I imagine that the Blizzard matchmaker tries to match parties of 6 against other parties of 6 since a 6 stack of friends is likely to stomp a group of 6 random people. There probably aren't a ton of groups of 6 playing at any one time.
Nov 4, 2, Oct 25, 7, Ibis Island. Me and my friends joke about the matchmaking since more times than not. We get put up against hire ranks. When we start getting stomped we blame it on "It must be pro -whatever day it is'".
Oct 27, 1, Germany. At the end of the day, the ultimate result of any matchmaking exercise is that losses are going to feel worse than wins; I very much doubt that you were complaining about matchmaking being terrible when your six stack was dunking on a bunch of solo queue players in similar fashion. Oct 25, 5, Singapore. Has it occurred to you that in some scenarios it is impossible to find a fair match?
Oct 27, You shouldn't be queuing in QP if you want balanced matches. I'm not even sure that your Competitive mmr even matters in QP. Also, if they really did have smurfs can you blame the system? The smurfs probably brought the group mmr down enough to match them against weaker players. Eventually they'll be matched with people at their level. Also, considering you're not even sure what their comp rankings are, they could have just had a good day while your squad was having a bad one.
Has it occurs to you that in some scenarios it is impossible to find a fair match? Oct 27, 1, Have had pretty similar experiences, and I only queue alone.
The matchmaking has really hurt me playing the game. I recently had this match: I joined a six stack random once and we keep meeting this other 6 stack like 3 times in a row.
First and most likely the last I'll ever got a 10 winning streak in one playthrough. Left the group after the 10th win because I felt bad and it seriously felt like cheating.
tomratacoles.ml I'm not that dumb. Its just lame that when a group of six friends want to group up and have some fun casual matches it shouldn't be punished. Are we going to get some bad matches?
But it shouldn't be like every fucking match. Oct 25, USA. Just talking about quick-play. Due to the nature of having no limits in terms of who can group with who, i do not think Bliz prioritizes rank. They want quick-play to be well Thus matches are going to be all over the place.
Players are matched based on several factors, including but not limited to: This article is a stub. You can help Overwatch Wiki by expanding it. Retrieved from " https: Navigation menu Namespaces Page Discussion.
Competitive play, otherwise known as ranked, fails to provide adequate, worthwhile practice for those who are currently pro and those who are striving to become pro. Furthermore, for most pros and casuals alike, it is draining and demoralizing more often than it is fun, and the collective attention of average players is fading due to the steady release of newer, arguably better, titles.
No matter the amount of money invested into Overwatch esports, its longevity is rooted in the long-term success of the game itself. Players striving to improve their skills are left at the mercy of an algorithm that places four support mains on one team and Diamond players in Grandmaster games.
Between one-tricks and team stacks, too many players of one role and not enough of another, most ranked games feel hopeless from the start. But, for ranked to facilitate the way competitive Overwatch is most effectively and commonly played, developers must first acknowledge that the game they ostensibly set out to create is not the one that currently exists.
Getting out of Elo hell". First and most likely the last I'll ever got a 10 winning streak in one playthrough. Now, as the infamous Bender B. We also see that distribution in each of the bins is approximately normal, which means that we can do things like regression and confidence intervals without too much concern of violating underlying assumptions. It does suck but I don't know what the solution really is for bigger teams.
That is, Overwatch was marketed on a dream of flexible players and frequent hero swaps, but, in practice, thrives on predictable compositions comprised of a handful of heroes, and most players — professional and otherwise — main one role and oftentimes specific characters. In competitive play, role flexibility is unrealistic and detrimental; the team that has the fewest players playing off roles or exceptionally unviable heroes is most likely to win. Thusly, for ranked to most reliably mimic a competitive environment, a role queue must be implemented, as well as separate queues for solo players and 2-stacks.
The benefit of these changes for esports is two-fold: Ideally, competitive in any game should simulate or at least closely resemble professional play because ranked play has a duty to function both as a breeding ground for up-and-coming talent and a training ground for established talent. Overhauling the current ranked system to facilitate higher quality games would make ranked more competitive and a more accurate reflection of skill. It would go a step further in cultivating an environment that allows players to perfect more than their mechanics, as well as spend less time playing off roles for the sake of a team and more time playing their chosen heroes.
For many of the same reasons, a reformed ranked queue would temper prevailing frustrations with Overwatch among average players.
In requests for players to adopt a "positive mental attitude" and a revival of the ability to avoid players as teammates, Blizzard has offered only Band-Aids for players' bullet wounds. Furthermore, the removal of performance-based SR above Diamond rank will take several seasons to impact the number of one-tricks in Masters and Grandmasters. Subtly, players have been asked over and over again to love Overwatch in spite of ranked, not because of it, and that dynamic is not sustainable. The esport's long-term success is dependent upon fans and viewership, and we have already seen the Overwatch League's viewership dip precipitously over its short lifespan.