Dev Talk Vol.11 | Seasonal Rank Adjustment (AGAIN!)

[Marvel Rivals]

Hey, Rivals!

After the release of Dev Talk 10 regarding the seasonal rank adjustment, we received a wealth of feedback from the community. A common concern was the pressure associated with having a rank reset every half-season, which has made participating in competitive mode less enjoyable. In light of the community’s input, we have decided to make some changes to optimize the rank system. Here are the details:

1.The first half of the season will still conclude on February 21, 2025, at 8:00 AM (UTC+0). Players at Gold rank will receive the costume reward, as well as Crests of Honors for those in Grandmaster and above, and the Crest of Honor for the top 500 (One Above All).

2.When the second half of the season begins, [there will be no rank reset]. Players will retain their ranks and scores from the end of the first half. To earn new rewards, players simply need to complete 10 matches in Competitive mode and meet the relevant conditions by the end of the season. Rewards will include a new Gold rank costume and a variety of Crests of Honor, featuring distinct designs for Grandmaster, Celestial, Eternity, and One Above All.

We strive to make Marvel Rivals the best game it can be, and the community is the driving force behind this mission! Please stay tuned to our official channels for more updates on the second half of the season. Your engagement and support mean the world to us, and we're excited to continue this journey together!

[Killjoychris]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dev Jonathan:

Imagine showing a gamer in 2016 people defending bots in an online PVP game LMAOOOO. We have fallen

Tell me you were too young for Unreal Tournament without telling me you were too young for Unreal Tournament.

imagine pretending that UT's bot tech designed by Steve Polge (made famous as a quake mod) is anywhere near comparable to this game's bots just to try winning an argument in a steam forum. those bots were literally designed to dodge projectile weapons, and bots in this game just eat projectile shots until they die. UT bots are STILL impressive to this day.

not only was that a useless "i'm older, kid, so I win" boomer argument with zero substance, but you even gave the worst example of bots that you possibly could.

Fat L

[Skeven]

Okay, now fix the RCE exploit that's in your game.

[Dev Jonathan]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Killjoychris:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Tell me you were too young for Unreal Tournament without telling me you were too young for Unreal Tournament.

imagine pretending that UT's bot tech designed by Steve Polge (made famous as a quake mod) is anywhere near comparable to this game's bots just to try winning an argument in a steam forum. those bots were literally designed to dodge projectile weapons, and bots in this game just eat projectile shots until they die. UT bots are STILL impressive to this day.

not only was that a useless "i'm older, kid, so I win" boomer argument with zero substance, but you even gave the worst example of bots that you possibly could.

Fat L

Typical

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Killjoychris:

if "the community is the driving force", how about listen to them when the vast majority ask for role queue or role limits (at least in competitive) and fix the DPS instalock issue.

Nobody cares about your hard stance philosophy about not having role queue or role limits, we care about the health and balance of the game.

If you don't fix the DPS/roles problem, this game is going to die. Don't let hubris over the success of the game cause you to ignore your community's problems with too many people locking in DPS on one team and throwing the match as a result.

OW2 has these things and they suck. There's a lot of reasons that game has a tenth of the players and overwhelmingly bad reviews, and those are a few of them.

Thought you knew your history.

[Mikaleto]

Dear Developers,

I am immensely grateful that you listen to the community, and I hope you will notice this post.

There is a significant issue with player matchmaking in the competitive mode. This is mentioned in almost every post. I understand that it’s impossible to please everyone, but I still believe that at least some improvements can be made. For example, I am willing to wait a few minutes for the system to match players of similar skill levels into both teams. For those who are not ready to wait, there is a quick play mode.
I believe that this approach will elevate your game to a higher quality level, and you will gain much greater support and respect from players, including those who are willing to pay for skins and battle passes.

P.S. Let’s summarize everything said above:

1) You will have a quick play mode to satisfy players who are not ready to wait long and just want to relax, have fun, and enjoy the game.

2) You will have a high-quality competitive mode with a different matchmaking method to satisfy professional players who seek challenges and a sense of progression through the ranks.

3) This way, you will attract the maximum number of players to your project. They will all be happy, and I am sure they will support you financially.

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Dear Developers,

I am immensely grateful that you listen to the community, and I hope you will notice this post.

There is a significant issue with player matchmaking in the competitive mode. This is mentioned in almost every post. I understand that it’s impossible to please everyone, but I still believe that at least some improvements can be made. For example, I am willing to wait a few minutes for the system to match players of similar skill levels into both teams. For those who are not ready to wait, there is a quick play mode.
I believe that this approach will elevate your game to a higher quality level, and you will gain much greater support and respect from players, including those who are willing to pay for skins and battle passes.

P.S. Let’s summarize everything said above:

1) You will have a quick play mode to satisfy players who are not ready to wait long and just want to relax, have fun, and enjoy the game.

2) You will have a high-quality competitive mode with a different matchmaking method to satisfy professional players who seek challenges and a sense of progression through the ranks.

3) This way, you will attract the maximum number of players to your project. They will all be happy, and I am sure they will support you financially.

This... says nothing. How do you expect to reduce queue times at the top levels of competitive without diluting the competitive ranks?

I mean, above GM, you better be ready to wait 20-30 minutes for a match pop.

[Mikaleto]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Dear Developers,

I am immensely grateful that you listen to the community, and I hope you will notice this post.

There is a significant issue with player matchmaking in the competitive mode. This is mentioned in almost every post. I understand that it’s impossible to please everyone, but I still believe that at least some improvements can be made. For example, I am willing to wait a few minutes for the system to match players of similar skill levels into both teams. For those who are not ready to wait, there is a quick play mode.
I believe that this approach will elevate your game to a higher quality level, and you will gain much greater support and respect from players, including those who are willing to pay for skins and battle passes.

P.S. Let’s summarize everything said above:

1) You will have a quick play mode to satisfy players who are not ready to wait long and just want to relax, have fun, and enjoy the game.

2) You will have a high-quality competitive mode with a different matchmaking method to satisfy professional players who seek challenges and a sense of progression through the ranks.

3) This way, you will attract the maximum number of players to your project. They will all be happy, and I am sure they will support you financially.

This... says nothing. How do you expect to reduce queue times at the top levels of competitive without diluting the competitive ranks?

I mean, above GM, you better be ready to wait 20-30 minutes for a match pop.

I’ve read most of the posts criticizing the matchmaking system in the competitive mode. People complain that the majority of games end in either a clear win or a clear loss, with no real chance for a balanced match. How did this happen? Judging by the feedback, there seems to be a system that intentionally matches you with either stronger or weaker players (or even bots) to maintain a 50/50 win/lose balance. I don’t mind this approach in quick play, but such matchmaking ruins the desire to play competitive games. In these posts, people mention that there’s little difference in skill between players of different ranks. So why were two modes created that don’t differ in terms of match quality? Personally, I believe that each mode should have its own matchmaking method, primarily to ensure higher-quality games.

How exactly should matchmaking work in competitive mode? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have some ideas and assumptions.

How do you determine if a player is good or not? I think it’s necessary to gather statistics on each player—not just their number of wins or losses, but their personal contribution to each game. For example, consider stats like K/D/A (kills/deaths/assists), damage dealt/damage blocked/healing, and the completion of key objectives such as defense or escort. Based on these factors, rank progression points (MMR) could be awarded.
A common situation is when you try your hardest to win but end up losing. You open the scoreboard and see each player’s performance, realizing that you were the best in the match because you genuinely tried to win, but lost due to other players being less effective. There should be a mathematical formula that takes into account each player’s performance metrics and fairly distributes rating points accordingly.
Moreover, I believe there shouldn’t be ranks like Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc., but rather a specific MMR number. This way, player skill levels can be more accurately balanced, and matches can be formed within a certain range of this number. Developers could implement such a system and observe how it works. If matchmaking takes too long at higher ranks, they could expand the range, but ensure that the total MMR of both teams remains roughly equal. Yes, this might mean that at higher ranks, a team could include both top-tier professionals and simply good players. I don’t know if this would satisfy the best players—I’m not among them and can’t speak for them. Perhaps they prefer longer wait times for more precise matchmaking at their rank.

P.S. Something definitely needs to be done about the matchmaking system in competitive mode. I see that the developers are listening to the community, and I hope they are working on solutions to these issues.

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

This... says nothing. How do you expect to reduce queue times at the top levels of competitive without diluting the competitive ranks?

I mean, above GM, you better be ready to wait 20-30 minutes for a match pop.

I’ve read most of the posts criticizing the matchmaking system in the competitive mode. People complain that the majority of games end in either a clear win or a clear loss, with no real chance for a balanced match. How did this happen? Judging by the feedback, there seems to be a system that intentionally matches you with either stronger or weaker players (or even bots) to maintain a 50/50 win/lose balance. I don’t mind this approach in quick play, but such matchmaking ruins the desire to play competitive games. In these posts, people mention that there’s little difference in skill between players of different ranks. So why were two modes created that don’t differ in terms of match quality? Personally, I believe that each mode should have its own matchmaking method, primarily to ensure higher-quality games.

How exactly should matchmaking work in competitive mode? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have some ideas and assumptions.

How do you determine if a player is good or not? I think it’s necessary to gather statistics on each player—not just their number of wins or losses, but their personal contribution to each game. For example, consider stats like K/D/A (kills/deaths/assists), damage dealt/damage blocked/healing, and the completion of key objectives such as defense or escort. Based on these factors, rank progression points (MMR) could be awarded.
A common situation is when you try your hardest to win but end up losing. You open the scoreboard and see each player’s performance, realizing that you were the best in the match because you genuinely tried to win, but lost due to other players being less effective. There should be a mathematical formula that takes into account each player’s performance metrics and fairly distributes rating points accordingly.
Moreover, I believe there shouldn’t be ranks like Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc., but rather a specific MMR number. This way, player skill levels can be more accurately balanced, and matches can be formed within a certain range of this number. Developers could implement such a system and observe how it works. If matchmaking takes too long at higher ranks, they could expand the range, but ensure that the total MMR of both teams remains roughly equal. Yes, this might mean that at higher ranks, a team could include both top-tier professionals and simply good players. I don’t know if this would satisfy the best players—I’m not among them and can’t speak for them. Perhaps they prefer longer wait times for more precise matchmaking at their rank.

P.S. Something definitely needs to be done about the matchmaking system in competitive mode. I see that the developers are listening to the community, and I hope they are working on solutions to these issues.

Are you a politician? Very serious question. This is, again, saying absolutely nothing (and taking a lot of words to do that).

[Dev Jonathan]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

This... says nothing. How do you expect to reduce queue times at the top levels of competitive without diluting the competitive ranks?

I mean, above GM, you better be ready to wait 20-30 minutes for a match pop.

I’ve read most of the posts criticizing the matchmaking system in the competitive mode. People complain that the majority of games end in either a clear win or a clear loss, with no real chance for a balanced match. How did this happen? Judging by the feedback, there seems to be a system that intentionally matches you with either stronger or weaker players (or even bots) to maintain a 50/50 win/lose balance. I don’t mind this approach in quick play, but such matchmaking ruins the desire to play competitive games. In these posts, people mention that there’s little difference in skill between players of different ranks. So why were two modes created that don’t differ in terms of match quality? Personally, I believe that each mode should have its own matchmaking method, primarily to ensure higher-quality games.

How exactly should matchmaking work in competitive mode? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have some ideas and assumptions.

How do you determine if a player is good or not? I think it’s necessary to gather statistics on each player—not just their number of wins or losses, but their personal contribution to each game. For example, consider stats like K/D/A (kills/deaths/assists), damage dealt/damage blocked/healing, and the completion of key objectives such as defense or escort. Based on these factors, rank progression points (MMR) could be awarded.
A common situation is when you try your hardest to win but end up losing. You open the scoreboard and see each player’s performance, realizing that you were the best in the match because you genuinely tried to win, but lost due to other players being less effective. There should be a mathematical formula that takes into account each player’s performance metrics and fairly distributes rating points accordingly.
Moreover, I believe there shouldn’t be ranks like Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc., but rather a specific MMR number. This way, player skill levels can be more accurately balanced, and matches can be formed within a certain range of this number. Developers could implement such a system and observe how it works. If matchmaking takes too long at higher ranks, they could expand the range, but ensure that the total MMR of both teams remains roughly equal. Yes, this might mean that at higher ranks, a team could include both top-tier professionals and simply good players. I don’t know if this would satisfy the best players—I’m not among them and can’t speak for them. Perhaps they prefer longer wait times for more precise matchmaking at their rank.

P.S. Something definitely needs to be done about the matchmaking system in competitive mode. I see that the developers are listening to the community, and I hope they are working on solutions to these issues.

Thank you for speaking on this. More people are becoming aware of the issues and we keep spreading awareness

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dev Jonathan:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

I’ve read most of the posts criticizing the matchmaking system in the competitive mode. People complain that the majority of games end in either a clear win or a clear loss, with no real chance for a balanced match. How did this happen? Judging by the feedback, there seems to be a system that intentionally matches you with either stronger or weaker players (or even bots) to maintain a 50/50 win/lose balance. I don’t mind this approach in quick play, but such matchmaking ruins the desire to play competitive games. In these posts, people mention that there’s little difference in skill between players of different ranks. So why were two modes created that don’t differ in terms of match quality? Personally, I believe that each mode should have its own matchmaking method, primarily to ensure higher-quality games.

How exactly should matchmaking work in competitive mode? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have some ideas and assumptions.

How do you determine if a player is good or not? I think it’s necessary to gather statistics on each player—not just their number of wins or losses, but their personal contribution to each game. For example, consider stats like K/D/A (kills/deaths/assists), damage dealt/damage blocked/healing, and the completion of key objectives such as defense or escort. Based on these factors, rank progression points (MMR) could be awarded.
A common situation is when you try your hardest to win but end up losing. You open the scoreboard and see each player’s performance, realizing that you were the best in the match because you genuinely tried to win, but lost due to other players being less effective. There should be a mathematical formula that takes into account each player’s performance metrics and fairly distributes rating points accordingly.
Moreover, I believe there shouldn’t be ranks like Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc., but rather a specific MMR number. This way, player skill levels can be more accurately balanced, and matches can be formed within a certain range of this number. Developers could implement such a system and observe how it works. If matchmaking takes too long at higher ranks, they could expand the range, but ensure that the total MMR of both teams remains roughly equal. Yes, this might mean that at higher ranks, a team could include both top-tier professionals and simply good players. I don’t know if this would satisfy the best players—I’m not among them and can’t speak for them. Perhaps they prefer longer wait times for more precise matchmaking at their rank.

P.S. Something definitely needs to be done about the matchmaking system in competitive mode. I see that the developers are listening to the community, and I hope they are working on solutions to these issues.

Thank you for speaking on this. More people are becoming aware of the issues and we keep spreading awareness

Did you even read this? XD

[Dev Jonathan]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dev Jonathan:

Thank you for speaking on this. More people are becoming aware of the issues and we keep spreading awareness

Did you even read this? XD

It didnt take that long to read

[Mikaleto]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

I’ve read most of the posts criticizing the matchmaking system in the competitive mode. People complain that the majority of games end in either a clear win or a clear loss, with no real chance for a balanced match. How did this happen? Judging by the feedback, there seems to be a system that intentionally matches you with either stronger or weaker players (or even bots) to maintain a 50/50 win/lose balance. I don’t mind this approach in quick play, but such matchmaking ruins the desire to play competitive games. In these posts, people mention that there’s little difference in skill between players of different ranks. So why were two modes created that don’t differ in terms of match quality? Personally, I believe that each mode should have its own matchmaking method, primarily to ensure higher-quality games.

How exactly should matchmaking work in competitive mode? I don’t have a definitive answer, but I have some ideas and assumptions.

How do you determine if a player is good or not? I think it’s necessary to gather statistics on each player—not just their number of wins or losses, but their personal contribution to each game. For example, consider stats like K/D/A (kills/deaths/assists), damage dealt/damage blocked/healing, and the completion of key objectives such as defense or escort. Based on these factors, rank progression points (MMR) could be awarded.
A common situation is when you try your hardest to win but end up losing. You open the scoreboard and see each player’s performance, realizing that you were the best in the match because you genuinely tried to win, but lost due to other players being less effective. There should be a mathematical formula that takes into account each player’s performance metrics and fairly distributes rating points accordingly.
Moreover, I believe there shouldn’t be ranks like Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc., but rather a specific MMR number. This way, player skill levels can be more accurately balanced, and matches can be formed within a certain range of this number. Developers could implement such a system and observe how it works. If matchmaking takes too long at higher ranks, they could expand the range, but ensure that the total MMR of both teams remains roughly equal. Yes, this might mean that at higher ranks, a team could include both top-tier professionals and simply good players. I don’t know if this would satisfy the best players—I’m not among them and can’t speak for them. Perhaps they prefer longer wait times for more precise matchmaking at their rank.

P.S. Something definitely needs to be done about the matchmaking system in competitive mode. I see that the developers are listening to the community, and I hope they are working on solutions to these issues.

Are you a politician? Very serious question. This is, again, saying absolutely nothing (and taking a lot of words to do that).

The only thing I see is criticism towards the developers and a lack of any proposals to solve the problems. So here I am, offering my ideas. You should try too.

[Dev Jonathan]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Are you a politician? Very serious question. This is, again, saying absolutely nothing (and taking a lot of words to do that).

The only thing I see is criticism towards the developers and a lack of any proposals to solve the problems. So here I am, offering my ideas. You should try too.

Its funny how they instantly reversed this rank reset change due to the mass outrage. If more people complained about the EOMM, change would happen

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Dev Jonathan:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Did you even read this? XD

It didnt take that long to read

I'm asking because it doesn't say anything. XD

[Steve]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Mikaleto:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Steve:

Are you a politician? Very serious question. This is, again, saying absolutely nothing (and taking a lot of words to do that).

The only thing I see is criticism towards the developers and a lack of any proposals to solve the problems. So here I am, offering my ideas. You should try too.

You don't offer any ideas though, at least none that are already being used (and better and more complex than you describe).

What, exactly, do you hope to accomplish by dumbing down the existing algorithm, for example?

What problem are you trying to solve with this?