CS GO

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

mm system is messed up
thats my point :pac:
explain how smurfs stay in silver ? its the mm system messing up
explain how pro players who play it for a living are in silver? its messed up :pac:
explain how me and a group of lets say lvl 4 silvers are playing against eagles, guardian elites? this game would be impossible to have fun in, because 1 team of silvers won't beat a team like that unless the team of silvers were smurfs.
again its wildy known how bad the mm system is, its the reason theirs so many 3rd party systems out their for clan vs clan or pug vs pug
e.g cevo, esea etc....
you can argue this point against me all day, but like I said its known how bad it is and how many players choose to play on a 3rd party mms, this is not a statement this is a fact :pac: if you'd like proof just google it

I'm not trying to prove I'm better then anyone else here but I am better then silver 4, i played cs 1.4 competitive and moved from their to this game, the mm system only ranks you based on WINS, so if you're playing solo, and you get teamed up with bad people (which in silver happens alot) you lose simple as. but that mm system is awful.

I mean I can take a screen shot for you right now and you're going to laugh,
yesterday I lost a game 16-14 (was an excellent game btw)
I went 42kills and 13 deaths. my friend who I played with went 28-16 and we lost because our squad played terrible. But because we lost that my friends rank dropped from silver 4 to silver 3. How is that fair? he plays good but loses rank because other players can't step up their game

Like I said I don't claim to be better then anyone else here, but the mm system is ****e, and it needs to be reworked. I am sick of losing games over teammates not pulling their weight and that causes me a loss? I lose rank?
the math? what ever is involved to make randoms teams when in a game, is way off the mark.

Lemming wrote: »

I read an interesting post on the steam forums regards this. The guy in question did state that this was all best-guess work and based on things the devs have said but nothing has ever been confirmed;

So in the absence of finding a link as I'm in work: I'll summarise: It's about wins (and loss) and MVPs.

If you win, you gain points; some (or all?) of which come from the other guys (hence how you de-rank). If you're a higher rank player vs.lower ranks, the amount you get will adjust accordingly. For example, a lower rank player will gain more beating a higher rank player and vice versa. I can't recall how the MVPs slotted into the equation but he had a plausible explanation.

The other thing I recall - can't remember if it was from this guy or not - was in the example partyjungle gave above of two new players playing ten games and being ranked differently; you'll be ranked higher if you won the first three games in a row, then the last three (for example). So there are other factors besides wins, losses, and mvps at play but the points raised in the article in question seemed to be plausible enough as a "core" base around which ranking might work.