Issues With Legend Matchmaking Have Been Resolved
Since the new ranked season, Legend players have been encountering oddities with their matchmaking system. After numerous reports by players across social media, Blizzard acknowledged the issue earlier today and got a fix out eight hours later.
Quote from Jesse HillThe team has been monitoring Ranked Play since coming back online last week. We are currently looking into potential issues surrounding Legend rank. We will update as more information becomes available.
We recently identified an issue where some Legend ranked players were being matched with players of a lower ranking than intended. A hotfix has gone out to remedy this issue. Legend ranked players should now experience intended matchmaking in Ranked Play. Thank you for your patience.
It’s people just fucking around, chill
It has always been the same, from rank 5 to legend, only 3 or 4 meta decks. I guess you didn’t notice ? One sure thing is that your win rate does not only rely on your draws
Oh yes, thanks Blizz for the amazing experience and for the fast reaction!:) Oh wait.....
http://imgur.com/dDNt5xn
Btw this was half an hour ago, but maybe it is just the fair "intended matchmaking".
Fun and interactive. Right? Right???
All what I saw on your screenshot was a Legend player playing against a L5G4ND player. Looks like matchmaking is working fine.
OMG! You are right!
I confused the poor matchmaking system with my name, I guess I'll have to change it:'D
It was a good experience to be honest :) Sure, it is unfair to be ranked with someone who is legend and you are rank 10 but at least the games weren't all bad :)
Amusingly, such a matchup is "unfair" to both parties involved
At legend, your rank is determined by an MMR. People who have not reached it yet still have an MMR, but it's hidden. A rank 10 player's MMR is so low that it would cause the legend player to lose ranks even if they win. For awhile, the best way for legend players to rank up was to not play at all and wait for everyone else to derank for winning games :)
I really doubt that you would lose MMR by winning against a vastly inferior opponent. As it happens in Starcraft, at worst you would gain 0 MMR. You may however lose ranks (NOT MMR!) after a won match, but that's common even among Legend players, as you may gain little to no MMR and some players behind you may just gain some positions during the timeframe of your game, thus surpassing you and making you seem to have lost MMR, while instead you may have even gained some, but lost positions because many behind have just gained more MMR than you in the same time.
It's however true that this is a card game, and not Starcraft, so even if you ARE a better player than a rank 10 opponent (at least in the long run) you may very well lose a game, and a ton of MMR, just by being unlucky. But that's the unfair nature of card games after all..
I dropped from legend 25xx to 43xx losing 3 and winning 20 games. Lose was like -300/500 ranks while winning -2/40
MMR = Match Making Rank. Not a very often found abbreviation, I'm not quite certain why he used it. My first thought went to the MMR vaccine strange enough :) .
MMR is actually quite commonly used but not when talking about ranked. There is actually an MMR system installed into casual so that new players don’t get matched up with experienced players. Unfortunately it does not work all too well atm. :(
Match Making Rating - basically means to be matched with people of equal or at least similar skill. I am not sure if the exact formula for HS is shared somewhere but it probably has to do with your overall win rating, games you've played, times you've achieved legend, etc.
I agree, regardless of your opponent winning is winning and should never ever lower your rank. Furthermore if you win in legend your rank gets closer to that TOP 1 EU so this can't be deranking in any way.
MMR is a number that stands for your actual "strength" in a game. It comes from chess, and it's used in many online games too, like Starcraft for example. It's however often hidden from the player, who sees only a more "friendly" rank representation. In Hearthstone, I'm unsure there's a real MMR until you get to Legend, given how your only gain/lose a single star each game, but it's surely there in Legend, both for matchmaking and for deciding how much MMR you gain/lose everygame. MMR is hidden however, and you only see your ranking relative to your MMR compared to other legends' MMRs. That's the reason why you may lose legend ranks even if you win: you gain MMR, but in the meantime others have gained more than you, so your relative ranking lowers even if your MMR rises.
Speaking about MMR, it's probably the most fair way to evaluate one's ability in a game: the mathematics behind isn't rocket science, but it's not too easy either. To the core, however, the idea is that you are expected to draw against players of your same MMR, win against lower ones, and lose against higher ones. Depending on how much MMR difference there is among the two players, the MMR shift changes in value (MMR is always transfered in value, you never gain more than your opponent loses).
Just an example: a 5000 MMR players (A) plays against a 6000 MMR one (B). The following numbers are made up, and depends on coefficients decided by the game owner, but you may expect something along these lines:
- player B wins. As it is expected to win against a vastly weaker opponent, he gains just a few points. Let's say he gains 2 points, and A then loses 2
- player A wins. That's unexpected by the game. In games heavily based on luck like hearthstone it may happen anyway, but it's rare in games where the abilities usually decides the winner on its own. That makes the game think that it has wrong MMR values for the players: that A is actually far stronger, and B far weaker than their MMR are representing. So B loses a lot of points, let's say 80, and B gains the same amount
- there's a draw. In a certain sense, it's not much different than the above, just less sever: B was expected to win, so a draw is still a very bad result for him. Let's say B loses 40 points, A gains 40.
This method works very well because it gives/takes points according not only to your results, but also considering the ability of the opponent against whom you got that result. It also helps you raise your MMR very quickly if you are far stronger than your actual MMR.
Being a bit more complex for the average user, it's often hidden, and in Heartstone it's used only in Legend ranking, while below that you gain or lose stars just one by one, in a very boring way. But it's probably true that behind that there's still an MMR, both for the cases when you are matched against Legend players, and for deciding matchups (as you are usually matched against people of your same MMR)
Well, it's certainly about time. Was getting tired of seeing all of the posts on r/hearthstone...