Party Matchmaking Gain/Loss

[GrIdL0cK]

Hello fronds.

After playing a fair amount of party matchmaking (not with a clan or team, just friends), I've noticed that the match making ratings are exactly the same for every player.

For example: MATCH ID: 455098452

That game is a 5 stack against a 5 stack, so the matchmaking worked in that regard. The difference is that my rating is around ~4200 where some of the other players on my team are around ~3500 or ~3000. We lost 25 points after being thoroughly stomped. Proving that we probably should have done better in the game, since we lost quite a high amount of rating.

My question is this:

Since I'm the 'best' player in this group of friends of mine, shouldn't I lose MORE rating where the player with ~3000 rating should lose less based on the fact that if I wasn't in the group, we wouldn't have been matched up against the same opponents?

[imsopure]

I've discovered the same thing and was wondering as well.
It doesn't make any sense at all and is a true proof of a weird MMR-calculation.

(And no, I'm quite high rated and I don't say anything about elo-hell or any other bullshit.)

[imsopure]

I'm bumping this for interest.

[fragZ]

Valve has no clue how to make a proper matchmaking.

[Heh_]

Is that your solo MMR or team MMR?

[pdrocaldeira]

I guess that's right.
If you think that you all are a team it seems more reasonable.
You're not more responsible because you're more skilled. Probably the other team have another player as skilled as you making the odds even.

[GrIdL0cK]

Is that your solo MMR or team MMR?

I'm talking about the party rating. They are all different and yet you win/lose different amounts.

[GrIdL0cK]

I guess that's right.
If you think that you all are a team it seems more reasonable.
You're not more responsible because you're more skilled. Probably the other team have another player as skilled as you making the odds even.

The argument is not whether or not I am more skilled. The argument is that because I joined up with the party of friends, the matchmaking would pit us against more difficult opponents. Say for arguments sake, it worked like this:

Me: 4000
Friend 1: 3500
Friend 2: 3500
Friend 3: 3000
Friend 4: 3000

It stands to reason that we should play against a similar party due to the matchmaking rating. If we play against a better team, we should win more, but if we lose to a worse team, we will lose more. Why then does Friend 4, not win MORE or lose LESS because he is at the bottom of the skill pool?

[Kryil-]

The argument is not whether or not I am more skilled. The argument is that because I joined up with the party of friends, the matchmaking would pit us against more difficult opponents. Say for arguments sake, it worked like this:

Me: 4000
Friend 1: 3500
Friend 2: 3500
Friend 3: 3000
Friend 4: 3000

It stands to reason that we should play against a similar party due to the matchmaking rating. If we play against a better team, we should win more, but if we lose to a worse team, we will lose more. Why then does Friend 4, not win MORE or lose LESS because he is at the bottom of the skill pool?

To avoid being carried probably. According to some people, your matchmaking rating seem to change based on your teams average MMR and your enemies average MMR, meaning the MMR change for all is the same. No guarantee on that though (got no official source).

[GrIdL0cK]

To avoid being carried probably. According to some people, your matchmaking rating seem to change based on your teams average MMR and your enemies average MMR, meaning the MMR change for all is the same. No guarantee on that though (got no official source).

I see what you are saying, but theoretically, if Valve's MMR is working as intented, ie. as accurate is possible, it's unlikely for Friends 3 and 4 to be "carried" as you put it, because their skill level is lower than that of 80% of the people playing in the current game.

[potisoldat]

The argument is not whether or not I am more skilled. The argument is that because I joined up with the party of friends, the matchmaking would pit us against more difficult opponents. Say for arguments sake, it worked like this:

Me: 4000
Friend 1: 3500
Friend 2: 3500
Friend 3: 3000
Friend 4: 3000

It stands to reason that we should play against a similar party due to the matchmaking rating. If we play against a better team, we should win more, but if we lose to a worse team, we will lose more. Why then does Friend 4, not win MORE or lose LESS because he is at the bottom of the skill pool?

If it worked by that then your friends would be consistently dragging your party MMR down (as you would lose more and win less) while you would be pushing theirs up. So if you later queued with different party system would strongly underrate you, and if Friend 4 queued with different party then system would strongly overrate him.
Not saying that current party MMR system is ideal, but I don't really see your suggestion as improvement.

[GrIdL0cK]

Thanks for your feedback.

I'm not suggesting that it be changed by a HUGE amount. But wrap your head around this example.

Team 1: Team 2:
A: 4100 A: 4600
B: 3800 B: 3600
C: 3500 C: 3200
D: 3000 D: 3000
E: 2800 E: 2600

Total: 17200 vs 17000

The game seems relatively even. Should Team 1 win, they will get less MMR, based on experience, lets guess +24 for each party member. If Team 2 should win, it's an unexpected result, so say +32. Obviously the losing team in each scenario would lose out on the same amount of points.

I'm suggesting the following.

Due to A being the highest rated party member of Team 1, should they win, he should receive +15. Since E is the lowest, (and Dota 2 is a team game), he should receive the highest, say +30. This then gives E a chance to rise more quickly due to the fact that he is Party Match Making and to achieve the win, he would have needed to play his part.

Should Team 1 lose, A should be decreased by a larger amount since they were supposed to win. Say he loses -30 where as E wouldn't lose as much, because he's not expected to play like an absolute beast and win the game. So for eg. he can lose -15.

This way, players will still win and lose in parties but will be able to increase their rating by winning more without having to suffer huge losses when you are matched up against a ridiculously strong team. Obviously the highest person in the party will take the brunt of it since they are supposed to rally the team together and help out and advise on heroes, item builds and positioning.

Thoughts?

[pdrocaldeira]

Thanks for your feedback.

I'm not suggesting that it be changed by a HUGE amount. But wrap your head around this example.

Team 1: Team 2:
A: 4100 A: 4600
B: 3800 B: 3600
C: 3500 C: 3200
D: 3000 D: 3000
E: 2800 E: 2600

Total: 17200 vs 17000

The game seems relatively even. Should Team 1 win, they will get less MMR, based on experience, lets guess +24 for each party member. If Team 2 should win, it's an unexpected result, so say +32. Obviously the losing team in each scenario would lose out on the same amount of points.

I'm suggesting the following.

Due to A being the highest rated party member of Team 1, should they win, he should receive +15. Since E is the lowest, (and Dota 2 is a team game), he should receive the highest, say +30. This then gives E a chance to rise more quickly due to the fact that he is Party Match Making and to achieve the win, he would have needed to play his part.

Should Team 1 lose, A should be decreased by a larger amount since they were supposed to win. Say he loses -30 where as E wouldn't lose as much, because he's not expected to play like an absolute beast and win the game. So for eg. he can lose -15.

This way, players will still win and lose in parties but will be able to increase their rating by winning more without having to suffer huge losses when you are matched up against a ridiculously strong team. Obviously the highest person in the party will take the brunt of it since they are supposed to rally the team together and help out and advise on heroes, item builds and positioning.

Thoughts?

But look at Team 2. They have the "worst" player at the game. The gap between 'A' and 'E' is huge.
Let's use the 2.A player point of view, get on her feet. Using your words, he's supposed to "rally the team together", "help", "advise" and etc.
This is not so easy, look at this forum, so many low skilled players so confident they're the top percentage of Dota 2. You'll get some hard job to convince them and make things work.

I got your point and it really makes sense, players tend to learn more playing with experienced players. But, after all, MMR it's just a number. If your friend it's learning fast, playing with you, his MMR will rise naturally.