HoTS family?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Heroes of the Storm |OT| Pretty sure that Abathur is AFK
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
- Status
HoTS family?
Hahhahahhahaha
Played the new map twice yesterday. Both lasted around 12 minutes. First one we roflstomped, second one got roflstomped. There was zero exchange in both matches, when we won we got 100% of the shrines and when we lost they got 100% of the shrines. KT is ridiculous on that map, he can get all 30 kills solo in like 10 seconds easily. As if we didn't have issues already with him getting first picked all the time, he will be in every single Shrine match. Just gotta build a team comp that can hold back 5 people while KT does his shit for a few seconds. It's also ridiculous that they don't increase the number of kills the winning team needs or anything. I guess they want this map to be a quick one?
When we lost the first shrine in my second match I tried to tell the team to counter push but they decided to get quad killed instead and blamed me for not showing up. That gave them a 2 level lead that never went away.
When we lost the first shrine in my second match I tried to tell the team to counter push but they decided to get quad killed instead and blamed me for not showing up. That gave them a 2 level lead that never went away.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Not to mention that all effort of the losing team is lost, if you get 29/30 all that was wasted.
It also encourages last hitting since only the damage that kills a minion counts.
That's what surprises me most - that they introduced a mechanic that is so last hit orientated (on top of it not scaling) after being so staunchly anti-last hit except on like two heroes.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
Turdburger
Member
So basically they're preventing the top tier mmr players from getting stuck because of their mmr but not solving the actual issue which was that they got no points for winning because they typically played against players with low mmr compared to theirs.
The only reason this was happening in the first place is because of their stupid unwillingness to sacrifice queue times for top mmr players in order to match them with only other top mmr players. If top players were only queuing into top players they wouldn't need "bonus points" because the average mmrs would be so high. And the players below them, once they hit rank 1-2, would move into that pool of players.
Just fucking let the top 2%-4% of the MMR rankings only queue into each other and max the queue party size at 2 and everything is fucking peachy. Better games and experience for everyone. WHY WONT THEY DO IT
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Yeah I expected something along the lines of first damage tags a mob and last hitting a mob that was tagged by the other team would reward no points for either team.
That way stealing would still be useful but KT wouldn't be as annoying on that map.
I am curious as to peoples expereinces of the matchmaker after this patch.
We've noticed queue times have shrunk *rapidly*, in both quick match and hero league. We never queue for very long in any format. Additionally, we're being matched with people who have less than 300 games played in quick match again.
It feels very much like they loosened the matchmaker even more this patch, which has resulted in an abnormally high number of games where the experience is very unfun because of the disparity between the team.
I really do think they prioritise speed of finding a game over quality of game.
We've noticed queue times have shrunk *rapidly*, in both quick match and hero league. We never queue for very long in any format. Additionally, we're being matched with people who have less than 300 games played in quick match again.
It feels very much like they loosened the matchmaker even more this patch, which has resulted in an abnormally high number of games where the experience is very unfun because of the disparity between the team.
I really do think they prioritise speed of finding a game over quality of game.
I think they do as well.
I haven't noticed a great deal of difference on my main account in queue times, but we did have two games the other day where the MMR spread was enormous (2100 - 3400) and I rarely see that...but it happened twice in one day. We did have a very disparate group MMR wise, though, so that may have been why.
I haven't noticed a great deal of difference on my main account in queue times, but we did have two games the other day where the MMR spread was enormous (2100 - 3400) and I rarely see that...but it happened twice in one day. We did have a very disparate group MMR wise, though, so that may have been why.
Orochinagis
Member
So Blizzard changed Johanna dinamic animation on her portrait and put a static one where she barely move her head.....wth.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
You could almost say... they made her more tanky.
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
Interesting...they won't be resetting MMR ever, even for the first season or any seasonal rolls thereafter. What's the point of seasonal rolls?
Agreed. Why reset at all if no one's MMR will ever change? You'll be endlessly trying to climb the treadmill unless you were already at the top.
Wouldn't it make more sense to...I dunno, use those 20 placement matches you put in for every single player (since they seem to think it works) and let it spit them out where they qualify to be at each reset...instead of it being a pre-ordained point every time?
I don't quite understand the logic other than them simply trying to avoid good players stomping bad ones. Seems like they'd be able to matchmake in placement based on your previous rank, but not actually hold you to that rank if you out perform or under perform.
Wouldn't it make more sense to...I dunno, use those 20 placement matches you put in for every single player (since they seem to think it works) and let it spit them out where they qualify to be at each reset...instead of it being a pre-ordained point every time?
I don't quite understand the logic other than them simply trying to avoid good players stomping bad ones. Seems like they'd be able to matchmake in placement based on your previous rank, but not actually hold you to that rank if you out perform or under perform.
That's not what I'm saying.
They just said in their post they reset to allow matchmaking to line up with your actual rank better as some people had inflated ranking (aka they were trying to line up the 2% thing).
They also said in the future that your MMR will not be reset. Not for season one. Not for season two. Not for anything.
I'm saying why would you not actually utilize the 20 placement games that you, as the developer, added into the game for when a season resets in order to reset everyone's MMR? It is a new season after all. We shouldn't all go back to the same rank we were immediately, but their description of how placement works for "veteran" players is basically that - you will more or less be put right back where you were unless you were past the rank 5 cap.
Right now it's looking like there's not going to be much reason to play HL again on a season reset unless you just love to draft because you're just going to continually be put in around the same spot or thereabouts for season after season unless you show a good amount of improvement during the course of a season. You're not going to get any better gains or placement in a new season than you got in a previous season...you still have to grind it out, 80-100 points at a time from wherever it is you left off....so why the fuck do we reset at all, then?
This all ties back into the discussion we had on people being "stuck" or whatever. Regardless of people's stances on that, we've established and agreed pretty much that once you've logged your 100-200 gains, your MMR is far more static and it's a longer climb. That is the case whether you are 3600 or 1600. By never allowing us to reset our MMR, they are basically doubling down on you playing copious amounts of games to improve 200 MMR, instead of starting from scratch each season and letting the placement (which again, this is the whole point of placement) determine that.
-----
TL;DR - If I'm rank 8 and slowly grinding my way up 80-100 points at a time and a season ends...but I'm going to go right back to rank 8 or even rank 10 (but with bonus points to get back to 8 quickly)...then why reset me? Just let me keep fucking grinding and not play the pointless 20 games of placement.
If I'm rank 1 and chilling and the season ends and you force me to grind from rank 5 to rank 1 again, but my MMR stayed the same...what is the point? Just leave me at rank 1 in the future if my MMR says I'm already destined to be there.
It just makes no sense to have a placement period for a real season - not preseason - but everything will more or less stay the same as it's been for 6 months now unless you were above rank 5, in which case you have been deemed wanting by the arbitrary cutoff gods of Blizzard and must grind back up. All the rest of you? As you were.
They just said in their post they reset to allow matchmaking to line up with your actual rank better as some people had inflated ranking (aka they were trying to line up the 2% thing).
They also said in the future that your MMR will not be reset. Not for season one. Not for season two. Not for anything.
I'm saying why would you not actually utilize the 20 placement games that you, as the developer, added into the game for when a season resets in order to reset everyone's MMR? It is a new season after all. We shouldn't all go back to the same rank we were immediately, but their description of how placement works for "veteran" players is basically that - you will more or less be put right back where you were unless you were past the rank 5 cap.
Right now it's looking like there's not going to be much reason to play HL again on a season reset unless you just love to draft because you're just going to continually be put in around the same spot or thereabouts for season after season unless you show a good amount of improvement during the course of a season. You're not going to get any better gains or placement in a new season than you got in a previous season...you still have to grind it out, 80-100 points at a time from wherever it is you left off....so why the fuck do we reset at all, then?
This all ties back into the discussion we had on people being "stuck" or whatever. Regardless of people's stances on that, we've established and agreed pretty much that once you've logged your 100-200 gains, your MMR is far more static and it's a longer climb. That is the case whether you are 3600 or 1600. By never allowing us to reset our MMR, they are basically doubling down on you playing copious amounts of games to improve 200 MMR, instead of starting from scratch each season and letting the placement (which again, this is the whole point of placement) determine that.
-----
TL;DR - If I'm rank 8 and slowly grinding my way up 80-100 points at a time and a season ends...but I'm going to go right back to rank 8 or even rank 10 (but with bonus points to get back to 8 quickly)...then why reset me? Just let me keep fucking grinding and not play the pointless 20 games of placement.
If I'm rank 1 and chilling and the season ends and you force me to grind from rank 5 to rank 1 again, but my MMR stayed the same...what is the point? Just leave me at rank 1 in the future if my MMR says I'm already destined to be there.
It just makes no sense to have a placement period for a real season - not preseason - but everything will more or less stay the same as it's been for 6 months now unless you were above rank 5, in which case you have been deemed wanting by the arbitrary cutoff gods of Blizzard and must grind back up. All the rest of you? As you were.
Is Muradin too simple for you or why don't you enjoy his playstyle? I'm on my way to lvl 9 with him and I like him more than Valla so far. Just curious.
It's really weird that/if they don't have a system that weights more recent games more heavily in determining a player's MMR. Surely it wouldn't be that difficult to go recalculate player MMR from their most recent 100 games every so often. Are they really using a method that assumes player skill is some unchanging variable that they're gaining increasing confidence in their estimation of?
Yeah, that's kind of my point.
If they believe we are where we belong then there is no need to reset seasons. Particularly when 92-95% or more of us will just end up right around the same spot (or with bonus points to get there) and the other 5-8% were rank 4 and above and for whatever reason just get cutoff arbitrarily.
They may as well just let us all continue grinding from where we are if virtually nothing is going to change.
If they want to approach it like other games, use the placement for what it is...let us play the games and spit us out where our current performance in those games indicates we belong instead of using past performance as the indicator.
Basically, the system sounds like a half-measure. And you know what they say about half-measures?
If they believe we are where we belong then there is no need to reset seasons. Particularly when 92-95% or more of us will just end up right around the same spot (or with bonus points to get there) and the other 5-8% were rank 4 and above and for whatever reason just get cutoff arbitrarily.
They may as well just let us all continue grinding from where we are if virtually nothing is going to change.
If they want to approach it like other games, use the placement for what it is...let us play the games and spit us out where our current performance in those games indicates we belong instead of using past performance as the indicator.
Basically, the system sounds like a half-measure. And you know what they say about half-measures?
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
He's just the most unimaginative tank that this game could possibly have. For a game that has so much diversity in its character roster, Muradin completely shits all over that. I see absolutely zero reason to play him compared to (example) Johanna.
Oh i understand what you mean now. It's possible that it's a communication problem? Like maybe they're saying that mmr wont ever go back to square one w/ everyone starting from the same spot, reset is kind of vague. I agree, itd be really odd to have placement matches that just rearrange you and you just grind back to where you were before the reset (kind of like what they are currently doing), as this pointless seasonal thing, playing against the same range you were pre-reset, i dont think that is what blizzard is planning because yeah it sounds absurd. Like maybe they think ppl are talking about a hard reset and they want to do a soft reset (what league does)?
Personally i think the 2% thing is booty, even if it becomes accurate itll be weird. It kind of works in a 1v1 setting like hearthstone but im definitely not into it for a team game.
Oh woops i read the post more closely, pretty confused at the idea that only "veteran" player will do placements in the future, but it's also vague enough that i have no idea what they mean by it
Personally i think the 2% thing is booty, even if it becomes accurate itll be weird. It kind of works in a 1v1 setting like hearthstone but im definitely not into it for a team game.
Oh woops i read the post more closely, pretty confused at the idea that only "veteran" player will do placements in the future, but it's also vague enough that i have no idea what they mean by it
Resetting MMR is a bad idea because the accuracy of your MMR is tied to how many faces you've pkayed. So if you reset, you just make every bodies MMR really inaccurate. Which isn't fun for anybody
Resetting rank is a good idea because over the course of a season your rank can get inflated just like it did/has for all the rank 1s that didn't belong there.
They said in there post that veteran HL players will only have to play a limited number of placements. That's probably just to double check if, hey I climbed three ranks this season... Do I actually belong there? Or did I just grind out more points then the other players.
Resetting rank is a good idea because over the course of a season your rank can get inflated just like it did/has for all the rank 1s that didn't belong there.
They said in there post that veteran HL players will only have to play a limited number of placements. That's probably just to double check if, hey I climbed three ranks this season... Do I actually belong there? Or did I just grind out more points then the other players.
Yeah, that's kind of my point.
If they believe we are where we belong then there is no need to reset seasons. Particularly when 92-95% or more of us will just end up right around the same spot (or with bonus points to get there) and the other 5-8% were rank 4 and above and for whatever reason just get cutoff arbitrarily.
They may as well just let us all continue grinding from where we are if virtually nothing is going to change.
If they want to approach it like other games, use the placement for what it is...let us play the games and spit us out where our current performance in those games indicates we belong instead of using past performance as the indicator.
Basically, the system sounds like a half-measure. And you know what they say about half-measures?
Yeah, having seasons is utterly pointless if they don't plan on resetting mmr. Especially when you see the kind of issues its causing. I mean the issue what the top mmr people are having is partly blamed by the fact mmr wasn't reset.
You may as well just do what Dota does otherwise, where it's basically just a constant rating which you slowly increase and never resets.
Exactly. No need to reset if we all stay in the same spot.
If they want to keep MMR then they need to look into it in a similar way described above (basically a system similar to how HOTSlogs began weighting on a rolling 2 month scale). Put the weight further on the most recent 50-100 matches and less on matches that took place in February.
Otherwise we'll all just chill in the same spot and I'd rather keep my rank than have to be hassled with placement only to get it back again.
Sothis Krieg
Member
8-2 on my placement games. I guess the other half is going to be a nightmare.
Sothis Krieg
Member
Edit : double post.
Hotslogs uses a 2 month rolling scale?
I thought they just disregard new replays, that are older than 2 months.
But if you already had replays older then 2 months in the system, that MMR is kept.
It's shocking how many Leoric players think spawning into a 5 man group is a "tactical" decision.
Yep it's a two month window on the ladder. You have to play 10 games I believe it was to show up on said ladder. They don't do replays older than 2 months now though, you're right, which is effectively how their window works. They used to but it bogged the whole system down a ton IIRC.
And of course your old MMR is kept if it was already there.
How does that work?
Wouldn't it require a lot of copmputation, which was the reason for the 2-month rule in the first place, to avoid computation?
It works like I was saying. You have to play at least 10 games to show up even if you are previously over the threshold of games that it prescribes for each league. That removes people from the ladder who don't play anymore or don't play often so they can't just sit at the top or what have you (not that that seems to be a big issue with hotdogs but normally it is with ladders).
That's why I was saying Blizz could adopt a similar system. The difference would be that it would require actual weighting of the games with higher returns and losses instead of just the exclusion of old games, but /shrug. They've got other templates to follow if they want to make it worthwhile as well.
That's why I was saying Blizz could adopt a similar system. The difference would be that it would require actual weighting of the games with higher returns and losses instead of just the exclusion of old games, but /shrug. They've got other templates to follow if they want to make it worthwhile as well.
From their post it sounds like that's what they are trying to do. Except their hiding true MMR and making it a ladder on ranked points.
That's not the way most everyone who has posted here about it has interpreted it, though. That's why we were throwing our hands up like "What's the point?" It says:
Which implies it will not be reset in the future. Then further on it says:
What I draw from that is they are narrowing in on a way to keep rank and MMR tight like people want...but if they never reset MMR, you are also going to have a harder time ranking up once you reach whatever the rank your MMR is slotted into happens to be. It'll basically become what people say the SC2 ladder is - stationary and stagnant. You'd need to significantly improve across a season to see any real gains when the reset occurred.
There's no mention of a soft reset/rolling scale/anything. Just that MMR won't be reset and that in the future it'll be more closely tied to rank. That's why several of us were asking why reset at all if we're just gonna Groundhog Day right back to where we were.
Ah, we were talking about different things then.
I thought you meant, the MMR used for ladder placement is on a rolling window
Like I posted above tho resetting MMR is bad. If every season they reset MMR then your gonna be stuck in a bunch of shitty matches untilevetyone evens back out to where they should be.
To me it sounds like they're still gonna be resetting rank every season though. Which is a good thing. It prevents people from just grinding out games to end up a higher rank then they should be.
Like if your 3k MMR maybe that means your somewhere around rank 10. Then you've got however long a season is to grind games earn points and hopefully improve. So maybe by the end your rank 8. Now everything gets reset and it's time to see if your actually rank 8 now or if you just grinded more then other people.
I don't understand why everyone thinks it's a good thing that you can just grind your way to the top. Whatever your rank is should be a representation of your skill, not how many games you've played.
I don't think people are saying it's a good thing you can grind your way to the top. I don't personally think it's a bad thing either though. You can't grind to the top without reaching a certain minimum of MMR (which appeared to be about 2800 before the reset and is now likely higher). All they have to do is set it to what the real value is. We are saying why bother resetting if I'm just gonna continually be in the same spot? May as well just leave it be and let me rise or fall based on my own determination.
They can easily reset MMR or soft reset like League if they want.
They keep your old MMR for the purpose of matchmaking through those 20 games, then based on your performance against similar opponents you move up, you move down, or you go ~10-10 and stand pat.
Right now you pretty much have to bomb the placement to move down more than a rank or two, and having a great placement doesn't really net you much of anything going upwards so the whole thing seems pretty useless all in all beyond this one time, which served simply as a way to thin out rank 1.
There is nothing "Season"-like about having everything remain the same from set to set. There's just no reason to even have it because there's no incentive to keep going as a player unless you just love drafting more than you like playing exactly who you want.
They can easily reset MMR or soft reset like League if they want.
They keep your old MMR for the purpose of matchmaking through those 20 games, then based on your performance against similar opponents you move up, you move down, or you go ~10-10 and stand pat.
Right now you pretty much have to bomb the placement to move down more than a rank or two, and having a great placement doesn't really net you much of anything going upwards so the whole thing seems pretty useless all in all beyond this one time, which served simply as a way to thin out rank 1.
There is nothing "Season"-like about having everything remain the same from set to set. There's just no reason to even have it because there's no incentive to keep going as a player unless you just love drafting more than you like playing exactly who you want.
They have to reset it to correct any outliers, like all of the people who were rank one when they shouldn't have been.
How is that any different then if you were to play 20 games right now? You keep your current MMR, and then your MMR will fluctuate based on how you preform in the next 20 matches? Sounds like exactly what they are doing now.. Except blizzard doesn't tell you your MMR, just your rank.
To me, when you say reset MMR, that sounds like everybody goes back to baseline 2k, or whatever it is, which would be really dumb.
Here's how I imagine the system working.
Let's say you and I are both 2500 MMR, rank 20, with the same exact 55% win rate. If you play 200 games and I only play 50 games, by the end of the season you'll be rank 15 but I'll only be rank 19 because you earned more points then me.
Then at the start of the next season your 2600 and I'm only 2550. And because that's not very much MMR change were both placed at only rank 19 in the new season.
the point of having seasons is so you can let people climb ranks during the season by accruing points.
Then the reason there's a reset is because you could play 2000 games in a season and accrue enough points to be like rank 5 even though your MMR is actually that of someone who should be rank 20.
So you get a fancy portrait or a mount or something. And then the system corrects itself so there's not 30% of the player base at rank 1, and everybody whose not actually rank 1 can climb the ladder again.
So, the theory behind all this MMR stuff is that player skill can be quantified on one axis. If you know exactly how good everyone is, you can look at all the players on one team and all the players on the other team and say just how often you expect the first team to win (that is, it's not deterministic - sometimes worse players beat better players). If you don't know exactly how good everyone is, you can work backwards - if one team beats another team then probably the players on the winning team are on-average better than the players on the losing team.
Now consider an individual player who we're trying to rank and suppose we know how good everyone else is. If you have no idea how good she is, but you see that her team just won a game against a team whose members were on-average better than all of the other members of this player's team, then all of the information you've got suggests she's probably better than the average player on the other team. If you've got a probability distribution of player skill across all players, you can come up with an initial most likely skill value for her. If she loses her next game then you might drastically revise your estimate of her skill downward. But after she's played a bunch of games you're going to be pretty confident that you've got a good estimate of her skill - new games aren't adding much new information - and even if she wins a game your system says she probably would lose you won't adjust her rank up too much. If you use hotslogs you might have noticed how players with few recorded games see huge MMR jumps while players with lots of recorded games barely move after each new game.
A problem for this sort of system is that players can get better at the game. If a player is constantly improving, your system might badly lag their true skill even as it thinks that it's got a very confident estimate. You don't want to weight the very first match a player ever played the same as the most recent one they played if there are 500 matches in between. That first match is probably not very useful at all for judging how good the player is now.
People's concern (and I don't really know how justified this is) about Blizzard's system is that players' old games might be following them around for far too long. People aren't necessarily asking for a total blank slate, but just for the opportunity to show the system that they've significantly improved. They feel like it takes far too long for someone with hundreds of games played to move from some MMR to a higher MMR, even if they really ought to be at the higher MMR. There's a balance that needs to be struck between keeping people's MMRs stable and allowing them to drift in response to real changes in skill.
I'm unsure how "grinding ranks" is supposed to work, personally. I'd thought that, absent the skill bonus from having a hidden MMR significantly higher than the one implied by your rank, gains and losses of rank points are roughly symmetric. I guess people could random walk up a couple ranks and then quit forever? That doesn't seem like a huge issue. But you mention going from 20 to 5 when you're supposed to be at 20 and I'm having trouble seeing how that can happen (edit: outside of a one-time shift when they change where the cutoffs are, which I guess is part of what motivated the reset they just did, but you seem to be talking about needing to do this every season).
It is quite a bit different. This is my theory for how it could be done:
You are Blizzard. You reset everyone's rank and soft reset MMR for the new season. Everyone now has to play "x" amount of placement matches in order to find their new spot and whether they've improved or not. In those "x" amount of placement matches you take their previous (true) MMR and use it for the matchmaking window.
If you are 2500, you play people in the 2300 - 2700 MMR range maximum or whatever arbitrary cutoff they wish to make. If this is your actual MMR (2500) you should theoretically be somewhere in the 10-10 range record wise. Any wins or losses above/below .500 are then weighted more heavily than normal allowing you to potentially move forward (we'll say ~200) MMR or backward the same amount in one "x" game window and potentially end up at a new ranking.
In an ideal circumstance, based purely on hotdogs as that's all we have, it takes a 60% winrate (6-4 every 10 games) to go up around ~20 MMR as you only gain ~10 MMR per win after you've played 150-200 games or so. You have to maintain a 60% winrate for 100 games to gain 200 MMR which is a pretty good grind. A low end Diamond player has about a 53% lifetime winrate, so the odds are that it takes the average player well more than 100 games to do that unless they severely outskill the bracket they are in.
Being able to move ~200 MMR in placement for doing well in your placement both allows you to advance out of an MMR that you must literally nose to grindstone grind out of in order to prove you've improved, as well as see a substantial positive reward on a semi-regular basis for your improvement.
Keeping MMR locked in perpetually rewards pretty much no one, though, as there's no opportunity for any given player to advance at any kind of pace when deserving unless they decide to make a smurf.
I think the concern over folks who don't belong at a certain rank are a little overblown and unnecessary. As the months go on, sure you will see inflation towards the top but you kind of should as players improve...playing 1000 games may allow you to reach a higher rank, sure, but you still have to actually improve to get there whether you play 50 or 500, The grind is improving, not playing a ton of games. It takes some people 1000 games to get that aforementioned 200 MMR and it takes others only 100 games...bottom line is they both reached 3200 MMR or whatever the cutoff is which means ultimately they had the skill to do so.
If Blizzard think they've found the key to tying MMR more closely to rank (which they imply they have), they should be able to accurately tie said rank to a reasonable minimum range of MMR and prevent what you're saying if it is actually an issue.
As I said before, they've already proven this is the case as the cutoff for rank 1 appeared to be somewhere in the ~2800 MMR range...so you up that cutoff. Make it 3200. Make it 3400. Whatever. The only way someone can grind to a rank - assuming a rank is tied closely to MMR like they are implying (and like we've already seen with rank 1 in the first preseason) - is if they are either already near that MMR or have the skill to get to that MMR.
Considering those things, I don't see a valid reason for resetting based simply on that.
Odds are they'll not reset anything but our ranks and instead will give out mounts and portraits like you implied for each season and that'll be that. For me that's a half-measure, though, and very much like Groundhog Day.
<3. This is precisely what I'm getting at.
Your first 50-100 matches have more or less set you where you are even at your 1,000th game considering the diminishing returns on MMR gain as you proceed past the 100 mark and then finally the 200 game mark where it really drops. Improvement counts regardless, but one need only look at the success of people on smurf accounts to see what a huge difference just winning 5-10% more of your games in your base MMR "placement" can do to your actual MMR in either mode. With no reset to MMR in Hero League (or at the very least no chance to have an advancement or promotion period like in League) you cannot prove or disprove that you may belong higher than you are but are being held back by the diminishing returns.
Yesterday I had the most insane moment in my HOTS history. We got rekt in spider and opponent went to the core with 4 man. I was the only one alive with Zeratul, I VP:d 2 of them and started nuking heroes that were focusing the core. I actually managed to kill all of them with berserk and rewind and the core was left with a few percentages of health. Needless to say we won after that. I couldn't believe my eyes.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll