i've had countless games where someone would pick a safelane hero like bloodseeker and proceed to do nothing useful/be shit all game while other team has their typical furion + tinker + lycan/tb push strats knocking down all t2 towers by 20 minutes. games like those are going to be lost over 90% of the time no matter how much you try to accommodate your team and it's better not to dwell on them. for this reason alone i usually take safelane carry since people are far less likely to pick a shitty hero for mid or offlane
although people say it's a "cheap way to gain mmr" i have not run into this problem nearly as often by queuing -cd mode. picks are fairly balanced (it's rare to get outpicked horribly even when i don't do the picks cuz i'm too lazy to) and people are much less reluctant to support me.
the catch is that there are very few players > 4.5k who queue -cd/-cm so if ur over 5k it's really just free wins rolling in and you'll probably get flamed by other 5k players for "abusing" the system. speaking of which i think this is a good way to recover lost points whenever u lose 2-3 -ap games cuz people on ur team refuse to pick decent heroes
from my experience loss streaks happen this way - your team picks like shit in 2-3 games and you're sick of adapting to them, so then you pick whatever YOU want to play and try to have them adapt to you (but of course they don't...) etc.
@HǣL
"Does anyone have a replay of someone snowballing out of control in a shitty 3k pool where the teammates are doing awful and or feeding on purpose?"
We still lost this match, thanks to dedicated Slark feeder 0/33/0, but Axe was epic. Most people don't know what to do when Axe goes behind their tier 1 and intercepts creeps there.
I actually don't fully believe in the "If you are better than your rating you will get out of your current rating" claim. The people that have done those experiments were 5k players. 5k players understand the game (you'd be surprised) a shit load more than 4k players and they piss all over 2k-3k players. But what if you are a 4500 players stuck in a 3700 pool? Is his difference big enough for him to get out of it? There is a good chance he plays heroes better than his teammates, gets more xpm and gpm, can play more heroes efficiently, always has a nice k/d but he can only go up 100 points and fall 100 points.
the dynamics have to be severely in your favor in order to beat it. 4k players know how to play Dota but 5k players know how to win. Thats the difference in that. But I bet a legit 4k player would have a lot of trouble getting out of a 3k pool. Same goes for a 3k getting out of a 2k and a 2k getting out of a 1k.
I don't think teams necessarily hold you back in those ratings. I think people have a clash with the attitude and perspective of the players since they are all confused on what to do as i said. 5k players know how to win 4k players know how to play. When I played in high 4k there was still clashing going on with certain people but at least they went logical builds rather than going daedalus Wisp and justifying it with some hogwash theory.
i've never dropped below 4200 rating, and my 5200 mmr friend has never dropped below 4700 even though we've both had vicious, consecutive loss streaks several times since ranked came out. basically if you're playing at a mmr 500 points below your average, you will shoot up very quickly. a 4500 player should win over 75% of his games at 3700 and once he hits 4000 he should slow down a bit to maybe 60-65% win rate
i don't know why you assume 5000 is some magic number that turns people into demigods, do you think there's a huge difference between someone rated 5000 and 4900? or 5001 and 4999? 5k is just a rough threshold and a psychologically satisfying number, not an absolute
and to answer your first point, the reason these experiments were done by 5k players is so that people CAN'T claim there is "elo hell" anywhere below 5k. if you get a 4.5k player to do this experiment, and he ends at 4.5k, you would still get retards who claim there is elo hell after 4.5k.
No I don't think 5k people are some kind of demi gods, but from observation it seems 4.5k and up have a more consistent grasp on the game, thus allowing them to get to the point they need to be. If you had a low 4k player start out at 1kmmr and work his way up I think a good 50% of them will get stuck at a high 3k not like 3999 but more like 3600-3700. What i'm saying is that it takes a certain place in Dota to realize what needs to be done in order to increase your mmr and at 4500+ thats when the highest percentage of people start realizing. There are people in 4k and I know people can agree with me on this, that do not seem like they should be at 4k. They got 4300 coming out of ranked and now they cant even play up to par with the 4300 players. So another flaw where people are being places higher than they should and have no clue to maintain. There are also high 3k players that play better and know more than the 3k players but have no drive and/or consensus about the ways of winning a game. NOT ONLY that but you cannot place attitude in the correct rating.
So you have high 3k players that watch tournies and want to get to 4k and you have other 3k that play to have fun and fuck around. That 3k player may get out soon enough, but some people are kinesthetic learners. They need hands on to actually understand. Not everyone has a superb learning ability. People can watch tournaments and see whats going on, but wont understand why its going on. Sometimes those few selected 3k players that want to improve need to be thrown to the wolves and fed to 4k players before they realize. Skill level and game knowledge is not the only thing that comes to rating and MMR doesnt measure anything beyond that.
Then maybe there should be a way or a feature in dota that allows people to find roles or like minded people rather than terrible troll forums in order to find a good team and make team matchmaking more of a thing.
it is fairly easy to form a team atm. The issue you have is that you are so delusional about your skill level that you buy accounts ruin games so that nobody ever adds you to team with.
1. Your MMR is just a number indicating what the game thinks your skill level is. It is also a fairly accurate indicator over time. More time = more accurate. Keep in mind this is an indicator of how well you actually perform, and it is NOT an indicator of how well you sometimes play. Every game on your account is factored in, not just the ones where you were alert, sober, happy, trying hard, and using serious builds.
2. The closer you get to your "true" MMR, the slower you will close the gap. So if you put a 5k MMR player into a 1k MMR account he will dominate, but the closer to 5k MMR the harder it gets to rise, and the slower his MMR will rise. I agree a 5k player could get stuck in the upper 4ks for a while, but eventually he would be expected to reach 5k.
3. Your MMR is not static, and neither is your skill. They can change over time, meaning as you improve, you can get better. The better you get, typically the higher your MMR will go. You can also get worse, or continually play under conditions where you will be at sub-optimal skill. If you played 100 straight games drunk, for example, then your MMR will certainly drop, despite your skill being better than that.
4. I think too many players in solo ranked matchmaking play with this "I'm all alone" mentality. I always communicate with my team via voice chat if they have it, or text if they don't. If you have 2-3 ppl on your team all acting like they're are the most important member of the team, and all three try to 1v9, you're going to have a shit game against anyone other than awful opponents. There is an art to getting on your teammates good side, quickly assessing their strengths/weaknesses, and trying to coordinate with them. Before ppl shout but Russian/Peruvian blah blah blah, no, not all games have ppl you can effectively communicate with. But not all games are full of non-English speakers either.
Really I think the best way to improve MMR is to ignore it. Focus on becoming a better player. A player focusing 100% on being 1v9 is ignoring a huge part of the game.
"Really I think the best way to improve MMR is to ignore it. Focus on becoming a better player. A player focusing 100% on being 1v9 is ignoring a huge part of the game. "
If this is really what it comes down to, Why was ranked matchmaking even bitched about in the first place? We do not need to number.
Also, for a game where someone carried his team I played against a mid/high 4k invoker who pretty much secured the win for his team.
Match 624613016
As a point of reference, I'm the highest MMR on my team (both teams were 5-stacks if I remember correctly), and my MMR at the time was maybe 3350.
Invoker's MMR was balanced by their mid 2k shadow shaman. The CK was also low MMR.
I think I was mid against invoker, something I've never attempted as pugna before. Needless to say I could tell from the outset I was outmatched mid. Plus Invoker is this guy's only char pretty much 1,196 games played on invoker.
If you want to watch an aggressive player who takes advantage of being better than his opponents, watch some of his plays against us.
@HǣL I was first calibrated at 2900 mmr and ive been winning my way to my current 3900 and the games arent that hard yet so yeah anyone can get out of the bracket if the player doesnt belong there
i'm pretty sure everyone has games where they went 0-xx and their teammates thought "why did i get matched with this retard?" it only feels unbearable if ur on the receiving end of having a 0-xx teammate for several games in a row, but that's bound to happen given the statistical odds of having bad teammates (similar to having several tails/heads in a row on coin flips...)
best solution is to stop playing after 2-3 losses in a row
if u "really care about being with players with good attitudes" what is stopping you from finding a few friends who you enjoy playing with? do u seriously expect everyone to have great attitudes when paired up with 4 strangers?
you usually always find two different types of people. people who dont want to get better and play for fun or people who think they are the best and don't need to improve. Its hard to find inbetween. Usually the better and more willing to learn the person is the better their attitude is too.
Будь ласка, увійдіть до системи для написання коментарів.
i've had countless games where someone would pick a safelane hero like bloodseeker and proceed to do nothing useful/be shit all game while other team has their typical furion + tinker + lycan/tb push strats knocking down all t2 towers by 20 minutes. games like those are going to be lost over 90% of the time no matter how much you try to accommodate your team and it's better not to dwell on them. for this reason alone i usually take safelane carry since people are far less likely to pick a shitty hero for mid or offlane
although people say it's a "cheap way to gain mmr" i have not run into this problem nearly as often by queuing -cd mode. picks are fairly balanced (it's rare to get outpicked horribly even when i don't do the picks cuz i'm too lazy to) and people are much less reluctant to support me.
the catch is that there are very few players > 4.5k who queue -cd/-cm so if ur over 5k it's really just free wins rolling in and you'll probably get flamed by other 5k players for "abusing" the system. speaking of which i think this is a good way to recover lost points whenever u lose 2-3 -ap games cuz people on ur team refuse to pick decent heroes
from my experience loss streaks happen this way - your team picks like shit in 2-3 games and you're sick of adapting to them, so then you pick whatever YOU want to play and try to have them adapt to you (but of course they don't...) etc.
@HǣL
"Does anyone have a replay of someone snowballing out of control in a shitty 3k pool where the teammates are doing awful and or feeding on purpose?"
I have an example.
http://dotabuff.com/matches/539102020
We still lost this match, thanks to dedicated Slark feeder 0/33/0, but Axe was epic. Most people don't know what to do when Axe goes behind their tier 1 and intercepts creeps there.
I actually don't fully believe in the "If you are better than your rating you will get out of your current rating" claim. The people that have done those experiments were 5k players. 5k players understand the game (you'd be surprised) a shit load more than 4k players and they piss all over 2k-3k players. But what if you are a 4500 players stuck in a 3700 pool? Is his difference big enough for him to get out of it? There is a good chance he plays heroes better than his teammates, gets more xpm and gpm, can play more heroes efficiently, always has a nice k/d but he can only go up 100 points and fall 100 points.
the dynamics have to be severely in your favor in order to beat it. 4k players know how to play Dota but 5k players know how to win. Thats the difference in that. But I bet a legit 4k player would have a lot of trouble getting out of a 3k pool. Same goes for a 3k getting out of a 2k and a 2k getting out of a 1k.
I don't think teams necessarily hold you back in those ratings. I think people have a clash with the attitude and perspective of the players since they are all confused on what to do as i said. 5k players know how to win 4k players know how to play. When I played in high 4k there was still clashing going on with certain people but at least they went logical builds rather than going daedalus Wisp and justifying it with some hogwash theory.
#Averagethreadondotabuff
#Myteamisholdingmeback
i've never dropped below 4200 rating, and my 5200 mmr friend has never dropped below 4700 even though we've both had vicious, consecutive loss streaks several times since ranked came out. basically if you're playing at a mmr 500 points below your average, you will shoot up very quickly. a 4500 player should win over 75% of his games at 3700 and once he hits 4000 he should slow down a bit to maybe 60-65% win rate
i don't know why you assume 5000 is some magic number that turns people into demigods, do you think there's a huge difference between someone rated 5000 and 4900? or 5001 and 4999? 5k is just a rough threshold and a psychologically satisfying number, not an absolute
and to answer your first point, the reason these experiments were done by 5k players is so that people CAN'T claim there is "elo hell" anywhere below 5k. if you get a 4.5k player to do this experiment, and he ends at 4.5k, you would still get retards who claim there is elo hell after 4.5k.
no matter how many people prove Hael wrong he will ocntinue to be delusional
No I don't think 5k people are some kind of demi gods, but from observation it seems 4.5k and up have a more consistent grasp on the game, thus allowing them to get to the point they need to be. If you had a low 4k player start out at 1kmmr and work his way up I think a good 50% of them will get stuck at a high 3k not like 3999 but more like 3600-3700. What i'm saying is that it takes a certain place in Dota to realize what needs to be done in order to increase your mmr and at 4500+ thats when the highest percentage of people start realizing. There are people in 4k and I know people can agree with me on this, that do not seem like they should be at 4k. They got 4300 coming out of ranked and now they cant even play up to par with the 4300 players. So another flaw where people are being places higher than they should and have no clue to maintain. There are also high 3k players that play better and know more than the 3k players but have no drive and/or consensus about the ways of winning a game. NOT ONLY that but you cannot place attitude in the correct rating.
So you have high 3k players that watch tournies and want to get to 4k and you have other 3k that play to have fun and fuck around. That 3k player may get out soon enough, but some people are kinesthetic learners. They need hands on to actually understand. Not everyone has a superb learning ability. People can watch tournaments and see whats going on, but wont understand why its going on. Sometimes those few selected 3k players that want to improve need to be thrown to the wolves and fed to 4k players before they realize. Skill level and game knowledge is not the only thing that comes to rating and MMR doesnt measure anything beyond that.
MM is how well you preform in pubs. If you have a low MM it is because you suck in pubs
Then maybe there should be a way or a feature in dota that allows people to find roles or like minded people rather than terrible troll forums in order to find a good team and make team matchmaking more of a thing.
it is fairly easy to form a team atm. The issue you have is that you are so delusional about your skill level that you buy accounts ruin games so that nobody ever adds you to team with.
1. Your MMR is just a number indicating what the game thinks your skill level is. It is also a fairly accurate indicator over time. More time = more accurate. Keep in mind this is an indicator of how well you actually perform, and it is NOT an indicator of how well you sometimes play. Every game on your account is factored in, not just the ones where you were alert, sober, happy, trying hard, and using serious builds.
2. The closer you get to your "true" MMR, the slower you will close the gap. So if you put a 5k MMR player into a 1k MMR account he will dominate, but the closer to 5k MMR the harder it gets to rise, and the slower his MMR will rise. I agree a 5k player could get stuck in the upper 4ks for a while, but eventually he would be expected to reach 5k.
3. Your MMR is not static, and neither is your skill. They can change over time, meaning as you improve, you can get better. The better you get, typically the higher your MMR will go. You can also get worse, or continually play under conditions where you will be at sub-optimal skill. If you played 100 straight games drunk, for example, then your MMR will certainly drop, despite your skill being better than that.
4. I think too many players in solo ranked matchmaking play with this "I'm all alone" mentality. I always communicate with my team via voice chat if they have it, or text if they don't. If you have 2-3 ppl on your team all acting like they're are the most important member of the team, and all three try to 1v9, you're going to have a shit game against anyone other than awful opponents. There is an art to getting on your teammates good side, quickly assessing their strengths/weaknesses, and trying to coordinate with them. Before ppl shout but Russian/Peruvian blah blah blah, no, not all games have ppl you can effectively communicate with. But not all games are full of non-English speakers either.
Really I think the best way to improve MMR is to ignore it. Focus on becoming a better player. A player focusing 100% on being 1v9 is ignoring a huge part of the game.
"I feel I am better than those people" topic #9001
"Really I think the best way to improve MMR is to ignore it. Focus on becoming a better player. A player focusing 100% on being 1v9 is ignoring a huge part of the game. "
If this is really what it comes down to, Why was ranked matchmaking even bitched about in the first place? We do not need to number.
^ I have no idea.
Also, for a game where someone carried his team I played against a mid/high 4k invoker who pretty much secured the win for his team.
Match 624613016
As a point of reference, I'm the highest MMR on my team (both teams were 5-stacks if I remember correctly), and my MMR at the time was maybe 3350.
Invoker's MMR was balanced by their mid 2k shadow shaman. The CK was also low MMR.
I think I was mid against invoker, something I've never attempted as pugna before. Needless to say I could tell from the outset I was outmatched mid. Plus Invoker is this guy's only char pretty much 1,196 games played on invoker.
If you want to watch an aggressive player who takes advantage of being better than his opponents, watch some of his plays against us.
@HǣL I was first calibrated at 2900 mmr and ive been winning my way to my current 3900 and the games arent that hard yet so yeah anyone can get out of the bracket if the player doesnt belong there
look how much my MM tanks when I practice on BS, shows how accurate MM is.
i'm pretty sure everyone has games where they went 0-xx and their teammates thought "why did i get matched with this retard?" it only feels unbearable if ur on the receiving end of having a 0-xx teammate for several games in a row, but that's bound to happen given the statistical odds of having bad teammates (similar to having several tails/heads in a row on coin flips...)
best solution is to stop playing after 2-3 losses in a row
psh real men keep going even after they go on a 6 game loss streak......
I'm less concerned about being with skills players. What I really care about is being with players with good attitudes.
havoc pls share mine :D
Month
6.79c
6.80
6.81
if u "really care about being with players with good attitudes" what is stopping you from finding a few friends who you enjoy playing with? do u seriously expect everyone to have great attitudes when paired up with 4 strangers?
you usually always find two different types of people. people who dont want to get better and play for fun or people who think they are the best and don't need to improve. Its hard to find inbetween. Usually the better and more willing to learn the person is the better their attitude is too.