Overwatch
- Thread starter Caliane
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Springbok
Karen
- 9,602
- 14,272
I had a bunch last night, all ranked lower than me as well.. Bitching about the dumbest stuff too, seems like the ones who never change hero's/comps, refuse to heal/tank etc are always the most vocal... just like any other multiplayer game I guess. Weirdly, until last night I'd had pretty good luck with not seeing whiny chimps
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,472
- 16,416
Why would we assume that it placed me accurately?
I did my games solo queue. It placed me at a rank relative to the skill of the 50 other players (assuming 5 unique players in every 10 matches) in those games. Unless I'm a hard carry, I'm at the mercy of everyone else.
The real point is I shouldn't play comp unless I'm on a team.
As a solo queuer your rank is absolutely not reflective on your skill.
Really dont get this mentality. Can you play every role or character at a skill level comparable to your best characters? When playing with randoms you won't always have people comfortable with a role. You either make it work or you dont. I can't play Hanzo for shit and my widow is meh for my skill level. My Reinhardt is balls terrible, my Winston is okay, and my roadhog isn't exactly a tank.
Wah wah wah, you're terrible at X. Wah wah wah, no one picked X. It's a catch 22 in a fucking game. Do what you find fun, expect others to do the same or find a group.
Amzin
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 2,917
- 361
Right, which is why all those really good solo queuers are higher than you. Has nothing to do with THEM, obviously.
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,472
- 16,416
Also it would seem it would depend heavily on what maps you got when doing your initial 10 games. If the games you lost were king of the hill, and the winning games were payload, you'd rank considerably higher than the opposite it seems.
Ravishing
Uninspiring Title
- 8,456
- 3,577
We need a blue post on KOTH issue in ranked - Overwatch Forums
Before Jeff's comment there was enough player evidence to confirm it, though.
And the post below is from yesterday and it quotes the "investigating" post from the 28th as "more info":
Remove KOTH from ranked, then - Overwatch Forums
It seems impossible to get a team without the instant pick genji dude that does jack shit all game and then calls others noobs.
spronk
FPS noob
- 23,636
- 27,721
since i don't care at all about ranked play i think i'll just always solo q as a reaper and spam "WE NEED A HEALER" in chat non stop
I do feel old though, i enjoy watching seagull stream the game way, way, way, way, way more than actually playing the game
just found out the latest twitch technology enhancement, they now have a category for people who are streaming food they are eating. what a time to be alive
Twitch
I do feel old though, i enjoy watching seagull stream the game way, way, way, way, way more than actually playing the game
just found out the latest twitch technology enhancement, they now have a category for people who are streaming food they are eating. what a time to be alive
Twitch
Amzin
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 2,917
- 361
You don't need to, because that's not how it works, at least not the way you're complaining about. You are 100% responsible for your own MMR. If you group with a team and climb, and then soloq and fall, that means that you are not as good as your team and they are carrying you. If you soloq and stay where you are, that means you're on the same level as everyone you're bitching about. That's why in every single competitive game ever, the best advice you can ever take is "focus only on your own play" because that's what matters the most. If you're in an organized, stable team, that can change but that's never going to happen on RR for more than a week or two at a time.
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,472
- 16,416
My argument is just focusing on your own play isn't going to rank you up. If you lose a game you lose rank. Unless you're a pro you aren't carrying your team to victory every match.
Intropy
Shit Gamer
- 358
- 60
You can do better than that.
The best troll I've encountered so far was last night in a competitive game. Join up, someone selects Mercy right away - great! The rest of us pick our heroes, team groups up as we wait at the door for the timer to start the match. Match starts. We all run out the door. Mercy immediately switches to Widowmaker.
Amzin
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 2,917
- 361
Except that it will rank you up. If you are consistently playing above the rest of your enemies (even by a little bit), you will win more games. If you are on the same level as your opponents, you will be about 50/50 and just see your rank fluctuate. If you are worse, you will lose rank until it stabilizes around 50/50. The KotH bug is somewhat irrelevant in the long run since it amounts to the same gain/loss for all involved.
Based on your logic, everyone 60+ is a "pro" which is obviously false. Even though team size in OW is bigger than say, League, it's easier to have a bigger impact on the match as a solo person here than League as well and people get to their "proper" skill level that game just fine, even if they won't accept it.
If you don't enjoy playing with random people, that's fine. But to try and make excuses for you not ranking up is only going to hurt you in the end. I will be shocked if I place above 50, but I'm pretty sure I'll hover around the correct skill level for me and that's just what should happen.
skribble
Golden Knight of the Realm
- 488
- 136
Its clear that 10 games is not enough for the system to correctly place your skill level, id say that should be pretty obvious to anyone? I would also say that the variance is probably going to be greater initially for solo queuers compared to a 6 stack, by the sheer fact that running a 6 stack decreases many of the random variables that smooth out over time for solo-queuers. For example, in solo placement games you might be unlucky and get two disconnects or a greater percentage of potatoes than normal, and this usually balances out over time but would not have enough time during the 10 games, so your rank would be understated. Whereas on a 6 stack, thats pretty much eliminated and the main variable is whether or not you fight teams like seagulls instead of normal 6 stacks in your placements, but id assume the difference in skill placement would be less.
Of course, your skill in this case will also reflect the skill of the whole group as a whole, and you could expect differences by finding a better group etc. So id say that skill level initially will be very fluid, people should not worry too much about their initial placement rank, and play 50-100 games for a better indication of your 'true' skill level.
Of course, your skill in this case will also reflect the skill of the whole group as a whole, and you could expect differences by finding a better group etc. So id say that skill level initially will be very fluid, people should not worry too much about their initial placement rank, and play 50-100 games for a better indication of your 'true' skill level.
Intropy
Shit Gamer
- 358
- 60
Regarding your first point about the 10 games:
It seems extremely likely that the ranking system starts you off based on your Quick Play MMR. On Seaguls stream hisfirst placementmatch was against players with rank in the high 60's. Obviously they aren't going to be pitting any random scrub against borderline pro-level players on their first match unless there is some additional information to get you started. So I think its safe to say that your initial rank is not based simply on those 10 games alone.
It's the exact same thing as any other game with ranks and MMR. Everyone thinks they're way better than they actually are, aside from the actual good people who miraculously manage to get out of ELO hell over and over.
Captain Suave
Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
- 5,497
- 9,402
I'm finding competitive mode refreshing. I don't really care about my rank. The quality of the good games is generally higher than Quick Play. More critically, the bad games are shorter because inevitably someone leaves or the round ends "early" due to victory conditions. In total, I spend less time raging to myself about morons.
I'd probably hate it if I were super serious about my rank.
I'd probably hate it if I were super serious about my rank.
Amzin
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 2,917
- 361
10 games isn't enough for plenty of people to find their rank, sure. But your progress after those 10 is pretty indicative of where you're going. Without knowing the actual stats and numbers behind Blizzard's ranking calculation, it's hard to know how many games people should expect to play before being at "their" rank, but yea 50-100 seems reasonable (and is frequently the amount quoted for other competitive games). Even once there there's always going to be some bouncing around just because of the nature of the system, but it should be minor.
