Should MMR be shown in game?
I saw a comment recently that basically said most people think they're better than they really are, and they think their own ideas of what needs to be buffed or nerfed is absolutely correct and no one else is.
Would it help if people actually knew where they stood as far as MMR is? I mean obviously anyone can lie on a forum but I'm talking about having people who actually have proof of being high skill players giving their ideas and thoughts on what is and isn't good in the game. (Other than the few well known content creators as there isn't enough to get a big enough sample IMO)
In other rank based games for example, you would never listen to a bronze or silver ranked player calling for a nerf to something they perceive as OP, when the platinum and diamond ranked players don't see any issues with it, and have clear counterplay. It would be laughable to listen to the low ranks.
But then of course DBD isn't meant to be a super competitive game which then begs the question of should we balance the game for high skill players or the larger majority of low skill players? Obviously money says the low skill majority but taking out that fact, and every single factor OTHER than gameplay that is the fairest it could possibly be, what should we be asking to balance the game around?
Comments
-
No, it absolutely shouldn't be- I've been in game communities where you know where you're placed, and it invariably makes the conversation surrounding game health much worse. You touched on why yourself- "you would never listen to a bronze or silver ranked player", as though skill in game automatically translates to understanding of the game, and vice versa. You don't need more reasons to discard people's opinions before you've even read them, my friend.
Also, this game doesn't use MMR the way that other games do. It's just a matchmaking tool, not a progression system like those games, so it makes even less sense to see what your rank is.
For the last question: Like every game in existence, you balance for all the ranks, not just one section.
7 -
I wouldn’t mind if they made it so instead of seeing everybody’s grades on the endgame screen you saw a rough bracket of their MMR rating. So divide the hidden ratings into roughly 5% percentile brackets, numbered 20 to 1 for instance, and show which percentile bracket the player is in. It would give you a better idea of how good or bad your opponents were in that match compared to your own, and it would eliminate the confusion some people have that Grades are used for matchmaking.
Display your own personal Grade at the top right as usual since Grades are used for rewards once a month, but it’s pretty irrelevant to know what Grades your opponents are.
1 -
Now imagine if BHVR had made MMR dependent on other factors. Then there would be only farm rounds which would be a disaster for DBD. That's why I think the developers have chosen the right way: Namely to go for Escape and Killrates. But to come back to your thread: The answer is clear: no because of ( toxic city )
1 -
I would want it just to silence all these ignorant people saying this in the forums:
1 -
Not necessarily for everyone to see, but at least for yourself. I get into a lot of matches where I wonder, "why was I put against/with these people?"
3 -
How does it make worse? If player A is master and player B is noob, player B shouldn't be expected to discuss balance. It will avoid a lot of unnecessary complains about how something is broken just because player B refuses to get bettter.
0 -
As I said, the ability to play a game and a thorough understanding of the game's balance, design, and needed fixes are fundamentally different knowledge bases. You can absolutely have both, or you can have just one.
The only thing Player A should be trusted on in your example is what a winning strategy with the game as it currently stands looks like. Player B may have a much better understanding of how the game functions, what the game's mechanics are designed for, and what the root causes of the game's problems actually are, despite getting flustered or not having particularly good reaction times when they're actually in a match.
The two concepts aren't linked. You can be a top tier player while having absolutely zero understanding of how game balance works, and vice versa.
1 -
How are u going to outplay other guy without understanding how u did it? U can't just be player A with zero understanding about how game works, while u say player B can be random guy with 0h 13m game time and already pretend he understands what needs to be nerfed and buffed.
This just makes no sense.
0 -
A lot of people in these forums would be in for a nasty surprise i think if mmr was revealed
2 -
Everyone including me - suck. While we can discuss multiple things we don't play even close perfectly. Problem is people refuse to admit it and pretend they are better than others. That's why MMR, stats and other information needs to be revealed. it encourages people to get better instead of fighting about X numbers none knows.
0 -
You misunderstand- you can't outplay the other guy without understanding how you did it, but you need much more than that to accurately and adequately talk about game balance.
Being a top tier player only requires that you understand the game as it is. Understanding how to fix the game, or what's causing any of the specific problems with the game, requires a much, much broader scope than that. Top tier killer mains could (and currently do!) hyper-focus on what's causing them issues in their games, while completely disregarding how those things play for the survivor side, or how they play for lower ranked players.
Game balance is not the same topic as game strategy. Someone with a very broad and nuanced understanding of how to balance a game doesn't need to be able to play it particularly well to achieve that understanding, there's a difference between mechanical skill and theoretical knowledge.
0 -
Current mmr doesn't actually measure skill, but I want to see it to see if the system is even functioning, if the other players I'm matched with are of roughly similar ratings, etc.
0 -
It doesn't explain why data should be hidden. It only explains that player A can be wrong. And as i see it, hidden data only promotes wrong feedback.
Let's make it simple: Legion is broken OP? (I know few survivors who want to nerf him). It's just a simple example that shows how feedback can be wrong because it came from player B who saw easy it is to hit 4 survivors and that Legion has 50%+ kill rate. And there are multiple similar situations that come from different people. Also there is no personal information to even track as how good I am myself unless I write it down on paper.
1 -
What it explains isn't just that Player A can be wrong, but that they're only very slightly less likely to be wrong to begin with, because the acclaim they have required a different skillset. Regardless.
You have it backwards- that isn't the reason the data should be hidden, it's that there is no reason for the data not to be. MMR is just a matchmaking tool, you don't need to see it to know how good you are at the game because it's not that kind of system. OP suggested that being able to dismiss people's arguments out of hand because they're low rank was a reason to show MMR, and I'm responding to that to explain why it isn't.
Hidden data doesn't promote wrong feedback, it promotes evaluating feedback for yourself instead of going "well they're high MMR so they must be right", or "well they're low MMR so they must be wrong". We do not need more reasons to start dismissing arguments without even considering them- if someone's clearly wrong, then you should be able to deduce that they're clearly wrong without turning to what their rank is to figure it out.
0 -
Should you see your own? Maybe.
Should you see others? Most definitely not, that would be the most vile, incessantly argumentative thing they could add to this game. People still complain about others ranks despite that not even being a dedicated factor into skill, only time.
0 -
I understand what you're saying, however I was thinking more along the lines of trying to explain to a lower rank player why their thinking may be flawed, and if they refuse to accept any sort of logic and reason, to give them proof of being wrong by simply showing them they are low rank, so whatever they've been doing has not been working for them for one reason or another, this proving there is a flaw in their thought process. For example, and I'm not going to say any names, but there was a post a couple days ago asking if Beast of Prey was actually a really good and underrated perk. And no matter how many people responded with explanation after explanation and reason after reason, the person just would not accept that he/she was wrong about the perk and even claimed to be using it to their advantage at high mmr which is incredibly doubtful and unlikely, I'm sure you'd agree
0 -
I would like MMR to be visible so I can see if I’m getting matched up correctly or not.
1 -
While that's a noble goal, you straight up don't ever need to invoke rank for those kinds of things. Nobody likes hearing "you're just trash", regardless of how well-intentioned or nicely-phrased it is, so mentioning that is only going to worsen your chances of convincing that person.
Like I said, with this system people are all but forced to take every argument on its merits instead of resorting to listening to higher-ranked players. That, or they just assume, which admittedly happens more often. Rank shouldn't really enter balance discussions like this, the ranks of the people having the discussion is only rarely very relevant and when it is there's no reason to start the "well you're a lower rank player so you wouldn't understand" spiel because it simply doesn't hold any logical weight beyond a moderate amount of correlation.
0 -
no it removes the whole point of the MMR system and brings back problems that where present in the rank based system
0 -
U don't need to convince anyone. U show them stats that prove they're wrong. If they don't care, it's upon them. And without any rank u can hear trash in aftergame chat or here just in different words so it's not an excuse. Like look at all both side complains about *bad teammates, bad killer, sweat squads and so on*. People call each other [Bad words] just in tolerant manner.
0 -
True, but at a certain point that "moderate amount of correlation" has to mean something. At least in terms of current game mechanics. As far trying to suggest a change or fix, I agree that everyones opinions should be heard to a degree. So that kinda feeds into my second question of what should the game be balanced around, the smaller amount of higher skill players, or the larger majority of average to lower skilled players. Should we as a community be looking at the top of the top and going "hey yeah we should fix this and that because at its peak it's not fair" or should it be "hey we need to look at these things that cause a problem for all but the best players, who ultimately can probably work around most obstacles anyway regardless of how unfair and unfun it may be for them"
0 -
The answer is "both" and it's why game balance/design is so difficult. You can't focus on one group, no matter which group that is, you need to take all of them into account and craft solutions that hopefully work adequately for everyone.
Deification of the top tier is fine for a community, but the developers have to take it a little more seriously than that. To BHVR's credit, they do seem to know this- they're just questionably good at actually acting on it.
1 -
Yeah, that's a fair answer. And also true as far as what BHVR has been trying to do. I guess maybe it's just not all that possible to 100% balance for ends of the spectrum at the same time though. And that causes a large divide and ultimately leaves a lot of people upset or wanting more
0 -
Of course. The only made up reason to hide it is irrelevant now since the devs disclosed the algorithm, so now they seem to hide it just to hide the fact it doesn't work as intended.
0 -
Yes, so we can see if it's working properly (which I would not be surprised if it isn't).
0 -
No, it would not help and would lead to a toxic situation where the 2200s consider the 2000s to be scrubs who consider the 1800s to be scrubs who consider the 1500s scrubs, etc etc. DbD is not a competitive esport and, as stated, the focus should be on all sections having fun; not just a small section. Another game example is from WoW their 'balancing' for esports hurt players in different situations (just an example from the past, I started in closed beta and finally quit in Cataclysm due to that; I have no idea what it's like now).
As game developers, BHVR needs to work on trying to ensure as many as possible have fun, not just one section.
0 -
Considering that it literally doesn't measure skill, it might as well be visible.
It's a stat that is not indicative of player quality. It's just a way to make players have a 50% win rate.
0
