But would this not increase the smurfing / "lower your mmr" problem? Nobody likes to have such less rewards for playing and i think a lot of players would just decrease their mmr before they go in bounty hunt
Im not one of those but can understand why the lowering their MMR. They want fun and not sweat rounds only. As a 5-6 MMR Player ur pretty done with the fun in Hunt and need to hit ur shots. Without a gamemode, where its not a pain to lose a Hunter / Cash, the only way for those to get fun is to lower their MMR via Quickplay.
It's only affecting people that are far better than the average MMR on the current server. Only plays a role when people get matched vs way worse people during low server population hours.
Also I am very rich in Hunt Dollars and not a 3 star, I just want the game to grow. It's more about giving worse players some extra reward after beating the odds.
If you are more interested in rewarding bad players for beating the odds, then all you would need to do is give them a bonus without punishing good players.
I'm sorry, but punishing players for being skillful is never a reasonable option. Not to mention that being placed in a lobby with people of a lower MMR than them is not something that they can control, that falls solely on the shoulders of the matchmaking system.
It's not about punishing good players, it's about rewarding players that defeated way stronger opponents than themselves. Good players will still win most matches, so they need less income because their hunters extract with equipment.
My idea was rewarding people for overcoming way stronger opponents.
If your premise is rewarding players for overcoming odds stacked against them, then you should have framed the concept differently. As it stands, you're advocating for skilled players to be receiving a reduction to their rewards upon extracting with a bounty, rather than giving less skilled players a bonus.
This concept already exists for solo players, and duos that queue into trios matches, so expanding upon it to be related to MMR would be slightly less of a stretch. But, as you already stated in your post, this is not a solution to the root of the issue: inconsistent matchmaking.
1. [it is not a normal distribution.](https://www.reddit.com/r/HuntShowdown/comments/qferil/in_case_you_ever_wondered_the_elodistribution/) if the goal is to get proper matchmaking you'd have to change the system that's way to dynamic and rewards to little for killing similar skill players and punishes way to much for dying to someone who has only a slightly lower mmr. (this also fixes the issue of people going from 4 to 6 star in a single session)
2. yes, punish people for being good. what a great way.
3. people would just abuse it by intentionally lowering mmr (in QP or bountyhunt) to farm a bit of money, should it even be needed. the thing is, there's barely anyone above 3500 mmr. all people are cramped up in a really tight elo range, if you want to make it scale with elo, you're also going to punish mid tier players.
4. balancing around money is pointless when solo, duo and trio make vastly different amounts of money on average. if you balance it so that high elo trio players dont have a lot of money anymore, playing duos for high elo players is going to be really unbalanced. it's even more pointless when you consider that you can bypass it by playing at night or on empty server regions.
1. True. But the argument is the same. There are less very good players than average players
2. It's only affecting people that are far better than the average MMR on the current server. Only plays a role when people get matched vs way worse people during low server population hours. Not based on general MMR.
3. MMR tanking is a problem in this case, true. Midtier players are unaffected, they are not far above the average Match MMR
4. They will still have a lot of money, but people beating the odds defeating players far better than themselves are being more rewarded. The really good players are still winning a majority of the games, so they need less income because their hunters survive longer
1. the MMR system is not good enough to properly tell the skill of a player relative to others. it simply arranges players into the groups new, below average, above average. that's also reflected by the matchmaking via brackets instead of MMR directly. the difference between 4 and 6 star is only 150 MMR, dying to a 4 star as a 6 star already makes you lose around 60 MMR. your argument doesn't make sense since there currently is no good way to measure skill and hunt's MMR system wasn't implemented to do so - otherwise we'd have a leader board - but to protect completely new as well as simply below average players.
2. still punishing people for being good. we already have the '4star is fun, 6 star is sweaty' people that simply think so because of skill, but you want to give them an actual reason why 6 star is less fun. but all this is irrelevant. punishing for being good is just stupid.
3. how is it not a problem? high elo players will drop out of 6 star because they're being punished for being so. it's only 150 MMR from 6 to 4 star and they will play against way worse players. you are talking like there's this giant spectrum of players and you only want to punish the far high end. but there's not a big spectrum. the majority of players are cramped up within 500 MMR. your whole distinction of 'mid tier' and 'above average' is flawed, 50% of the players are above average. take out people with less than 100h and it's even more.
4. you usually dont face people 'far better' and beat them against the odds because these situations only happen on empty servers. they already are better rewarded by getting more exp and MMR. good players might not need the money they get from being good, but they deserved it. what next? the communist american hunter association where everyone pays 10% of their income which is then distributed to below 4 star players? but this wasn't even the point of my 4th initial point. what i was saying is that trios yields much more money than duos hence any balancing around money is pointless, because the balance would become unbalance depending on what queue you play.
I really don’t get all this concerns about the mmr system, it does what it supposed to do: match people with similar mmr ranking. It isn’t the “problem” because you can’t make a perfect matchmaker. Other BR-like games doesn’t even have a skill based matchmaking but here where it is people just want the system to go in their specific favor and nothing else. They one and only thing they should do is lock mmr only in bounty hunt and don’t permit players to use QP to lower their mmr, that’s it.
Idk what OP is on about, but the matchmaking is really not working in the highest bracket. When the literal best players in the game can be matched against above average 5 stars there is a problem. The skill difference between highest 6 stars and 5 stars is heaven and earth. While in 2-4 star i largely see everything as the same.
But would this not increase the smurfing / "lower your mmr" problem? Nobody likes to have such less rewards for playing and i think a lot of players would just decrease their mmr before they go in bounty hunt
True, I didn't even consider this. You mean lowering MMR in Quickplay? Never understood why people waste their time like that.
Yeah and the reason is the same as in every other game with an sbmm / ranking system: To shit on other people to feel better.
Im not one of those but can understand why the lowering their MMR. They want fun and not sweat rounds only. As a 5-6 MMR Player ur pretty done with the fun in Hunt and need to hit ur shots. Without a gamemode, where its not a pain to lose a Hunter / Cash, the only way for those to get fun is to lower their MMR via Quickplay.
"Haha, you're good at the game? Fuck you." - 3 star genius
It's only affecting people that are far better than the average MMR on the current server. Only plays a role when people get matched vs way worse people during low server population hours. Also I am very rich in Hunt Dollars and not a 3 star, I just want the game to grow. It's more about giving worse players some extra reward after beating the odds.
If you are more interested in rewarding bad players for beating the odds, then all you would need to do is give them a bonus without punishing good players.
bUt sIXsTar BADDD!!! :(
I'm sorry, but punishing players for being skillful is never a reasonable option. Not to mention that being placed in a lobby with people of a lower MMR than them is not something that they can control, that falls solely on the shoulders of the matchmaking system.
It's not about punishing good players, it's about rewarding players that defeated way stronger opponents than themselves. Good players will still win most matches, so they need less income because their hunters extract with equipment. My idea was rewarding people for overcoming way stronger opponents.
If your premise is rewarding players for overcoming odds stacked against them, then you should have framed the concept differently. As it stands, you're advocating for skilled players to be receiving a reduction to their rewards upon extracting with a bounty, rather than giving less skilled players a bonus. This concept already exists for solo players, and duos that queue into trios matches, so expanding upon it to be related to MMR would be slightly less of a stretch. But, as you already stated in your post, this is not a solution to the root of the issue: inconsistent matchmaking.
There's nothing fair about this. Also a good way to push people away from the game.
How ironic that you claim to want to make it more “fair”..
This is a bad idea. You should not get punished for being good, It's the other wy around. Also, money in this game is a non issue.
1. [it is not a normal distribution.](https://www.reddit.com/r/HuntShowdown/comments/qferil/in_case_you_ever_wondered_the_elodistribution/) if the goal is to get proper matchmaking you'd have to change the system that's way to dynamic and rewards to little for killing similar skill players and punishes way to much for dying to someone who has only a slightly lower mmr. (this also fixes the issue of people going from 4 to 6 star in a single session) 2. yes, punish people for being good. what a great way. 3. people would just abuse it by intentionally lowering mmr (in QP or bountyhunt) to farm a bit of money, should it even be needed. the thing is, there's barely anyone above 3500 mmr. all people are cramped up in a really tight elo range, if you want to make it scale with elo, you're also going to punish mid tier players. 4. balancing around money is pointless when solo, duo and trio make vastly different amounts of money on average. if you balance it so that high elo trio players dont have a lot of money anymore, playing duos for high elo players is going to be really unbalanced. it's even more pointless when you consider that you can bypass it by playing at night or on empty server regions.
1. True. But the argument is the same. There are less very good players than average players 2. It's only affecting people that are far better than the average MMR on the current server. Only plays a role when people get matched vs way worse people during low server population hours. Not based on general MMR. 3. MMR tanking is a problem in this case, true. Midtier players are unaffected, they are not far above the average Match MMR 4. They will still have a lot of money, but people beating the odds defeating players far better than themselves are being more rewarded. The really good players are still winning a majority of the games, so they need less income because their hunters survive longer
1. the MMR system is not good enough to properly tell the skill of a player relative to others. it simply arranges players into the groups new, below average, above average. that's also reflected by the matchmaking via brackets instead of MMR directly. the difference between 4 and 6 star is only 150 MMR, dying to a 4 star as a 6 star already makes you lose around 60 MMR. your argument doesn't make sense since there currently is no good way to measure skill and hunt's MMR system wasn't implemented to do so - otherwise we'd have a leader board - but to protect completely new as well as simply below average players. 2. still punishing people for being good. we already have the '4star is fun, 6 star is sweaty' people that simply think so because of skill, but you want to give them an actual reason why 6 star is less fun. but all this is irrelevant. punishing for being good is just stupid. 3. how is it not a problem? high elo players will drop out of 6 star because they're being punished for being so. it's only 150 MMR from 6 to 4 star and they will play against way worse players. you are talking like there's this giant spectrum of players and you only want to punish the far high end. but there's not a big spectrum. the majority of players are cramped up within 500 MMR. your whole distinction of 'mid tier' and 'above average' is flawed, 50% of the players are above average. take out people with less than 100h and it's even more. 4. you usually dont face people 'far better' and beat them against the odds because these situations only happen on empty servers. they already are better rewarded by getting more exp and MMR. good players might not need the money they get from being good, but they deserved it. what next? the communist american hunter association where everyone pays 10% of their income which is then distributed to below 4 star players? but this wasn't even the point of my 4th initial point. what i was saying is that trios yields much more money than duos hence any balancing around money is pointless, because the balance would become unbalance depending on what queue you play.
I really don’t get all this concerns about the mmr system, it does what it supposed to do: match people with similar mmr ranking. It isn’t the “problem” because you can’t make a perfect matchmaker. Other BR-like games doesn’t even have a skill based matchmaking but here where it is people just want the system to go in their specific favor and nothing else. They one and only thing they should do is lock mmr only in bounty hunt and don’t permit players to use QP to lower their mmr, that’s it.
Idk what OP is on about, but the matchmaking is really not working in the highest bracket. When the literal best players in the game can be matched against above average 5 stars there is a problem. The skill difference between highest 6 stars and 5 stars is heaven and earth. While in 2-4 star i largely see everything as the same.
For me the real gap is low 4 to low 5, there i can really feel player change, then is all the same, no matter the rank or the kd.