TG rating will be fixed when TheViper, Yo, vivi, Lyx, miguel, Nicov, Villese, TheMax etc. will be able to queue up for TGs and get matched together
Instead of needing a Steam group
Take some part of the 1v1 rating into account for TG matchmaking, I supposewhat possible system could be put in place to ensure this happens?
As I said in a previous post, unless you play an equal amount of 1v1s as team games and have similar skills in both how can you combine 1v1 rating to accommodate this? I’d say 90% of the players I play against have vastly uneven amounts of experience with team games and 1v1s. Some players will have a 12xx 1v1 rating but have played 15 and won 12... and others will have an 1800 rating and have played 2 lost 2. Neither player is at their true rating and get both with be 2.1k team with 500 games played and a roughly 50% win rate!
it’s only the experts where we can safely say ‘ok Hera etc are definitely 2k5, therefore they should also be top ranked team players.’
They don't "need" a steam group - they do it because its just better. Lobby teamgames >>>>> ranked TG.TG rating will be fixed when TheViper, Yo, vivi, Lyx, miguel, Nicov, Villese, TheMax etc. will be able to queue up for TGs and get matched together
Instead of needing a Steam group
I wonder how long it would take the developers to change the method that calculates TG elo gains so that it uses opponent average rather than opponent max. It seems like such a simple fix to implement to me.
If the playerbase is much larger now and many of these players only play a few ranked TG then it would drag the median elo down so your second point and first point compromise each other.@DaisyChain There are mainly three reasons
1) TG elo not being zero-summed results an overall inflation in elo. This was a way bigger issue before they fixed the TG matchmaking tho, in April 2020 the median elo was like 13XX and now its just like 1500. Not to mention the player base is a lot bigger now.
2) There are more players on the TG ladder, making elo distribution more widespread. Also note that casual noobs tend to check all the queues when they first play ranked, making them more likely to inject elo into the TG ladder before they quit ranked for getting destroyed.
3) There are more uncertainty / variations in TGs. In 1v1s, a 100 elo difference makes a matchup 60|40, and if you die you die. In TGs, one single player being 100elo higher isnt that big of a deal. And even if someone dies, his teammate might still manage to hard carry. With the same K-factor, even if the TG algorithm isnt "broken", players still need to play more games than 1v1s to get to their real elo.
Who knows? Their whole process is so opaque it is hard to tell what the actual problem is. Maybe they want to do more but they are under pressure from Microsoft to prioritize things like the pointless MOBA mimicry events each month or maybe they are just woefully incompetent at what they are doing so they lack the ability to meaningfully engage with their playerbase. Maybe it is both. We couldn't know without transparent communication from them but it seems like there has never really been that.I don't think they even know it's a problem? Do they play the game? I say it because they are so many easy fixes for anoying issues (that you notice grinding) and they keep ignoring patch after patch.
You know only the players who have played at least one game in last 28 days stay on the ladder, dont you?If the playerbase is much larger now and many of these players only play a few ranked TG then it would drag the median elo down so your second point and first point compromise each other.
No I did not. If that is the case then they have much less of an effect compromising your point about median ELO that I originally thought. Still I am not sure if the median ELO says too much about the ELO loss/gain disparity being fixed when we have recent feedback from higher level players still complaining about it.You know only the players who have played at least one game in last 28 days stay on the ladder, dont you?