Hey there guys,
Thank you for reaching out to us about this!
Do you happen to have any scoreboard screenshot examples to share so we can take a look?
In some instances, to allow for faster matchmaking and to balance the teams, higher ranked players may be grouped with lower ranks, thus making the average more comparable to the opposing team.
But we'd be happy to look and your experiences to ensure this fits.
Thank you!
Perhaps you could check these out, it may help the future of Siege. I've already got positive feedback from friends and on Twitter. I love this site and have been able to navigate it well.Originally Posted by Ubi-TheBerry Go to original post
https://forums.ubisoft.com/showthrea...ew-MMR-Ranking
https://forums.ubisoft.com/showthread.php/2350680-Ranking-in-North-Star
https://forums.ubisoft.com/showthread.php/2350944-Thunderbird-Changes-Needed
If a game has such a great rank disparity why should the lower rank lose MMR if they don't win against extremely bad odds?Originally Posted by Ubi-TheBerry Go to original post
Same question if 1-2 people quit really early on.
MMR system really needs a bottom up rebuild.
Hello again KillerVailes thanks for posting.
The feedback section is answered by our Siege community team, the Player Support section is more so for helping players with account related problems or bugs that appear in the game, that is where Ubisoft Support come in.
In regards to the matchmaking issues you have faced, there should be no more than a 700MMR difference between players with highest and lowest MMR, on your individual team.
Any players who do not fall into this boundary should not be able to be matched together on the same team, in the Ranked game mode when this works correctly.
For players who are matched against higher skilled players, the MMR loss is compensated by the fact that if the lower skilled players go onto win the game, they should win more MMR then usual, as the odds where uneven, this also gives these players the chance to have their skill stat raised, through playing against higher skilled players, which in the long run may result in ranking up too.
This rank restriction was put in place at the start of Year 6.
That's half of a solution. Players should lose far less when playing against better players, and also more/less depending on how well they played. Staying neutral or only going +/-5 MMR rather than 40-50 after carrying a team to OT (or just getting to OT in the first place) would be far more satisfying.Originally Posted by Ubi-Milky Go to original post
The MMR system is trash, and the first 2 weeks of every season is unplayable, how many threads need to be started on this forum before the message sinks in?
Hello SuperSearle,Originally Posted by SuperSearle Go to original post
Thank you for your feedback on the current workings of the game's MMR Ranking and Gain / Loss system.
We're more than happy to pass this on as something for the team to consider moving forward with future ranked seasons.
If there is anything further you'd like to share or we can help with, please let us know.
Thank you!
Hey another amazing idea - how about you don't put me and some other low silvers against a 5 stack of unranked players who were plat last year?Originally Posted by Ubi-TheBerry Go to original post
The ratio of even games is about 30%, this is a joke.
You haven't fixed any problems, you're just trying to hide smurfs by removing the ability to see levels - most games I play I look up their MVP who was stomping everyone and he either has a crazy high KD of 2+ and a low level (obvious smurf) or was plat in previous seasons.
EVERYONE is complaining about this, what are you actually DOING about it?
Operation Health 2.0 is about 3 years overdue.
I've spent my last penny at Ubisoft, what a joke.