Support NeoGAF

[AbundantChoice]

Another question: If I want to level up the free heroes I should probably play a couple of training/bot matches first right? Doesn't seem like a good idea to go into quickmatch without playing the chararcter first.

Yeah, play a few AI matches with a hero you've never played before to get a basic feel for their skills and whatnot. Don't bother with Practice, it's basically useless. VS AI is the way to go for "training."

The other reason to level up the free heroes is not just to learn if they're right for you, but to learn what to expect when you're going up against them, and what to expect when your team-mate uses them. Even if you don't like the character, it's good to know, for example, that ETC's Ultimate is almost always the one that stuns in an area around him for a few seconds. Good to see it coming from the other side, good to know if he's on your side. And so on. Which characters have basic escape abilities and which don't. Which characters have the ability to catch up to you when you're running away, and which don't.

 

[Altairre]

Is there a recommended difficulty for the AI matches? Just pick the highest one?

 

[bizzle]

most complaints about mmr/mm have to do with this being a new game
a lot of ppl dont even do correct lane assignments in high mmr, that's going to be something that sounds absolutely ridiculous once the game begins to achieve a settled state

im sure league/dota both had similar problems when they were new, but it's easier to be ok w/ mm when there is a transparent elo number available

also like every conversation about this is based on anecdotal shit, or flawed number stuff

Both League and DOTA 2 didn't have the same issues because us early adopters came from DOTA. It's interesting to note that the games have gone down in quality since the game launched, so this phase is probably better considered early mid-phase rather than beginning. In the beginning I suspect those of us in the game were already interested in the genre.

For whatever reasons, possibly because it's Blizzard and they cross pollinate their gamers with the Battle.net app, many of the players in our community are incredibly horrible.

We could also attribute it to the fact that the game may appeal to people who can't compete in the other flavors that require carrying, supporting, items builds, last hitting, denials, and have hundreds of characters to learn, etc.

Also, in both DOTA2 and LoL (League moreso), it takes a lot longer to get into ranked play. It would take a casual player several months to get into ranked play in League.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

The finale yesterday were infuriating to watch, C9 just can't close a game against Tempo Storm

I know they are an amazing team, they've shown as much early game, but they seem to be afraid of taking any risks late game against them, skirt around giving TS ample time to recover, pick off that Zagara that was caught way out in the open alone and just force a teamfight 5v4 from there.

When it comes to rotating TS just schooled them with the shrines on Shire

 

[brian!]

Both League and DOTA 2 didn't have the same issues because us early adopters came from DOTA. It's interesting to note that the games have gone down in quality since the game launched, so this phase is probably better considered early mid-phase rather than beginning. In the beginning I suspect those of us in the game were already interested in the genre.

For whatever reasons, possibly because it's Blizzard and they cross pollinate their gamers with the Battle.net app, many of the players in our community are incredibly horrible.

We could also attribute it to the fact that the game may appeal to people who can't compete in the other flavors that require carrying, supporting, items builds, last hitting, denials, and have hundreds of characters to learn, etc.

Also, in both DOTA2 and LoL (League moreso), it takes a lot longer to get into ranked play. It would take a casual player several months to get into ranked play in League.

yeah i agree w/ all of this to a certain point, like I agree that all of this affect the game I just don't know to what extent

it's partially why I'm excited for league/moba players, particularly ("failed") pros to come over, especially league where I think the transition would be really natural due to league being high rotation and high objective minded

 

[Dice]

The biggest problem League has for new players is not the elements of the game, but the seeming 85% smurf account ratio.

The biggest problem with HotS is everyone playing it like League until you get to high rank, which is hard when everyone is playing it like League.

 

[evilpigking]

Gave Hungering Arrow Valla a chance and went 26-1 =). Seems pretty legit relative to the MS build. Just depends on the composition.

 

[Celegus]

Man, Johanna + Kerrigan is a nasty combo. We were pulling Jainas and KTs left and right, talk about wrecked.

 

[The1Ski]

Anyone have an issue with the mouse cursor locking in the bottom left area of the screen? I can still control but the cursor is basically invisible. I've had to disconnect from two games because of this and now I'm told that I can't play hero league until I complete a QM with other "leavers".

I read that changing to Windowed (fullscreen) mode can fix this but every time I try and change, the game crashes to desktop.

Side note: Hearthstone crashes to desktop after a couple minutes.

Is battle.net falling apart?

 

[Duress]

Picked up Rehgar. Tired of healing as Lili and Malfurion.

No one wants me as Tyrande.

 

[bizzle]

I still see the exact same thing.

Last pick randoms zagara because he was hovering on Tychus even though 1. the other team first picked tychus (also a stupid thing to do), and 2. we had no supports.

we won that game.



edit: but that's not the point. It's just as likely that the other team will have a shitty comp. It might feel like its only ever your teammates who suck, but it's almost assuredly not the case.

@milly are you insta-locking nova enough?

You're not making a stronger argument.

At best, someone is more or less likely to have a crappy player or a crappy team as someone on the other team and then it comes down who makes the worst play at the worst time.

At worst, those chances are equally spread among both teams and the game comes down to random mishaps. That sense of randomness doesn't make the game any more enjoyable to play. In fact, I suspect that's where most of the frustration comes from in these threads.

It's not the games where people are getting stomped that are so infuriating, it's the games where the person who believes he may be the better player, and is actually playing a good game (and his team is up in objectives, up in kills, up in pushed lanes, etc.), and then a teammate makes a clearcut decision that results in a thrown game that end in the most agitation.

 

[LiQuid!]

Pretty sure me and 2 of my friends got trolled in this game today. Some Nova wearing the roller derby outfit and riding on a rainbow unicorn on our team spent the entire game rotating to lanes and just standing still next to enemies while we tried to fight them. Really annoying. This is the reason I've tried to stick to larger stacks for queuing in this game. I went with a 2-3 stack for a couple games today and we had some teammates that just outright refused to try and play the game as a team, if at all. Maybe it's just my super competitive nature rolling over from Dota but nothing annoys me more than getting into a game with someone that doesn't care even a little bit whether we win or lose so they don't even try.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

You're not making a stronger argument.

At best, someone is more or less likely to have a crappy player or a crappy team as someone on the other team and then it comes down who makes the worst play at the worst time.

At worst, those chances are equally spread among both teams and the game comes down to random mishaps. That sense of randomness doesn't make the game any more enjoyable to play. In fact, I suspect that's where most of the frustration comes from in these threads.

It's not the games where people are getting stomped that are so infuriating, it's the games where the person who believes he may be the better player, and is actually playing a good game (and his team is up in objectives, up in kills, up in pushed lanes, etc.), and then a teammate makes a clearcut decision that results in a thrown game that end in the most agitation.

But that's where conformation and negative bias come into play. When you're already of the mindset that you don't belong in your MMR range a bad play on your team will have a much bigger impact on you than the ones among your opponents, which you'll barely notice.

I did climb out of a very low MMR and I'm still in a MMR range where I can be grouped with new players but I honestly don't mind the matchmaking a lot. At least not in QM.

If I have a losing streak I can get irritated but then I just pick murky and all is fine.

Heck I still regularly get into teams that give no fuck about being down a talent and fight over an objective we can't win instead of soaking/mercing/pushing, doing anything else.

All of that is anecdotal evidence and I do notice an exorbitant amount of complains so there has to be something up but personally I'm not too bothered.

Yesterday I even had a match where we all rejoiced at getting a single kill, what you get when not having any CC against Illi+Aba+Zera.

 

[Alavard]

Wow, Hammer's winrate has jumped a fair bit since her changes. She's 14th overall on Hotslogs right now, at exactly 50%. I haven't had a chance to try out her adjustments, but clearly they worked.

The funny change to me is that Chen's winrate has risen 4.4%, and all they did was fix his bugged Q.

 

[bizzle]

But that's where conformation and negative bias come into play. When you're already of the mindset that you don't belong in your MMR range a bad play on your team will have a much bigger impact on you than the ones among your opponents, which you'll barely notice.

I did climb out of a very low MMR and I'm still in a MMR range where I can be grouped with new players but I honestly don't mind the matchmaking a lot. At least not in QM.

If I have a losing streak I can get irritated but then I just pick murky and all is fine.

Heck I still regularly get into teams that give no fuck about being down a talent and fight over an objective we can't win instead of soaking/mercing/pushing, doing anything else.

All of that is anecdotal evidence and I do notice an exorbitant amount of complains so there has to be something up but personally I'm not too bothered.

Yesterday I even had a match where we all rejoiced at getting a single kill, what you get when not having any CC against Illi+Aba+Zera.

No, it's very clear when opponents are completely horrible.

It seems like you think people are only complaining when they lose. Games that are ridiculously too easy are just as much a waste of time as when the horrible player is on your own team.

Don't make the assumption that someone noticing their player is completely clueless and that the same person wouldn't notice the other team's players are acting clueless as well.

People are not complaining about *losing*, they're complaining about bad matchmaking. The problem with matchmaking is that terrible and/or beginning players are on both teams and neither winning nor losing under those conditions is fun to play.

 

[bizzle]

Wow, Hammer's winrate has jumped a fair bit since her changes. She's 14th overall on Hotslogs right now, at exactly 50%. I haven't had a chance to try out her adjustments, but clearly they worked.

The funny change to me is that Chen's winrate has risen 4.4%, and all they did was fix his bugged Q.

Keep in mind that when a hero isn't picked much that a small number of matches can move win/loss percentages much more than one would expect. Also, that bug fix was a concerning issue to those who play Chen regularly so it's not surprising it would have a significant impact on their games.

 

[Mengy]

Wow, Hammer's winrate has jumped a fair bit since her changes. She's 14th overall on Hotslogs right now, at exactly 50%. I haven't had a chance to try out her adjustments, but clearly they worked.

Hammer's changes were great. They didn't change much but just tweaked a few numbers and it helped her out quite a bit. Going into and out of seige isn't such a mana penalty anymore, she just feels more viable and playable.

I'm actually of the opinion that she may be my favorite hero. I mean I liked playing her a lot before, but she always felt a bit clunky until now. Hammer and Tyrael will probably be my first two level 10 heroes, I have them both at 8 now.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

No, it's very clear when opponents are completely horrible.

It seems like you think people are only complaining when they lose. Games that are ridiculously too easy are just as much a waste of time as when the horrible player is on your own team.

Don't make the assumption that someone noticing their player is completely clueless and that the same person wouldn't notice the other team's players are acting clueless as well.

People are not complaining about *losing*, they're complaining about bad matchmaking. The problem with matchmaking is that terrible and/or beginning players are on both teams and neither winning nor losing under those conditions is fun to play.

Steamrolling a game is indeed not fun, but I disagree on noticing/noting bad opponents.

I didn't say people don't notice enemy misplays at all I said it wouldn't stick out to them as much as when it happens to them on their team.

Even then, steamrolled game are short and both from personal experience and in general average game length has been rising in recent months.

If it's an even game, with no toxicity, under most circumstances it's fun for me. Bad players and or beginners don't make much of a difference with that so long as it stays even.

 

[brian!]

They are considering showing straight up mmr which is surprising to me

 

[bizzle]

Steamrolling a game is indeed not fun, but I disagree on noticing/noting bad opponents.

I didn't say people don't notice enemy misplays at all I said it wouldn't stick out to them as much as when it happens to them on their team.

Even then, steamrolled game are short and both from personal experience and in general average game length has been rising in recent months.

If it's an even game, with no toxicity, under most circumstances it's fun for me. Bad players and or beginners don't make much of a difference with that so long as it stays even.

It's becoming clear to me that you don't quite get what we're talking about here.

This isn't about a bad play here or there, this is about when someone is completely out of step with the entire game.

Like during draft when a last pick person is showing they're going to Leoric and you choose Monk and then they instead switch to Nova and tell the Monk to tank...and then complain all game long that "the tank sucks."

Or when Jaina goes off and farms a lane...for the entire game. And when you need to engage in a team fight it's 4v5 because Jaina is off soloing mercs...on the other side of the map...every time.

Or an Azmodan who continually pushes lanes...and dies repeatedly following it up with, "I'm a specialist, it's what I do" and then proceeds to refuse to group up or do anything other than beeline right into a deathball.

It's very clear when someone has no concept of the game or a rudimentary understanding of the goals but doesn't understand or want to coordinate with the rest of the team.

It's not a bad move, it's an entire game of watching someone bumble around the map.

It's painfully obvious when that person is on the other team because they'll be doing those same things with the difference being your team consistently ganking them and then subsequently smashing their shorthanded team.

This isn't about confirmation bias, one way or the other. Most players don't even know what their MMR is or even what an MMR would be. They know their rank because it's in game, and the unfortunate thing about pre-patch players with their inflated ranks was that they'd consistently lash out at people pointing to their ranks as evidence that they knew what they were doing.

If you can have fun under those conditions then kudos to you. I know at least one of my friends and myself have played through the night for many weeks because we really couldn't care less about our ranked MMR (we do care about Team League, however) and just laughed hysterically at the shenanigans that happens in these games. HL is our QM (ironically, my QM MMR is significantly higher than my HL MMR-by about a thousand points even though there's less control over teams and players in QM) and we leave the serious gameplay for TL. So I get it that you might find such games fun. I can also understand why a significant portion of the community doesn't like being trolled for 20 minutes at a time, though.

 

[SoundLad]

I guess I'm making this post as a way to validate whether I'm ready or not for Hero League now.

This is my first MOBA type game and I have been playing HotS for the last 3 months or so. I have unlocked about 50% of the heroes and have probably played around 300-400 games so far. Always playing QM and I'm starting to question whether HL would be more fun. My win percentage is about 60% on average in QM.

HL just seems pretty scary to jump into. Pointers from you guys would be great, feel free to ask anything I might be leaving out here.

 

[brian!]

I think he gets what you are saying

What you are describing here isnt a mm failure tho, it's a particular type of "mismatch" that occurs in all mobas at particular mmr ranges. In hots case this range may be inflated due to reasons we brought up like lower population, influx of new players, general low skill, etc. which all in all should settle down in the future (hopefully). But what mm does is it brings ppl of a certain mmr range together, as long as it is doing that it's working as intended

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

It's becoming clear to me that you don't quite get what we're talking about here.

This isn't about a bad play here or there, this is about when someone is completely out of step with the entire game.

Like during draft when a last pick person is showing they're going to Leoric and you choose Monk and then they instead switch to Nova and tell the Monk to tank...and then complain all game long that "the tank sucks."

Or when Jaina goes off and farms a lane...for the entire game. And when you need to engage in a team fight it's 4v5 because Jaina is off soloing mercs...on the other side of the map...every time.

Or an Azmodan who continually pushes lanes...and dies repeatedly following it up with, "I'm a specialist, it's what I do" and then proceeds to refuse to group up or do anything other than beeline right into a deathball.

It's very clear when someone has no concept of the game or a rudimentary understanding of the goals but doesn't understand or want to coordinate with the rest of the team.

It's not a bad move, it's an entire game of watching someone bumble around the map.

It's painfully obvious when that person is on the other team because they'll be doing those same things with the difference being your team consistently ganking them and then subsequently smashing their shorthanded team.

This isn't about confirmation bias, one way or the other. Most players don't even know what their MMR is or even what an MMR would be. They know their rank because it's in game, and the unfortunate thing about pre-patch players with their inflated ranks was that they'd consistently lash out at people pointing to their ranks as evidence that they knew what they were doing.

If you can have fun under those conditions then kudos to you. I know at least one of my friends and myself have played through the night for many weeks because we really couldn't care less about our ranked MMR (we do care about Team League, however) and just laughed hysterically at the shenanigans that happens in these games. HL is our QM (ironically, my QM MMR is significantly higher than my HL MMR-by about a thousand points even though there's less control over teams and players in QM) and we leave the serious gameplay for TL. So I get it that you might find such games fun. I can also understand why a significant portion of the community doesn't like being trolled for 20 minutes at a time, though.

Yes those games suck but good thing is they are usually over quickly.

Not every game nor very frequently do games end up that uneven from my anecdotal experience, there's a much bigger chance you're just gonna get trolled with your team comp in QM.

And I honestly never experienced anyone changing his HL pick so dumb and my MMR was at sub 1k there at some point.

 

[bizzle]

I think he gets what you are saying

What you are describing here isnt a mm failure tho, it's a particular type of "mismatch" that occurs in all mobas at particular mmr ranges. In hots case this range may be inflated due to reasons we brought up like lower population, influx of new players, general low skill, etc. which all in all should settle down in the future (hopefully). But what mm does is it brings ppl of a certain mmr range together, as long as it is doing that it's working as intended

Blizzard is still developing their algorithms and the developers have expressed concern over the system, so I'm not sure why some people are so hellbent on defending a clearly broken system.

 

[brian!]

I always assumed mmr was a static system based on winrate which is used the same way in all team mmr games, but maybe im off about that

I dont mean to defend it, mainly just to say that i dont see any evidence that it doesnt work exactly how it does in other mobas, which is why im bemused to see elo hell discussion play out identically to ones ive seen in other threads/internet at large

 

[bizzle]

Your post is confusing to me:

The double negative that you don't see any evidence that it doesn't work the same way in other games translates to you seeing evidence that it works the same way as elsewhere. Given that, why are you puzzled by the fact that same discussions are occurring here as elsewhere?

One thing to keep in mind, however, is that MMR systems are not supposed to move players around. Initial games are supposed to place an individual with subsequent games raising the system's confidence. After a certain threshold, they are supposed to tighten down where you've landed. The more games you play, the less likely you are to move (up or down).

In fact, in a true ELO system you can't even drop below your assumed floor. Obviously when people think about it they'd realize that it's presumed that you would not become worse over time, something the MMR system in HL and QM doesn't prevent. I wonder what kinds of mechanisms Blizzard has or intends to implement in TL because teams could potentially game it by intentionally throwing matches so they could play in low-tier.

 

[Mengy]

All of this in depth talk about MMR and such is interesting, but does anyone else here simply play the game to have fun? I mean I try my best to win when I play but I honestly have fun win or lose, I just like playing the game. Sometimes the losses are due to idiot team mates but sometimes I win too due to the enemy team having idiot team mates.

A bigger factor for me is the long queue times for QM's. There are times I'll simply switch over to AI games because the queues are instant for them and I just want to play the game NOW instead of waiting several minutes for a QM. I can usually get in 2 - 3 AI games for every one QM, that's a lot more chances at getting a goblin!!!

 

[Ketch]

It's not the games where people are getting stomped that are so infuriating, it's the games where the person who believes he may be the better player, and is actually playing a good game (and his team is up in objectives, up in kills, up in pushed lanes, etc.), and then a teammate makes a clearcut decision that results in a thrown game that end in the most agitation.

That's MOBAs bro. But it's not some indicator of Elo hell. Same thing happens at all levels of play.

 

[Alur]

They are considering showing straight up mmr which is surprising to me

I think, despite our complaints as well as the occasional over the top bitching we forget just how Blizzard has invested in this game succeeding. They let this boat and it's money get away from them once, I highly doubt they intend to again.

Though change seems slow in implementation, the game has only been playable by members of the public at large since the winter. Nothing they have done has shown me they are not interested in player feedback. On the contrary, Browder seems to respond to it regularly and it seems to turn into action. It may be half-measures from time to time, or Blizzard may get the stigma of

but they seem to be taking regular action on both sides of the fence - casual and competitive. They most certainly aren't ignoring us and this is another topic that they are proving that on. It may have taken a while to get to this point where they admit to considering a different way of defining HL, but we also have to consider what I said before, the system has only existed since like February.

They for damn sure aren't perfect, but they certainly aren't clueless like some posts and threads would have you believe either.

I guess I'm making this post as a way to validate whether I'm ready or not for Hero League now.

This is my first MOBA type game and I have been playing HotS for the last 3 months or so. I have unlocked about 50% of the heroes and have probably played around 300-400 games so far. Always playing QM and I'm starting to question whether HL would be more fun. My win percentage is about 60% on average in QM.

HL just seems pretty scary to jump into. Pointers from you guys would be great, feel free to ask anything I might be leaving out here.

If you are winning 60% of your games (legit) then you are well more than ready. By that I mean you are uploading all your games to HOTSlogs and it's saying you are at a 60% winrate...if so and that's at 300-400 games, you are pretty damn good at this game. It only takes like ~52.8% winrate prior to the Hero League reset to reach rank 1 lifetime, for example, if you are capable of replicating that in both modes. It's probably higher now due to the way they re-did the points, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying.

As for advice, just make sure you are well rounded. Two tanks, two heals, two assassins, and preferably two assassin capable specialists you are proficient with just in case. From there, narrow down what you are best at to a final 3-5 and attempt to stick with those heroes whenever possible (HOTSlogs again can help you determine your proficiency with each hero, I suppose). If you stick to your strongest and your strongest fits the comp each time, you'll have a much better chance at winning.

And don't worry about the qq or toxicity or whatever. It's unavoidable, but at least in HL you typically have a real comp.

 

[brian!]

Your post is confusing to me:

The double negative that you don't see any evidence that it doesn't work the same way in other games translates to you seeing evidence that it works the same way as elsewhere. Given that, why are you puzzled by the fact that same discussions are occurring here as elsewhere?

One thing to keep in mind, however, is that MMR systems are not supposed to move players around. Initial games are supposed to place an individual with subsequent games raising the system's confidence. After a certain threshold, they are supposed to tighten down where you've landed. The more games you play, the less likely you are to move (up or down).

In fact, in a true ELO system you can't even drop below your assumed floor. Obviously when people think about it they'd realize that it's presumed that you would not become worse over time, something the MMR system in HL and QM doesn't prevent. I wonder what kinds of mechanisms Blizzard has or intends to implement in TL because teams could potentially game it by intentionally throwing matches so they could play in low-tier.

I meant i was the opposite of puzzled haha (it's a same shit different toilet situation for me). I cant really do much but compare the game's mm to other mobas ive played, it's hard to do anything else w/ the information we are given. I have no problem with the idea that mm is flawed here, i just wouldnt know where to begin in saying what the problems are (in the context of comparing other moba mm systems to hots).

Your concern about hots tl exists in league to a different degree; you can of course artificially lower your team mmr (or for more lazy ppl just make new accounts), but league takes it even further allowing you to construct new teams and repeating placements as many times as you want (placement is tied to other mmr, but im just pointing out that you can game it so you get placed higher and league gives rewards at certain tiers)

@alur, i was thinking about the casualness of hots (chu mentions this in his rank 1 problems post) and how that philosophy runs counter to providing a number that a lot of ppl will misunderstand or use in fukked up ways, id personally love to see my mmr tho

 

[SoundLad]

If you are winning 60% of your games (legit) then you are well more than ready. By that I mean you are uploading all your games to HOTSlogs and it's saying you are at a 60% winrate...if so and that's at 300-400 games, you are pretty damn good at this game. It only takes like ~52.8% winrate prior to the Hero League reset to reach rank 1 lifetime, for example, if you are capable of replicating that in both modes.

As for advice, just make sure you are well rounded. Two tanks, two heals, two assassins, and preferably two assassin capable specialists you are proficient with just in case. From there, narrow down what you are best at to a final 3-5 and attempt to stick with those heroes whenever possible (HOTSlogs again can help you determine your proficiency with each hero, I suppose). If you stick to your strongest and your strongest fits the comp each time, you'll have a much better chance at winning.

And don't worry about the qq or toxicity or whatever. It's unavoidable, but at least in HL you typically have a real comp.

Thanks!

I haven't dabbled in HOTSlogs any more than looking up what types of builds seem to be popular so far. Must try uploading those logs I suppose

Thing is, I loooove playing assassin and warrior heroes but support does nothing for me. So I guess I need to get proficient with at least one or two.

 

[Alur]

All of this in depth talk about MMR and such is interesting, but does anyone else here simply play the game to have fun? I mean I try my best to win when I play but I honestly have fun win or lose, I just like playing the game. Sometimes the losses are due to idiot team mates but sometimes I win too due to the enemy team having idiot team mates.

I think ultimately most play it for fun. Like Ketch says, no one here but Milly79 and brian! are going pro

Spoiler

no one is going pro

.

Part of the discussion stems from curiosity, the other from passion and frustration. I mean, when you spend as much time playing one single game over months like we have...and a bunch of us have sunk a good sum of money into it as well, even the littlest things become mountains out of mole hills I suppose.

I do think most of us do love the game and want it to succeed and attempt to be constructive. If you follow the history of the thread and the thread before the topic of the month shifts from one thing to another depending on what seems most pressing...right now I guess it's just HL and MMR.

I always assumed mmr was a static system based on winrate which is used the same way in all team mmr games, but maybe im off about that

I dont mean to defend it, mainly just to say that i dont see any evidence that it doesnt work exactly how it does in other mobas, which is why im bemused to see elo hell discussion play out identically to ones ive seen in other threads/internet at large

I think a lot of the thread's prior discussion was misunderstood by both sides.

As bizzle says, a good MMR system works by locking you into a place. The only way out is improvement over time.

My argument was simply being locked into the low tiers (Bronze/Silver/Gold) is a harder climb than being locked anywhere else because of the unreliability of that situation game to game. You can climb out for certain if you have the patience and persistence, but it takes more work and is most certainly on the whole a more frustrating experience.

We've seen davemo climb out of the low tiers in both QM and HL, Ketch partially has in HL, I partially have on two accounts in QM and HL respectively and a few others here have as well. We don't see people climb out much, though, and that's because once you are in it the deck is heavily stacked against you...which was my whole point. Some people are like god damn, this game is so toxic...because they are only ever at the level where games are the most toxic. Most people never improve enough to get out. A few do improve their knowledge and skill but can't keep their cool due to the idiocy and RNG nature of dc'ing and toxicity they see down there. Then a handful or two a month actually play enough games (which is a shitton at ~10 MMR per game) to climb out.

With all that said I do, however, disagree entirely with the premise that Ketch puts forward that if you get locked into low MMR that you belong there.

When all of my accounts are ~2900+ MMR, did my main account belong at ~1700-1800 MMR in Hero League? No, but it sure as hell got locked there because I wasted my placement matches goofing around due to being unaware how weighted they were. I struggled up to like 2050 MMR before just giving up. It wasn't even worth the effort or the shit you'd see in the games versus what I normally have in QM in Diamond on the same account. I've had 2900-3k MMR on other accounts in HL, however. Seems odd, no?

Did Ketch also belong in the same ~1500 MMR in Hero League? Considering he's fluctuated from 2500-2900 MMR for months and months, probably not, but he got stuck there somehow. I dunno what he did or how serious he took his placement either, but he was there for a while and it took him having a 72% winrate across 50 games to get out which is far from common. kirblar is Platinum in QM, yet according to him his MMR in HL was (and is, I believe) locked below the new player threshold.

Most of these scenarios are outliers, sure, but they do exist. As post after countless post here in the past year has described, the system is not perfect. It happens. Good players occasionally end up where they shouldn't. And sometimes players improve but are just not willing or are not of the right temperament to slog through 1000 MMR just to get from 1500 to 2500 once they figure out WTF they are doing.

 

[KillerDark]

I guess I'm making this post as a way to validate whether I'm ready or not for Hero League now.

This is my first MOBA type game and I have been playing HotS for the last 3 months or so. I have unlocked about 50% of the heroes and have probably played around 300-400 games so far. Always playing QM and I'm starting to question whether HL would be more fun. My win percentage is about 60% on average in QM.

HL just seems pretty scary to jump into. Pointers from you guys would be great, feel free to ask anything I might be leaving out here.

You're definitely ready! Like others have said, just make sure you have a couple heroes in each role you are comfortable with playing.

 

[Alur]

Thanks!

I haven't dabbled in HOTSlogs any more than looking up what types of builds seem to be popular so far. Must try uploading those logs I suppose

Thing is, I loooove playing assassin and warrior heroes but support does nothing for me. So I guess I need to get proficient with at least one or two.

It's fine to have two roles to focus on, in fact I'd encourage it for the best results if those are indeed your best roles. The best way to know that is, like I said, upload to HOTSlogs (and upload every single game). You may think you are a badass Muradin only to find out your winrate is 43% with him. You may also think you are a shit Valla and see you win 63% of your games. It injects a little realism into whatever your perception might be.

The main reason to have a viable option or two in each role is because the pick order is random...if you are at the back end of your team's draft, you can almost guarantee you will play warrior or support because most of the time the first couple picks go towards damage.

 

[brian!]

Yeah i dont disagree at all that ppl get stuck in places that are harder to climb out of, but i do think the conclusion that the fault here lies soley in mm/bad teammates is off base.

And I do disagree w/ ppl inherently belonging to a certain range; mmr is based on w/l and there are an incredible amount of factors that go into this beyond personal skill. Maybe thats where i differ from a bunch of ppl, to me there is no basis that anyone belongs somewhere they arent already at, what was achieved was specifix to the player and the games they went through. It doesnt say anything about whether they are a good or bad player (or at least it doesnt allow the conclusion for me). To me having different accounts at different ranges makes total sense.

I do think there is a conversation to be had about nuances in hots compared to other mobas, and what skillset is needed to advance

here are two league comedy videos on the subject (not throwing my lot in w/ what he's saying):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ4vPCY11eM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz7TWpRXyRY

 

[Samurai G0SU]

Man , i really love the Butcher. Can't get enough of it when he says .. "aahhhh FRESH MEAT" then bee-lines at the person about get some "MASSIVE DAMAGE" lulz.

Except when a zagara times her ult on point and captures me mid-bee-line. i proceed to cry.

So far though, i only see burning furnace as my ult choice. Slaughter seems like a good choice but i never used it in practice yet and i want to provide that high burst dmg.

Nexus blade is my choice instead of the 2nd furnace explosion. Any suggestions on builds people have tried and said, hot damn! honey bisquits?

 

[Alur]

To me having different accounts at different ranges makes total sense.

How does that make sense, though? After 1,000 games, your skill is more or less your skill, more than likely. You may do better, I suppose, but you're unlikely to do worse.

To be clear, the only part of any of my accounts outside the range is the HL MMR on my main account. Every single other account in every mode is right around the ~2900 range, sometimes a little higher.

I don't understand how different ranges makes sense at all...maybe you get super lucky on one account in your first 20 and don't on another accounting for a 200-300 MMR difference or something...but 1000 MMR? I don't think so.

Yeah i dont disagree at all that ppl get stuck in places that are harder to climb out of, but i do think the conclusion that the fault here lies soley in mm/bad teammates is off base.

I'm not making that conclusion. I don't think anyone was. Like I said, I think both sides are misunderstanding.

There is little doubt the matchmaking is worse and has a much higher average range at low levels. We can see that with our own eyes by comparing HOTSlogs from Diamond to HOTSlogs from Bronze or Silver. There is also very little doubt that you see more people with bad connections, more Laynors, and more toxicity at low levels simply because they haven't been weeded out yet. Often those with bad connections are just starting and then find out they have an issue. Those people don't stay around long typically, so they never make it to our point in the game. Matchmaking + bad teammates is definitely not the sole reason for it being harder to climb, but, again, the abundance of those things at this level make it more of a struggle.

 

[SoundLad]

Man , i really love the Butcher. Can't get enough of it when he says .. "aahhhh FRESH MEAT" then bee-lines at the person about get some "MASSIVE DAMAGE" lulz.

Except when a zagara times her ult on point and captures me mid-bee-line. i proceed to cry.

So far though, i only see burning furnace as my ult choice. Slaughter seems like a good choice but i never used it in practice yet and i want to provide that high burst dmg.

Nexus blade is my choice instead of the 2nd furnace explosion. Any suggestions on builds people have tried and said, hot damn! honey bisquits?

Slaughter chains is almost always my 1st choice since I usually run the Abattoir, Blood Frenzy auto-attack build.
No escape from those massive hits then.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

With all that said I do, however, disagree entirely with the premise that Ketch puts forward that if you get locked into low MMR that you belong there.

When all of my accounts are ~2900+ MMR, did my main account belong at ~1700-1800 MMR in Hero League? No, but it sure as hell got locked there because I wasted my placement matches goofing around due to being unaware how weighted they were. I struggled up to like 2050 MMR before just giving up. It wasn't even worth the effort or the shit you'd see in the games versus what I normally have in QM in Diamond on the same account. I've had 2900-3k MMR on other accounts in HL, however. Seems odd, no?

Did Ketch also belong in the same ~1500 MMR in Hero League? Considering he's fluctuated from 2500-2900 MMR for months and months, probably not, but he got stuck there somehow. I dunno what he did or how serious he took his placement either, but he was there for a while and it took him having a 72% winrate across 50 games to get out which is far from common. kirblar is Platinum in QM, yet according to him his MMR in HL was (and is, I believe) locked below the new player threshold.

Well that's hard to say maybe you'd be in the same range if you hadn't created various smurf accounts by now.

Would Ketch's winrate have been 72% over 50 games if he weren't stuck lower than he was supposed to be, that only seems to validate his claim.

I don't think anyone is saying it's easy to climb out of that range and it can be frustrating but over time you should be able to do so. Whether that is weighted properly on hotslogs and internally is another issue, that's especially hard to gauge in game since there's no information available.

 

[Samurai G0SU]

Slaughter chains is almost always my 1st choice since I usually run the Abattoir, Blood Frenzy auto-attack build.
No escape from those massive hits then.

I'm going to give that a try.

abiattior,
Blood Frenzy
Slaughter of the lamb

Thanks!

 

[brian!]

How does that make sense, though? After 1,000 games, your skill is more or less your skill, more than likely. You may do better, I suppose, but you're unlikely to do worse.

To be clear, the only part of any of my accounts outside the range is the HL MMR on my main account. Every single other account in every mode is right around the ~2900 range, sometimes a little higher.

I don't understand how different ranges makes sense at all...maybe you get super lucky on one account in your first 20 and don't on another accounting for a 200-300 MMR difference or something...but 1000 MMR? I don't think so.

By personal skill i mean things like mechanics and knowledge.
So lets say you decide to fuk around, play inebriated, have bad luck, whatever. You dip down in mmr because of losses; what happens here is you are experiencing personal skill discrepency w/ the majority of who you are matched with, they dont understand what they are doing, they are non-communicative etc. To put it simply the skillset you need to raise yourself out of here has changed. If youre the type to blame or be argumentative you will likely stay at this range, for example. Another example could be that your style was pretty passive, which works well when ppl around you have similar mehanics and knowledge, but doesnt help alleviate a personal skill disrepency, it doesnt make up for certain lacks in your team which is what is needed to win games. And so on

It is very hard to attribute personal skill to mmr, maybe having a skillset to succeed in a team environment is more appropriate (imo). A lot of ppl in league need to raise themselves out of a shitty range

But that brings me back to comparison, because certainly there is a different skillset needed to be successful in hots vs. othet mobas; the conclusion that it's the lowest common denominator that decides games doesnt work for me yet based on available evidence and ofc personal experience/bias (in my last qm game the decisive moves that won the game were made by lower mmrs and i basically rode on their wings to victory, mercviper the god).

 

[Alur]

Well that's hard to say maybe you'd be in the same range if you hadn't created various smurf accounts by now.

Would Ketch's winrate have been 72% over 50 games if he weren't stuck lower than he was supposed to be, that only seems to validate his claim.

I don't think anyone is saying it's easy to climb out of that range and it can be frustrating but over time you should be able to do so. Whether that is weighted properly on hotslogs and internally is another issue, that's especially hard to gauge in game since there's no information available.

I'm sure I would. That wasn't the point. The point was that I got stuck there in the first place. I don't even know what you're trying to argue here.

As for Ketch, his inflated winrate most certainly had something to do with him being roughly ~1000 MMR more skilled than where he was playing. Despite that, the 72% is pretty unlikely for the other reasons that have been listed ad nauseum by multiple posters. There are far more people DCing, playing Laynor or otherwise not contributing, and being toxic at that range which means you are up against more than just the opposition...particularly compared to what a player of Ketch's level typically sees in Diamond where there might be a permanent DC one in 10 games.

As I also said repeatedly, you can climb out. It's just a harder road dealing with the issues you see at that level unless you, like Ketch, get on a serious run. Even that run only got him to like 2200-2300, which is still below his real MMR and below the threshold for what folks in the thread consider the sweet spot for "good" games which avoid the majority of the pitfalls listed above. They are just lessened at 2300 compared to 1700 and lessened further as you continue up.

 

[brian!]

Yeah i think we all agree w/ u alur about certain ranges being harder to climb out of, but the "stuck" aspect is up for debate

 

[SoundLad]

I'm going to give that a try.

abiattior,
Blood Frenzy
Slaughter of the lamb

Thanks!

No prob, this is the build I usually run if not under too much threat: http://www.heroesfire.com/hots/talent-calculator/the-butcher#rwHj

If the other team is competent and lock you down then bolt of the storm is a better pick at 20.

 

[Orochinagis]

So Leoric is playabe this week right?

Which is his best build so far

 

[Rizzi]

Something occurred to me earlier.
Why don't all of the terran heroes have infested skins? Seems like an obvious decision.

 

[kirblar]

All of this in depth talk about MMR and such is interesting, but does anyone else here simply play the game to have fun? I mean I try my best to win when I play but I honestly have fun win or lose, I just like playing the game. Sometimes the losses are due to idiot team mates but sometimes I win too due to the enemy team having idiot team mates.

A bigger factor for me is the long queue times for QM's. There are times I'll simply switch over to AI games because the queues are instant for them and I just want to play the game NOW instead of waiting several minutes for a QM. I can usually get in 2 - 3 AI games for every one QM, that's a lot more chances at getting a goblin!!!

http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b

We have a lot of Spikes. If you are not a spike, that is ok. But for Spike, the whole "it's the most fun for me when my enemy is trying to shank me!" thing is huge.

 

[brian!]

I prtty much just play for fun now, in the beginning i was in get gud try to achieve optimal condition mode but i only play now if someone asks me to play since ~december

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

I'm sure I would. That wasn't the point. The point was that I got stuck there in the first place. I don't even know what you're trying to argue here.

As for Ketch, his inflated winrate most certainly had something to do with him being roughly ~1000 MMR more skilled than where he was playing. Despite that, the 72% is pretty unlikely for the other reasons that have been listed ad nauseum by multiple posters. There are far more people DCing, playing Laynor or otherwise not contributing, and being toxic at that range which means you are up against more than just the opposition...particularly compared to what a player of Ketch's level typically sees in Diamond where there might be a permanent DC one in 10 games.

As I also said repeatedly, you can climb out. It's just a harder road dealing with the issues you see at that level unless you, like Ketch, get on a serious run. Even that run only got him to like 2200-2300, which is still below his real MMR and below the threshold for what folks in the thread consider the sweet spot for "good" games which avoid the majority of the pitfalls listed above. They are just lessened at 2300 compared to 1700 and lessened further as you continue up.

I'm arguing whether you ever truly got stuck, did you actually plateau or did it just become a slow crawl?

A slow crawl is one thing, it's frustrating but there's progress and you're not really stuck.

Like Ketch mentioned a couple pages back if your skill exceeds your MMR range's you should have lesser chances than the opposing team to hit these rotten eggs by being the constant and make some progress.

If you are plateauing for months on end I don't think MM alone can be blamed for that.

That it's frustrating is out of the question.

I'm still below your mentioned threshold and your examples are very foreign to me, I mostly get lack of general game knowledge as troubles.

Like fighting a talent down over an inconsequential tribute while there's a boss walking towards an unprotected keep.

http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b

We have a lot of Spikes. If you are not a spike, that is ok. But for Spike, the whole "it's the most fun for me when my enemy is trying to shank me!" thing is huge.

I'd like to get into competitive mtg but man that landbase.

I'll stick to making casual highly competitive thematic decks with friends and attending sealed events whenever a new edition comes out.

I mean ffs an uncommon from lorwin costs upwards of €12 and it's irreplaceable for a CoCo elves deck, which is one of the cheapest decks in the current meta.

 

[Milly79]

Brian imma question why you want me to watch a video with the preview that says gay black both at the same time