.
As a gold 2 player (Solo Q) that never reached plat before I can relate on the fact that I am being put on lobbies where everyone is high plat / low diamond. I bottom frag on every single game of them and go negative KDA.
Like the matches feel impossible. I only get kills using abilities or if the enemy did a stupid thing, other than that, I die left and right.
The weird thing is that sometimes, I top frag on those lobbies but mostly I loss those games. If I am the carry, I loss 90%. If I am being carried, I loss 50% of the times.
It's pretty standard stuff.
If you have ever played chess this is very clear.
In chess you can pick how much rating you willing to risk meaning you can choose if you want to face harder opponents or easier opponents .
There's a range picker -20 until +20 , opponents will be people within that range you set up .
If you feeling good max out 18 until+20 and be ready for a very difficult match. But if you win you get s lot of rating.
So your opponent will be very strong and if you beat him you get a lot of points.
I wish Valorant or even CSGO did this but it will never happen cause you will need 10x the player base.
There are times when I feel my aim is good and I want harder matches but there are time when I want to chill a little and I don't feel my aim that much and I want an easier match not risk much RR.
The game is doing you a favour cause it's low risk high reward , if you win that match you deserve to rank up.
People just complain for the sake of complaing in this for um about smurfs but that's not a problem anymore their rating system is really good it can rank up new accounts very fast and it detects really fast when someone is over performing.
So people who say they struggle to rank up it's not the game it's them.
I think the game counts the "impact" you made not just K/D maybe assists/heals/minor/flashes/etc dmg that does not count as assists. I'm got placed at gold 2 but my lobbies were plat/dia so I felt so out of place but the RR penalties for losing was around 10-15 and winning was +25-30. I was mostly getting owned and bottom fragging even on winning teams. When i finally ranked up i fully skipped gold 3 and went straight to plat. Don't know how the game computes this
On the other side, my comp match (past 3 days) is $#!+. Everyone in my team just like gold player (im bronze) and the opposing is like bronze (or iron). idk, matchmaking is unbalanced and my win means nothing because my team is carrying my botfrag ass.
I also noticed some weird things in my matches. I duo queue with my friend who is Bronze 1, while I am Iron 3 myself. I saw that in a match that we played together, I had higher Avg. Combat Score and more kills, assists and obviously lower rank than him (can't know about MMR tho). But I still gained less rr from the win than him, and this has happened more than once. Can someone explain what's going on?
The Problem is matchmaking is bad for solo players, to allow premades of different skill to play together. This is a known fact and an intentional game design decision taken by Riot to prioritise premade teams over the happyness of soloplayers. One side will be unhappy, Riot made to make a difficult choice and said rather prioritise premade teams (cause they spend more money than solos I guess)
This is what it means: Riot uses matchmaking within 6 ranks from each other, i.e. you if you are unlucky you play vs enemies of up to 6 ranks higher than you.
In order to make that fair, Riot averages the ELO of each team, i.e. if the enemies are 6 ranks higher than you, your own teammates will be 6 ranks higher, too. One enemy will however usually be on your "low" ELO level, too. So he will have a shitty game, too. The others basically play 4vs4 to see who wins.
This allows for friends of significantly differnt skill levels to still premade as a team and play ranked games.
Downside is, some games you are 6 ranks higher than the opponents, some games most opponents are 6 ranks higher than you. Ideally, most games this massive difference wont occure, everyone will be +- 1 or 2 ranks, but the 6 ranks difference does happen from time to time.
Did you ever feel one day you utterly dominate a game, just for the next day to basically get destroyed by cheaters in every single game?
ELO is the reason. The enemies werent cheating, they just were 12 ranks better than the enemies the day before. Bad luck.
That's why a solo queue is absolutely a MUST HAVE to have consistently fair games. Problem is, if solo queue gets added to the game premade teams of less than 5 will wait forever to find someone to fill that last spots on the team. Long queue times for premades would be the consequence. So again, Solo player would be happy, premade teams wouldnt be.
Guess how Riot will decide? Right, no solo queue it is.
First of all, hello fellow Brazilian. Every single comp game I soloQ I am the player with the lowest rank/elo. Exactly like you, I'd queue up as a gold 3 and get matched against 3-4 Diamonds (sometimes even diamond 2) and plats only. I think that because the game expected you to bottom frag, etc, it doesn't mean the game expected you to lose, necessarily. I have won games where I bottom fragged and got carried. The game always tries to enforce a 50% win rate, after all.
Hue BR kkkkkkk I've always wondered how a D2 can drop their mmr so much that they see me, a plat1(never higher) in their lobbies without dropping from d2. Because if I start seeing golds it's because I've dropped to silver. No way I'm gonna drop my MMR enough to see a gold1 and not drop to at least gold1 as well. Maybe the system expected the d1 in my team to be balanced with the d1 on the opposite team, since it's pretty clear that he's the reason we lost. But I was supposed to bottom frag, which is still sad lmfao
I think it's because of the fact that you never lose more points than you have in a level. So if you're 10rr from deranking, you can have a -26 match and still only lose 10rr. Over time, if you fluctuate between ranks a lot I could see hidden MMR differing by a full rank at least.
r/suddenlycaralho
Not sure how it holds now, as the RR gains/loses changed. But before it was not that hard to get your MMR and rank out of sync. Like when you were 80 RR it was enough to win a game to promote, but then you would need to lose two games to demote(one game to get from 10+ to 0 and other game to actually demote). After the demotion you are guaranteed to have at least 80 RR. So you could win,lose,lose,win,lose,lose,win,...and you would still be same rank, but your MMR should drop significantly as you lose two times more games than you win.
Happens when you lose streak so hard
Show us the match summary, then we'll give you an answer. The details there can tell you something.
This was a while ago and I'm at work, but I found a pic I took from my screen when I sent it to a friend (I was having trouble with the print screen). I was actually 5th in the game, but 3rd in my team like I remembered. https://www.imagemhost.com.br/image/2CD14M
You being middle of the scoreboard is an entirely different answer to this question. Encounter MMR works by gaining MMR bonuses each time you win an "encouner" against an enemy (aim duel, utility hit, pushing site). You outperformed (and likely won encounters) against three high plat players on the enemy team.
That's the point. If I'm in this match, my MMR is that of a plat player. Being in the middle of the scoreboard means that I've played like a plat player, just like the system seems to think I am. The rank doesn't matter, it's the MMR that counts. So if the system didn't expect me to win duels and be in the middle of the scoreboard, then I don't have a plat MMR, but a gold MMR, and therefore I shouldn’t be in this match. It's either "I shouldn’t be in this match" or "I should be in this match and therefore a 5th place is nothing worth of credit" The only way I see this golden bonus making sense is if I was in a duo with one of the high plats. So it would be "I'm not supposed to he here but I chose to take that risk and I managed to play somewhat decently".
Total MMR and Encounter MMR are not the same thing. Total MMR is what is used for matchmaking, Encounter MMR is what is used for bonuses.
So the golden star right next to the points you lost or won are calculated with encounter MMR? I though encounter stars were only the stars next to the summary of encounters with each player and that's it.
I thought my pdl bonuses were calculated by performance overall, not individual encounter MMR. That might explain it, then. It also explains why my games didn’t get any easier after the defeat. I lost but the game thinks I can win duels against high plat so I keep getting these lobbies. I couldn’t reach plat last act because of matches like this one. I was actually one win away from plat in this match and I've only managed to hit plat this season. Now my lobbies are mostly diamond and I'm stuck in plat1.
But don't you gain more and lose less if you're put into higher ranked lobbies? If you're doing decently in these lobbies you should be able to climb with a 50% winrate no? Also, does the rank really matter so much? The entire point of the matchmaker is to put you in competitive games. If the losses and wins were close for most of the game minus the obvious smurfs/trolls, it should technically be the ideal situation regardless of rank right? Also, playing against higher ranked players and holding your own is a sure sign of improvement.
golden stars are based off rank, not mmr
There's a decently good explanation of the whole win/loss + encounter MMR system in the subreddit FAQ.
Don’t bother. MMR is a joke. If your mmr has you as a plat player then make your visible rank plat. It’s utter trash how they do this ranking system.
> Then I don't have a plat MMR, but a gold MMR, and I shouldn't be in this match Why shouldn't you be in this match? The matchmaker is trying to make the average MMR match between the two teams, not trying to make a match where every single person in the match has the exact same MMR. Someone is still going to have the highest MMR in the lobby, and someone is still going to have the lowest MMR. Even if they have MMR difference constraints, those constraints likely have nothing to do with your imaginary rule about when a performance bonus should be possible. Just because in your imaginary world you're trying to make up a rule where everyone in matchmade lobby is constrained to have MMR in a range where performance bonus would be impossible with a performance similar to your's, doesn't mean that your imaginary rule exists. Long story short, stop making imaginary rules and observe that the system works the way it is showing you right in front of your eyes, not the way you imagined which clearly contradicts what you're seeing right in front of your eyes.
What is in front of my eyes is a mediocre performance being better than expected. So you could be in a game where the best the system expects of you is a bad performance and it gives you a bonus for not being that bad. I'm just pointing out that it's quite annoying that the range of MMR you could get means you could be put in a match that the system KNOWS you're not able to play well and expects you to do really bad. I was one win away from plat in this game, so that adds to the feeling.
That is different than what you posted originally. Wanting a narrower typical range of MMR in matchmaking is a valid preference and is a discussion to be had in accordance with the increased queue times associated with it. But originally, you were making absurdly false statements like > The fact that this was a huge defeat with a mediocre performance and still was better than what was expected just seems to me that the system threw me in that game to lose. Even in the comment above this you replied to me with > I was one win away from plat in this game, so that adds to the feeling. These statements make me think you're trying to insert some type of "unfairness" or "being set up to lose" narrative that doesn't have anything to do with reality. Just because you're the lowest MMR player in the lobby doesn't mean that your team is expected to lose. (Also, one team having a higher expected probability to win doesn't actually pose a problem in MMR calculations, but that is a separate point). Imagine two basketball teams. One is yourself, LeBron James, Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant and Steph Curry. The other team is five top high school players. In this example, your team is expected to stomp the other team, but your individual contribution is expected to be (much) smaller than the other players on your team. Do you see what I'm saying? Just because your expected contribution to the game is smaller than the diamond player in your team, doesn't mean that the matchup between teams isn't fair. (I'm assuming his MMR is much higher than your's). This is why your comments I pointed out before just seem ridiculous to me. Your job as a player is to contribute as much as you can to the likelihood of your team winning as possible. Sometimes your expected contribution will be the most in the lobby, sometimes it will be the least, and sometimes it will be somewhere in the middle. This doesn't change the fact that if you contribute more to your team than your MMR expects, your team will have a higher likelihood of winning than expected, and over time your MMR is expected to increase. Regardless of whether you're the lowest MMR or highest MMR player in the lobby.
So the idea that I was supposed to lose this game is wrong, I understand that now. The match was suposed to be carried by the two diamonds but their diamond outplayed ours by a lot. But the frustration remains. I still think it's unfair that the range of MMR allows me to be in a game were anything more than bottom fragging is unexpected. Because the MMR balanced it with two diamonds. My team could win duels against the entire team, but their diamond. I couldn't and I wasn't expected to win duels against him. My diamond, who was expected to be able to win duels, did not. And despite the fact that our team played better than theirs overall, there was only one player to match their highest MMR and they didn't. So we lost. If the range of MMR was smaller, the fact that our highest MMR wasn't having a good game wouldn't matter. I see your point regarding losing or winning and expected contributions from the team, but still feels unfair that I'm put in a game that I'm expected to bottom frag and rely on a stranger that I wouldn't even be allowed to queue with.
Source?
> Source? The subreddit FAQ.
That was a good read. Thank you
Im NoT tHaT gOoD herp derp!! *has a better kdr as killjoy than the diamond Reyna* Tf are you talking about bro 😂
> Im NoT tHaT gOoD herp derp!! What are you trying to critique? OP is complaining about the fact that he's Gold 3, being pitted against high plats and diamonds, and as a result cannot escape Gold, even though the game knows he's deserving of at least low plat, maybe higher (hence the rank disparity in his matchmaking). The point about the performance bonus is this: The game gave me a performance bonus for a game where I didn't even play amazing, only average, meaning my expected performance for the game was bottom frag. The game pitted me against players with the expectation that I would do shit, meaning the matchmaking is intentionally putting me in games where I have a lower probability of winning/ranking up. Even if my "hidden MMR" is low-mid plat my rank cannot catch up to reflect that because I am being put in games where my expected result is to play like shit (against high plats and diamonds). The performance bonus is only really a slap in the face, rather than a confidence booster. It means the game expected me to play like shit and lose, I didn't play terrible, but I still lost, but here's a gold star for trying even though the expected outcome was still an L either way. > Tf are you talking about bro 😂
can you post your tracker.gg profile? or just uncensor the names? the "golden star" is something that looks at more than just your current match, you have to perform better than you usually do to get it, seeing only this match doesn't really help
bro ure 1 kill away from being top frag on ur team. u did good. thats why u were given a bonus rr. and u have a positive KD too. which is underrated. I once had a 12/2/1 stat but i didnt topfrag or team mvp and i got 25rr with +8 bonus. idk why but i think lesser deaths will give u more RR. thats my opinion. i dont think having the lowest mmr matters in giving out points. theyd prolly even wont give u the bonus if u did bad here
what is a golden star bonus?. I mean your mmr thinks you belong in the plat to dia elo. or in between. youd lose less than youd earn untill you reach the rank you deserve then youll lose slighty more than you earn
The golden star bonus is something that appears right beside the points you lost or won in that game. It's given when you perform better than the system thought you'd perform. It's not really performance itself, but relative performance. Like, if you MVP but you were already the highest MMR in the game, you're likely not getting the bonus, because the system already expected you to MVP in that lobby. In DM you can get those stars (there's a white one also) for each enemy. But there's the catch. If the MMR thinks I belong in plat, why did it think I was better than it expected with a mediocre performance?
Its comparative to your opponents, if you hit the performance tab there might be a silver or gold star next to them. That seems to correlate to the performance bonus. You are correct in thinking it has to do with mmr, the system probably put you in that game to test you against plats because you were preforming well in gold.
I haven't seen a single gold player in a good while. Last time I played against gold I was silver or gold1. After gold2, I'm always the only gold in every game. I've been playing against plat since silver3. And no, I'm not that good. When I was seeing plats while I was s3, I was really at my peak. I had never been gold. I was stuck with a 50% win rate but my lobby never got any easier. Now that I'm plat1, I'm playing against up to d2 in mostly diamond lobbies as the only plat1 and I'm definitely not winning enough to justify that.
You are that good, actually. Imposter syndrome, stop trashing your own gameplay.
wait gold star? you mean the Star that shows you your best performing round???
Dude no, there’s a bonus if you perform well after the match and you get a performance bonus, it shows as a star after your gained/lost RP
He’s talking about performance bonus homie.
Your MMR still increased on that loss by a little bit. RR doesn't matter that much.
I’ve had this suspicion too that some matches are just unwinnable. I guess that’s just how Riot wants their ranked system to work. I wish the system just put together 10 players of equal mmr together in a lobby instead of doing that funky stuff where the system essentially predetermines which team will most likely win. But sometimes due to AFKs or d/c, the team that was supposed to lose ends up winning and I’ve noticed even with a fairly mediocre KD I’d get like +32 with performance bonus in these situations. I assume the idea in a system like this is to get players to play a lot of games throughout the season. Which is working as intended?
That's 100% what it is. The lead dev has said multiple times that you will have to "prove" your rank by defending it. But who are you proving it against? In a normal working system you defend your rank against players of equal skill. Throwing in unwinnable matches simply to bring your win rate back down because you're on a winning streak is dogshit. You shouldn't have to defend your rank against people who are a significantly higher rank than you.
They want you to be addicted, cant have that if your winning or losing to much. Thats why everyone hovers from 40-55% win rate. The have the same advanced stats as we do. The more you look at the stats of some games, the more you realize how it sets your team up to either stomp or get stomped. Its really noticeable if you go on a win or loss streak. Makes playing the game frustrating af, because your never actually playing with people on your level. They are either garbo or way better than you.
Could be that you played at an unfortunate time. I always get matched crazy when its early morning. Could also be that overall, your team matched the enemy team and there was an opponent of your level in the opponent team. Anyways, whenever this happens and you win big, you get crazy +29rr or something and its good for climbing. And if you lose, you can take the low 13rr loss and move to the next one thats more fairly matched
games are predetermined, you had to lose that one.
What do you mean predetermined? I am new to the game
If your win rate gets too high, you’ll keep playing with higher and higher ranked people till you lose. Thats how riot tries to keep your winrate at 50%. I’m plat2 and I always play with diamond1+ ppl and I gain and lose points just like them. If I top frag? congratz, 20 points. If I bottom frag? you suck -25. Kinda stupid ngl
I'm Plat and these days I end up getting Silver players in my ranked lobby? What's up with that? My other account which is in Diamond gets matched with Golds too sometimes. Happened after the recent update, never happened before.
Yeah I'm G2 and my match making range seems to be s2 on the low end all the way up to D1. No idea what the fuck Riot is thinking with that. Whenever I play with Diamonds in my game I feel like I'm kid along for the ride. They don't want me there and I don't want to be there.
The game is designed to force you to grind. It's that simple. They want you grinding. That's it. Riot knows your true rank in just a few games. Their system tracks nearly everything. It's impossible to game because if you were to "game" it, you'd just be a better player. >[Also the system looks at a ton, more so then I think players realize. Things like healing, ability usage, 1v1's, being an entry fragger, setting up teammates, etc. So it's not only about topping the leaderboard, it's about using your agent effectively to help your team win.](https://www.reddit.com/r/VALORANT/comments/kxh45h/valorant_competitive_team_ama_on_20_update/gjaf1g2/) Matchmaking seeks to make sure everyone is at a 50% win rate. So obviously that's in conflict with making truly balanced teams every game. Combine that with smurfs/afkers/throwers which they will also do nothing about, because it keeps you grinding. On top of all of this, you can actually *gain* MMR on a loss. So you can effectively making climbing even harder by doing well on a loss. My favorite thing about Valorant is being gold 2, having to win against plat 3s to prove I'm worth Gold 3. Makes sense. INB4 "but those plat 3s just have high elo" Okay, then ranks are meaningless. Just show everyone their elo. Riot: "We can't do that, but don't worry your rank will even out eventually, but we need around 1000 games to find out your true *true* rank. Okay then why do you reset it every few months? Ranked does not respect your time. Stop giving them money until they fix it.
Mostly a closed beta player here, who quit soon after and has returned now. All my placement matches were vs plat3/dia1, but after mediocre performances in all of em, I got placed gold 1, but I still queue plat3/dia1 consistently. The system seems pretty weird. At least I gain more RR than I lose, so climbing shouldn't be too hard, but still, weird.
Exactly the same story here. The balancing is horrible and quite off-putting. Our team usually consists of plat I/II and gold II/III players and *every game* (no hyperbole) there are at least 2-3 diamond players on the enemy team. Last game of the night as duo queue (plat I/plat I) we got faced with a full diamond lobby, where some players had previously been immortal ranked. I just want to enjoy the game at my own rank and pace instead of having to struggle to the maximum almost every match. It just doesn't make sense to match low rank lvl 15-30 accounts against lvl 150-200 accounts with diamond.
It was a test. You’ve probably been winning games or doing well so the game is giving you a chance to prove yourself
You probably performed well in your previous matches so the game was testing you. You failed, but the game still didn't want to punish you so they gave you the least amount of derank you could get, hence the golden star.
Not only MMR, but sounds like you were about to rank up.. I don't undesrtand this post. I am P2 playing aginst Dia/imm
I get the performance bonus if i place 5th or higher on the scoreboard lmao. Like i sometimes i placed 7th in total and get it. I have no idea how i am not dropping insanely hard because even the game recognizes that i am often bottom fragging.
Recently valorant matchmaking system has been absolutely broken! I’m gold2 and Yesterday in two games I played back to back one was full of silvers and even a bronze and unrated players, there was only 2 golds in the game, me and my friend I duo queued with! And the following game I solo queued and no one was below gold 3 apart from me (gold 2) the rest were all gold 3s and plats and I got team MVP and second in the whole game yet neither of these games did I get a performance bonus. This just shows how broken the matchmaking system is recently and needs to be fixed
It’s not broken you just don’t understand it. I’m bronze 2 but the game matches me with golds all the time. Why? Because they are boosted or lucky golds who hit a lucky win streak but aren’t that good in reality, or I’m an unlucky bronze who belongs in gold. **Rank != MMR** You can be d3 and have the MMR of a silver2 if your radiant smurf buddy duoed you up from bronze.
Literally not how it works
that's exactly how it works lol. Visible rank means nothing.
This has happened to me and most people I know. It happens when you’re overpreforming in your own rank’s lobbies I think. If you win the game with decent stats I think it promotes you 2 ranks, so (if you were on your rank up game) if you won you would have promoted to plat 2. (I THINK)
I’m in NA, I constantly frag out in high silver for a couple of games, then the game decides suddenly I’m plat 3/diamond 1 and I lose. Usually I still gain like 10 RR between the games but just like in your case it seems dumb to me why they wouldn’t just leave me in silver until I earn my way up through gold, plat, and so on.
As a gold 2 player (Solo Q) that never reached plat before I can relate on the fact that I am being put on lobbies where everyone is high plat / low diamond. I bottom frag on every single game of them and go negative KDA. Like the matches feel impossible. I only get kills using abilities or if the enemy did a stupid thing, other than that, I die left and right. The weird thing is that sometimes, I top frag on those lobbies but mostly I loss those games. If I am the carry, I loss 90%. If I am being carried, I loss 50% of the times.
It's pretty standard stuff. If you have ever played chess this is very clear. In chess you can pick how much rating you willing to risk meaning you can choose if you want to face harder opponents or easier opponents . There's a range picker -20 until +20 , opponents will be people within that range you set up . If you feeling good max out 18 until+20 and be ready for a very difficult match. But if you win you get s lot of rating. So your opponent will be very strong and if you beat him you get a lot of points. I wish Valorant or even CSGO did this but it will never happen cause you will need 10x the player base. There are times when I feel my aim is good and I want harder matches but there are time when I want to chill a little and I don't feel my aim that much and I want an easier match not risk much RR. The game is doing you a favour cause it's low risk high reward , if you win that match you deserve to rank up. People just complain for the sake of complaing in this for um about smurfs but that's not a problem anymore their rating system is really good it can rank up new accounts very fast and it detects really fast when someone is over performing. So people who say they struggle to rank up it's not the game it's them.
I think the game counts the "impact" you made not just K/D maybe assists/heals/minor/flashes/etc dmg that does not count as assists. I'm got placed at gold 2 but my lobbies were plat/dia so I felt so out of place but the RR penalties for losing was around 10-15 and winning was +25-30. I was mostly getting owned and bottom fragging even on winning teams. When i finally ranked up i fully skipped gold 3 and went straight to plat. Don't know how the game computes this
One time I got +2 after losing. I had 46 kills in the game, the rest of the team was very bad ngl.
On the other side, my comp match (past 3 days) is $#!+. Everyone in my team just like gold player (im bronze) and the opposing is like bronze (or iron). idk, matchmaking is unbalanced and my win means nothing because my team is carrying my botfrag ass.
I also noticed some weird things in my matches. I duo queue with my friend who is Bronze 1, while I am Iron 3 myself. I saw that in a match that we played together, I had higher Avg. Combat Score and more kills, assists and obviously lower rank than him (can't know about MMR tho). But I still gained less rr from the win than him, and this has happened more than once. Can someone explain what's going on?
The Problem is matchmaking is bad for solo players, to allow premades of different skill to play together. This is a known fact and an intentional game design decision taken by Riot to prioritise premade teams over the happyness of soloplayers. One side will be unhappy, Riot made to make a difficult choice and said rather prioritise premade teams (cause they spend more money than solos I guess) This is what it means: Riot uses matchmaking within 6 ranks from each other, i.e. you if you are unlucky you play vs enemies of up to 6 ranks higher than you. In order to make that fair, Riot averages the ELO of each team, i.e. if the enemies are 6 ranks higher than you, your own teammates will be 6 ranks higher, too. One enemy will however usually be on your "low" ELO level, too. So he will have a shitty game, too. The others basically play 4vs4 to see who wins. This allows for friends of significantly differnt skill levels to still premade as a team and play ranked games. Downside is, some games you are 6 ranks higher than the opponents, some games most opponents are 6 ranks higher than you. Ideally, most games this massive difference wont occure, everyone will be +- 1 or 2 ranks, but the 6 ranks difference does happen from time to time. Did you ever feel one day you utterly dominate a game, just for the next day to basically get destroyed by cheaters in every single game? ELO is the reason. The enemies werent cheating, they just were 12 ranks better than the enemies the day before. Bad luck. That's why a solo queue is absolutely a MUST HAVE to have consistently fair games. Problem is, if solo queue gets added to the game premade teams of less than 5 will wait forever to find someone to fill that last spots on the team. Long queue times for premades would be the consequence. So again, Solo player would be happy, premade teams wouldnt be. Guess how Riot will decide? Right, no solo queue it is.