Should MMR be removed from BGs?

TheTruestKing

MMR and how it effects Battlegrounds.

Necrotech_Master

i dont know if MMR should be removed entirely, but it should at least well matter more than # of games played

i wouldnt vote the first option because the current MMR system is terrible, but i dont think there should be no MMR at all, because then your going to get sweaty competitive tryhards mixed with casuals trying to do their dailies which is going to cause other issues/complaints

the BG MMR should be overhauled so that its similar to the tribute MMR for ranked matches

TheTruestKing

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

i dont know if MMR should be removed entirely, but it should at least well matter more than # of games played

i wouldnt vote the first option because the current MMR system is terrible, but i dont think there should be no MMR at all, because then your going to get sweaty competitive tryhards mixed with casuals trying to do their dailies which is going to cause other issues/complaints

the BG MMR should be overhauled so that its similar to the tribute MMR for ranked matches

Good points. I agree.

OBJnoob

Ayup. I'm also with Necro on this one.

And, OP, you're going to end up with a lot of feedback but 0 actual votes if you don't reword your options. Most people that will be attracted to this discussion like the idea of an MMR just not THIS one.

haelgaan

would OP like to define what their acronym means, or should we be left to guess? because i'm not sure what Measles, Mumps, and Rubella have to do with BattleGrounds...

Solariken

MMR should be used only to sort teams. It's dumb that it filters people out of quick matchmaking just because they play a lot of games.

chessalavakia_ESO

haelgaan wrote: »

would OP like to define what their acronym means, or should we be left to guess? because i'm not sure what Measles, Mumps, and Rubella have to do with BattleGrounds...

MMR = Matchmaking Rating.

My impression is that ESO starts each character off with a low matchmaking ranking.

I'm not aware of any official statements on how exactly it functions.

Some people think it functions purely on the number of matches you do.

Personally, my impression is that your results also matter.

I level most of my alt's Alliance War rank in Battlegrounds and some of them have been dramatically better than others. The ones that have been better have found themselves against generally competent opposition before they hit max rank and the others have generally been against weak opposition.

ESO will generally try to match players with other players based on their MMR. (My impression is that the matchmaker will drop it's standards if the match takes too long to form as the times I've waited in queue for extended periods have generally placed me in matches that felt like they were a poor fit.)

As a result, players with high MMR can end up with longer queue times.

Personally, I tend to quit doing Battlegrounds regularly within a week or two after hitting high MMR on most of my characters.

I don't love the builds and tactics used in optimized PvP.

I don't enjoy interacting with some of the people and with maybe a few hundred people in the upper MMR you run into the same people over and over.

Needless to say, I'm opposed to the removal of MMR because I think having the players from High MMR interacting with the players in lower MMR more frequently will lead to bad outcomes for most parties. The matches where it feels the MMR has relaxed due to the matchmaker taking too long are frequently horribly uneven (with only four players to a team if their is a big skill gap it is very apparent). If the MMR was gone that would be every match.

If I don't enjoy playing with the High MMR population regularly, I certainly don't expect someone that could be significantly worse/less geared to enjoy the experience.

CameraBeardThePirate

Solariken wrote: »

MMR should be used only to sort teams. It's dumb that it filters people out of quick matchmaking just because they play a lot of games.

God this is the most frustrating part of the mmr system.

If I play a ton of BGs, I should NOT be waiting 10x the amount of time a brand new level 50 toon is waiting. It's absurd. I get that population is low, but that's not an excuse - especially considering the low pop is a direct result of the lack of support BGs have received from the devs.

Miracle19

Remove MMR, and give us back the choice to que for specific game-modes. Most of the higher MMR players only care about DM and would only que for DM. This allows everyone to get what they want and much faster que's.

Necrotech_Master

chessalavakia_ESO wrote: »

haelgaan wrote: »

would OP like to define what their acronym means, or should we be left to guess? because i'm not sure what Measles, Mumps, and Rubella have to do with BattleGrounds...

MMR = Matchmaking Rating.

My impression is that ESO starts each character off with a low matchmaking ranking.

I'm not aware of any official statements on how exactly it functions.

Some people think it functions purely on the number of matches you do.

Personally, my impression is that your results also matter.

I level most of my alt's Alliance War rank in Battlegrounds and some of them have been dramatically better than others. The ones that have been better have found themselves against generally competent opposition before they hit max rank and the others have generally been against weak opposition.

ESO will generally try to match players with other players based on their MMR. (My impression is that the matchmaker will drop it's standards if the match takes too long to form as the times I've waited in queue for extended periods have generally placed me in matches that felt like they were a poor fit.)

As a result, players with high MMR can end up with longer queue times.

Personally, I tend to quit doing Battlegrounds regularly within a week or two after hitting high MMR on most of my characters.

I don't love the builds and tactics used in optimized PvP.

I don't enjoy interacting with some of the people and with maybe a few hundred people in the upper MMR you run into the same people over and over.

Needless to say, I'm opposed to the removal of MMR because I think having the players from High MMR interacting with the players in lower MMR more frequently will lead to bad outcomes for most parties. The matches where it feels the MMR has relaxed due to the matchmaker taking too long are frequently horribly uneven (with only four players to a team if their is a big skill gap it is very apparent). If the MMR was gone that would be every match.

If I don't enjoy playing with the High MMR population regularly, I certainly don't expect someone that could be significantly worse/less geared to enjoy the experience.

my understanding of the MMR is that it is based on lifetime medal score earned on the character

there is no way to "lose" medal score, you only gain it, basically with each match you play (hence why it boils down to # of games played)

in a true MMR you lose points on a loss, which would lower your overall score and could drop you into a lower skill tier bracket, but in the current system as i understand how it works, there is no way to lose points

even a 3rd place team gains medal score which would increase their MMR

SkaraMinoc

I'm tired of playing against the same 30 players for years.

gariondavey

Miracle19 wrote: »

Remove MMR, and give us back the choice to que for specific game-modes. Most of the higher MMR players only care about DM and would only que for DM. This allows everyone to get what they want and much faster que's.

This.

Please @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin help us out here

El_Borracho

Completely with @Necrotech_Master. I don't want to go to a KDR (Kill Death Ratio) format nor do I think newbs should be thrown into a BGs with super experienced players. And also agree with @Solariken, but only if they make solo group finder actually solo as its pointless to sort out 2 teams to go against a 3 or 4 man premade.

ESO_CenturionPlayer

The problem isn’t matchmaking rank, the problem is lack of interest.

As mentioned above, there’s two or three dozen people that do battlegrounds regularly. Getting grouped with or against these people is a very unpleasant experience. They expect the team to operate with a perfected battleground build when most people will never care enough to put one together.

Battlegrounds aren’t fun for most and it doesn’t draw a large enough contingent of the player base for diversified play. Only people who want the daily bonus for finishing first or second, then move on to something else.

_Ahala_

Trust me on this one. You don't want this specific change. For hardcore players this would make BGs dull fast because where is the challenge? For casual players... well, this might push even more people away because its not fun to go up against overwhelming odds. I hear you on the ques taking too long, but as others have put it, this has more to do with a lack of interest.

Alternative ideas: Maybe we should push for more maps with cool mechanics to generate more interest? (i.e. naval battle map with Vateshran Hallow like hook-shot synergy to let you jump ships, a wild hunt themed PvPvE map where killing mini-bosses min battleground grants your team powerful buffs, or maybe even something even more different like two (not three) team battlegrounds with some sort of "Guards vs Thieves" or "Mortals vs Vampires/Werewolves" premise). Just spitballing here.

Off topic non-ap rewarding spin offs ideas that could be seriously fun for PvPers: custom lobbies for guild battlegrounds, allowing us to turn player homes into pseudo-battlegrounds disconnected from the que "spawn point and objective furnishings?", and group duels

auz

Even just reset the mmrs regularly would help.

OBJnoob

Here's an idea. Take away the MMR and just provide a box players can check or not check. Call it what you want. The "High MMR" box. The Veteran box. The Ranked box.

There will then be only 2 MMR levels, which is bound to help que times. And people can choose if they want it hard or easy.

Yes some high MMR players will dip into easymode sometimes to scorch the poor noobs and get a quick daily, but for the most part I don't think they will. No more often than the current method allows for similar happenstances.

Araneae6537

MMR should be based on WINS.

gariondavey

We had a huge bg population back in 2018 but changes to the queue system + whiplash changes to dots from 1 patch to the next resulted in over half of the population leaving the game.

Fast forward to 2021 when dark convergence and hrothgar chill were released in overpowered states despite all the feedback from the pts AND new world releasing, and we had another mass exodus from the bg community.

They also removed the dm only queue in the last 2 years which drove away a lot of bg players.

Lastly, u35 drove away a ton of veteran players from the game.

There desperately needs to be changes to the bg system in order to increase interest.

As it stands, the inability to choose your mode is doing nothing for cultivating the population. Same with poorly designed objective modes. Same for the "mmr" system which is essentially just games played, not games won.

Fix one of those 3 and you'll see an increase in the bg community. Fix all 3 and you'll be swimming in players.

El_Borracho

OBJnoob wrote: »

Here's an idea. Take away the MMR and just provide a box players can check or not check. Call it what you want. The "High MMR" box. The Veteran box. The Ranked box.

There will then be only 2 MMR levels, which is bound to help que times. And people can choose if they want it hard or easy.

Yes some high MMR players will dip into easymode sometimes to scorch the poor noobs and get a quick daily, but for the most part I don't think they will. No more often than the current method allows for similar happenstances.

Not a terrible idea, but you would need to put a limit or cap on queueing for the lower box. Something like you win 3, lower is locked for your account for a period of time, move up to the next level, win 3, get locked out, move up, etc. After all, this is a game where people spend real money (crowns) to max out sub-Level 50 characters in order to beat up noobs in U-50 Cyrodiil.

Brakkish

I think the game already defaults to no MMR when there's not enough players.

It seems clear when I see some new faces that clearly are just there for their daily and get vaporized in a matter of seconds.

OBJnoob

El_Borracho wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

Here's an idea. Take away the MMR and just provide a box players can check or not check. Call it what you want. The "High MMR" box. The Veteran box. The Ranked box.

There will then be only 2 MMR levels, which is bound to help que times. And people can choose if they want it hard or easy.

Yes some high MMR players will dip into easymode sometimes to scorch the poor noobs and get a quick daily, but for the most part I don't think they will. No more often than the current method allows for similar happenstances.

Not a terrible idea, but you would need to put a limit or cap on queueing for the lower box. Something like you win 3, lower is locked for your account for a period of time, move up to the next level, win 3, get locked out, move up, etc. After all, this is a game where people spend real money (crowns) to max out sub-Level 50 characters in order to beat up noobs in U-50 Cyrodiil.

Yes something like that might be in order.

I will say though it's pretty obvious by now that there aren't enough BG people for ZOS to want to divide the playerbase any more than it already is (group and solo que.)

I think creating a division that replaces an existing division (MMR,) is the only solution that will work. And maintaining an optional MMR while also allowing for the occasional quicker que time may be preferable.

But some people will have to give some things up to make that happen. It's a lesser of two evils situation.

El_Borracho

@OBJnoob totally agree. The more I thought about this, the ladder/king of the mountain/relegation/elevation format makes the most sense. You win, you go up. You lose, you go down. And I guess, if you come in second, you stay put. Will people try to game the system by losing? Sure. But that means someone else won, which probably made them happy

OBJnoob

Well honestly I don't know about that @El_Borracho I don't think people losing on purpose "to game the system" is as big an issue as people, not gaming the system at all, losing because they refuse to play OBJ modes. And I'm not using this as an opportunity to start an argument I'm just honestly saying there seems to be a lot of those people. And those people, from what I see on the forums, tend to be very good players. And they also seem to want a challenge.

They might all find themselves in the lower MMR if it were all about wins -v- losses.

I still like my original idea of just letting people choose. But, to incorporate your idea, I might just make it about games played instead of games won. You get 3 low MMR matches a day. That should be enough for anyone just doing their daily... And should also be enough for casuals, since I doubt very much they play that many anyway.

Anybody gaming the system can only do it 3 times, and anyone selecting high mmr can enjoy a slightly faster que time. Their bracket won't be quite as elite but it'll be bigger.

This would make mid-to-high players like me happy too I would think. I like to run weird set-ups but basically all my toons are high mmr and sometimes it feels like being punished LOL. Jump on a toon you haven't played in a year... New gear, new skills, decide to play a BG to warm-up... Oops high mmr, get rekt.

El_Borracho

@OBJnoob no problems with that here. Anything to increase BGs population and make them more fun works for me. I see the same players in them all the time.

Necrotech_Master

i think they should do something similar to tribute, have the MMR reset every month

i think also having a "competitive" and "casual" mode would probably also be better, competitive would more likely revolve around deathmatch, where as casual would be a random mode like we have now

then it would give the high-mmr/competitive players somewhere to go, and give the low mmr/more casual players place to go

i dont know how it would look population wise, but if it were to try to draw more people in i would think that this would be a better system than what we have now (virtually no mmr other than games played, 1 single queue mixing tryhards and casuals)

if there ends up being enough population, they could branch out additional modes such as no proc, but definitely will have to keep as few queues as possible to not split up what population is still there

rymere83

MMR doesnt need to be in a game mode where it doesnt matter. Look at WoW...MMR matters there because there is a competitive seasonal ladder. Thats not a thing in ESO. Its just queuing for randoms in a random non-competitive environment

OBJnoob

rymere83 wrote: »

MMR doesnt need to be in a game mode where it doesnt matter. Look at WoW...MMR matters there because there is a competitive seasonal ladder. Thats not a thing in ESO. Its just queuing for randoms in a random non-competitive environment

Competitive and ranked or not, having a MMR may still matter to the stability of the population. If removing it results in newer players getting demolished and quitting then that does matter.

I support an MMR system I just wish it were different. Right now the game can't tell the difference in skill level between long-time players. Experience isn't the same as skill.

the1andonlyskwex

OBJnoob wrote: »

rymere83 wrote: »

MMR doesnt need to be in a game mode where it doesnt matter. Look at WoW...MMR matters there because there is a competitive seasonal ladder. Thats not a thing in ESO. Its just queuing for randoms in a random non-competitive environment

Competitive and ranked or not, having a MMR may still matter to the stability of the population. If removing it results in newer players getting demolished and quitting then that does matter.

I support an MMR system I just wish it were different. Right now the game can't tell the difference in skill level between long-time players. Experience isn't the same as skill.

In some ways the current system is worse than no MMR at all. Every time I bring a new character into BGs the same thing happens. At first I'm in the middle of the pack as I learn (or re-learn) to play the character's class and develop a decent build. Then, once I get myself sorted out, I dominate almost every match I play for a little while. I eventually get moved into a high enough MMR bracket where I stop dominating, and the transition from dominating to practically useless happens very quickly. At this point I'm struggling to do enough damage to get anyone below about 75% health and I feel like I'm getting one-shotted (although my death recaps show I'm really taking 4-5 hits before I die). This isn't fun, and it's essentially a permanent state.

At this point, I've had some success golding out most of my gear and switching to tri-stat enchantments. This tends to get me back into feeling like I'm not completely useless, but it's also more than I can afford to do with most of my characters. I also never get back to a point where my K/D ratio is better than 1/3ish, so I'm still not particularly competitive (or having all that much fun).

Ultimately, I eventually stop playing all of my characters in BGs because high(er) MMRs just aren't fun. I'm just not good enough to compete in high(er) MMR and there's no way to move back down once you've climbed the mountain. As-is, the current MMR implementation actively drives away players who otherwise like BGs but don't have top-tier skills.

The ideal solution would be to have MMR decay when you have bad matches or don't play for a while, but a no-MMR solution would at least make it random who you get matched with, instead of consistently matching lower-skill BG enthusiasts with people who will consistently wreck them.

Jierdanit

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

rymere83 wrote: »

MMR doesnt need to be in a game mode where it doesnt matter. Look at WoW...MMR matters there because there is a competitive seasonal ladder. Thats not a thing in ESO. Its just queuing for randoms in a random non-competitive environment

Competitive and ranked or not, having a MMR may still matter to the stability of the population. If removing it results in newer players getting demolished and quitting then that does matter.

I support an MMR system I just wish it were different. Right now the game can't tell the difference in skill level between long-time players. Experience isn't the same as skill.

In some ways the current system is worse than no MMR at all. Every time I bring a new character into BGs the same thing happens. At first I'm in the middle of the pack as I learn (or re-learn) to play the character's class and develop a decent build. Then, once I get myself sorted out, I dominate almost every match I play for a little while. I eventually get moved into a high enough MMR bracket where I stop dominating, and the transition from dominating to practically useless happens very quickly. At this point I'm struggling to do enough damage to get anyone below about 75% health and I feel like I'm getting one-shotted (although my death recaps show I'm really taking 4-5 hits before I die). This isn't fun, and it's essentially a permanent state.

At this point, I've had some success golding out most of my gear and switching to tri-stat enchantments. This tends to get me back into feeling like I'm not completely useless, but it's also more than I can afford to do with most of my characters. I also never get back to a point where my K/D ratio is better than 1/3ish, so I'm still not particularly competitive (or having all that much fun).

Ultimately, I eventually stop playing all of my characters in BGs because high(er) MMRs just aren't fun. I'm just not good enough to compete in high(er) MMR and there's no way to move back down once you've climbed the mountain. As-is, the current MMR implementation actively drives away players who otherwise like BGs but don't have top-tier skills.

The ideal solution would be to have MMR decay when you have bad matches or don't play for a while, but a no-MMR solution would at least make it random who you get matched with, instead of consistently matching lower-skill BG enthusiasts with people who will consistently wreck them.

MMR should be based on your average score or average K/D and not on your total score.

With no MMR at all you would have 1 or 2 people in each BG that completely dominate, which is in most cases not fun for either side.

The problem at the moment is that 2 players who have been playing BGs for long time are going to end up in the same match even though one might have an average score of 1.5k and the other one of 4k+. Simply because the high MMR bracket is so small and the MMR system is terrible.

the1andonlyskwex

Jierdanit wrote: »

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

rymere83 wrote: »

MMR doesnt need to be in a game mode where it doesnt matter. Look at WoW...MMR matters there because there is a competitive seasonal ladder. Thats not a thing in ESO. Its just queuing for randoms in a random non-competitive environment

Competitive and ranked or not, having a MMR may still matter to the stability of the population. If removing it results in newer players getting demolished and quitting then that does matter.

I support an MMR system I just wish it were different. Right now the game can't tell the difference in skill level between long-time players. Experience isn't the same as skill.

In some ways the current system is worse than no MMR at all. Every time I bring a new character into BGs the same thing happens. At first I'm in the middle of the pack as I learn (or re-learn) to play the character's class and develop a decent build. Then, once I get myself sorted out, I dominate almost every match I play for a little while. I eventually get moved into a high enough MMR bracket where I stop dominating, and the transition from dominating to practically useless happens very quickly. At this point I'm struggling to do enough damage to get anyone below about 75% health and I feel like I'm getting one-shotted (although my death recaps show I'm really taking 4-5 hits before I die). This isn't fun, and it's essentially a permanent state.

At this point, I've had some success golding out most of my gear and switching to tri-stat enchantments. This tends to get me back into feeling like I'm not completely useless, but it's also more than I can afford to do with most of my characters. I also never get back to a point where my K/D ratio is better than 1/3ish, so I'm still not particularly competitive (or having all that much fun).

Ultimately, I eventually stop playing all of my characters in BGs because high(er) MMRs just aren't fun. I'm just not good enough to compete in high(er) MMR and there's no way to move back down once you've climbed the mountain. As-is, the current MMR implementation actively drives away players who otherwise like BGs but don't have top-tier skills.

The ideal solution would be to have MMR decay when you have bad matches or don't play for a while, but a no-MMR solution would at least make it random who you get matched with, instead of consistently matching lower-skill BG enthusiasts with people who will consistently wreck them.

MMR should be based on your average score or average K/D and not on your total score.

With no MMR at all you would have 1 or 2 people in each BG that completely dominate, which is in most cases not fun for either side.

The problem at the moment is that 2 players who have been playing BGs for long time are going to end up in the same match even though one might have an average score of 1.5k and the other one of 4k+. Simply because the high MMR bracket is so small and the MMR system is terrible.

Are you sure there are enough high skill players that every match would have 1-2 of them? Based on the queue lengths, it certainly seems possible that what would actually happen is that only a small percentage of matches would have any high skill players