Win\lose depended system

[nkpyo]

I don't know of any game that doesn't use wins and losses as a matchmaking metric. League of Legends and DotA 2 both use win/loss based matchmaking, so I don't know why you brought up DotA as an example. Though DotA does use a "Hidden MMR", it's clearly not doing what you think it does. The "Hidden MMR" is a hidden matchmaking system used for unranked play. It's the same thing, just not shown to you.

Dota 2 does not use pure win/loss based matchmaking. You will not get brand-new players with less than 10 matches in your lobbies if you're mid-high mmr even in unranked.

Millions of Dota players interact with the matchmaker every day and every single one has different priorities when looking for a game. Some prefer to get into a match as quickly as possible, and are willing to accept a higher skill variance in the game to save some time. Others want every match to be perfectly balanced, and are willing to wait longer for the best chance at the closest game. Other players care less about the skill level of the other players, and much more about their personality and behavior in-game.

We've long wanted to build features to let players find matches that better align with their individual preferences. Early attempts ran into two main problems:

• First, while players are good at describing their preferences to other people, they aren't necessarily good at describing their preferences as inputs to a complex, global matchmaking algorithm ("I value skill variance 13% higher than the average Dota player!"). How can we create tools that let players express their preferences naturally and directly?
• Second, changes to the matchmaker affect all Dota players, so we tend toward caution. The matchmaker is always trying to strike a balance between individual player preferences and the health of Dota as a whole. (If matches of Dota are bad, whether because of wild skill gaps or poor player behavior, that's bad for Dota as a community. If every match is perfect, but takes three hours to form, that's bad, too.) New matchmaker features available to everyone at once risk breaking the matchmaker, and if we break the matchmaker, we break Dota. How can we ship new matchmaking features and learn how they work in practice while keeping risk to Dota as a whole low?

https://www.dota2.com/newsentry/6127782523022178336
It actually has a pretty good system that considers behavior score, player skill and other technical metrics.

Now, when it comes to league, the matchmaking is way worse. It's a different kind of mm system that focuses more on role-based matchmaking and making sure every players winrate is 50%.

Our aim is for new players to be placed with similarly skilled players and achieve a ~50% winrate. While we’re currently sitting at a ~46% winrate for new players, with future adjustments and tweaks we expect to be much closer to 50% in the future.

We’ve also got an evaluation underway on a system called TrueSkill2 at present.

Currently, players returning to ranked players have a ~46% win rate on average, but there’s still room for improvement there as we’d like for that number to be closer to 50%.

https://www.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/news/dev/dev-matchmaking-in-2024/

How Trueskill2 works:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2018/03/trueskill2.pdf

Now, Riot doesn't use exactly what's given in the paper. They use their own version with different metrics for determining player skill. Their philosophy and algorithm for matchmaking is honestly pretty garbage. They prioritize win rate stats over match quality, which is why most of the games are of terrible quality for the average player. However, if you perform really well on a losing team, you don't lose a lot of mmr, so you do get to climb towards higher ranks with better players. It just takes a lot of time.

Conclusion: No, you're wrong. LoL and Dota 2 do not use pure win/loss based matchmaking like current Deadlock mm. They both use in-game performance metrics and recent performance variance for fairer matches. While LoL forces 50% win rate regardless of match quality, Dota 2 gives you the choice to have faster queue or better match quality based on player preference.

Does this mean Deadlock matchmaking is broken? No, it means that Valve does not prioritize match quality and player experience in Deadlock for now. They're collecting data for the playtest. Players should not expect good match quality, they are just testers. If you want good match quality, uninstall the game and play other good games while waiting for Valve to update their mm to prioritize match quality and player experience.

 

[Owen CMYK]

1. The DotA related link you posted doesn't say that the game is using factors other than wins and losses to determine player skill.
2. You're now describing a completely different system from what you were describing yesterday.
3. You've moved the argument so far beyond what it was originally about that there isn't any point in trying to argue with you about this any more.

My original point was that win/loss based matchmaking is not what's causing matches in this game to feel shitty. If you don't disagree with that anymore than there's no reason to continue discussing this.

 

[Noun-Creature]

"Impact" based ranking was attempted in Dota 2 and it led to a stark reduction in match quality because people would optimise the metrics which the game weighted for impact. At first this was KP% which lead to Zues and Spectre being in every game and just spamming their ults to get as close to 100% KP as possible.

Every time the metrics that were weighted were changed similar behaviour would emerge to optimise impact metrics.

The only way to build a functional ranking system is to base it on how much you contribute to your teams average chance of winning, and the only reliable way to determine that is to look at how often a team with your approximate skill rating wins with you on it.

Obviously such a system will occasionally hand out unwinnable games as several players with low or high approximate skill will get matched, but on average each match will work out at a 50% chance to win if you are at the right approximate skill rating.

If you are losing long streaks of games then the player who is causing the team to use might just be the common denominator in that case.

Also the idea of having pros manually review games to hand out ranks is pure derangement.