Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
5-27 lose again 0 chance from min 1 cause all 4 feed 1-7, 1-4, 0-7, 2-6
why the fk does the enemy dont pick 4 carrys? oh its because its a low bracket and a fun mode? then why the enemy doesnt have 4 carrys? somehow its always a team of normal people playing vs total ruiners - im so sick of this trash by now. no matter what side the game puts me on. the outcome of my games is clear and sure after 2 min. what a cowcrap design.
there is an abvious smurf with 500 hours playing earth spirit and trolling with his 1 spell.
a 0-8 mider and a 0-9 muerta. this game because such a shtshow, its actualy sad to watch it happen. its unplayable
but who cares as long as there are still stupids out there spending 20$ or whatever for some idiotic voiceline or a stupid laugh.
its one of those typical losestreaks that you can see a mile ahead and still cant do anything about it - i played like 2 or 3 hours and had about 2-3 minutes of fun in there.
I played a match earlier today (link below) where 2 people on our team where totally new to the game and didn't even understand basic mechanics (like what the neutral stash was or where the secret shop is) and yet in total contravention to my prediction my team managed to win anyway.
https://www.dotabuff.com/matches/7054151524
It happens that sometimes the system just can't get it perfectly right, with what heroes people are going to pick, or what their matchup will be, or how they are going to perform, etc. If you really want to be absolutely sure of who is on your team, make your own 5-stack. But if you're lazy and won't put the effort into doing that, then be satisfied with what the system gives you instead.
Yes, matchmaking sucks. The matchmaker does an atrocious job at sampling the pool of available players to create fair games. Almost every game features the losing team having the 2-3 worst people in the lobby, which could easily be resolved by better mixing the good/bad players on both teams. So not only does an average game have extreme variance in skill in the lobby, but the variance in skill in a single team tends to be extreme.
What you described as an uncommon occurrence in reality is the norm. If anything, it is exceedingly rare to have a match that is not 1-sided.
But players are in fact very unreliable regarding this, in particular in solo queue, a convenient push-one-button way to play Dota2 without any mutual obligations. Players come into the game with changing attitudes from game to game. And once the game starts all this frustration - aggression is fired up by the slightests deviation from unrealistic high expectations.
Add this to a game design build on snowballing heroes and come-back mechanics, two imbalances that doesn't guarantee a balance at the end and we have what we have in Dota2 public matchmaking, in particular in lower ranks/skill brackets.
One of the basic questions is what drives players to push that play button although it may lead to situations as described by OP. And this question is for the bad as well as the good apples in the basket.
lmfao that answer.
as of anyone could take that serious at that point, considering the ammount of data that game has on each player, im sure it exactly does what it should.
putting me into the same team as trolling smurfs with 500 hours vs players with 1000s of hours. the stupid game knows exactly im a support player, so when it decides to give me 4 carrys it knows what its doing. a 5 sec look into the profile of the players tells me that they dont belong in the same match as me, but volvos dataset thinks its fine putting beginners and veteran players together.
there are still people out there trying to defend that atrocity?
just wow effin wow
another muerta feeding 12 times
another pudge feeding / keeping all wards in his inv and or warding the fountain / destroying his items. funny how magicly enemy pudges always rush a blink and then just destroy the map. pudge in my team? aether lens or travels.
another time funny how the enemy picks a abuse hero (sky mid 18-2, cause thats normal right?) and i have a muerta player who misses all spells =)
epic how i manage to "outfarm" my cores without even trying to
same trash as yesterday evening - idiotic matchmaker putting my in the same team as absolutly braindead bots
what the fk am i supposed to do, when they pick the cores and feed and when i pick a core my "supp" takes my farm?
game is full of litteral bots
the most fun fact - i played now 4 or 5 games in a row with feeders and ruiner, did i get a report back? nope they are still out there trolling and feeding and my report went into the trash, nice design
One of the basic questions is what drives players to push that play button although it may lead to situations as described by OP. And this question is for the bad as well as the good apples in the basket.
Do you have an answer on this? The answer may help you to understand the situation.
i wont waste my time giving you serious answer to your lowkey trolling "question"
try harder
You need to remember that YOU are only looking at a single match, while the system is looking at a player's average performance over HUNDREDS or even thousands of matches. You cannot possibly be a better judge of average skill from a single data point than the system can be from several orders of magnitude more information.
A match IS balanced- at the start. But with every decision you make, beginning with character-selection. Pick a hero your good with, the odds go up slightly. The enemy couterpicks you, they go down slightly. Your team buys wards, odds go up. The enemy smoke-ganks, they go down. And on and on and on.
So stop looking at the last 3 minutes of a match after your team picked badly, played badly, itemized badly, failed to back each other up, and jungled instead of maintained map control, etc, and ask how "THIS" match is winnable. Instead go back to the first 30 seconds of the game and ask how you are supposed to win. Because if you had made different decisions the outcome could easily have gone the other way.
MOBAs in general are snowbally, yet DOTA by far has the worst matchmaker that I have ever encountered. In games like SMITE, having a small advantage in levels is usually enough to snowball into the late game and there are virtually no ways to turn the tides besides getting a lucky teamfight win at the Fire Giant (the equivalent of Roshan but fighting at the Fire Giant has a much more prominent role in SMITE). On the contrary, in DOTA there are MANY comeback mechanics to help losing teams reverse the outcome of games. Ironically, these comeback mechanics actually help to secure wins for the team that was already winning, but that is besides the point. SMITE's matchmaker went through periods of times where it was similar to DOTA (extreme variance in skill in a lobby and between teams), but the developers were very vocal that the mm was a work in progress. Now, SMITE's mm is better in establishing fair games with reasonable outcomes, at least for games without premades. So the narrative that DOTA's design is unique and it should be expected to have terrible mm is absolutely false. Valve continues to add non-skill based parameters like the behavior score which reduce the pool of available players and therefore adds to the variance in skill in a lobby. Furthermore, DOTA is the only MOBA that I have played where premades greater than 2 are allowed to play in ranked; this places a great amount of strain on the mm, because it is impossible to create fair games when the variance in skill in a premade is already high. There are just 2 probable and objective evidence how Valve ruins mm with no concern for the players.
I am not looking at a single match; I am referring to my experience across ALL matches. When I state that the losing team almost always has the 2-3 worst people in the lobby (something that should be a rare occurrence with a functioning mm), I am talking about on average. In fact, I have been making these claims for years on the forums which show that I am consistent in reporting my experience and that this is not random. Also, anyone can spectate immortal matches and see the exact same trend whereby the mm routinely stacks the better or worst-performing players on opposing teams,. If you do deeper investigations you will often see that those outliers have histories consistent with their performance.....meaning that the mm frequently stacks the best or worst players (as a measurement of their historical skill/performance) in the lobby on opposite teams. Moreover, different variants of my complaints are parroted by many people from completely different backgrounds, leading to beliefs that the game has a threshold for winning/losing. Hell, even prominent players are skeptical about the fairness in mm. Even people who don't think that the mm is rigged believe that are really only 33% of games where your actions truly matter, and the other 66% are 1-sided stomps in favor or against you. Again, you shouldn't expect a low confidence in having fair games if the mm was anywhere near balanced. A matchmaker that sampled random people in an MMR bracket would on average foster more balanced teams 50% of the time.
How are the start of matches balanced? By what metric? Because an average DOTA match is an absolute stomp across all MMR medals and rankings. In fact, you stated yourself that the game is snowbally suggesting that 1 team usually gets an advantage that leads to a dominant victory. Snowbally games are by nature NOT balanced. People who don't understand programming or statistics treat randomness like its magic and something that cannot be predicted, but in reality it is VERY easy to determine at some level how the code works because the outcome of the code manifests as observable trends.
The reason why games in DOTA are so snowbally is because the mm creates these trends, the most important of which I previously described (putting the worst/best people in the lobby on opposing teams). As I stated before, you can view the match history of a player and in most cases their performance (relative to the rest of their team) is consistent even in 1-sided stomps. Whenever I get the same players across multiple games, they perform the same regardless of what roles or characters that they pick. Why do you think that the avoid list exists? Its not to avoid toxic, but competent, players, because that is what the report and Overwatch system is for. Most people use the avoid list to avoid repeatedly getting matched with the same game-ruiners over and over again. BTW, DOTA supposedly has one of the most active playerbase on STEAM, yet I constantly see the same players in my lobby. SMITE has a fraction of the active users as DOTA, yet I almost never see the same players across different games.
Again, you contradict yourself. If most games are snowbally (by your own admission), then your advice to assess how games can be winnable is moot. You can't make a comeback from most losing games because 1 team got a huge advantage early on and snowballed out of control; your decisions going forward doesn't really matter since 2-4 players on your team messed up so spectacularly that you cannot recover. If you get a lucky teamfight kill, then the opposing team buybacks, plays more carefully, and wins.
stop washing money
LMFAO!!! That is true. IDK why it is allowed to advertise boosting, but its supposedly a bannable offense to play on multiple accounts.