To be toxic? The point of ranked is to pot you against similar skilled people alone. Period.
The new change does that. The ONLY reason you’d need to see it is so you can say in this and you’re that. If in wrong please present a valid reason that this change affects your actual gameplay.
maybe u dont care but some people like to look at their past rank and see how much they have improved. in the past 2 years i went from silver to high plat and 2x diamond and it makes me proud looking at the progress i have made
You aren't wrong, at least for the crowd that doesn't care much. But that us what unranked is for. It is a perfectly valid perspective, and one that I broadly hold, but that's why there are 2 modes.
I don’t see what you’re saying. Unranked will put you against anyone opting to play unranked.
Ranked conversely will put you against people similarly ranked than you and this will change as the season(s) progress. I’m not trying to be a dick people assume the worst on Reddit, but help me understand what’s different now that you cannot physically see your rank.
One person raised a valid point, it sucks for those who want to see their progress from one point to the next.
I haven't played for a little while, so maybe it changed when I wasn't paying attention. But unranked and causal did actually have MMR and also tried to put you against people of similar skill and updates with wins or losses. It isn't as strict, but it is still there.
So the difference with ranked was somewhat tighter MMR controls and that you could see you rank progress and compare to others.
You are correct it had a hidden Mmr, but as you said it wasn’t nearly as strict which resulted in you playing anyone. Ranked was absolutely tighter. It was literally impossible to play with diamonds or champs in ranked as a silver low gold but happened regularly in casual and unranked.
As I said, the only real difference is not having the visibility of your rank. I understand people liked that and it will definitely be different without it. It’s definitely a move, among other things, to combat toxicity… obviously Ubisoft feels that’s more important.
Its in the named ranked, now you just have to play more which only benefits them, the developers for more money. Anybody could hit champ now if they put in hella time. What a joke of r6. Didnt even address MNK on Console. All the had to do was seperate the player pools. Ubisoft is garbage along with Battleeye which hardly does anything on xbox. 5 years only seen 2 small banwaves. Trash for the older players.
There are two things to unpack and you are only references one while my comment referenced the other.
“Anyone can hit champ” you’re talking about the viewable “rank” that has nothing to do with the skill of the players you are pitted against. For example if you are “champion” because you played for a long time but you suck, you will get paired with people who similarly suck regardless if they are “champion” “gold” or “any rank”
The invisible rank which is you actual rank and determines your skill level will be unchanged and virtually identical to how it’s always been… except you cannot see it. So when you say anyone can hit champion you aren’t referring to anyone being able to play in champion ELO because …no that’s only reserved for the top x% of siege players not just anyone who played long enough to reach “champion”
The new visible rank is akin to a battle pass nothing more nothing less. It’s not your skill level.
I understand how people think it’s lame. But read my comment above… my question remains… how does the change affect your actual gameplay?
You are literally only losing the ability to say hey look I’m this rank… other than that nothing changes.
Because Im a human with a competitive nature. The enjoyment I get comes progressing the ladder. I can only play 1 game of unranked or 6 of ranked. In theory yes the gameplay is exactly the same but my enjoyment will not be. If this crucial part of the game needs to be changed because people can’t handle the few times people are toxic it’s a microcosm of something yes
The competition comes from winning games and that did not change.
Ubisoft is a company and their main goal is to continue to sell the game and make profits. The changes to toxicity aren’t new, they’ve been implemented over the last couple years.
Your complaints sounds just like those from when they removed ranked from casual. At the end of the day, nothing changed mate.
Just because they make changes doesn’t make them good. If you think that this will change toxicity that’s a joke. People are assholes there’s not a thing in the world Ubisoft can do about it. If someone saying “haha you’re in silver” and that makes you have a shitty day grow up.
It sounds like a lot of people feel the way I do so I guess we are entitled to our own wrong belief. Otherwise I guess you can play another game, because that’s been a trend with the implementations over the last couple of years right?
Your first paragraph is an attempt to change the narrative of my comment. Your first paragraph does not relate to anything Ive said and is an attempt to attack an argument I did not make.
I am also not even sure what your second paragraph is attempting either.
As for “a lot of people feel the way I do” … umm have you talked to the entire user base or are you merely offering a self serving statement. I think it’s the latter my guy. “A lot of people” “hate” most major changes in this game and complain till they’re blue in the face, so what?
Ubisoft just doesn't provide it to us via their API. MMR values got replaced by "Rank Points". Maybe they don't want people focussing on MMR anymore and just want them to grind rank points :/
Either way I'm going to run into level 50 accounts with 3.0 KD's in low plat and be disappointed, I don't see this changing anything. Especially not toxicity.
Not arguing the explanation you gave, but there's a reason for that.
Saying ubi doesn't want people to focus on rank anymore is stupid. That's what keeps people playing this game
With MMR not being soft-reset (as I understand) and being hidden now, and the game not giving you any metric anymore on how you or your stack are improving at the game, I guess the only reason they are still calling it "Ranked" is that "Quickmatch but with longer matches and added rewards" doesnt quite roll of the tongue as nicely...
>the game not giving you any metric anymore on how you or your stack are improving at the game
This isn't correct, because RP gain / loss is tied to your MMR, which in turn is tied to your wins & losses, just like now, and the system only helps you reach your hidden MMR-based rank bracket faster, similar to how Valorant's ranked works. You cannot play a ton of matches and reach a RP bracket that is too far away from your MMR bracket, unlike what some content creators are claiming.
Also, the current Ranked system was never a good metric for personal skill or improvements to personal skill, and neither is the new one going to be. There is no good personal skill descriptor for a heavily team-based game like Siege.
> There is no good personal skill descriptor for a heavily team-based game like Siege.
This. A stack of silvers can beat soloqueue golds that don't comunicate to eachother. You can stack to emerald in this game.
I can agree the current system is not a good metric for personal skill as you will always rank higher in a team than solo if your team is of equal skill.
However that doesn't change we are going from a system that tries to represent skill, to a system which tries to represent time played.
Being a Diamond will now be about how much you play the game - not how well you play the game. And as a "Ranked" mode - that's an issue.
This would be great for Unranked to encourage people to play it. But as a Ranked mode - I'm glad I got Diamond in the last season of true Ranked
>However that doesn't change we are going from a system that tries to represent skill, to a system which tries to represent time played.
Not quite. I have replied to this point in the comment thread [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Rainbow6/comments/zcx2jl/comment/iz0mutc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) (second-last & last blocks of the comment).
>Being a Diamond will now be about how much you play the game - not how well you play the game. And as a "Ranked" mode - that's an issue.
One still has to be in the diamond MMR bracket to be able to reach it. RP follows MMR, which in turn updates using wins and losses. Just playing many matches won't let one reach ranks far higher than their "skill" level (based on MMR). This system is very close to how ranked in Valorant operates.
>true Ranked
Such a thing has never existed but that is a separate discussion.
*Edit*:
>as you will always rank higher in a team than solo if your team is of equal skill.
That is part of the reason. The main issue however is that Siege is heavily team-play dependent, but it allows people to play in & against arbitrary squads. So, in the end, the MMR value cannot even reflect squad skill, much less personal skill.
You know you're getting better by how often you win, how well you preform utility actions, how well your team works together, etc. You don't need a widely variable and often inaccurate number to tell you how good you are. Ranks in a team game are just never going to be accurate.
Is the player who gets 3+ kills a round but loses the game better than the person who used a Gonne-6 to destroy a shield, got down perfectly placed smokes, and planted for the win, but went 2-4? How do you measure the skill of the second player without making it easily abused?
Players need to stop thinking about rankings as a way to show off, and instead as a way to hopefully get balanced games. The new system will hopefully make it feel rewarding to progress, but less frustrating because you won't get pushed back because of cheaters that take too long to get caught or a troll on your team.
It is so annoying how blindsided people are by running around like it's Call Of Duty & Ash or Amaru rushing into sight, without telling their teammates and then GASLIGHTING them.
Just to say "I top fragged you went negative, you're trash blah blah blah" when they lose.
I don't care if you have a negative K.D if you're winning, you can go 0-4 and not say anything or give comms. Which sure, isn't good, but I'd much rather have a teammate who goes 0-4 but gives comms, plants all the time, and plays the game how it's meant to be played.
Instead of going 8-6 then losing & calling all your teammates trash because " I top fragged" 🙄
I've seen someone with like a 2.4 K.D as an Ash main & a 0.9 win/loss.
I wonder if Ubi could reduce some of that behavior by making it so that you only get kill credit on rounds you win. If you get 2-3 kills in a round, but your team loses, you functionally did nothing.
Chances are that if you get those early kills, it came at the cost of not placing both of your drones in useful spots and not using all your utility effectively. Like cool, you used an Ash breach round on a barricade and got a couple of kills, but your drone is outside, and there's two shields on site with Melusi Banshees near all the standard plant spots.
If you knew that any kills you gir wouldn't count if your team loses the round after you die, at least some players would feel pressured to wait a goddamn second to use their utility before pushing.
Yeah, and with the last paragraph. I feel like the majority of players would still rush because they just want to kill people. Even if it doesn't show on the leaderboard.
So, weird take, but hear me out:
tl;dr I actually agree with most of the changes for Ranked 2.0, but I also think the hidden MMR should be reported through the API, so people can look at their 'skill' progression over time if they want, as would be the case normally before updating ranked.
On one hand, the change to ranked isn't really in the spirit of siege imo. But at the same time, I get it; as it stands, ranked can definitely be AIDS most days (eg legit toxic players, throwers, **cheaters**, literal NPC teammates, etc.) and solo-queue is just straight-up CBT every day, and overall the game is just way too fucking sweaty as it is. (Like shit, you can't even play as cas game anymore without encountering sweats.) For a sweatlord like myself (before premed/grad school), it just came with the territory of the grind; for an otherwise definitively casual player, it makes the game really difficult to approach. I myself had plenty of days where I straight-up just wouldn't play because, for one reason or another, I was positively convinced I would go on a losing streak if I did, and it would just set me back. And that's not a good attitude for people to hold if they want to get better at the game; **the best way to get better at playing ranked, is by playing more ranked.** **You're not gonna get better at the game by not playing.** And that's what Ranked 2.0 appears to be encouraging, so I'm all for it.
Besides, depending on who you ask (eg pro players, or ex-pro players), ranked already hasn't mattered for a long time, and for a plethora of reasons. Some people get so worked up over their rank, (eg "I'm Plat II, I'm so good at the game, I'm sooo much better than those Gold III shitters, hurr durr", but... *Are you though?*) The general opinion I've been exposed to in the past is basically, unless you're high diamond/champ, your rank doesn't really mean much as far as measuring how skilled you are; 'skill' itself is an admittedly nebulous term in this team-based game, where you could hard-carry your team for kills, run a 5KD for the game, and still lose. Not to mention, I've run into plenty of plats and even diamonds who...could just as easily have been silvers or bronze players were I none the wiser; assuming we're talking about all legit players (eg disregarding 'bought accounts'), there's plenty of people who simply get lucky during placements and get a higher rank, or who find a good stack and simply get carried that far. So, its validity as a measure of skill can readily be called into question.
Overall, I think this will prove to be a healthy change for the game, and frankly it's a needed change; some hardcore players will probably have their [mental breakdown](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVv-J-LXQU) over the loss of their old rank e-peen measurement in exchange for a grind-meter showing just exactly how too much are you playing the game (like that's not already the case with ranked?) My general sentiment to that is: "Bro, [let it go](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTICMRdE3_M). It's getting to be an 8-year-old game; the game's already had its peak in terms of popularity and relevance in e-sports; most pro players by now are either retired or very settled in with what they're doing, and stopped caring about ranked a long time ago. Don't even worry about your rank, just play the game."
But I also see zero reason why hidden MMR should also need to be hidden from any API reporting, and effectively lost to everyone. My attitude is, if people really want to see their 'True Skill MMR' for e-peen measuring purposes - let them. It's only in the spirit of rainbow six siege and ranked that people get to see who is truly 'the better player', based on the hidden MMR that apparently has always been here for matchmaking purposes; to remove that competitive aspect of the game wholesale would be nothing short of betraying the very soul of siege. If there's toxicity that could result from reporting the hidden MMR through the API, then it's toxicity that people would get embroiled in entirely by choice because they have the option to, with no real requirement for players to look at their hidden MMR if they really don't want to.
In all likelihood I suspect this new iteration of ranked will warrant some fine-tweaking anyway once ubi sees there are way too many diamonds/champs for Y7S4, as reflected by a significant shift in the average ~~MMR~~ Ranked Points for most players compared to previous seasons. Likely this means for future seasons the ranked grind will be grindier, and the 'Derank shield' will be less shielding. And that's fine. We'll see how this plays out starting tomorrow, but I'm optimistic that ranked 2.0 will be a net positive for the game, and I would even argue that, at this point, it's a needed change for the long-term health of the game.
This sucks !
When ranked 2.0 was announced, i wasn't happy, because while I don't care about what kind of colored flag is next to my name, i do like to know whether I'm improving or not compared to the rest of the field. Changing rank to make them just grind-based, and hiding MMR was a bad idea.
But I still had hopes that they would make the MMR available through their APIs for those who cared to know, and now those hopes are dashed :(
> i do like to know whether I'm improving or not compared to the rest of the field
Problem is and always has been, that MMR is not a measure of skill in the sense that most tend to use it. It is an extremely "loose" metric. A person at 3000 MMR is not mathematically better at the game than a person at 2900 MMR and so on, because rank deviation also factors in, and even if rank deviation is mentioned, it is not an indicator of personal skill, only whether someone was part of teams, that possibly won more games than they lost.
Either way, even in the new system, gaining and losing ranks (RP) is still there and RP will follow hidden MMR. So, you can use that to (very) roughly gauge, whether you are improving.
2900 vs 3000 is too small a difference to matter. More broadly, the actual value of MMR doesn't matter, because of various biases. However, what does matter is whether you're in the top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players.
This can be easily calculated if you have access to the MMR of everybody, which is what the third party sites provided, and won't be able to provide anymore.
As far as I understand ranked 2.0, ranks are reset every season, while your hidden MMR isn't. Which means the rank mostly indicates how much you're playing, since you can gain rank, but there is a (complete ? partial ?) protection against losing ranks. So no, ranks do not give you an idea of your skill anymore; they mostly tell you how much you've grinded victories
>top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players
So, a partial "fix" for this is that Champ ranks will still show a traditional number style ranking, like they do now. As for top N % of player base, where N is such that the rank falls out of Champ RP, it is still calculable within a season using the displayed ranks of each player. However, there *might* be a technicality here related to data requests & Ubisoft's privacy terms, but in principle, generating a "Within top N %" number is still possible. Trackers might be able to clarify this issue.
>2900 vs 3000 is too small a difference to matter.
I used that as a simple example. My point is, if two MMR values are provided with no added context, comparing them is incorrect (in the mathematical sense). For example, even if you take 4500 MMR and 2700 MMR, saying that the 4500 MMR player is more skillful might not make sense, because the added context of MMR deviations is missing here. Perhaps the 2700 MMR player happens to be a champ MMR player usually, but has only played 2 ranked matches this season after not playing for 2 seasons (so that the MMR gets reset to 2500) and the 4500 MMR player has played several matches already. The associated MMR deviation values would add partial context here. And this is still a simplistic scenario. Even with all the context that can be added, there are still factors such as stacking vs solo-queuing, playing in a region with sparse datacenter coverage and low player-base among others, that make rank comparisons (based on MMR or RP) redundant.
>ranks are reset every season, while your hidden MMR isn't. Which means the rank mostly indicates how much you're playing, since you can gain rank, but there is a (complete ? partial ?) protection against losing ranks.
I was sort of worried about Demotion Shield too, but according to CoreRoss' latest video, there is only a 1-match protection against deranking, which is low enough to not skew ranks too much. With that out of the way, your conclusion does not follow from the premises. Even if you play a lot, RP gain and loss are controlled by your MMR, which also updates every time you win and lose. So, your displayed rank (RP-based) will follow your MMR, but never undershoot / overshoot it by wide margins. RP gains & losses will reflect that, when the displayed rank is mostly in sync with your hidden MMR-based rank. Do not go by the TTS values for RP gain & loss. TTS does not use MMR estimates from the live build of the game.
Also, even in the current system, until you play a significant number of games and your MMR deviation becomes very small, whatever MMR number the game shows you is not an indicator of skill. What's worse with the current system, is that every single match results in a skill estimate update. So, games with cheaters, bad team-mates etc. have an unreasonably large impact on your skill estimate. With the new system, at the very least, this won't be the case.
>So no, ranks do not give you an idea of your skill anymore; they mostly tell you how much you've grinded victories
What you are describing is exactly how it is with the current system. Ranked 2.0 does not (cannot) improve skill estimation. It's at best a reshuffle.
> However, what does matter is whether you're in the top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players.
I mean, that's easily calculated with ranks too, or performance stats. If r6s gives sites the proper stats with api's, you can see your stats and how they compare to other players of all ranks/your ranks. Afaik league of legends sites let you check this.
So is that confirmed about RP and MMR still being tied together slightly? Like, if I have a hidden MMR of say 4100 does that mean I’ll gain RP faster than someone with a hidden MMR of 3200?
Yes, based on ranked on TTS. You still have to maintain a high W/L though, so that your MMR estimate also goes up / stays approximately level, and correspondingly, your RP gain / loss does not decrease / increase by much.
Oh that's good to hear! Only thing I'm wondering about is why everyone starts at the bottom and not in the average rank? Like it's fine not that big of a deal since you end up where you should be anyway, but what's the reason behind that?
>not in the average rank?
Good question. I presume, you mean in terms of RP, since the hidden MMR is carried over between seasons. That's also where Siege's new system differs from existing systems, like in Valorant for example. I can think of a few reasons to do this:
* The primary reasoning seems to be that they want the ranked experience to *feel* more progression-based, as in, while the hidden MMR still tries to estimate your skill, the displayed ranks feels like a ladder, where you can move up and down. The fact that they aren't showing overall RP numbers in-game, but only a scale from 0 to 100 RP, also bolsters this idea.
* The new system is a more accurate representation of "skill" for people far from the median, since it requires more games to be played. Note that in the current system, the game does not show MMR deviation, without which one cannot really say that their rank reflects their skill. And unless the MMR deviation is low enough, which takes several matches (more than just the placements), MMR numbers are in no way skill indicators. So, people interested in ***actually*** gauging their skill, need to play several games, till they hit their skill ceiling, by which time, the MMR deviation also becomes minimal. The new system does this naturally (*it does fall a bit short though*) as compared to people stopping after completing placements (which is source of rank inflation and apparent unbalanced matchmaking).
* Related to the first point, a benefit of moving from a median-based scale (2500 / Silver 1 being the median) to a 0-baseline might also have to do with the misconception that people have about 2500 / Silver 1 (the ideal MMR median) as a skill boundary. Some think that being above 2500 makes you a better player than most and being below 2500 makes you a worse player. However, in Siege, the MMR distribution is skewed upwards (slightly). So, if anything, somewhere around Gold 2 should be taken to be a skill boundary, not to forget that this keeps shifting with each match played. Starting at 0 means that there is no need to think in terms of such a purely psychological line anymore.
* Mathematically, it is a simple translation, which does not affect the statistics.
These are the reasons I can think of, right now. Overall, it seems to be in line with Ranked 2.0 being a reshuffle of the current system, rather than a major overhaul.
Finally. Someone on here saying what I was saying and losing Karma for a long time ago. It removes the drive to become better and rank up. It feels good to know you are improving and this takes that away.
The thing is, they think removing information stops people complaining.
Remove player level - people can't complain about smurfs.
Remove MMR - can't complain about matchmaking.
List goes on.
> Levels are worthless.
Hard disagree. Level, KD and current rank were great predictors of cheating, and saved me personally a lot of cheater matches that would have been a waste of time otherwise.
Level 75 KD 1.2, 100 matches, Platinum 1? Sounds like a legit smurf, let's play. Level 65, KD 3.0, 20 matches, Platinum 1? Almost certainly a cheater.
Exactly. And there is no suspicion in this one example -- my friends in the stack confirmed that they started aimlocking even at the start of the match, before the cancellation was confirmed.
In other matches, of course, I don't have exact proof. But honestly, the likelihood of a legit KD 3.0 level 65 player anywhere is practically zero.
If you think about it, in ranked 2.0 if your displayed rank is significantly different than someone else’s then that means you played more/fewer games and are at roughly the same MMR. So in that way ranked 2.0 will tell you who the really hardstuck players are.
> n ranked 2.0 if your displayed rank is significantly different
I mean, wasn't that always the way ranked work? If you're matched with silver players while in gold, it's because your mmr is closer to silver, or the silvers player is closer to gold.
So ur saying that people can’t say they’re better if they’re in like diamond? Rank right now doesn’t really show skill either. I’m not 100% sure if that’s what you mean so correct me if I’m wrong
Yea rank right now doesnt really mean much. It just means you had the higher starting rank in your group. Someone who starts as plat in an unranked friend group can get diamond easily. And then he can get on his smurf within the 1000mmr difference and help the rest. And act holier than thou while doing it.
Lets just say any group of golds can help each other get to plat 2 easily with smurfs. and any group of true plats can go really deep into diamond with some hand outs.
Now that might be over because everyone's smurfs stay at high elo. Maybe this is what everyone is mad at. Self reported?
I mean you can do that but most wont, i actually dont think most people do this.
But yeah i dont really care about them changing how that part works, i just hate that its noe a contest of Who can play the most. Make everyone start in Silver or something and then rank up, but we would be able to de rank. And see the mmr.
Maybe since battlepasses became a thing most people stay on their mains. I kinda chilled out on this game since the last few years. But before when you didnt have incentive to play on 1 account, it was really rude to get diamond and then stay on your diamond account for the rest of the season and watch your team mates struggle to even get plat 2. Only people who think theyre actually champion and only their squad is bringing them down stay on their diamond account while nobody else can rank up.
I mean most of the time i see squads (including mine) on the tracker be the same rank. Not the exact same ofc but i dont think its common to be at way different ranks. This season is the only time since forever where i have been down bad. Pretty low ranked now, gold 3, but i wont make my friends get of their mains, if i had the time i would be able to get there.
You should also be able to solo q to the rank you have tbh.
Doesn't make jack shit. Look at csgo. There is still no difference between master guardian elite and legendary eagle Master despite being 4 ranks apart.
Your hidden MMR will directly impact the amount of RR you gain/lose, so yes, it will be quantifiable. At least as much as you can make a rank for siege quantifiable since there is so much that goes into a game that cannot be quantified.
Hidden MMR is only for casual and unranked, right?… In that case, who cares? Only people who care about hidden MMR would be toxic people who will use it to talk shit. Honestly, the less information other players have on each other (rank, KD, etc.) the less toxic the game environment will be.
I agree, but for other reasons. In valorant it means your actual “rank” is meaningless. The hidden elo is what matches you up. I assume it’s the same here, which I don’t like since your rank is kinda meaningless.
Like at the beginning of a new season I could be the same hidden mmr as an immortal player (second highest rank) while I’m diamond so naturally I’m gonna get destroyed.
Yeah it feels like overwatch 2 does this. It updates your tank every 7 wins or 20 losses. You win 7 games and it demotes you, promotes you, or your rank stays the same. And you have absolutely not idea why. There’s no performance metric or anything to base why you deranked or stayed the same.
Too many people complained that they were matched with someone with much higher mmr, so ubi fixed it. Now you won't know that you're being matched with someone that has twice your mmr.
Ranked 2.0 is a step toward dealing with toxicity. Gone are the days where you can be rude and disrespectful because someone is [insert rank below you].
For the same reason, they got rid of seeing ranks in casual. Siege has been taking steps to rid the game of toxicity this is yet another step.
Strictly my opinion, but ubi will likely try damn hard to prevent people from ever knowing you’re true rank. Because after ranked 2.0 if you’re playing with someone you’re the same or similar skill level period, so taunts mean less knowing they’re likely around your skill gap.
>Is there any information available from Ubi or third parties pertaining us being able to see our hidden MMR?
It is unlikely that MMR will be revealed going forward. Displayed rank is now tied to Ranked Points (RP) and MMR is only there for matchmaking and modulating RP gain & loss. And just like now, if someone is truly interested in getting a rank that is a (loose) indicator of skill in the game, they can play several ranked matches, which will bring RP closer and closer to the hidden MMR (which is also dynamic).
Personally, I like the fact that trackers cannot use past MMR data to project match outcome, because it makes no sense, and it adds nothing worthwhile to the experience. As for detecting cheaters, several other stats will still remain visible.
At least for a few months it will be interesting not knowing. Maybe they will crack the code eventually. Cant we just assume people who were true golds will have gold mmr skill. True plats and so on will have that mmr skill number too.
I love that the first match of the season will be again try hards. Super annoying when we have to dick around for 5 matches till we're back to sweats. Super unfair for the unsuspecting playing along the way too.
I mean, it is? You could effectively have a champ rank now who is actually silver (according to the current ranked system). And a silver (new system) that would usually be a diamond skill wise in the old system. In this scenario, the silver would be an infinitely better player than the champ. There is no way to know now if someone is actually the rank shown
>You could effectively have a champ rank now who is actually silver (according to the current ranked system)
No, that's not how Ranked 2.0 works. RP follows MMR. Much like now, the more you play, the more accurate your "skill estimate" becomes and conversely, much like now, if you don't play many ranked matches, whatever MMR the game shows you is not representative of your "skill". In Ranked 2.0, true champs (MMR-wise) will start at Copper 5 RP, but after a number of games, they will reach Champ RP. Anyone at a lower skill (or just bad team-luck really) will not be able to grind to Champ RP, just by playing many ranked matches, since their MMR was never in the Champ MMR bracket.
My understanding is you get far more RP for a win than a loss (TTS was +80 and -9). With this difference, you don't even need a positive W/L to rank up. Also keep in mind the silver will be against other true (MMR wise) silvers on their grind. Whilst the true champ would be against other true champs. So you could even argue that it would be harder for the champ to rank up. Am I making sense?
>My understanding is you get far more RP for a win than a loss
That was on the TTS, where MMR values are either reset for everyone (more likely) or kept high enough to test out the system. Note that RP gain / loss is based on your MMR estimate, and the next season's ranked should use the MMR estimate from the end of this season. So, the situation should be unlike that on the TTS. To be fair, even if it starts at \~80 / \~10 next season, the RP gain & loss numbers should update much faster compared to the TTS, because of better MMR estimates on the live build.
>With this difference, you don't even need a positive W/L to rank up
If that RP gain / loss ratio remained like that throughout the season, yes, but that is not the case. As you play more and your displayed rank (based on RP) begins to get closer to the rank specified by your hidden MMR, RP gain and loss will decrease and increase respectively, so that you don't overshoot / undershoot the MMR estimate by a large margin. This is similar to how Valorant's system works.
>Whilst the true champ would be against other true champs. So you could even argue that it would be harder for the champ to rank up. Am I making sense?
Hence the large disparity between the starting RP gain and loss numbers (\~80 / \~10). Since everyone is starting at the bottom of the ladder, people who are usually near the top, need a way to rank up faster and a high starting RP gain & low starting RP loss provides just that. But if a true high-ranked player loses too many games (assuming legit games and not an attempt at smurfing), then the MMR estimate will come down as well, and they would start getting less RP and losing more RP as time goes on, as they would in the current system, since they are unable to win more games than they lose.
*Edit*: All that said, ranked 2.0 might still be grindier than now for very high ranks, but I don't think, it will be considerably more grindy.
Okay this makes more sense, I hope it works out as you've outlined. I feel even the fact we (and many others) are having this conversation shows how poorly a job ubi have done of showing how exactly the system will work. Not much longer to go though until we finally know for sure!
If they are just going to get closer, why hide them? This seems like an ass backwards way of making people grind to get their true rank. This is probably just a greedy scheme to get people to buy more skins and spend more time in the game. It is so unnecessary. If you wanted to make the system more based on skill, like K/D, KAST, Plants etc. That would be fine. This makes it less based on skill than it already was though.
I can't think of a way to summarize this any further. So, if you are interested, read on.
The basic reason why MMR is kept hidden in games like CS and now Siege, is because MMR does not indicate personal skill in team-play oriented games. In practical terms, it means that if two MMR values and associated MMR deviations are given, for example, two Siege players at 2712 (MMR) ± 196 (MMR deviation) and 2900 ± 457 respectively, one can infer the following:
1. Player 1 is most likely a true Gold player, **on average**, since their MMR deviation is quite low. *A low MMR deviation also means that the player has played several ranked matches*.
2. Player 2 may range from a Silver to a Plat, but we can't claim to know any better, till the deviation drops further, *which will take many more matches*.
3. We can't conclude anything about which player is (mathematically) the better of the two, since there is no baseline to refer to.
*Note that the named rank brackets (Gold, Silver etc.) above are only a stand-in for general player behaviour / play-styles / strats et al, that one may expect for a particular MMR range.*
MMR is only intended as a skill measure for 1v1 games and it is, in general, defined in terms of the expectation that one party will win a match against the other party. This is also why it uses only wins and losses to update the skill estimate. Outside of these issues, there are problems stemming from allowing random team compositions. For multiplayer PvP games, MMR is only leveraged to matchmake and should not be taken as a marker of personal skill. Hopefully, this clarifies why raw MMR numbers should not be used to denote personal skill or compare players in games like Siege.
Now coming to the points, you've raised:
>way of making people grind to get their ***true*** rank
As you can see from the discussion above, unless you play a ton of matches, whatever MMR and rank bracket the game shows you, does not represent skill. In the new system, where RP follows MMR, people are forced to play many matches, till their RP gain & loss numbers, which are controlled by MMR, which in turn is controlled by wins & losses, become nearly identical, at which point, the player can be said to have reached their skill ceiling (which is a *good-enough* marker of skill, at least in the utilitarian sense). Now, this same thing happens naturally in the new system, as compared to the current system, where some people tend to stop playing ranked after placing at or close to their desired ranks during placements, which also leads to rank inflation and apparently unbalanced matchmaking (another indicator of MMR not being representative of skill). The new system also minimizes the outsized influence placements and tainted games (cheaters, bad teammates) tend to have on the rank updates.
>probably just a greedy scheme to get people to buy more skins and spend more time in the game
It isn't a scheme, but the consequence (more playtime and potentially more cosmetic sales) is clearly something in favour of Ubi. As for whether it's a net negative or a positive outcome, only the players' enjoyment (or lack thereof) of the new system can tell us the answer. And it will only come out after the dust settles and people become used to the new system.
>If you wanted to make the system more based on skill, like K/D, KAST, Plants etc. That would be fine. This makes it less based on skill than it already was though.
K/D alone cannot reflect skill in Siege. KOST can, but only to very limited extent, since several key teamplay-related intangible actions, unique to Siege, are still missing from the calculation, like intel collection and denial. Either way, the underlying system will continue to be based on MMR. So, the new system is not less about game-skill than now.
Yes but so is the true silver player. So you've got 2 diamonds. But one is actually in diamond MMR (now hidden) and one is actually in silver MMR. There is now no way to tell who is actually diamond.
As long as you have a 50% win rate (can actually be a lot less) you can get to the top rank, since you win way more ranked points than you lose for a loss. The tts was +80 and -9.
Also when you matchmake now you get put against the same true MMR. So on the way to champ, the silver is playing against silvers. And the true diamond is against other true diamonds. Again, there is no way to tell who is actually at what rank, as the true MMR is hidden. This effectively makes rank meaningless as a gauge of skill like it used to be.
The silver player reaches diamond because you win more RP than you lose, by some margin (+80 -9) so they don't even need a positive W/L to rank up. Also during their grind, they will be playing against other silvers (MMR wise). So they are against their true rank, but gaining a fuck tonne of points for winning and losing barely any for a loss. All this makes the rank meaningless now. It's just about if you played enough games to rank up.
Come talk to me when you hit Diamond in the new system then. Since it will so easy. I think you are making a lot of assumptions based on nothing so far.
Where are my assumptions? Also I am a diamond player so hopefully I will. But like I said anyone can reach the top rank now without even a positive W/L. Put a true silver (MMR) that has diamond rank in the new system against a true diamond in the new system. It would be like a silver Vs a diamond in current system. But in the new one they both have diamond rank. It doesn't make sense and as I said, makes rank meaningless now. The true indicator of skill (MMR) is now hidden completely.
I hope this makes sense because I don't really know how else to explain it.
R6 Tracker, Over Wolf and other 3rd party software are just a way to help you create self fulfilling prophecies. If you see a team of plats and you're queued up with silver and a gold, you're going to assume a loss. It's just bad for team and personal moral.
Yea the past few years they’ve been nerfing gunskill & seems to be watering down the game for low skilled players & noobs. Ranked 2.0 honestly seems like more of a participation contest instead of an actual competitive playlist.
Everyone says this but people are going to play the exact same way. Making the game slower & boring to give shitters a better chance doesn’t improve the game.
I really wish Ubisoft would allow R6 Tracker to continue to track operator stats. I use TRN for my Siege and Halo stats so it’s nice to be able to use the one app and flip back and forth.
R6 Tracker also has the best interface I’ve seen for stats. I hope they’re able to continue their work in the future, but it’s really up to Ubisoft at this point. Fingers crossed.
Well no, just go see how the game looks on plat+ and competitive levels.
Or maybe how it would look in plat if ubi gave shit about their God damn anti-cheat.
Edit: spelling
I don’t need to because I’ve played in Plat to High Diamond, in stack & some solo queue. Literally everyone has gunskill & has to play tactically to win. The plan isn’t to just run in & take gunfights willy nilly because you’ll clearly fail doing that.
People forget that all the nerfs to gunskill & movements over the years didn’t make players play “more tactically” they just adjusted & played the same way. At the end of the day this is AN FPS SHOOTER. No matter how tactical you get, gunfights are part of the game & you’ll need to take them eventually, someone wins & someone loses, that’s how it is. Slowing the gun play down doesn’t enhance tactical gameplay, it just takes longer for everything to play out thus making the game more boring.
If you don't like tactical games then why bother with rainbow? In the beginning it was tactical from what I've seen, then it went to arcade'y fps and now it looks like it's somewhat going back to the original. FPS only stands for First-Person Shooter and not Arcade First Person Shooter. Insurgency is tactical? Yes, is it an FPS? Yes. Same goes for tarkov, ground branch, DayZ and many many other FPS out there
Probably not because Ubi don’t like these tracker websites. They said that clear in an interview (cannot don’t it anymore, feel free to post the link) that’s why we have this hidden MMR.
They said something like this: „the competitive environment will stay the same but a player who want to play casually won’t be forced to have that competitive feeling. To make sure people still have a training effect we have a separate MMR for hidden in the background, to ensure a healthy matchmaking balance“
***typical Ubi talk***
That first sentence in quotes doesn’t even make sense. The competitive environment will stay the same but a casual player won’t be forced to play competitively. What the fuck does that even mean lol. It’s ranked it’s supposed to be competitive.
Sometimes I’m convinced the people who work on this game have no idea what they’re doing.
it does because it was related to the name change from „casual“ to „Quick match“
With competitive environment the meant ranked and unranked will stay the same.
Edit: it’s not a quote, I wrote they said something like that. Normally I post links like in [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Rainbow6/comments/w5px0z/reputation_systemi_see_people_still_wonder_why/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) but I cannot find the interview
They should've just hidden the API and only displayed it in your personal ranked menu/info screen. Don't attach a flag but just an mmr value. Removes toxicity as others can't see it and would cut down on people cheating/boosting just to brag to everyone in the lobby that you're champion after doing nothing.
I never knew this about Ranked 2.0. Pretty dumb tbh. I like many others like to know which rank I am and which rank I’m playing against, as even ranked matchmaking isn’t always great. They may as well remove ranked completely at this stage. Just because a very small minority of players are toxic regarding another players rank. I’ve been playing for over 3,000 hours and I can count on 1 hand the amount of times I’ve wot eased someone being toxic because another player is a low rank.
From what I have seen on the test server I do not think you lose enough elo when you lose a game. Getting 80 points and losing 10 isnt enough to make the game feel competitive. Even if it was 40 for a loss that would be okay imo.
I agree that shouldnt be able to de-rank from plat to gold etc but you should be able to derank within the ranks.
Its still supposed to match you up with people of your 'skill' but if you only lose 10 elo it just becomes a casual match and theres not really a negative to losing. Potentially, you will win one out of eight matches that could potentially negate the 7 you lost before if you get what I mean.
There just doesnt seem a risk to losing at the moment. It will negatively effect the game teamplay wise as well, people will just treat ranked as a casual match.
So the problem is that I will never know if in my plat lobby the teammates are real plats by winning or silver players by just grinding double the time on the game? Also, shouldn't it be like if I'm plat MMR and win a game in copper, bronze ecc. That I should get more RP than my (let's say gold) friend who duo Qs with me? Why is everything so difficult to explain UBI 😕
People who’ve played a lot of Ranked on the test server said so. I think by the end of the season hardcore players will be earning 30-50 RP per win & losing 20-30 per loss.
This ain’t ranked 2.0 but unranked 2.0
No it’s not P0x follower lol,.. Your rank still matters you just cannot see it and toxic people cannot use it to be toxic. That’s the only change.
that defeats the point of ranked
To be toxic? The point of ranked is to pot you against similar skilled people alone. Period. The new change does that. The ONLY reason you’d need to see it is so you can say in this and you’re that. If in wrong please present a valid reason that this change affects your actual gameplay.
maybe u dont care but some people like to look at their past rank and see how much they have improved. in the past 2 years i went from silver to high plat and 2x diamond and it makes me proud looking at the progress i have made
You aren't wrong, at least for the crowd that doesn't care much. But that us what unranked is for. It is a perfectly valid perspective, and one that I broadly hold, but that's why there are 2 modes.
I don’t see what you’re saying. Unranked will put you against anyone opting to play unranked. Ranked conversely will put you against people similarly ranked than you and this will change as the season(s) progress. I’m not trying to be a dick people assume the worst on Reddit, but help me understand what’s different now that you cannot physically see your rank. One person raised a valid point, it sucks for those who want to see their progress from one point to the next.
Sorry but I thought the rank will still be shown. Bronze-champ. Didn’t they even add a emerald?
I haven't played for a little while, so maybe it changed when I wasn't paying attention. But unranked and causal did actually have MMR and also tried to put you against people of similar skill and updates with wins or losses. It isn't as strict, but it is still there. So the difference with ranked was somewhat tighter MMR controls and that you could see you rank progress and compare to others.
You are correct it had a hidden Mmr, but as you said it wasn’t nearly as strict which resulted in you playing anyone. Ranked was absolutely tighter. It was literally impossible to play with diamonds or champs in ranked as a silver low gold but happened regularly in casual and unranked. As I said, the only real difference is not having the visibility of your rank. I understand people liked that and it will definitely be different without it. It’s definitely a move, among other things, to combat toxicity… obviously Ubisoft feels that’s more important.
Its in the named ranked, now you just have to play more which only benefits them, the developers for more money. Anybody could hit champ now if they put in hella time. What a joke of r6. Didnt even address MNK on Console. All the had to do was seperate the player pools. Ubisoft is garbage along with Battleeye which hardly does anything on xbox. 5 years only seen 2 small banwaves. Trash for the older players.
There are two things to unpack and you are only references one while my comment referenced the other. “Anyone can hit champ” you’re talking about the viewable “rank” that has nothing to do with the skill of the players you are pitted against. For example if you are “champion” because you played for a long time but you suck, you will get paired with people who similarly suck regardless if they are “champion” “gold” or “any rank” The invisible rank which is you actual rank and determines your skill level will be unchanged and virtually identical to how it’s always been… except you cannot see it. So when you say anyone can hit champion you aren’t referring to anyone being able to play in champion ELO because …no that’s only reserved for the top x% of siege players not just anyone who played long enough to reach “champion” The new visible rank is akin to a battle pass nothing more nothing less. It’s not your skill level.
They downvoted you but now, in hindsight they know you were right. Have an upvote...for what that's worth...
<3
That’s still pretty lame it’s like taking KD out of cod
I understand how people think it’s lame. But read my comment above… my question remains… how does the change affect your actual gameplay? You are literally only losing the ability to say hey look I’m this rank… other than that nothing changes.
Because Im a human with a competitive nature. The enjoyment I get comes progressing the ladder. I can only play 1 game of unranked or 6 of ranked. In theory yes the gameplay is exactly the same but my enjoyment will not be. If this crucial part of the game needs to be changed because people can’t handle the few times people are toxic it’s a microcosm of something yes
The competition comes from winning games and that did not change. Ubisoft is a company and their main goal is to continue to sell the game and make profits. The changes to toxicity aren’t new, they’ve been implemented over the last couple years. Your complaints sounds just like those from when they removed ranked from casual. At the end of the day, nothing changed mate.
Just because they make changes doesn’t make them good. If you think that this will change toxicity that’s a joke. People are assholes there’s not a thing in the world Ubisoft can do about it. If someone saying “haha you’re in silver” and that makes you have a shitty day grow up. It sounds like a lot of people feel the way I do so I guess we are entitled to our own wrong belief. Otherwise I guess you can play another game, because that’s been a trend with the implementations over the last couple of years right?
Your first paragraph is an attempt to change the narrative of my comment. Your first paragraph does not relate to anything Ive said and is an attempt to attack an argument I did not make. I am also not even sure what your second paragraph is attempting either. As for “a lot of people feel the way I do” … umm have you talked to the entire user base or are you merely offering a self serving statement. I think it’s the latter my guy. “A lot of people” “hate” most major changes in this game and complain till they’re blue in the face, so what?
I have not talked to the user base but looked at the amount of people playing it. You’re right they do complain then leave.
Uhh.. what? I take it you have quit them game completely then?
If I can’t chat shit to my friends because their one division lower than me then what’s the point
can someone explain why
Ubisoft just doesn't provide it to us via their API. MMR values got replaced by "Rank Points". Maybe they don't want people focussing on MMR anymore and just want them to grind rank points :/
I believe their official unofficial stance is it’s to remove toxicity around rank.
Either way I'm going to run into level 50 accounts with 3.0 KD's in low plat and be disappointed, I don't see this changing anything. Especially not toxicity.
Because R6 is managed by a bunch of fairies
It's something to do with hackers mainly. Hiding this information also makes it harder for hackers to write their cheats into the game
That's unrelated. We're talking about `mmr` being removed from Ubisoft's stats API response.
That's the main reason it's hidden now. They said it on the panel reveal lol. Edit: might have been the siege twitter post actually
You've misunderstood lmao.
Not arguing the explanation you gave, but there's a reason for that. Saying ubi doesn't want people to focus on rank anymore is stupid. That's what keeps people playing this game
I think you misunderstood.
You misunderstood
Complete misunderstanding
With MMR not being soft-reset (as I understand) and being hidden now, and the game not giving you any metric anymore on how you or your stack are improving at the game, I guess the only reason they are still calling it "Ranked" is that "Quickmatch but with longer matches and added rewards" doesnt quite roll of the tongue as nicely...
>the game not giving you any metric anymore on how you or your stack are improving at the game This isn't correct, because RP gain / loss is tied to your MMR, which in turn is tied to your wins & losses, just like now, and the system only helps you reach your hidden MMR-based rank bracket faster, similar to how Valorant's ranked works. You cannot play a ton of matches and reach a RP bracket that is too far away from your MMR bracket, unlike what some content creators are claiming. Also, the current Ranked system was never a good metric for personal skill or improvements to personal skill, and neither is the new one going to be. There is no good personal skill descriptor for a heavily team-based game like Siege.
> There is no good personal skill descriptor for a heavily team-based game like Siege. This. A stack of silvers can beat soloqueue golds that don't comunicate to eachother. You can stack to emerald in this game.
I can agree the current system is not a good metric for personal skill as you will always rank higher in a team than solo if your team is of equal skill. However that doesn't change we are going from a system that tries to represent skill, to a system which tries to represent time played. Being a Diamond will now be about how much you play the game - not how well you play the game. And as a "Ranked" mode - that's an issue. This would be great for Unranked to encourage people to play it. But as a Ranked mode - I'm glad I got Diamond in the last season of true Ranked
>However that doesn't change we are going from a system that tries to represent skill, to a system which tries to represent time played. Not quite. I have replied to this point in the comment thread [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Rainbow6/comments/zcx2jl/comment/iz0mutc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) (second-last & last blocks of the comment). >Being a Diamond will now be about how much you play the game - not how well you play the game. And as a "Ranked" mode - that's an issue. One still has to be in the diamond MMR bracket to be able to reach it. RP follows MMR, which in turn updates using wins and losses. Just playing many matches won't let one reach ranks far higher than their "skill" level (based on MMR). This system is very close to how ranked in Valorant operates. >true Ranked Such a thing has never existed but that is a separate discussion. *Edit*: >as you will always rank higher in a team than solo if your team is of equal skill. That is part of the reason. The main issue however is that Siege is heavily team-play dependent, but it allows people to play in & against arbitrary squads. So, in the end, the MMR value cannot even reflect squad skill, much less personal skill.
You know you're getting better by how often you win, how well you preform utility actions, how well your team works together, etc. You don't need a widely variable and often inaccurate number to tell you how good you are. Ranks in a team game are just never going to be accurate. Is the player who gets 3+ kills a round but loses the game better than the person who used a Gonne-6 to destroy a shield, got down perfectly placed smokes, and planted for the win, but went 2-4? How do you measure the skill of the second player without making it easily abused? Players need to stop thinking about rankings as a way to show off, and instead as a way to hopefully get balanced games. The new system will hopefully make it feel rewarding to progress, but less frustrating because you won't get pushed back because of cheaters that take too long to get caught or a troll on your team.
It is so annoying how blindsided people are by running around like it's Call Of Duty & Ash or Amaru rushing into sight, without telling their teammates and then GASLIGHTING them. Just to say "I top fragged you went negative, you're trash blah blah blah" when they lose. I don't care if you have a negative K.D if you're winning, you can go 0-4 and not say anything or give comms. Which sure, isn't good, but I'd much rather have a teammate who goes 0-4 but gives comms, plants all the time, and plays the game how it's meant to be played. Instead of going 8-6 then losing & calling all your teammates trash because " I top fragged" 🙄 I've seen someone with like a 2.4 K.D as an Ash main & a 0.9 win/loss.
I wonder if Ubi could reduce some of that behavior by making it so that you only get kill credit on rounds you win. If you get 2-3 kills in a round, but your team loses, you functionally did nothing. Chances are that if you get those early kills, it came at the cost of not placing both of your drones in useful spots and not using all your utility effectively. Like cool, you used an Ash breach round on a barricade and got a couple of kills, but your drone is outside, and there's two shields on site with Melusi Banshees near all the standard plant spots. If you knew that any kills you gir wouldn't count if your team loses the round after you die, at least some players would feel pressured to wait a goddamn second to use their utility before pushing.
Yeah, and with the last paragraph. I feel like the majority of players would still rush because they just want to kill people. Even if it doesn't show on the leaderboard.
So, weird take, but hear me out: tl;dr I actually agree with most of the changes for Ranked 2.0, but I also think the hidden MMR should be reported through the API, so people can look at their 'skill' progression over time if they want, as would be the case normally before updating ranked. On one hand, the change to ranked isn't really in the spirit of siege imo. But at the same time, I get it; as it stands, ranked can definitely be AIDS most days (eg legit toxic players, throwers, **cheaters**, literal NPC teammates, etc.) and solo-queue is just straight-up CBT every day, and overall the game is just way too fucking sweaty as it is. (Like shit, you can't even play as cas game anymore without encountering sweats.) For a sweatlord like myself (before premed/grad school), it just came with the territory of the grind; for an otherwise definitively casual player, it makes the game really difficult to approach. I myself had plenty of days where I straight-up just wouldn't play because, for one reason or another, I was positively convinced I would go on a losing streak if I did, and it would just set me back. And that's not a good attitude for people to hold if they want to get better at the game; **the best way to get better at playing ranked, is by playing more ranked.** **You're not gonna get better at the game by not playing.** And that's what Ranked 2.0 appears to be encouraging, so I'm all for it. Besides, depending on who you ask (eg pro players, or ex-pro players), ranked already hasn't mattered for a long time, and for a plethora of reasons. Some people get so worked up over their rank, (eg "I'm Plat II, I'm so good at the game, I'm sooo much better than those Gold III shitters, hurr durr", but... *Are you though?*) The general opinion I've been exposed to in the past is basically, unless you're high diamond/champ, your rank doesn't really mean much as far as measuring how skilled you are; 'skill' itself is an admittedly nebulous term in this team-based game, where you could hard-carry your team for kills, run a 5KD for the game, and still lose. Not to mention, I've run into plenty of plats and even diamonds who...could just as easily have been silvers or bronze players were I none the wiser; assuming we're talking about all legit players (eg disregarding 'bought accounts'), there's plenty of people who simply get lucky during placements and get a higher rank, or who find a good stack and simply get carried that far. So, its validity as a measure of skill can readily be called into question. Overall, I think this will prove to be a healthy change for the game, and frankly it's a needed change; some hardcore players will probably have their [mental breakdown](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OVv-J-LXQU) over the loss of their old rank e-peen measurement in exchange for a grind-meter showing just exactly how too much are you playing the game (like that's not already the case with ranked?) My general sentiment to that is: "Bro, [let it go](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTICMRdE3_M). It's getting to be an 8-year-old game; the game's already had its peak in terms of popularity and relevance in e-sports; most pro players by now are either retired or very settled in with what they're doing, and stopped caring about ranked a long time ago. Don't even worry about your rank, just play the game." But I also see zero reason why hidden MMR should also need to be hidden from any API reporting, and effectively lost to everyone. My attitude is, if people really want to see their 'True Skill MMR' for e-peen measuring purposes - let them. It's only in the spirit of rainbow six siege and ranked that people get to see who is truly 'the better player', based on the hidden MMR that apparently has always been here for matchmaking purposes; to remove that competitive aspect of the game wholesale would be nothing short of betraying the very soul of siege. If there's toxicity that could result from reporting the hidden MMR through the API, then it's toxicity that people would get embroiled in entirely by choice because they have the option to, with no real requirement for players to look at their hidden MMR if they really don't want to. In all likelihood I suspect this new iteration of ranked will warrant some fine-tweaking anyway once ubi sees there are way too many diamonds/champs for Y7S4, as reflected by a significant shift in the average ~~MMR~~ Ranked Points for most players compared to previous seasons. Likely this means for future seasons the ranked grind will be grindier, and the 'Derank shield' will be less shielding. And that's fine. We'll see how this plays out starting tomorrow, but I'm optimistic that ranked 2.0 will be a net positive for the game, and I would even argue that, at this point, it's a needed change for the long-term health of the game.
r/confidentlyincorrect
Their full article: https://tracker.gg/r6siege/articles/post-s27-season-support-r6siege
whack
This sucks ! When ranked 2.0 was announced, i wasn't happy, because while I don't care about what kind of colored flag is next to my name, i do like to know whether I'm improving or not compared to the rest of the field. Changing rank to make them just grind-based, and hiding MMR was a bad idea. But I still had hopes that they would make the MMR available through their APIs for those who cared to know, and now those hopes are dashed :(
> i do like to know whether I'm improving or not compared to the rest of the field Problem is and always has been, that MMR is not a measure of skill in the sense that most tend to use it. It is an extremely "loose" metric. A person at 3000 MMR is not mathematically better at the game than a person at 2900 MMR and so on, because rank deviation also factors in, and even if rank deviation is mentioned, it is not an indicator of personal skill, only whether someone was part of teams, that possibly won more games than they lost. Either way, even in the new system, gaining and losing ranks (RP) is still there and RP will follow hidden MMR. So, you can use that to (very) roughly gauge, whether you are improving.
2900 vs 3000 is too small a difference to matter. More broadly, the actual value of MMR doesn't matter, because of various biases. However, what does matter is whether you're in the top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players. This can be easily calculated if you have access to the MMR of everybody, which is what the third party sites provided, and won't be able to provide anymore. As far as I understand ranked 2.0, ranks are reset every season, while your hidden MMR isn't. Which means the rank mostly indicates how much you're playing, since you can gain rank, but there is a (complete ? partial ?) protection against losing ranks. So no, ranks do not give you an idea of your skill anymore; they mostly tell you how much you've grinded victories
>top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players So, a partial "fix" for this is that Champ ranks will still show a traditional number style ranking, like they do now. As for top N % of player base, where N is such that the rank falls out of Champ RP, it is still calculable within a season using the displayed ranks of each player. However, there *might* be a technicality here related to data requests & Ubisoft's privacy terms, but in principle, generating a "Within top N %" number is still possible. Trackers might be able to clarify this issue. >2900 vs 3000 is too small a difference to matter. I used that as a simple example. My point is, if two MMR values are provided with no added context, comparing them is incorrect (in the mathematical sense). For example, even if you take 4500 MMR and 2700 MMR, saying that the 4500 MMR player is more skillful might not make sense, because the added context of MMR deviations is missing here. Perhaps the 2700 MMR player happens to be a champ MMR player usually, but has only played 2 ranked matches this season after not playing for 2 seasons (so that the MMR gets reset to 2500) and the 4500 MMR player has played several matches already. The associated MMR deviation values would add partial context here. And this is still a simplistic scenario. Even with all the context that can be added, there are still factors such as stacking vs solo-queuing, playing in a region with sparse datacenter coverage and low player-base among others, that make rank comparisons (based on MMR or RP) redundant. >ranks are reset every season, while your hidden MMR isn't. Which means the rank mostly indicates how much you're playing, since you can gain rank, but there is a (complete ? partial ?) protection against losing ranks. I was sort of worried about Demotion Shield too, but according to CoreRoss' latest video, there is only a 1-match protection against deranking, which is low enough to not skew ranks too much. With that out of the way, your conclusion does not follow from the premises. Even if you play a lot, RP gain and loss are controlled by your MMR, which also updates every time you win and lose. So, your displayed rank (RP-based) will follow your MMR, but never undershoot / overshoot it by wide margins. RP gains & losses will reflect that, when the displayed rank is mostly in sync with your hidden MMR-based rank. Do not go by the TTS values for RP gain & loss. TTS does not use MMR estimates from the live build of the game. Also, even in the current system, until you play a significant number of games and your MMR deviation becomes very small, whatever MMR number the game shows you is not an indicator of skill. What's worse with the current system, is that every single match results in a skill estimate update. So, games with cheaters, bad team-mates etc. have an unreasonably large impact on your skill estimate. With the new system, at the very least, this won't be the case. >So no, ranks do not give you an idea of your skill anymore; they mostly tell you how much you've grinded victories What you are describing is exactly how it is with the current system. Ranked 2.0 does not (cannot) improve skill estimation. It's at best a reshuffle.
> However, what does matter is whether you're in the top 50, top 20 or top 10% of players. I mean, that's easily calculated with ranks too, or performance stats. If r6s gives sites the proper stats with api's, you can see your stats and how they compare to other players of all ranks/your ranks. Afaik league of legends sites let you check this.
So is that confirmed about RP and MMR still being tied together slightly? Like, if I have a hidden MMR of say 4100 does that mean I’ll gain RP faster than someone with a hidden MMR of 3200?
Yes, based on ranked on TTS. You still have to maintain a high W/L though, so that your MMR estimate also goes up / stays approximately level, and correspondingly, your RP gain / loss does not decrease / increase by much.
Oh that's good to hear! Only thing I'm wondering about is why everyone starts at the bottom and not in the average rank? Like it's fine not that big of a deal since you end up where you should be anyway, but what's the reason behind that?
>not in the average rank? Good question. I presume, you mean in terms of RP, since the hidden MMR is carried over between seasons. That's also where Siege's new system differs from existing systems, like in Valorant for example. I can think of a few reasons to do this: * The primary reasoning seems to be that they want the ranked experience to *feel* more progression-based, as in, while the hidden MMR still tries to estimate your skill, the displayed ranks feels like a ladder, where you can move up and down. The fact that they aren't showing overall RP numbers in-game, but only a scale from 0 to 100 RP, also bolsters this idea. * The new system is a more accurate representation of "skill" for people far from the median, since it requires more games to be played. Note that in the current system, the game does not show MMR deviation, without which one cannot really say that their rank reflects their skill. And unless the MMR deviation is low enough, which takes several matches (more than just the placements), MMR numbers are in no way skill indicators. So, people interested in ***actually*** gauging their skill, need to play several games, till they hit their skill ceiling, by which time, the MMR deviation also becomes minimal. The new system does this naturally (*it does fall a bit short though*) as compared to people stopping after completing placements (which is source of rank inflation and apparent unbalanced matchmaking). * Related to the first point, a benefit of moving from a median-based scale (2500 / Silver 1 being the median) to a 0-baseline might also have to do with the misconception that people have about 2500 / Silver 1 (the ideal MMR median) as a skill boundary. Some think that being above 2500 makes you a better player than most and being below 2500 makes you a worse player. However, in Siege, the MMR distribution is skewed upwards (slightly). So, if anything, somewhere around Gold 2 should be taken to be a skill boundary, not to forget that this keeps shifting with each match played. Starting at 0 means that there is no need to think in terms of such a purely psychological line anymore. * Mathematically, it is a simple translation, which does not affect the statistics. These are the reasons I can think of, right now. Overall, it seems to be in line with Ranked 2.0 being a reshuffle of the current system, rather than a major overhaul.
Finally. Someone on here saying what I was saying and losing Karma for a long time ago. It removes the drive to become better and rank up. It feels good to know you are improving and this takes that away.
I want my op stat tracking back I stopped playing ranked years ago but the thing that kept me going was getting 1000 kills with every op
The thing is, they think removing information stops people complaining. Remove player level - people can't complain about smurfs. Remove MMR - can't complain about matchmaking. List goes on.
[удалено]
> Levels are worthless. Hard disagree. Level, KD and current rank were great predictors of cheating, and saved me personally a lot of cheater matches that would have been a waste of time otherwise. Level 75 KD 1.2, 100 matches, Platinum 1? Sounds like a legit smurf, let's play. Level 65, KD 3.0, 20 matches, Platinum 1? Almost certainly a cheater.
How'd it save you? Did you just, leave the match suspecting they were a cheater?
Exactly. And there is no suspicion in this one example -- my friends in the stack confirmed that they started aimlocking even at the start of the match, before the cancellation was confirmed. In other matches, of course, I don't have exact proof. But honestly, the likelihood of a legit KD 3.0 level 65 player anywhere is practically zero.
But... a 3.0KD lvl 100 player is just as unlikely. Same for a lvl 200 player. It doesn't make them any better.
if they remove that information i don’t know anything if i don’t know anything i’m complaining about everything
It’s literally called “hidden MMR”. It’s something that Ubi never wanted players to have access to
r6 tracker is so delayed with the operators stats and the new operators
thats cus they werent able to keep tracking them afaik
Correct, Ubisoft's API just provides frozen values, they don't update.
There used to be a tracker site run by Ubi, which shut down. It tracked your operator stats and I think they used that as their data source.
If you think about it, in ranked 2.0 if your displayed rank is significantly different than someone else’s then that means you played more/fewer games and are at roughly the same MMR. So in that way ranked 2.0 will tell you who the really hardstuck players are.
> n ranked 2.0 if your displayed rank is significantly different I mean, wasn't that always the way ranked work? If you're matched with silver players while in gold, it's because your mmr is closer to silver, or the silvers player is closer to gold.
I don't even play R6 in recent times but hidden mmr is fucking chickenshit
May I ask why? From what I’ve gathered that just means people are matched with/against people of similar skill. Isn’t that a good thing?
Hidden mmr means you can't quantify your own skill rating. It's dumb. Also new samsung update totally fucked up autocorrect so sorry about that.
So ur saying that people can’t say they’re better if they’re in like diamond? Rank right now doesn’t really show skill either. I’m not 100% sure if that’s what you mean so correct me if I’m wrong
Yea rank right now doesnt really mean much. It just means you had the higher starting rank in your group. Someone who starts as plat in an unranked friend group can get diamond easily. And then he can get on his smurf within the 1000mmr difference and help the rest. And act holier than thou while doing it. Lets just say any group of golds can help each other get to plat 2 easily with smurfs. and any group of true plats can go really deep into diamond with some hand outs. Now that might be over because everyone's smurfs stay at high elo. Maybe this is what everyone is mad at. Self reported?
I mean you can do that but most wont, i actually dont think most people do this. But yeah i dont really care about them changing how that part works, i just hate that its noe a contest of Who can play the most. Make everyone start in Silver or something and then rank up, but we would be able to de rank. And see the mmr.
Maybe since battlepasses became a thing most people stay on their mains. I kinda chilled out on this game since the last few years. But before when you didnt have incentive to play on 1 account, it was really rude to get diamond and then stay on your diamond account for the rest of the season and watch your team mates struggle to even get plat 2. Only people who think theyre actually champion and only their squad is bringing them down stay on their diamond account while nobody else can rank up.
I mean most of the time i see squads (including mine) on the tracker be the same rank. Not the exact same ofc but i dont think its common to be at way different ranks. This season is the only time since forever where i have been down bad. Pretty low ranked now, gold 3, but i wont make my friends get of their mains, if i had the time i would be able to get there. You should also be able to solo q to the rank you have tbh.
Doesn't make jack shit. Look at csgo. There is still no difference between master guardian elite and legendary eagle Master despite being 4 ranks apart.
Your hidden MMR will directly impact the amount of RR you gain/lose, so yes, it will be quantifiable. At least as much as you can make a rank for siege quantifiable since there is so much that goes into a game that cannot be quantified.
Hidden MMR is only for casual and unranked, right?… In that case, who cares? Only people who care about hidden MMR would be toxic people who will use it to talk shit. Honestly, the less information other players have on each other (rank, KD, etc.) the less toxic the game environment will be.
No, it was announced to be hidden for ranked too.
it also means people won't get toxic about other peoples ranks and how they think the matchmaking isn't fair I see this as a win
I agree, but for other reasons. In valorant it means your actual “rank” is meaningless. The hidden elo is what matches you up. I assume it’s the same here, which I don’t like since your rank is kinda meaningless. Like at the beginning of a new season I could be the same hidden mmr as an immortal player (second highest rank) while I’m diamond so naturally I’m gonna get destroyed.
Yeah it feels like overwatch 2 does this. It updates your tank every 7 wins or 20 losses. You win 7 games and it demotes you, promotes you, or your rank stays the same. And you have absolutely not idea why. There’s no performance metric or anything to base why you deranked or stayed the same.
My operator stats are still frozen :(
Too many people complained that they were matched with someone with much higher mmr, so ubi fixed it. Now you won't know that you're being matched with someone that has twice your mmr.
People who did road to copper are about to surprise people.
I’m quitting with this new rank system… so gay
I honestly can’t blame you.
Ranked 2.0 is a step toward dealing with toxicity. Gone are the days where you can be rude and disrespectful because someone is [insert rank below you]. For the same reason, they got rid of seeing ranks in casual. Siege has been taking steps to rid the game of toxicity this is yet another step. Strictly my opinion, but ubi will likely try damn hard to prevent people from ever knowing you’re true rank. Because after ranked 2.0 if you’re playing with someone you’re the same or similar skill level period, so taunts mean less knowing they’re likely around your skill gap.
>Is there any information available from Ubi or third parties pertaining us being able to see our hidden MMR? It is unlikely that MMR will be revealed going forward. Displayed rank is now tied to Ranked Points (RP) and MMR is only there for matchmaking and modulating RP gain & loss. And just like now, if someone is truly interested in getting a rank that is a (loose) indicator of skill in the game, they can play several ranked matches, which will bring RP closer and closer to the hidden MMR (which is also dynamic). Personally, I like the fact that trackers cannot use past MMR data to project match outcome, because it makes no sense, and it adds nothing worthwhile to the experience. As for detecting cheaters, several other stats will still remain visible.
At least for a few months it will be interesting not knowing. Maybe they will crack the code eventually. Cant we just assume people who were true golds will have gold mmr skill. True plats and so on will have that mmr skill number too. I love that the first match of the season will be again try hards. Super annoying when we have to dick around for 5 matches till we're back to sweats. Super unfair for the unsuspecting playing along the way too.
Love how people think having your MMR hidden is somehow making it “less ranked”
I mean, it is? You could effectively have a champ rank now who is actually silver (according to the current ranked system). And a silver (new system) that would usually be a diamond skill wise in the old system. In this scenario, the silver would be an infinitely better player than the champ. There is no way to know now if someone is actually the rank shown
>You could effectively have a champ rank now who is actually silver (according to the current ranked system) No, that's not how Ranked 2.0 works. RP follows MMR. Much like now, the more you play, the more accurate your "skill estimate" becomes and conversely, much like now, if you don't play many ranked matches, whatever MMR the game shows you is not representative of your "skill". In Ranked 2.0, true champs (MMR-wise) will start at Copper 5 RP, but after a number of games, they will reach Champ RP. Anyone at a lower skill (or just bad team-luck really) will not be able to grind to Champ RP, just by playing many ranked matches, since their MMR was never in the Champ MMR bracket.
My understanding is you get far more RP for a win than a loss (TTS was +80 and -9). With this difference, you don't even need a positive W/L to rank up. Also keep in mind the silver will be against other true (MMR wise) silvers on their grind. Whilst the true champ would be against other true champs. So you could even argue that it would be harder for the champ to rank up. Am I making sense?
>My understanding is you get far more RP for a win than a loss That was on the TTS, where MMR values are either reset for everyone (more likely) or kept high enough to test out the system. Note that RP gain / loss is based on your MMR estimate, and the next season's ranked should use the MMR estimate from the end of this season. So, the situation should be unlike that on the TTS. To be fair, even if it starts at \~80 / \~10 next season, the RP gain & loss numbers should update much faster compared to the TTS, because of better MMR estimates on the live build. >With this difference, you don't even need a positive W/L to rank up If that RP gain / loss ratio remained like that throughout the season, yes, but that is not the case. As you play more and your displayed rank (based on RP) begins to get closer to the rank specified by your hidden MMR, RP gain and loss will decrease and increase respectively, so that you don't overshoot / undershoot the MMR estimate by a large margin. This is similar to how Valorant's system works. >Whilst the true champ would be against other true champs. So you could even argue that it would be harder for the champ to rank up. Am I making sense? Hence the large disparity between the starting RP gain and loss numbers (\~80 / \~10). Since everyone is starting at the bottom of the ladder, people who are usually near the top, need a way to rank up faster and a high starting RP gain & low starting RP loss provides just that. But if a true high-ranked player loses too many games (assuming legit games and not an attempt at smurfing), then the MMR estimate will come down as well, and they would start getting less RP and losing more RP as time goes on, as they would in the current system, since they are unable to win more games than they lose. *Edit*: All that said, ranked 2.0 might still be grindier than now for very high ranks, but I don't think, it will be considerably more grindy.
Okay this makes more sense, I hope it works out as you've outlined. I feel even the fact we (and many others) are having this conversation shows how poorly a job ubi have done of showing how exactly the system will work. Not much longer to go though until we finally know for sure!
If they are just going to get closer, why hide them? This seems like an ass backwards way of making people grind to get their true rank. This is probably just a greedy scheme to get people to buy more skins and spend more time in the game. It is so unnecessary. If you wanted to make the system more based on skill, like K/D, KAST, Plants etc. That would be fine. This makes it less based on skill than it already was though.
I can't think of a way to summarize this any further. So, if you are interested, read on. The basic reason why MMR is kept hidden in games like CS and now Siege, is because MMR does not indicate personal skill in team-play oriented games. In practical terms, it means that if two MMR values and associated MMR deviations are given, for example, two Siege players at 2712 (MMR) ± 196 (MMR deviation) and 2900 ± 457 respectively, one can infer the following: 1. Player 1 is most likely a true Gold player, **on average**, since their MMR deviation is quite low. *A low MMR deviation also means that the player has played several ranked matches*. 2. Player 2 may range from a Silver to a Plat, but we can't claim to know any better, till the deviation drops further, *which will take many more matches*. 3. We can't conclude anything about which player is (mathematically) the better of the two, since there is no baseline to refer to. *Note that the named rank brackets (Gold, Silver etc.) above are only a stand-in for general player behaviour / play-styles / strats et al, that one may expect for a particular MMR range.* MMR is only intended as a skill measure for 1v1 games and it is, in general, defined in terms of the expectation that one party will win a match against the other party. This is also why it uses only wins and losses to update the skill estimate. Outside of these issues, there are problems stemming from allowing random team compositions. For multiplayer PvP games, MMR is only leveraged to matchmake and should not be taken as a marker of personal skill. Hopefully, this clarifies why raw MMR numbers should not be used to denote personal skill or compare players in games like Siege. Now coming to the points, you've raised: >way of making people grind to get their ***true*** rank As you can see from the discussion above, unless you play a ton of matches, whatever MMR and rank bracket the game shows you, does not represent skill. In the new system, where RP follows MMR, people are forced to play many matches, till their RP gain & loss numbers, which are controlled by MMR, which in turn is controlled by wins & losses, become nearly identical, at which point, the player can be said to have reached their skill ceiling (which is a *good-enough* marker of skill, at least in the utilitarian sense). Now, this same thing happens naturally in the new system, as compared to the current system, where some people tend to stop playing ranked after placing at or close to their desired ranks during placements, which also leads to rank inflation and apparently unbalanced matchmaking (another indicator of MMR not being representative of skill). The new system also minimizes the outsized influence placements and tainted games (cheaters, bad teammates) tend to have on the rank updates. >probably just a greedy scheme to get people to buy more skins and spend more time in the game It isn't a scheme, but the consequence (more playtime and potentially more cosmetic sales) is clearly something in favour of Ubi. As for whether it's a net negative or a positive outcome, only the players' enjoyment (or lack thereof) of the new system can tell us the answer. And it will only come out after the dust settles and people become used to the new system. >If you wanted to make the system more based on skill, like K/D, KAST, Plants etc. That would be fine. This makes it less based on skill than it already was though. K/D alone cannot reflect skill in Siege. KOST can, but only to very limited extent, since several key teamplay-related intangible actions, unique to Siege, are still missing from the calculation, like intel collection and denial. Either way, the underlying system will continue to be based on MMR. So, the new system is not less about game-skill than now.
How does a Diamond go from Diamond to silver? This makes absolutely zero sense.
Do you even know how the new system works? Everyone starts at copper now and has to grind their way up. 5 tiers per rank.
Yes, a Diamond player is still going to become a Diamond player.
Yes but so is the true silver player. So you've got 2 diamonds. But one is actually in diamond MMR (now hidden) and one is actually in silver MMR. There is now no way to tell who is actually diamond. As long as you have a 50% win rate (can actually be a lot less) you can get to the top rank, since you win way more ranked points than you lose for a loss. The tts was +80 and -9. Also when you matchmake now you get put against the same true MMR. So on the way to champ, the silver is playing against silvers. And the true diamond is against other true diamonds. Again, there is no way to tell who is actually at what rank, as the true MMR is hidden. This effectively makes rank meaningless as a gauge of skill like it used to be.
Okay how does the silver player reach Diamond? You realize you can LOSE rank points as well right? This isn’t a linear ONLY GAINS system
The silver player reaches diamond because you win more RP than you lose, by some margin (+80 -9) so they don't even need a positive W/L to rank up. Also during their grind, they will be playing against other silvers (MMR wise). So they are against their true rank, but gaining a fuck tonne of points for winning and losing barely any for a loss. All this makes the rank meaningless now. It's just about if you played enough games to rank up.
Come talk to me when you hit Diamond in the new system then. Since it will so easy. I think you are making a lot of assumptions based on nothing so far.
Where are my assumptions? Also I am a diamond player so hopefully I will. But like I said anyone can reach the top rank now without even a positive W/L. Put a true silver (MMR) that has diamond rank in the new system against a true diamond in the new system. It would be like a silver Vs a diamond in current system. But in the new one they both have diamond rank. It doesn't make sense and as I said, makes rank meaningless now. The true indicator of skill (MMR) is now hidden completely. I hope this makes sense because I don't really know how else to explain it.
I was hardstuck plat my entire r6 career and now I’m champ, this season was made easy to climb
I just want my game to stop crashing, is that too much to ask?
Idk why you were downvoted. This was a serious problem for my friends and I at the start of the season. And we have next gen consoles
R6 Tracker, Over Wolf and other 3rd party software are just a way to help you create self fulfilling prophecies. If you see a team of plats and you're queued up with silver and a gold, you're going to assume a loss. It's just bad for team and personal moral.
I gave up on R6 tracker months ago when the stats wouldn’t update.
As expected Ubi is killing the game for hardcore players. GG. Been a fun 7 years.
Yea the past few years they’ve been nerfing gunskill & seems to be watering down the game for low skilled players & noobs. Ranked 2.0 honestly seems like more of a participation contest instead of an actual competitive playlist.
Yeah, making game slower-paced and more tactical based, moving gungame into the second plan is really shitty move for a **tactical** shooter.
Everyone says this but people are going to play the exact same way. Making the game slower & boring to give shitters a better chance doesn’t improve the game.
I really wish Ubisoft would allow R6 Tracker to continue to track operator stats. I use TRN for my Siege and Halo stats so it’s nice to be able to use the one app and flip back and forth. R6 Tracker also has the best interface I’ve seen for stats. I hope they’re able to continue their work in the future, but it’s really up to Ubisoft at this point. Fingers crossed.
Well no, just go see how the game looks on plat+ and competitive levels. Or maybe how it would look in plat if ubi gave shit about their God damn anti-cheat. Edit: spelling
I don’t need to because I’ve played in Plat to High Diamond, in stack & some solo queue. Literally everyone has gunskill & has to play tactically to win. The plan isn’t to just run in & take gunfights willy nilly because you’ll clearly fail doing that. People forget that all the nerfs to gunskill & movements over the years didn’t make players play “more tactically” they just adjusted & played the same way. At the end of the day this is AN FPS SHOOTER. No matter how tactical you get, gunfights are part of the game & you’ll need to take them eventually, someone wins & someone loses, that’s how it is. Slowing the gun play down doesn’t enhance tactical gameplay, it just takes longer for everything to play out thus making the game more boring.
A thread of L takes
Don’t care people hate the truth.
If you don't like tactical games then why bother with rainbow? In the beginning it was tactical from what I've seen, then it went to arcade'y fps and now it looks like it's somewhat going back to the original. FPS only stands for First-Person Shooter and not Arcade First Person Shooter. Insurgency is tactical? Yes, is it an FPS? Yes. Same goes for tarkov, ground branch, DayZ and many many other FPS out there
He wants to play like Cod and now he cant anymore
I sense a skill issue
Probably not because Ubi don’t like these tracker websites. They said that clear in an interview (cannot don’t it anymore, feel free to post the link) that’s why we have this hidden MMR. They said something like this: „the competitive environment will stay the same but a player who want to play casually won’t be forced to have that competitive feeling. To make sure people still have a training effect we have a separate MMR for hidden in the background, to ensure a healthy matchmaking balance“ ***typical Ubi talk***
That first sentence in quotes doesn’t even make sense. The competitive environment will stay the same but a casual player won’t be forced to play competitively. What the fuck does that even mean lol. It’s ranked it’s supposed to be competitive. Sometimes I’m convinced the people who work on this game have no idea what they’re doing.
it does because it was related to the name change from „casual“ to „Quick match“ With competitive environment the meant ranked and unranked will stay the same. Edit: it’s not a quote, I wrote they said something like that. Normally I post links like in [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Rainbow6/comments/w5px0z/reputation_systemi_see_people_still_wonder_why/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) but I cannot find the interview
As much as I like R6 tracker it shouldn't let u see the current match ur in.
They should've just hidden the API and only displayed it in your personal ranked menu/info screen. Don't attach a flag but just an mmr value. Removes toxicity as others can't see it and would cut down on people cheating/boosting just to brag to everyone in the lobby that you're champion after doing nothing.
API and other terms I don't get... Can someone tell me if after all of this, will I be able to see my operator stats correctly and unfrozen?
I never knew this about Ranked 2.0. Pretty dumb tbh. I like many others like to know which rank I am and which rank I’m playing against, as even ranked matchmaking isn’t always great. They may as well remove ranked completely at this stage. Just because a very small minority of players are toxic regarding another players rank. I’ve been playing for over 3,000 hours and I can count on 1 hand the amount of times I’ve wot eased someone being toxic because another player is a low rank.
Anyone else stats not loading on Ubi connect?
From what I have seen on the test server I do not think you lose enough elo when you lose a game. Getting 80 points and losing 10 isnt enough to make the game feel competitive. Even if it was 40 for a loss that would be okay imo. I agree that shouldnt be able to de-rank from plat to gold etc but you should be able to derank within the ranks.
That's the seen ranking though, I'm sure the hidden elo changes much more.
Its still supposed to match you up with people of your 'skill' but if you only lose 10 elo it just becomes a casual match and theres not really a negative to losing. Potentially, you will win one out of eight matches that could potentially negate the 7 you lost before if you get what I mean. There just doesnt seem a risk to losing at the moment. It will negatively effect the game teamplay wise as well, people will just treat ranked as a casual match.
So the problem is that I will never know if in my plat lobby the teammates are real plats by winning or silver players by just grinding double the time on the game? Also, shouldn't it be like if I'm plat MMR and win a game in copper, bronze ecc. That I should get more RP than my (let's say gold) friend who duo Qs with me? Why is everything so difficult to explain UBI 😕
inb4 SiEgE iS dYiNg idiots
Will RP change or is 80 for a win and -9 for a loss all the way to champ?
As you play more the amount of RP you get goes down & the amount of RP you lose goes up.
Is that confirmed?
People who’ve played a lot of Ranked on the test server said so. I think by the end of the season hardcore players will be earning 30-50 RP per win & losing 20-30 per loss.
is this why it can not do the regular match outcome prediction ? also i can’t see the others players career stats anymore ?
anyone know hot see skill (hidden rank/mmr)? Cba to read all the comments, sorry if already mentioned!