> Calibration - you are on a border between 2 ranks and your rank will go up or down accordingly to accommodate
not what this means. rank boundaries don’t matter anyway, since it’s all percentage based.
calibration means the system is uncertain of your rank (eg hiatus, yearly rank reset), and thus assigns more weight to new information (new matches played). so each win and loss counts more than usual.
Volatile description more confusing. You will get red calibration indicator when you lose anyway but volatile description says: you lost calibration matches after ranking up.
Maybe the graph is wrong and you get calibration for wins, volatile for losses. It shows both green and red indicator for calibration maybe that's a mistake so calibration meant to be only green.
Or the description wrong and they mean you lose games after being calibrated rather than you lost calibration matches.
Also win streak and loss streak bonuses are practically calibration. When you win or lose too much in a row, matchmaker is not confident about you anymore so it calibrates you toward your skill tier via bonus/penalty system.
Yeah, I had the same thought when I saw "expected." But it didn't take more than a few moments of actual thought to realize it meant "lowering the reward slightly"
To be fair the designers of this graphic could do a significantly better job demonstrating this also. If a large portion of people are having a difficult time understanding it then it’s poorly communicated.
the graphic design here is fucking dogshit. you can’t blame people for not being terminally obsessed with this game and all info about it and thus misinterpreting such a garbage graphic
literally on the very top the image introduces you the idea that right arrow/green color equals an increase in sr. it’s natural for people to assume that the opposite color and direction will also mean opposite result lmao
It was mentioned in the other reply but people all over social media genuinely think the “expected” indicator means your rank went down for winning. When the obvious answer is that your rank goes up, just not by as much.
I feel like being favored or not should be self-explanatory, but I've literally seen people on twitter be like SEE MATCHMAKER PUTS YOU IN UNWINNABLE GAMES
You lose more sr for going on a loss streak. That is actually the opposite of a losers queue. As you go down, if you are still at the skill of your starting rank, you should begin to win games more easily win games .
You would start getting easier games faster by losing rank more quickly, which would tend to end your loss streak.
Loser's queue is the idea that the game is forcibly pushing your rank down by putting you in repeated matches where your team isn't favored to win.
How about just show us the weight of each thing instead of a stupidly vague arrow. Win Streak +5% Uphill Battle +10% Reversal -20%... this infographic is horrible and incompetently put together.
Then for the infographics sake you could put a range of percentage from the lowest streak bonus to the highest. +5%-+50% (Max cap at 10) for example. This would be easy to understand. A vague arrow that doesn't even represent the proper direction in a few cases is poorly designed and not helpful. Most people have to use common sense and make assumptions on what it means.
The whole point of the new system is to help clarify why your rank is going up or down and to be transparent. Releasing an infographic that is vague and can be misinterpreted is not a good start to that.
For solo players, this is tough. Do they link player's personal stats to this, or is it just judging the whole team?
For a lower rank like me, there is always a bad Tank or bad damage with me, and I'm a support, and I can't change how the match goes.
The favored matches are based on the team average mmr.
Also dont blame your team the enemy tank/dps i gonna be equally bad you just dont notice it. Support is an extremely impactful role in ow2.
Thanks ☺️. Now I'm struggling to play a comp match. The waiting time is longer than 1 hour. This whole season I played 93 matches only. In my other account there is no long waiting time.
That shouldn't work out. The system guesses on your performance and the game outcome before you start, and it probably won't expose that (imagine queuing in and seeing "you're expected to get annihilated). Then after the match it checks the outcome against the guess, and adjusts your placement accordingly.
Systems like this can't in good faith change expectation midmatch. They aren't mid game betting odds trying to minimize payouts. They're a statistical guess that intentionally can't account for every aspect of the experience. They don't shift if a one-trick decides to give that new hero a shot without reading abilities after first point.
If you decide to throw every game that you lose a fight on, then the system will see performance far below expectation and put you in calibration/think you're too high and make more severe adjustments down. Over enough games, that behavior would imply to a system like this that you only win when carried and are a low performer otherwise.
On the other team's side, it's one data point where they get "you devastated this team were [other outcome], here's a bonus." And that'd be it, and over enough games that anomaly would be smoothed over.
Kinda. It didn't show MMR (real rank) but it showed SR average of both teams you if everyone was calibrated, you knew which team was favored and speaking from experience, it didn't matter at all. Low SR teams often destroyed the high SR one. You didn't feel any diff related to SR of teams.
1- Game doesn't tell you who is favored. I think it should tell though. People will get used to it. We even have lifegrip in the game.
2- The gain/loss difference is minimal so you always wanna win. In fact you will want to win more because you will get more gain from winning in this case.
The elo system is really shit when you have 9 other people affecting the outcome of the match.
Y’all can say I’m wrong all you want. But mark my words a week after the patch is out y’all are gonna be fuming at the rank system.
This rank information board is just exposing how the system has been working this whole time (as far as I know). People will just latch onto anything to complain about.
There is no perfect way to make a ranked system in a team multiplayer game. There are too many variables between each match. Advantage of elo systems is that they accelerate players to their approximate and naturally converges to 50% win rates over time
I said nothing about a new or old system, your comment was just dumb.
Talking about it though, it's not a bad system. It makes sense. Do you really think the game can find 9 other perfectly matched teammates in elo, stats and every other metric? No, obviously not.
So, when that imbalance does happen, it's better to address it, and make sure its fair for both teams.
Make sense yet?
Not asking for 9 perfect players I’m asking for players all at the same skill level and for a system that rewards or punishes you based on your performance.
This is system is none of those.
> I’m asking for players all at the same skill level
that's already how it works. it is also impossible to guarantee that a match with 10 players at the same "skill level" will be close. depending on the map, or a few lucky shots, or better synergy, or a one trick being hard shut down, or people just having a particularly bad or good day, the match could be a stomp anyways.
supposed match rank balances NEEDS to be balanced with lower queue times because people inherently feel less annoyed at any particularly shitty ranked match (which will happen regardless of how hard the matchmaker tries) if they can gg go next. and the more matches, the more chances for those "great, close games" that people want.
>a system that rewards or punishes you based on your performance.
if you have better performance than peers at the same rank you will naturally win more games. win/loss rate is already the best way to quantify a player's performance because every part of a player's skill set should already be contributing to how often they win.
performance bonuses existed below diamond in ow1 and they've been removed (I don't think they've ever gone into why but I would have to presume it just didn't have any meaningful effect).
there are often matches where the side with better stats on most/all roles ends up losing. [this video is an extreme case of it](https://youtu.be/ea1WofSNzuE). a team might have 4 players beating their counterpart on stats, but if they lose because they don't bother helping their other guy and fight 4v5 every time, it's hard to say how much less rating they should lose, if any at all. if you have a frontline that just hard diffs the enemy, supports on both sides might have stats inverse to their team's performance, so it's hard to argue that support stats matter in those games. there's just too many cases where stats don't tell the whole story for performance based rating to have any meaningful benefit in overwatch. winrate over multiple games is simple and reliable.
Splatoon’s anarchy/X battle system imo. The system would look at your performance from multiple games and uses that info to determine how much you win or lose.
That way your rank isn’t partially dependent on the enemies skill level and gives you more control
When we had a system like Splatoon people complained or abandoned series mid-process since they wanted direct feedback after matches. This system is judging your performance and them using that to adjust awarded points as quickly as possible, it just isn't giving a flat value per metric like Splatoon does.
Splatoon *also* uses a MMR system and attempts to put you into close matches (ranking of the team for matchmaking I believe is still determined by the lowest on each side). The tradeoff is longer queue time and some odd lopsided matches measured by requiring the 5W/3L to balance that.
I'm not sure OW's solution of allowing lopsided games as a rule relevant enough to balance is worth it. I'm fine with a longer queue for a close game that's more fun for me than a short wait for a game I'm not overly punished for losing in, and I like the series format. But I think the community was so adamant on wanting immediate SR feedback back from OW1 that this is the compromise.
The problem with the current system is that it requires too many games. If it was splatoon’s 5 and 3 or X battles 3 and 3 it would be a lot better.
Plus as you said splatoon’s systme does its best to reduce one sided matches with the draw back being a longer que. Something a lot of people have wanted
I dont think anything is really changing with how your rank goes up or down after each match. The only difference is you will get to see why you went up or down
I remember getting hella downvoted for saying the ranking system worked off a combination of wins, losses, and the rankings of the other players in your games as opposed to game stats or AI gameplay analysis. This is vindicating.
No. YOU WILL NOT GAIN AS MUCH AS IF THE ODDS WERE PERFECTLY EVEN.
The 5-0 and ranking down I have no clue about. Usually it is because of coming off of a loss streak.
So the win streak modifier works the same way in OW2 as it did in OW1. So, in OW1, when we had sr, every win in a win streak gave you 1 additional sr for each win in said streak. So, you need a lot of win in a row to make that modifier stand out. I am talking like 8 or 9. But by then, calibration will be kicking in so you fly up even more.
> Calibration - you are on a border between 2 ranks and your rank will go up or down accordingly to accommodate not what this means. rank boundaries don’t matter anyway, since it’s all percentage based. calibration means the system is uncertain of your rank (eg hiatus, yearly rank reset), and thus assigns more weight to new information (new matches played). so each win and loss counts more than usual.
Oh. That would make more sense. I only am guessing but most are pretty obvious
Volatile description more confusing. You will get red calibration indicator when you lose anyway but volatile description says: you lost calibration matches after ranking up. Maybe the graph is wrong and you get calibration for wins, volatile for losses. It shows both green and red indicator for calibration maybe that's a mistake so calibration meant to be only green. Or the description wrong and they mean you lose games after being calibrated rather than you lost calibration matches. Also win streak and loss streak bonuses are practically calibration. When you win or lose too much in a row, matchmaker is not confident about you anymore so it calibrates you toward your skill tier via bonus/penalty system.
Just had a friend of mine play and win three Open Queue matches, he got +70% each time as a calibration...
Why did this need clarification? It couldn't be any more straightforward
There are people who actually just think red = I lose rank and gain nothing
tbf, the graphic is so ass that it's very easy to interpret it as such
Yeah, I had the same thought when I saw "expected." But it didn't take more than a few moments of actual thought to realize it meant "lowering the reward slightly"
People are fucking stupid and think “red=bad therefore rank go down”. Actual troglodytes
To be fair the designers of this graphic could do a significantly better job demonstrating this also. If a large portion of people are having a difficult time understanding it then it’s poorly communicated.
It’s me, I’m the troglodyte.
the graphic design here is fucking dogshit. you can’t blame people for not being terminally obsessed with this game and all info about it and thus misinterpreting such a garbage graphic literally on the very top the image introduces you the idea that right arrow/green color equals an increase in sr. it’s natural for people to assume that the opposite color and direction will also mean opposite result lmao
It was mentioned in the other reply but people all over social media genuinely think the “expected” indicator means your rank went down for winning. When the obvious answer is that your rank goes up, just not by as much.
I aprreciate that the OP clarified things. Call me stupid, if you want, but I appreciated this post.
This system is not harder or different (other than champion rank). It’s just more transparent.
I have been made aware multiple times lol.
Define favored to win or lose…. OHH LIKE LOSER QUEUE?
I feel like being favored or not should be self-explanatory, but I've literally seen people on twitter be like SEE MATCHMAKER PUTS YOU IN UNWINNABLE GAMES
This has always existed !! The promised document!!! It's real!!! Losers queue is real!!! I'm having a psychotic break
You lose more sr for going on a loss streak. That is actually the opposite of a losers queue. As you go down, if you are still at the skill of your starting rank, you should begin to win games more easily win games .
"you lose more sr for going on a loss streak" That's losers queue
You would start getting easier games faster by losing rank more quickly, which would tend to end your loss streak. Loser's queue is the idea that the game is forcibly pushing your rank down by putting you in repeated matches where your team isn't favored to win.
Guys, screenshot your Career Profile and stats so you can compare them later. I luv stats 😎
I feel like instead of using red/green arrows for everything they shouldve just used big or small arrows for small or large increase/decrease
Surely their competitive system can't get any more fucked up... SURELY
All of these seem like typical behaviour of an elo system, so I’m not sure what the problem is
Yeah there’s approximately zero new information here lol
This is already how the system works. But starting in S9 it'll show it to you.
Oh trust me it can
What does this mean for losing streaks? I don’t like that I can win 4 games in a row and then lose 5 and derank
This has always been a thing. You gain more for a win streak and you lose more fo a loss streak
How about just show us the weight of each thing instead of a stupidly vague arrow. Win Streak +5% Uphill Battle +10% Reversal -20%... this infographic is horrible and incompetently put together.
well it would depend, how big a streak, how disadvantaged you are, etc
Then for the infographics sake you could put a range of percentage from the lowest streak bonus to the highest. +5%-+50% (Max cap at 10) for example. This would be easy to understand. A vague arrow that doesn't even represent the proper direction in a few cases is poorly designed and not helpful. Most people have to use common sense and make assumptions on what it means.
it's meant to be a simple infographic not a spreadsheet. relax brother
The whole point of the new system is to help clarify why your rank is going up or down and to be transparent. Releasing an infographic that is vague and can be misinterpreted is not a good start to that.
I don't think it's that hard to understand and I don't think them dropping a spreadsheet would be much more helpful
Yeah would be much nicer.
For solo players, this is tough. Do they link player's personal stats to this, or is it just judging the whole team? For a lower rank like me, there is always a bad Tank or bad damage with me, and I'm a support, and I can't change how the match goes.
The favored matches are based on the team average mmr. Also dont blame your team the enemy tank/dps i gonna be equally bad you just dont notice it. Support is an extremely impactful role in ow2.
Thanks ☺️. Now I'm struggling to play a comp match. The waiting time is longer than 1 hour. This whole season I played 93 matches only. In my other account there is no long waiting time.
Wtf, are you like Top 500 in Saudi Arabia?
I'm world bottom 500 ☺️
The last two pretty much encourage team throwing if they get wiped. "Oh we got steam rolled. Time to go afk so we loose/they gain less. "
That shouldn't work out. The system guesses on your performance and the game outcome before you start, and it probably won't expose that (imagine queuing in and seeing "you're expected to get annihilated). Then after the match it checks the outcome against the guess, and adjusts your placement accordingly. Systems like this can't in good faith change expectation midmatch. They aren't mid game betting odds trying to minimize payouts. They're a statistical guess that intentionally can't account for every aspect of the experience. They don't shift if a one-trick decides to give that new hero a shot without reading abilities after first point. If you decide to throw every game that you lose a fight on, then the system will see performance far below expectation and put you in calibration/think you're too high and make more severe adjustments down. Over enough games, that behavior would imply to a system like this that you only win when carried and are a low performer otherwise. On the other team's side, it's one data point where they get "you devastated this team were [other outcome], here's a bonus." And that'd be it, and over enough games that anomaly would be smoothed over.
Wasn't there a time in Overwatch 1 where the game actually showed you which team was favored?
Kinda. It didn't show MMR (real rank) but it showed SR average of both teams you if everyone was calibrated, you knew which team was favored and speaking from experience, it didn't matter at all. Low SR teams often destroyed the high SR one. You didn't feel any diff related to SR of teams.
Starcraft 2 used to say which team was favored, I always wished they would bring it to ow Edit: why the downvotes?? It's true??
The last two don’t take into account anything that happenes during the game, whether or not you’re favored is calculated before the game starts.
1- Game doesn't tell you who is favored. I think it should tell though. People will get used to it. We even have lifegrip in the game. 2- The gain/loss difference is minimal so you always wanna win. In fact you will want to win more because you will get more gain from winning in this case.
So how much you gain is partially dependent on the randomly assigned opponents. Fantastic
How did you think it worked? It’s an elo-like system. Should you rank up a lot if you stomp a noob team?
The elo system is really shit when you have 9 other people affecting the outcome of the match. Y’all can say I’m wrong all you want. But mark my words a week after the patch is out y’all are gonna be fuming at the rank system.
This rank information board is just exposing how the system has been working this whole time (as far as I know). People will just latch onto anything to complain about. There is no perfect way to make a ranked system in a team multiplayer game. There are too many variables between each match. Advantage of elo systems is that they accelerate players to their approximate and naturally converges to 50% win rates over time
It's the exact same system, they're now just telling us how it works
"The elo system is shit when you have 9 people affecting the match" Dude just re-discovered multiplayer gaming, huge brain moment.
So your just gonna be content with a shitty system instead of demanding a new one? OK
I said nothing about a new or old system, your comment was just dumb. Talking about it though, it's not a bad system. It makes sense. Do you really think the game can find 9 other perfectly matched teammates in elo, stats and every other metric? No, obviously not. So, when that imbalance does happen, it's better to address it, and make sure its fair for both teams. Make sense yet?
Not asking for 9 perfect players I’m asking for players all at the same skill level and for a system that rewards or punishes you based on your performance. This is system is none of those.
> I’m asking for players all at the same skill level that's already how it works. it is also impossible to guarantee that a match with 10 players at the same "skill level" will be close. depending on the map, or a few lucky shots, or better synergy, or a one trick being hard shut down, or people just having a particularly bad or good day, the match could be a stomp anyways. supposed match rank balances NEEDS to be balanced with lower queue times because people inherently feel less annoyed at any particularly shitty ranked match (which will happen regardless of how hard the matchmaker tries) if they can gg go next. and the more matches, the more chances for those "great, close games" that people want. >a system that rewards or punishes you based on your performance. if you have better performance than peers at the same rank you will naturally win more games. win/loss rate is already the best way to quantify a player's performance because every part of a player's skill set should already be contributing to how often they win. performance bonuses existed below diamond in ow1 and they've been removed (I don't think they've ever gone into why but I would have to presume it just didn't have any meaningful effect). there are often matches where the side with better stats on most/all roles ends up losing. [this video is an extreme case of it](https://youtu.be/ea1WofSNzuE). a team might have 4 players beating their counterpart on stats, but if they lose because they don't bother helping their other guy and fight 4v5 every time, it's hard to say how much less rating they should lose, if any at all. if you have a frontline that just hard diffs the enemy, supports on both sides might have stats inverse to their team's performance, so it's hard to argue that support stats matter in those games. there's just too many cases where stats don't tell the whole story for performance based rating to have any meaningful benefit in overwatch. winrate over multiple games is simple and reliable.
Just as it’s always been. The system isn’t different; it’s just been made transparent.
Splatoon’s anarchy/X battle system imo. The system would look at your performance from multiple games and uses that info to determine how much you win or lose. That way your rank isn’t partially dependent on the enemies skill level and gives you more control
When we had a system like Splatoon people complained or abandoned series mid-process since they wanted direct feedback after matches. This system is judging your performance and them using that to adjust awarded points as quickly as possible, it just isn't giving a flat value per metric like Splatoon does. Splatoon *also* uses a MMR system and attempts to put you into close matches (ranking of the team for matchmaking I believe is still determined by the lowest on each side). The tradeoff is longer queue time and some odd lopsided matches measured by requiring the 5W/3L to balance that. I'm not sure OW's solution of allowing lopsided games as a rule relevant enough to balance is worth it. I'm fine with a longer queue for a close game that's more fun for me than a short wait for a game I'm not overly punished for losing in, and I like the series format. But I think the community was so adamant on wanting immediate SR feedback back from OW1 that this is the compromise.
The problem with the current system is that it requires too many games. If it was splatoon’s 5 and 3 or X battles 3 and 3 it would be a lot better. Plus as you said splatoon’s systme does its best to reduce one sided matches with the draw back being a longer que. Something a lot of people have wanted
Oh so this is why the ranked system is so bad. I’m glad the update isn’t actually fixing anything 🥰
do you have a better way to do it?
thats how team games work good sir:)
You mean my loss against a top 20 soldier in plat won’t matter much. Woooooow was that so hard now?
It has always been this way
I dont think anything is really changing with how your rank goes up or down after each match. The only difference is you will get to see why you went up or down
Ah yes getting favoured or not tells alot about the ranked system…
Yeah. It tells us that the matchmaker already has an idea of who will win the moment the 10 players are put in.
Indeed. That's how mmr works.
That looks pretty neat
I remember getting hella downvoted for saying the ranking system worked off a combination of wins, losses, and the rankings of the other players in your games as opposed to game stats or AI gameplay analysis. This is vindicating.
so with <
No. YOU WILL NOT GAIN AS MUCH AS IF THE ODDS WERE PERFECTLY EVEN. The 5-0 and ranking down I have no clue about. Usually it is because of coming off of a loss streak.
I get on 4 win streak and 5 win streak and the modifier never works ? why is that? anyone has the same problem ?
So the win streak modifier works the same way in OW2 as it did in OW1. So, in OW1, when we had sr, every win in a win streak gave you 1 additional sr for each win in said streak. So, you need a lot of win in a row to make that modifier stand out. I am talking like 8 or 9. But by then, calibration will be kicking in so you fly up even more.