Win Rate > Deck Weight for Brawl Matchmaking?

[Ripshot Blue]

I'm starting to think that win rate has a bigger role to who your opponent is over the actual deck weight. I am suspiciously facing alot of mono decks while im running wubrg (Tom Bombadill) now that ive been playing more often these days. Out of 7 matches I played with tom today, 4 were mono something. When I was more casual with less wins, I would usually see similar multi colour gimmicks like Tiamat or Prismatic Bridge, Now im finding people who get combo's before I even get my 3rd colour.

This isnt a rant post, I actually like the challenge as it forces me to adapt my deck to play more aggressive, im more or less asking if anyone else has similar results or if there's some 3rd factor that isnt deck weight or win rate that is accounted for finding an opponent in Historic Brawl.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3464250248
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3464250111
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3464249948
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3464250045

[Zlehtnoba]

MMR kicking in? I would think all matches count for that.

[Tom the Mime Artist]

It's not exactly hidden that both deck weight and player skill (reflected by the win rate here) are a factor - wotc said as much in the news announcement after the leak of the weights last year. The relative importance of each one isn't public but if you're winning more in brawl, you should expect to go up against stronger decks and/or better opponents.

[Ripshot Blue]

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

MMR kicking in? I would think all matches count for that.

its possible to be an MMR system in the background but what I cant get my head around is how its tracked, if I run one of my older similar Tom decks I'll find a usual expected opponent almost everytime, with my current tom deck that has a 87% win rate this season seems to be facing a majority of mono players. The weight of it should be lower then the older decks as it uses more basic lands & less legendary creatures.

[Zlehtnoba]

Originally posted by Ripshot Blue:

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

MMR kicking in? I would think all matches count for that.

its possible to be an MMR system in the background but what I cant get my head around is how its tracked, if I run one of my older similar Tom decks I'll find a usual expected opponent almost everytime, with my current tom deck that has a 87% win rate this season seems to be facing a majority of mono players. The weight of it should be lower then the older decks as it uses more basic lands & less legendary creatures.

MMR should be a separate metric from deck weight, a measure of your skill as a player. It should track your wins and losses, go up after a win, go down after a loss. IIRC, Arena uses Glicko II, which is a bit more complicated, but this is the general idea.

But what you are saying is that if you switch to a different deck with a similar deck weight, you get different opponents? Or was that before the win streak?

[Baxxy.Nut]

game straight up shouldn't have any sort of balancing for mm. it should be totally random. in a game such as this it's just annoying af. only reason it's there is for little timmy to feel good sometimes. for anyone who would be invested enough to spend money it's annoying.

[Zlehtnoba]

Originally posted by Baxxy.Nut:

game straight up shouldn't have any sort of balancing for mm. it should be totally random. in a game such as this it's just annoying af. only reason it's there is for little timmy to feel good sometimes. for anyone who would be invested enough to spend money it's annoying.

So, you want to enter a ranked queue at gold, and get matched against a pro player with a top deck? Imagine all the salt on these forums if that were the case.

[Baxxy.Nut]

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

Originally posted by Baxxy.Nut:

game straight up shouldn't have any sort of balancing for mm. it should be totally random. in a game such as this it's just annoying af. only reason it's there is for little timmy to feel good sometimes. for anyone who would be invested enough to spend money it's annoying.

So, you want to enter a ranked queue at gold, and get matched against a pro player with a top deck? Imagine all the salt on these forums if that were the case.

You misunderstand, let me elaborate because I wasn't clear enough. For non-ranked play you should face totally randomized opponents and decks, no need to have EOMM. In ranked you only need to face someone of a similar rank, their deck, win-rate, etc shouldn't matter because you are the same rank. Otherwise the entire ranking system is totally pointless and non-ranked is just a typical ranked without any of the perks.

[Zlehtnoba]

Originally posted by Baxxy.Nut:

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

So, you want to enter a ranked queue at gold, and get matched against a pro player with a top deck? Imagine all the salt on these forums if that were the case.

You misunderstand, let me elaborate because I wasn't clear enough. For non-ranked play you should face totally randomized opponents and decks, no need to have EOMM. In ranked you only need to face someone of a similar rank, their deck, win-rate, etc shouldn't matter because you are the same rank. Otherwise the entire ranking system is totally pointless and non-ranked is just a typical ranked without any of the perks.

I see. AFAIK, rank is the most important criterion in ranked queues, but not the only one, as they want to shorten wait times. I rarely see opponents not at my rank, unless the wait goes for more than half a minute (I play Historic and Standard best-of-one).

For non-ranked, at least your collection size should be a factor. It's quite dishartening to take a slightly modified starter deck into unranked and face a player testing a tournament deck. It might turn away players just starting out.

And thank you for your explanation, I respect your point of view, even if I don't quite agree.

[Ripshot Blue]

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

Originally posted by Ripshot Blue:

its possible to be an MMR system in the background but what I cant get my head around is how its tracked, if I run one of my older similar Tom decks I'll find a usual expected opponent almost everytime, with my current tom deck that has a 87% win rate this season seems to be facing a majority of mono players. The weight of it should be lower then the older decks as it uses more basic lands & less legendary creatures.

MMR should be a separate metric from deck weight, a measure of your skill as a player. It should track your wins and losses, go up after a win, go down after a loss. IIRC, Arena uses Glicko II, which is a bit more complicated, but this is the general idea.

fair enough, ill have to read up on Glicko

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

But what you are saying is that if you switch to a different deck with a similar deck weight, you get different opponents? Or was that before the win streak?

The deck swap is to a copy of the same deck but at an older state, iirc the difference is 5 lands & 6 creatures, the older deck uses 5 dual lands & 6 more legendary creatures then my current deck, the current swapped the dual lands for basics & changed the legendary creatures for some mana rocks & chumps. Before the win streak with my current deck I had a general idea of which opponents I would face, but now that my current is on a good streak, it seems to be facing mono's more then the usual's of max weight wubrg decks like tiamat dragons or prismatic super friends, which the older deck does still continue to face.

[nul]

You will mostly stick to your usual tier, but will be faced against players with higher MMR around that tier as well. I find a lot of the 5c/mono commanders are roughly in the same low tiers, but yeah.

Originally posted by Ripshot Blue:

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

MMR should be a separate metric from deck weight, a measure of your skill as a player. It should track your wins and losses, go up after a win, go down after a loss. IIRC, Arena uses Glicko II, which is a bit more complicated, but this is the general idea.

fair enough, ill have to read up on Glicko

Originally posted by Zlehtnoba:

But what you are saying is that if you switch to a different deck with a similar deck weight, you get different opponents? Or was that before the win streak?

The deck swap is to a copy of the same deck but at an older state, iirc the difference is 5 lands & 6 creatures, the older deck uses 5 dual lands & 6 more legendary creatures then my current deck, the current swapped the dual lands for basics & changed the legendary creatures for some mana rocks & chumps. Before the win streak with my current deck I had a general idea of which opponents I would face, but now that my current is on a good streak, it seems to be facing mono's more then the usual's of max weight wubrg decks like tiamat dragons or prismatic super friends, which the older deck does still continue to face.

Depending on which lands and which creatures, that could make a major difference. At least as far as the older weighting system goes. (new one is completely unknown to us)
In the old system, cards in the 99 could have anywhere between 0 and 45. So 11 different cards could be up to 495 total weight, which is a number larger than the gap between some commander tiers.
All basics were 0, so if you swapped some basics out for some rare dual lands, that will bump you up. As for the creatures, no idea. Could've gone down, could've gone up, could've drastically gone in either direction, could've stayed about the same.



Edit:

Also keep in mind, when a new set just releases, they have no weighting data for new cards. So people running new cards will be placed in lower tiers, till they get the data to place them higher.

[s_teamboatwillie]

I have a Balmor deck in standard brawl and I get all the nastiest commanders as my opponents, all the time, on endless repeat. My win rate is probably only 50%