Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: MMR is your number but who are you at the back?

  1. #21
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    673
    This idea of choosing roles when queuing has been talked about in the past and has been done in other games, and generally leads to very long queue times, and a stagnant laning meta. Even if my games have bad team compositions, I would rather have different bad compositions than the same 'balanced' one every match and 5-10 minute queue times.

    I don't understand why you think choosing a role should give players more MMR when winning. Ideally their incentive is that they increase their chance of winning by having a better team comp. However, this is not really the case, so it raises a big problem with 'role queuing'.

    Historically, although it shouldn't be so, the lineup with the strongest winrate in pub games of Dota was 5 core heroes. You might not be playing Dota properly but you'll win more games. I expect this is probably even more true now when supports are weaker and talent trees make carries scale incredibly well in the mid-game even with less farm.

    Although in an ideal world, the team that is most balanced/defined would go into a game with a better chance of winning, that is not true outside of competitive. Picking a good lineup doesn't give you as large a benefit as, say, picking carries and farming for 30 minutes whilst trading kills back and forth. It probably gives you <1% boost to your chances of winning (again, outside of very high skill matches). It would be an interesting study, though.

    So essentially, although encouraging players to play more roles is positive, I don't think this system would actually do that - your mids would pick mid and queue for 10 minutes to get their mid game. I think right now the 'strategy phase' has actually increased the number of matches with decent lanes, and the number of games where people fight over mid has decreased from what I remember.

    I do however think that when people pick a hero they should be able to show what roles they are intending to play.

    Finally I really have a problem with the idea that MMR is worth worrying about*. In reality you have a number for each role and a number for each hero in the game, and a number for how you feel when you load up Dota each day. A lot of numbers which are not broken down into a single score.

    Play support and nobody will ever 'steal your role' Seriously, though, play all roles and play what the team needs. And unless you're building a team to go competitive, play unranked and stop worrying about a number that doesn't represent much†.



    * think about how MMR goes down if you lose, and yet, you never get worse after playing a game of Dota, only better.

    † or alternatively, focus on the numbers that are useful like XPM, fight participation, etc.
    Last edited by cinephile; 07-31-2017 at 03:03 PM.
    "It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."
    Io, the Guardian Wisp

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by cinephile View Post
    This idea of choosing roles when queuing has been talked about in the past and has been done in other games, and generally leads to very long queue times, and a stagnant laning meta. Even if my games have bad team compositions, I would rather have different bad compositions than the same 'balanced' one every match and 5-10 minute queue times.

    I don't understand why you think choosing a role should give players more MMR when winning. Ideally their incentive is that they increase their chance of winning by having a better team comp. However, this is not really the case, so it raises a big problem with 'role queuing'.

    Historically, although it shouldn't be so, the lineup with the strongest winrate in pub games of Dota was 5 core heroes. You might not be playing Dota properly but you'll win more games. I expect this is probably even more true now when supports are weaker and talent trees make carries scale incredibly well in the mid-game even with less farm.

    Although in an ideal world, the team that is most balanced/defined would go into a game with a better chance of winning, that is not true outside of competitive. Picking a good lineup doesn't give you as large a benefit as, say, picking carries and farming for 30 minutes whilst trading kills back and forth. It probably gives you <1% boost to your chances of winning (again, outside of very high skill matches). It would be an interesting study, though.

    So essentially, although encouraging players to play more roles is positive, I don't think this system would actually do that - your mids would pick mid and queue for 10 minutes to get their mid game. I think right now the 'strategy phase' has actually increased the number of matches with decent lanes, and the number of games where people fight over mid has decreased from what I remember.

    I do however think that when people pick a hero they should be able to show what roles they are intending to play.

    Finally I really have a problem with the idea that MMR is worth worrying about*. In reality you have a number for each role and a number for each hero in the game, and a number for how you feel when you load up Dota each day. A lot of numbers which are not broken down into a single score.

    Play support and nobody will ever 'steal your role' Seriously, though, play all roles and play what the team needs. And unless you're building a team to go competitive, play unranked and stop worrying about a number that doesn't represent much†.



    * think about how MMR goes down if you lose, and yet, you never get worse after playing a game of Dota, only better.

    † or alternatively, focus on the numbers that are useful like XPM, fight participation, etc.
    This is not about role stealing. The team is hardly to show teamwork when they always want to play like god or thought themselves are the professionals. Too many players dreaming while playing and they never be serious.

  3. #23
    Valve still don't know how to create a system that able to control the players' demands before clicking the "PLAY DOTA" button.
    Until now, there are a lot of good ways can control the players but the company or developer still didn't make it out. Plus, the communities in some regions are becoming worse already.

  4. #24
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by Crystal Nova - lce View Post
    This is not about role stealing.
    Neither was my reply about role stealing. That was a single (joke) sentence at the end.

    I discussed the issues you talked about in this thread. Your ideas! But if that was your take away, it doesn't seem like you're actually interested in what you talk about.

    I'll be honest: if you can't discuss things properly when people go out of their way to listen and reply to you, nobody will ever take you seriously.

    I read what you wrote and I did take you seriously, but now you make me regret it. Thanks!
    "It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."
    Io, the Guardian Wisp

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by cinephile View Post
    Neither was my reply about role stealing. That was a single (joke) sentence at the end.

    I discussed the issues you talked about in this thread. Your ideas! But if that was your take away, it doesn't seem like you're actually interested in what you talk about.

    I'll be honest: if you can't discuss things properly when people go out of their way to listen and reply to you, nobody will ever take you seriously.

    I read what you wrote and I did take you seriously, but now you make me regret it. Thanks!
    Are you a MMR booster?

  6. #26

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •