MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

I agree, and personally I would not consider winning a factor as none of the top/endgame pvp players care about objective gaming. If it were deathmatch only, winning could be a good metric to use. However ZOS does care about objective pvp, so it's a factor that should be factored into the equation.

Well its that nobody cares about the objective until matches are all players of equal skill.

There are always other methods of pushing objectives on players like monetary rewards, or even something as goofy as tiered leaderboard placements. Practically the whole reason people play a lot of mobas or other competitive games is because they can say they are a "diamond" player or "global elite"

Much like how when you get emperor you can put the emperor title under your name. You'd have the current BG rank titles available ONLY when you hold that rank actively.

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Miracle19 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

ESO is not a competitive game by any means, so you first need to make a simple functional MMR system that is actually implementable before talking about the combat aspects. Because there shouldn't be 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4 games where new pvp players ever fight someone with 5000+ hours of pvp.

Once you understand all the four reasons you might change your mind about this. For all intents and purposes, 90% of ppl in BGs are only there for rewards. This is where we are right now. This is where we've always been. Talking about ''better MMR'' is all well and good, but it's been happening from the start, and it led absolutely nowhere. It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.

Can you please explain how your MMR system would help with this problem , which is specific to 8v8?

The rest of the post explained it. By separating the leaderboard/rewards system from the MMR system you could then just have mmr based on simple concepts like KDA. Accounts would then just climb or lower on the ladder as such separating the new pvp and higher tier pvp players. Its not really specific to 8v8 or 4v4 or 4v4v4, the simplified system would work for all.

4v4v4 was not the silver bullet people remember. There were plenty of games that boiled down to spawn camping or pug stomping all the time. Sometimes it was even easier to go 40/0 because you had less allies stealing kills since it was 4v8 instead of 8v8.

Did you click the explanation in the spoiler? The one about Magic Matchmaking?

Yeah I don't understand your point there. It relies on a poor MMR distribution of KDA on a team.....Fix the mmr system and you would see a more even distribution of KDA on each team regardless of team size.(except for healer players)

Ok I'll just keep it in the other thread. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, just honestly looking for some answers.

''It's not impossible to put the 5000+ hours pvpers and newcomers in the same matches, because even if a few of them think they want to go 40/0/15 and then complain, there are pvpers who only want to kill each other by any means necessary, and maybe win the match while they're at it.''

Regarding your KDA based MMR system, wouldn't the complaining pvper that targets newcomers have a much higher MMR than the pvper that only wants to kill him?

That complaining pvper being qued against new players would increase in mmr until they weren't qued against new players?

Eventually the pugstomper would only be matched up with high mmr players and will find their place in the ladder.

90% of people in queue are low MMR only there for rewards.
10% are BG regulars from various skill levels.
Not only you want to keep the 90% separated, it seems you want to split the remaining 10% into multiple tiers.

Population barely supports placing high and low MMR players together to make a team average, and here you are honestly thinking this is possible?

And you got these statistics from where?

And you assume the population of the game will forever be the same?

If you dont base the matchmaking on previous data, there is no way you would avoid pugstomping.....like how live is run right now. The matchmaking is not based on the most important data.

Ok so you do believe it's possible. I wish I did too.
I think I still don't quite understand your proposed mmr system. Let's go back to the previous example: We have two equally skilled pvpers. One is a pugstomper that avoids pvpers, the other is a Chad that only cares about going after other pvpers. They start at zero MMR. The pugstomper consistently has a much higher KDA than Chad, because they're basically playing different games. How does Chad ever catch up to pugstomper while remaining true to himself?

There is no catching up, you are not understanding. In this scenario they both get higher KDA compared to the pugs and will both move up. Inevitably fighting each other. You are correct in that the pug stomper would get to higher mmr faster, but once at higher mmr they taper off in kills, so their mmr climb rate balances out in the end.

Chad is so obsessed with going after pvpers (pugstompers and other Chads alike) that the pugs in his team get better KDA than him. All his damage goes to pvpers and pvpers alone. What then?

He would still climb compared to the pugs? after however many games they literally never interact with pugs again.

The problem is you are taking a 16 player population and assuming these same 16 people are only going to be fighting the same 16 people......they wont and thats the point. The pug stompers quickly get forced to max mmr and only get into games against other 16 players at the same skill level.

It seems to me that it's entirely possible that Chad might get stuck fighting other Chads in lower or mid MMR. Don't you think we should just make Chad's life easier and give him everything he wants so he can go after pugstomper and put the disgusting rat in the ground where it belongs?

That's only possible if you assume everyone is perfectly equivalent and there are never group fights or objective fights ever. Basically hyper unrealistic. There is enough chaos that by the first day or two everyone would have already moved in a direction away from each other mmr wise.

Why not just make the mmr based on damage done or healing done, whichever is higher? And find away to fit shielders in there somehow.

Damage done and healing done only rewards aoe dot and aoe hot builds. If I run a direct damage only dizzy onslaught build I may get 20 kills in a match but have sub 500k damage. Where the next guy only closes out 10 kills with 2m damage.

Kills and Assists directly show your involvement in output. Did you actually close out kills, or just be supplemental in pressure?

Like I explained in the mmr post(now on post 1) zos can then check how many heals+shields you applied in a match to determine if you were a healer and can change the mmr to favor assists more since healers wont be closing out as many kills.

Rewarded with what? Inflated MMR, longer queue times and more difficult matches? And it would only affect a couple of playstyles. Seems worth it to me, since it's a lot simpler and wouldn't make Chad's life harder.

Why would that be a good thing to base the MMR system off of something not representative of player skill? What you are suggesting is that dot/hot builds should be high mmr and direct damage builds should be low mmr.

Another solution, which is very similar to yours could be how most online games do it. No option for solo que, all are group que. Kills, wins, deaths all impact your MMR in different weights. Maybe winning is the highest metric, with kills next deaths, medal score last. Use those metrics to ensure that an endgame player doesn't end up fighting the new guy that just hit lv 50. As you get better and more experienced, you eventually fight better plays and can gradually improve at the game. Maybe even make MMR account wide versus character based so that you don't have Smurfs.

What is the core purpose of an MMR system?............think..................It is to separate the 10 year vets and new players for player retention purposes. So next, do you really think "winning" a bg or "losing" a bg shows player skill? No it doesn't in the slightest because endgame players have no reason to actually win objectively. Infact the opposite is true since objective win conditions just put you back in que again for 10-20 mins after a 1min objective game.

Do you think Call of Duty would be popular if you spent 90%-95% of your time sitting in que doing nothing? Is that what you want to do after you get home from school or work? AFK and do nothing?

---

Thus the leaderboard should be objective based giving out rewards and such. However you need to separate the playerbase using actual player skill based factors like KDA. If I go 40/0/20 in every match for a week there is an issue.

For the ques available this is simple. Zos needs to decide how many times they can divide the playerbase before the system doesn't work. They could also just make the que selection a "preference" setting to try and prefer solo matches.

Yes this mmr system should be account wide. 90% of technical knowledge translates to new characters. Also if you swap to a new character it would be better to play against the same players so you know how to adjust your build.

I agree, and personally I would not consider winning a factor as none of the top/endgame pvp players care about objective gaming. If it were deathmatch only, winning could be a good metric to use. However ZOS does care about objective pvp, so it's a factor that should be factored into the equation.

Well its that nobody cares about the objective until matches are all players of equal skill.

There are always other methods of pushing objectives on players like monetary rewards, or even something as goofy as tiered leaderboard placements. Practically the whole reason people play a lot of mobas or other competitive games is because they can say they are a "diamond" player or "global elite"

Much like how when you get emperor you can put the emperor title under your name. You'd have the current BG rank titles available ONLY when you hold that rank actively.

That would be very cool to have a system like that in ESO. Objectives just don’t serve a purpose in competitive gameplay at all however. Not a single competitive player cares about anything other than kills and deaths. There has never been a capture the flag tournament. They’ve all been DM.