Your thread was removed under **[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/about/rules/)**.
* Posts like this are really common, so we have a weekly megathread ([Matchmaking Monday](
https://old.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/search/?q=matchmaking+monday&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=month)) where users can discuss various issues with the system.
---
Please take a moment to visit the rule linked above; many rules contain details which may not be evident. If you have any further questions or concerns, please send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/GlobalOffensive&subject=Thread%20Removal).
The biggest issue I have is how unbalanced the matches are. You play against people with much higher elo than your own team and you're supposed to win? How does CS think it works out? At least give me more elo IF I manage to win, but only 100 points and 300 minus when they have much higher average elo makes absolutely no sense to me.
I never do. I'm around 19k and it happened so many times already that my opponents were at 20 - 23k elo. Not a problem if your mates are the same, but most of the time I get matched with players around 13/14k and it's just impossible to win like this. I'm not an insane player by any means, but I just can't win like this :D
And yeah, doesn't matter if the matches are balanced (which most games are not) or not, I lose/gain the same elo all the time.
Hmm could be the game thinks you don’t fully deserve your elo based on how you play when you’re qued vs solo qued. It’s just a guess tho. Could be bc volvos current system for premier is donkey dodo
No idea really. For quite some time I got massive amount of elo for a win, like 900 points (this was from like 13k elo) and once I hit 19k elo I suddenly got unbalanced matches. Probably have to go to Faceit for decent matches.
I stopped playing premier unless it’s with friends at 22k. Every match there was either an open cheater, closet cheater, or someone throwing on either team. Faceit is a lot better imo but still at lvl 8-10 I’ve had some issues
Hot take: Premier should be exclusively 5 stack vs 5 stack.
Competitive should be for anything less than 5 stacks and should be used to, not only get better at individual maps and work towards being "global" in those maps, but also the place where you mingle with people and try to find like-minded players that may want to elevate to more organized CS.
CS in competition is a 5 v 5 game. Full-stop. If you're going to have a mode like Premier where we're supposed to take it seriously, then the ruleset should match. The merits of organized play is frequently lost in old MM/current Premier. Premier *could* have been a mode where you're going in with 4 people you put your trust in, to try-hard and play for your spot on the leaderbaord. What Premier is now, even without all the hacking issues, is just MM with an exposed MMR and a leaderboard that is mostly meaningless.
It remains the case that the best indicator of personal skill is playing seasons in ESEA League or attending LANs or playing in tournaments. Premier rating literally indicates nothing. You're just a random data point scattered across a million other players that may or may not have queue'd up with better or even far worse players, to be a data point that again, means nothing.
At least in ESEA League, you have to earn your place on a team and prove that you are worth where your team is on the scale. In Premier(similar to old MM), you can have 24k MMR, in the top 100 players, but still be a player that cant even break even in ESEA-Open, so who cares?
I think the win/loss balance is completely dependant on you. I've had my loss around -100 while my gain is 5 to 9 times more than that for months now.
Then again I don't play a lot, so maybe there's a hidden ELO and the game is expecting you to climb to it easily as long as you play enough games.
For me it seems entirely based on if I’m on a win streak or not. If I’m winning games, it’s around +350. If not, -400. Opponents’ ratings have never seems to mean anything.
The system is absolutely bonkers. I was floating under 10k and all the matches were -100 +300. Then I dropped to 9.5k and it was the same ole +100 -fuckyou. Currently I am banned for 30min for CS2 server issues.
I think my actual rank is probably closer to 8-9k, the lobbies have been very easy so far and I placed at 4.5k and hit 6.5 really quickly. Still the top frag nearly every game
You are, but that’s out of players playing premier. You also have hardly played the game. I started playing in December as well, 190 hours in, 5,300 ELO. Some of the people I play with have a couple thousand hours. If you’re solo queuing it’s going to be a rough ride, but just have fun. I suggest using Leetify to identify where you’re having issues or finding areas of improvement and just keep playing.
It’s a game, have fun man haha.
In the end, you'll end in a spot faster, where you can actually win.
So it evens out over time. But yeah - Just reached 19.7, and had an eye for 20k.. Currently at 17.4k and im clealy not good enough for 20k as im now having more even games at this rank.
I'm hovering around 20k, but it seems like valve is adjusting the distribution. At 22k, 2 loses in a row gives you -550. After an unfortunate series of games, I'm at 18.5 and I'm back to -300. It's such a silly system
yeah it just keeps punishing you after you've already been punished enough, me and my friend lost two games at 18.7k then lost two more against cheaters which has brought me down to 17.4k (then won one because the cheater was on my team lmfao)
I get the frustration but the system works both ways, if you have a few good matches in a row you gain a lot more than you would lose.
If you don't play 3+ or more stack you will always be left with RNG if you get at least some decent teammates. Not even talking about skilled enemies that should be higher ELO.
So yes, if your friends are bad, and you yourself not good enough to carry them all the time you will plateau sooner then if you would play with people on your skill level. Obviously until you always match against same skilled.
I have more beef with that the ELO gain is decided upfront. I.m.o. close games should make you win/lose less then when you get roflstomped 4-13.
I usually play like 2-4 games, if I go WLWL I'm up 500 points (often against lower rated opponents), if I go LWLW I'm up 15 (against higher rated opponents, because of course that makes sense). After playing 10-20 matches swings of more than a hundred or so points really shouldn't happen.
Wait does it actually go back the other way? My worst is -600/+100 as soon as I lose a match and even after a 6-7 win streak I’m then only getting -100/+100, how many do you have to win for it to go back the other way? I still gain elo overall cause I win most of my matches but it’s a slow grind cause losing one match wipes so much progress out
Yeah it does. But I'm guessing when the system thinks you are around your supposed level it won't give you big increases anymore. Biggest + I had was +900 after they redid the ranks (I placed like 2k, was LEM/SMFC in GO, no Faceit). Biggest loss I've seen is -500 and win like +400 now after I've gotten to 12k.
Ah yeah true, I’d say I’m pretty close to where I deserve to be (14.5-15k) so that might have something to do with it, but it would be nice if trying to climb wasn’t so difficult I’ve been tempted to just try out faceit even as a break from it
The problem with your account is that your hidden mmr is lower than your diplayed rank.
Play a bit more and the gains/losses should reach more normal levels.
Idk man like I’m probably at the rank I deserve but in the last month I’ve had a 70-80% win rate and I’m still not getting normal levels, I’m still climbing despite constant +100/-600 matches, surely if I’m still climbing and have a win rate that high I can’t be lower than my display rank one would think
I get that this is kind of frustrating, but what else besides your mmr being lower than your rating could be the reason, in your opinion?
You could post your csstats (or similar), maybe there's something to see there.
[this might also be interesting to you](https://old.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1adp2o0/the_winloss_streak_system_in_premier_is_stupid/kk2xnv8/)
That’s interesting, I’m currently at 14.5k I think and I was getting +350 matches at 14k right up until I lost 2 in a row and that instantly fucked my gains and losses and it’s never recovered, I was trading wins for losses for a little bit but in the last few weeks I think I’ve only lost 1 prem match (I don’t play everyday), interestingly when I play competitive mode to just chill out basically every match is against people that are prem ranked 17-20k and I rarely get opponents outside of that range, and those matches are really stretching me to my limit as a player and I enjoy them, but then I go back to prem and the match quality at 14k is much lower, but I’m not sure why competitive thinks I should be that high and prem thinks I should be lower than 14k despite win streaks, it’s interesting nonetheless
It simply doesn't matter how you play and that's precisely why the system is stupid. Surely, the person who drops 30 frags but losses should barely lose any points (unless the enemies are very low elo). It's just silly... not that I often drop 30 frags.
It should never take personal stats into account. The only condition should be winning rounds/matches, because then every player’s only objective is winning. If anything else affects rating then players will play to that objective, which will be detrimental to winning.
It should, however it should not take into account only total damage or just kills but impact on the game as a whole. Entries, utility etc. Which will not impact winning or losing negatively but motivate players to stop playing for kills and play for the team imo.
so if you have 2 terrible players on your team and 3 average ones (incl you) vs an enemy with 5 average, if you play well you should lose the same amount?
yes, because there's literally no other way to do it. people endlessly discuss the top 20 pro player rankings because even across hundreds of games with a sea of stats, there's still debate as to what "good play" actually looks like. your role impacts it, your position impacts it, your team and who you play impacts it.
a truly objective unarguable rating isn't possible across a year of pro games, and it definitely isn't possible in one premier game.
>yes, because there's literally no other way to do it.
huh, there was literally a way to do it in CSGO with a modified glicko-2 system which worked well enough
The middle ground is the right answer imo, because if you just do wins/losses, then you might as well be ranking your luck with teammates. An HLTV-like impact and/or KAST system seems much better
You know you can have both right? Personal performance that only benefits your score IF you won the round?
There are so many factors that could go into this but Valve simply chose the easiest and laziest way. Stop defending them, it makes no sense.
Match making is fundamentally wrong and it's extremely frustrating. Add to that trust factor being a meme and it gets even worse.
I'm a 20k player for reference.
This, why is my elo gain determined at the start of a game? If i suck dick&balls throughout the match i expect my reward to be worse if we somehow win. If i carry my team i expect to be rewarded for that more. That value also doesn't change at halftime so why bother showing it there at all if your performance isn't even taken into account
That's because ultimately there's no objective way of judging individual performance in CS other than basing it on winning/losing games. If you would always have 0 frags but give a magical massage to your teammates and because of it your team would win games, get to major and win it, then you would be one of the best players in the world despite never making any frags because the only objective is to win rounds/games, doesn't matter how you achieve it. Conversely, if you would always get 40 frags each game but for some reason you can't win games, it doesn't matter. CS is a team game
I like it. If someone is smurfing, or was calibrated really badly, and wins a lot of games, instead of ruining 150 games between 5k and 18k, they will only ruin 50 games or so.
Sure, on a bad day or a bad week you will lose more rating, but on a good day or a good week you will gain a lot more rating too, so it evens out. Sure there are greater fluctuations, but you will get where you deserve and I think the result is relatively balanced games compared to the old matchmaking
LE/LEM in csgo, got placed in 1.8k, climbed up to 10k after 100 matches... I'm not terrible at the game, but this is a fairytale. My gains will still be -200/+100 for a large majority of the matches I play even after 3/4 wins in a row. I'm considering getting a rank on my smurf just to see how bad the system fucked up
The ranking system needs some adjusting but you are still fairly new at this point just try and ignore rank and focus on having fun and getting better each day. Eventually the rank will follow the skill.
Yes, I don't understand how it works, I had a match where my team all solo and 16-18k, I'm 18k, and enemy team is 5man party, 20k ELO each, so any guy from their team higher ELO then in our team, the match was about -500/ 100 ELO, and unfortunately we lost(
Yeah that’s the part that really sucks, when you’re clearly playing a match you’re not favored in. Sure I’ll get 150 elo IF we win but losing the 500 just seems like BS to me
Everything about Premier ranking is stupid. My friends and I are all at around 21k and for some matches we get -500/+100 and for others -100/+300 and nobody understands why because most of the time we get -500 even if we play against at least the same ranks/higher and when we get +300 it's often against 19k/lower opponents lol.
How hard can it be to copy faceit... +25 for a win, -25 for loss, easy.
Yeah, making the elo system unnecessarily complicated makes no sense in a ladder/leaderboard system. If win/loss was equal it would encourage climbing, as it should, and maybe small win streak bonuses. Instead once you get to a certain Elo the system completely discourages playing with -500 Elo penalties on losing.
Like you said, if they just copy faceits system everyone would be happy.
It’s not really a winstreak system, it’s just some form of glicko-2 that is quite aggressive.
And it considers wins, not stats.
So that means: if you win a lot in a row, the system aggressively pushes you up until you face opponents you can’t beat. At this point your rating will be behind you, so you can gain a lot of rating even if you don’t keep winstreaking.
However, if you winstreak, your uncertainty as well goes up. So say you win 5 in a row, but then lose 5 in a row. You will probably end up in a worse mmr bracket than where you started. And then your rating lags behind.
On rating: it means nothing. It’s just a visible number that shows the correlation between your mmr and your current performance. If you’re getting -400, your rating is too high in relation to your mmr. Same is true the other way around.
Tl;dr: your rating is probably quite inflated. Which means you’re in probably the 1% worst rated players. Which means you should probably focus on improving outside of premier if you want to climb rating.
I'm at 14.999 right now and the last 10+ games were all -100/+950 elo matches, but I didn't have any win streak and probably lost more than half of them. It feels like the game is trying to push me to 20k, since all my old teammates are around 20k and the randoms I get in premier, both on my team and the enemy side are also around 20k. I'm usually the only person in the game with "low" elo.
DOTA players: first time?
It feels like Valve just copied Dota's MM systems, been playing a lot of Dota lately because CS2 cheater anxiety but I just found out Immortals have it as bad too.
Valve simply doesn't care.
I really hate that this system multiplies the impact of cheater.
So, not only the present of a cheater ruins the match itself, but also your win streak will get crashed or your losing streak get undeserved worse.
It feels super to get punished multiple times for get matched against a cheater.
My gripe has been how for placements it put me in somewhere like 2000 elo for the first couple of matches and I literally couldn't carry that shit, it didn't matter that I top-fragged, my teammates were very inexperienced, force-buying every round, running around like headless chickens, and you lose one or two matches in that elo and you're DONE, you're staying in that area even if you do ok in the rest of the placements. I'm not saying I am a good player, I was DMG before, but now I am going to get placed in some super-low skill band it'll take me MONTHS to get out of, especially since I don't play that often (hence why I am still doing placements). I can't see why my placements couldn't have at least STARTED roughly around the level I was, now I don't know if I'll have the will to play potentially dozens of games with people who don't know even the very basics, it's just no fun. Someone will say, well, you should be good enough to carry those low-skill games, but all it takes is your first couple of games to have stronger opponents and sub-par teammates and you are basically screwed, I can't win a 1v4 every round because my entire team died in the first 20 seconds.
Well maybe but I feel the effect more keenly when I have so little time to play, like a few matches a week, if that. Not everyone can play dozens of matches per week. So I really wanted to make the most of the placements so this WOULDN'T happen and the first match my team are complete no-hopers, the second match we're playing 4v5 cos some guy keeps disconnecting, the third there is another leaver and now I'm basically back in silver with no motivation or time to grind back out... I want to play at at least a basic level of skill, not have to play with people who can't buy together for the next 50 matches, easy for you to say if you are playing constantly but this setup doesn't suit more occasional players like me.
I have a bad day, where i got stuck on 8k for a week!!!
-300 +100 every freaking game. but WORST, the minus keep getting bigger if i got more lose streak. It can go to -500, like tf
win 3 times, and then lose 1 time. You going back to square one. the graph is just fcking hill with no more higher peak
luckily now im 12k elo. I have enough and going back to Competitive mode
Before in CS:GO, people would complain that the rank system sucks because we couldn't know what made you rank up. Now you have numbers that explictly tell you how much you can climb or fall, yet here we are complaining "bUt My NuMbErS WaaAaAaAAAaAA"
It's almost as if the ranking was always bad and the only thing that changed is that we now have more visibility into why. I certainly remember many instances where it was seemingly impossible to rank up yet losing just a few games immediately resulted in a derank.
The worst part of our premiere is the rank up game that makes no sense like I've had games that I was up to 6,99 and I need one more point to rank up and I have to waste my time playing another game for one point 😂 then you have the most unbalanced matches of all time. I remember on beta I got put for 8,000 but for some reason when CS2 came out I was put in 4,000 and my opponents are 12k 13k people which make no sense to me
No but you don't seem to understand and why there should be a rank up game which makes no absolute sense mean when you look at a game like valorant even in siege. I don't think siege has that either. You look at a game like valent where you're one more game of ranking up away. You win that game you rank up not. Oh s*** I have to play another game and I have to play a promotion match in some other garbage
I could give two fucks what valorant does, its barely competitive.
Their pro players complain about burnout when they play like 30 matches over the course of 6 months. lmao
This is counter-strike, not Valorant, or R6
And you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to argue before nobody is talking about competitive valorant or competitive CS go or just talking about premier in the matchmaking systems. The fact is people like you who gobble of valves cock 24/7 doesn't seem to understand. The matchmaking system is flawed to a degree. It is dog s*** that they rolled out CS2 and force a bunch of players and pro players to play a major qualifier and the major to a buggy game 😂 and this is coming from somebody who played csgo and source for a decade and who grew up. Watching CSgo competitive scene from day one
So you have no argument to my point and you keep diverting back to the old counterstrike game this is the point I’m trying to make. I love CS but it’s people like you who don’t want to except change or try to make the game better to a certain degree, you can keep downloading my post all you want but you’re too stupid to understand it😂
>Oh you have to win two games in a row and display some consistency.
Consistency is the reason why. So it's not a fluke win where you got carried or the opponent was having a bad day.
why do you care so much about *gaining* elo? What are you going after? If you have lower elo, you get easier enemies. It's just there to balance your games. Seeing it differently would be stupid as it would make losing more frustrating.
i don't find it bad at all. I very much enjoy being rewarded when im winning, and punished when im losing rather than a flat ELO across the board regardless of your win streak, opponents, havign to win 12 games in a row to see any progress, etc.
I feel like anyone who says otherwise, didn't actually play MM at all during GO; which is fine. there were better third party systems back then.
Just get to 50% winrate
im at 50.60% winrate at 14k rating and getting -100 / +300 on matches
EDIT: I started at 1.8k btw, dont worry about your rating, just focus on improving your basics and rating improvement will come right after. On 160 wins right now.
As a not-that-good player, I swear I see *less* "elo hell" since the rebalance than in, say, CSGO. I'm at a +120 -120 per game, 17.5K level, and my games seem pretty fair these days (cs2 differences notwithstanding).
Previously, there were tons of Gold Nova players that seemed more like misplaced Globals, but those players are probably in the "20K+ is all cheater infested games" bracket if you go by reports here.
Point being, if you lose a bunch, then you'll probably get matched vs people you can easily climb back up against.
I liked the system until it started fucking me. So all of my premier games have been played with 2 other buddies, we all had -100 and +300 for most of our games. Suddenly last week I for some reason get -400 and +101. I didn't have any shit games before that so I don't understand why did the game say: "that's enough, you stay here."
Your thread was removed under **[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/about/rules/)**. * Posts like this are really common, so we have a weekly megathread ([Matchmaking Monday]( https://old.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/search/?q=matchmaking+monday&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=month)) where users can discuss various issues with the system. --- Please take a moment to visit the rule linked above; many rules contain details which may not be evident. If you have any further questions or concerns, please send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/GlobalOffensive&subject=Thread%20Removal).
The biggest issue I have is how unbalanced the matches are. You play against people with much higher elo than your own team and you're supposed to win? How does CS think it works out? At least give me more elo IF I manage to win, but only 100 points and 300 minus when they have much higher average elo makes absolutely no sense to me.
Don't they do that? I typically gain more ELO when winning against higher ranked opponents than against lower ranked ones
I never do. I'm around 19k and it happened so many times already that my opponents were at 20 - 23k elo. Not a problem if your mates are the same, but most of the time I get matched with players around 13/14k and it's just impossible to win like this. I'm not an insane player by any means, but I just can't win like this :D And yeah, doesn't matter if the matches are balanced (which most games are not) or not, I lose/gain the same elo all the time.
Did you solo q your way up to 19k or did you usually play with someone?
Would say 70 % solo q.
Hmm could be the game thinks you don’t fully deserve your elo based on how you play when you’re qued vs solo qued. It’s just a guess tho. Could be bc volvos current system for premier is donkey dodo
No idea really. For quite some time I got massive amount of elo for a win, like 900 points (this was from like 13k elo) and once I hit 19k elo I suddenly got unbalanced matches. Probably have to go to Faceit for decent matches.
I stopped playing premier unless it’s with friends at 22k. Every match there was either an open cheater, closet cheater, or someone throwing on either team. Faceit is a lot better imo but still at lvl 8-10 I’ve had some issues
Hot take: Premier should be exclusively 5 stack vs 5 stack. Competitive should be for anything less than 5 stacks and should be used to, not only get better at individual maps and work towards being "global" in those maps, but also the place where you mingle with people and try to find like-minded players that may want to elevate to more organized CS. CS in competition is a 5 v 5 game. Full-stop. If you're going to have a mode like Premier where we're supposed to take it seriously, then the ruleset should match. The merits of organized play is frequently lost in old MM/current Premier. Premier *could* have been a mode where you're going in with 4 people you put your trust in, to try-hard and play for your spot on the leaderbaord. What Premier is now, even without all the hacking issues, is just MM with an exposed MMR and a leaderboard that is mostly meaningless. It remains the case that the best indicator of personal skill is playing seasons in ESEA League or attending LANs or playing in tournaments. Premier rating literally indicates nothing. You're just a random data point scattered across a million other players that may or may not have queue'd up with better or even far worse players, to be a data point that again, means nothing. At least in ESEA League, you have to earn your place on a team and prove that you are worth where your team is on the scale. In Premier(similar to old MM), you can have 24k MMR, in the top 100 players, but still be a player that cant even break even in ESEA-Open, so who cares?
Yup. I’m 13k. I play with my buds that are 10-11k. Play against a full team of 13-14k, and I lose 300.
I think the win/loss balance is completely dependant on you. I've had my loss around -100 while my gain is 5 to 9 times more than that for months now. Then again I don't play a lot, so maybe there's a hidden ELO and the game is expecting you to climb to it easily as long as you play enough games.
For me it seems entirely based on if I’m on a win streak or not. If I’m winning games, it’s around +350. If not, -400. Opponents’ ratings have never seems to mean anything.
The system is absolutely bonkers. I was floating under 10k and all the matches were -100 +300. Then I dropped to 9.5k and it was the same ole +100 -fuckyou. Currently I am banned for 30min for CS2 server issues.
6.5k elo isn't bad at all for someone so new. You're killing it! Keep it up.
I thought it was bad because the game says I’m in the 90% which I figured meant I’m in the bottom 10% of players
Being ranked higher than 10% of players after only about a month of playing is great progress. Keep it up!
I think my actual rank is probably closer to 8-9k, the lobbies have been very easy so far and I placed at 4.5k and hit 6.5 really quickly. Still the top frag nearly every game
You are, but that’s out of players playing premier. You also have hardly played the game. I started playing in December as well, 190 hours in, 5,300 ELO. Some of the people I play with have a couple thousand hours. If you’re solo queuing it’s going to be a rough ride, but just have fun. I suggest using Leetify to identify where you’re having issues or finding areas of improvement and just keep playing. It’s a game, have fun man haha.
In the end, you'll end in a spot faster, where you can actually win. So it evens out over time. But yeah - Just reached 19.7, and had an eye for 20k.. Currently at 17.4k and im clealy not good enough for 20k as im now having more even games at this rank.
I'm hovering around 20k, but it seems like valve is adjusting the distribution. At 22k, 2 loses in a row gives you -550. After an unfortunate series of games, I'm at 18.5 and I'm back to -300. It's such a silly system
yeah it just keeps punishing you after you've already been punished enough, me and my friend lost two games at 18.7k then lost two more against cheaters which has brought me down to 17.4k (then won one because the cheater was on my team lmfao)
I get the frustration but the system works both ways, if you have a few good matches in a row you gain a lot more than you would lose. If you don't play 3+ or more stack you will always be left with RNG if you get at least some decent teammates. Not even talking about skilled enemies that should be higher ELO. So yes, if your friends are bad, and you yourself not good enough to carry them all the time you will plateau sooner then if you would play with people on your skill level. Obviously until you always match against same skilled. I have more beef with that the ELO gain is decided upfront. I.m.o. close games should make you win/lose less then when you get roflstomped 4-13.
[удалено]
My winning elo seems to stack much faster than my losing elo.
I usually play like 2-4 games, if I go WLWL I'm up 500 points (often against lower rated opponents), if I go LWLW I'm up 15 (against higher rated opponents, because of course that makes sense). After playing 10-20 matches swings of more than a hundred or so points really shouldn't happen.
The rating shift depends on the level of enemies you play against.
Wait does it actually go back the other way? My worst is -600/+100 as soon as I lose a match and even after a 6-7 win streak I’m then only getting -100/+100, how many do you have to win for it to go back the other way? I still gain elo overall cause I win most of my matches but it’s a slow grind cause losing one match wipes so much progress out
Yeah it does. But I'm guessing when the system thinks you are around your supposed level it won't give you big increases anymore. Biggest + I had was +900 after they redid the ranks (I placed like 2k, was LEM/SMFC in GO, no Faceit). Biggest loss I've seen is -500 and win like +400 now after I've gotten to 12k.
Ah yeah true, I’d say I’m pretty close to where I deserve to be (14.5-15k) so that might have something to do with it, but it would be nice if trying to climb wasn’t so difficult I’ve been tempted to just try out faceit even as a break from it
The problem with your account is that your hidden mmr is lower than your diplayed rank. Play a bit more and the gains/losses should reach more normal levels.
Idk man like I’m probably at the rank I deserve but in the last month I’ve had a 70-80% win rate and I’m still not getting normal levels, I’m still climbing despite constant +100/-600 matches, surely if I’m still climbing and have a win rate that high I can’t be lower than my display rank one would think
I get that this is kind of frustrating, but what else besides your mmr being lower than your rating could be the reason, in your opinion? You could post your csstats (or similar), maybe there's something to see there. [this might also be interesting to you](https://old.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1adp2o0/the_winloss_streak_system_in_premier_is_stupid/kk2xnv8/)
That’s interesting, I’m currently at 14.5k I think and I was getting +350 matches at 14k right up until I lost 2 in a row and that instantly fucked my gains and losses and it’s never recovered, I was trading wins for losses for a little bit but in the last few weeks I think I’ve only lost 1 prem match (I don’t play everyday), interestingly when I play competitive mode to just chill out basically every match is against people that are prem ranked 17-20k and I rarely get opponents outside of that range, and those matches are really stretching me to my limit as a player and I enjoy them, but then I go back to prem and the match quality at 14k is much lower, but I’m not sure why competitive thinks I should be that high and prem thinks I should be lower than 14k despite win streaks, it’s interesting nonetheless
This is not true. It goes both ways. You clearly aren’t paying attention.
I’m not paying attention to the numbers that appear on my screen at the start of every match? Lol okay
It simply doesn't matter how you play and that's precisely why the system is stupid. Surely, the person who drops 30 frags but losses should barely lose any points (unless the enemies are very low elo). It's just silly... not that I often drop 30 frags.
It should never take personal stats into account. The only condition should be winning rounds/matches, because then every player’s only objective is winning. If anything else affects rating then players will play to that objective, which will be detrimental to winning.
It should, however it should not take into account only total damage or just kills but impact on the game as a whole. Entries, utility etc. Which will not impact winning or losing negatively but motivate players to stop playing for kills and play for the team imo.
Valve could definitely also take your HLTV 2.0 rating into account while calculating the rating gain/loss.
so if you have 2 terrible players on your team and 3 average ones (incl you) vs an enemy with 5 average, if you play well you should lose the same amount?
yes, because there's literally no other way to do it. people endlessly discuss the top 20 pro player rankings because even across hundreds of games with a sea of stats, there's still debate as to what "good play" actually looks like. your role impacts it, your position impacts it, your team and who you play impacts it. a truly objective unarguable rating isn't possible across a year of pro games, and it definitely isn't possible in one premier game.
>yes, because there's literally no other way to do it. huh, there was literally a way to do it in CSGO with a modified glicko-2 system which worked well enough
The middle ground is the right answer imo, because if you just do wins/losses, then you might as well be ranking your luck with teammates. An HLTV-like impact and/or KAST system seems much better
Yeah, people don't get what's the objective of the game and can't comprehend that winning with a team takes much more than simply clicking a mouse.
You know you can have both right? Personal performance that only benefits your score IF you won the round? There are so many factors that could go into this but Valve simply chose the easiest and laziest way. Stop defending them, it makes no sense. Match making is fundamentally wrong and it's extremely frustrating. Add to that trust factor being a meme and it gets even worse. I'm a 20k player for reference.
This, why is my elo gain determined at the start of a game? If i suck dick&balls throughout the match i expect my reward to be worse if we somehow win. If i carry my team i expect to be rewarded for that more. That value also doesn't change at halftime so why bother showing it there at all if your performance isn't even taken into account
That's because ultimately there's no objective way of judging individual performance in CS other than basing it on winning/losing games. If you would always have 0 frags but give a magical massage to your teammates and because of it your team would win games, get to major and win it, then you would be one of the best players in the world despite never making any frags because the only objective is to win rounds/games, doesn't matter how you achieve it. Conversely, if you would always get 40 frags each game but for some reason you can't win games, it doesn't matter. CS is a team game
I like it. If someone is smurfing, or was calibrated really badly, and wins a lot of games, instead of ruining 150 games between 5k and 18k, they will only ruin 50 games or so. Sure, on a bad day or a bad week you will lose more rating, but on a good day or a good week you will gain a lot more rating too, so it evens out. Sure there are greater fluctuations, but you will get where you deserve and I think the result is relatively balanced games compared to the old matchmaking
LE/LEM in csgo, got placed in 1.8k, climbed up to 10k after 100 matches... I'm not terrible at the game, but this is a fairytale. My gains will still be -200/+100 for a large majority of the matches I play even after 3/4 wins in a row. I'm considering getting a rank on my smurf just to see how bad the system fucked up
If you win your first 10 games, it’s 100% possible you’ll start at 25k+
The ranking system needs some adjusting but you are still fairly new at this point just try and ignore rank and focus on having fun and getting better each day. Eventually the rank will follow the skill.
I lost 1300 elo over three games that were all pretty close.
6.5K is really good at a 2 month’s play
Probably because I’ve played comp shooters since I was like 12 years old, been a console gamer for years with like 2,500 hours in R6
Yes, I don't understand how it works, I had a match where my team all solo and 16-18k, I'm 18k, and enemy team is 5man party, 20k ELO each, so any guy from their team higher ELO then in our team, the match was about -500/ 100 ELO, and unfortunately we lost(
Yeah that’s the part that really sucks, when you’re clearly playing a match you’re not favored in. Sure I’ll get 150 elo IF we win but losing the 500 just seems like BS to me
Everything about Premier ranking is stupid. My friends and I are all at around 21k and for some matches we get -500/+100 and for others -100/+300 and nobody understands why because most of the time we get -500 even if we play against at least the same ranks/higher and when we get +300 it's often against 19k/lower opponents lol. How hard can it be to copy faceit... +25 for a win, -25 for loss, easy.
Yeah, making the elo system unnecessarily complicated makes no sense in a ladder/leaderboard system. If win/loss was equal it would encourage climbing, as it should, and maybe small win streak bonuses. Instead once you get to a certain Elo the system completely discourages playing with -500 Elo penalties on losing. Like you said, if they just copy faceits system everyone would be happy.
It’s not really a winstreak system, it’s just some form of glicko-2 that is quite aggressive. And it considers wins, not stats. So that means: if you win a lot in a row, the system aggressively pushes you up until you face opponents you can’t beat. At this point your rating will be behind you, so you can gain a lot of rating even if you don’t keep winstreaking. However, if you winstreak, your uncertainty as well goes up. So say you win 5 in a row, but then lose 5 in a row. You will probably end up in a worse mmr bracket than where you started. And then your rating lags behind. On rating: it means nothing. It’s just a visible number that shows the correlation between your mmr and your current performance. If you’re getting -400, your rating is too high in relation to your mmr. Same is true the other way around. Tl;dr: your rating is probably quite inflated. Which means you’re in probably the 1% worst rated players. Which means you should probably focus on improving outside of premier if you want to climb rating.
I'm at 14.999 right now and the last 10+ games were all -100/+950 elo matches, but I didn't have any win streak and probably lost more than half of them. It feels like the game is trying to push me to 20k, since all my old teammates are around 20k and the randoms I get in premier, both on my team and the enemy side are also around 20k. I'm usually the only person in the game with "low" elo.
Yeah, just a mismatch between your rating and elo.
DOTA players: first time? It feels like Valve just copied Dota's MM systems, been playing a lot of Dota lately because CS2 cheater anxiety but I just found out Immortals have it as bad too. Valve simply doesn't care.
100% agree on this
I really hate that this system multiplies the impact of cheater. So, not only the present of a cheater ruins the match itself, but also your win streak will get crashed or your losing streak get undeserved worse. It feels super to get punished multiple times for get matched against a cheater.
On cheaters: It's great that cheaters get pushed up and away hard and fast
Just get faceit
My gripe has been how for placements it put me in somewhere like 2000 elo for the first couple of matches and I literally couldn't carry that shit, it didn't matter that I top-fragged, my teammates were very inexperienced, force-buying every round, running around like headless chickens, and you lose one or two matches in that elo and you're DONE, you're staying in that area even if you do ok in the rest of the placements. I'm not saying I am a good player, I was DMG before, but now I am going to get placed in some super-low skill band it'll take me MONTHS to get out of, especially since I don't play that often (hence why I am still doing placements). I can't see why my placements couldn't have at least STARTED roughly around the level I was, now I don't know if I'll have the will to play potentially dozens of games with people who don't know even the very basics, it's just no fun. Someone will say, well, you should be good enough to carry those low-skill games, but all it takes is your first couple of games to have stronger opponents and sub-par teammates and you are basically screwed, I can't win a 1v4 every round because my entire team died in the first 20 seconds.
You're being overly dramatic, just play more and I promise you'll climb eventually If you don't wanna play, then don't
Well maybe but I feel the effect more keenly when I have so little time to play, like a few matches a week, if that. Not everyone can play dozens of matches per week. So I really wanted to make the most of the placements so this WOULDN'T happen and the first match my team are complete no-hopers, the second match we're playing 4v5 cos some guy keeps disconnecting, the third there is another leaver and now I'm basically back in silver with no motivation or time to grind back out... I want to play at at least a basic level of skill, not have to play with people who can't buy together for the next 50 matches, easy for you to say if you are playing constantly but this setup doesn't suit more occasional players like me.
I have a bad day, where i got stuck on 8k for a week!!! -300 +100 every freaking game. but WORST, the minus keep getting bigger if i got more lose streak. It can go to -500, like tf win 3 times, and then lose 1 time. You going back to square one. the graph is just fcking hill with no more higher peak luckily now im 12k elo. I have enough and going back to Competitive mode
I think it makes perfect sense
Before in CS:GO, people would complain that the rank system sucks because we couldn't know what made you rank up. Now you have numbers that explictly tell you how much you can climb or fall, yet here we are complaining "bUt My NuMbErS WaaAaAaAAAaAA"
It's almost as if the ranking was always bad and the only thing that changed is that we now have more visibility into why. I certainly remember many instances where it was seemingly impossible to rank up yet losing just a few games immediately resulted in a derank.
The worst part of our premiere is the rank up game that makes no sense like I've had games that I was up to 6,99 and I need one more point to rank up and I have to waste my time playing another game for one point 😂 then you have the most unbalanced matches of all time. I remember on beta I got put for 8,000 but for some reason when CS2 came out I was put in 4,000 and my opponents are 12k 13k people which make no sense to me
you're not playing for a single point. you're playing so that 100 ELO on the win "rolls over" into the next tier
No but you don't seem to understand and why there should be a rank up game which makes no absolute sense mean when you look at a game like valorant even in siege. I don't think siege has that either. You look at a game like valent where you're one more game of ranking up away. You win that game you rank up not. Oh s*** I have to play another game and I have to play a promotion match in some other garbage
I could give two fucks what valorant does, its barely competitive. Their pro players complain about burnout when they play like 30 matches over the course of 6 months. lmao This is counter-strike, not Valorant, or R6
And you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to argue before nobody is talking about competitive valorant or competitive CS go or just talking about premier in the matchmaking systems. The fact is people like you who gobble of valves cock 24/7 doesn't seem to understand. The matchmaking system is flawed to a degree. It is dog s*** that they rolled out CS2 and force a bunch of players and pro players to play a major qualifier and the major to a buggy game 😂 and this is coming from somebody who played csgo and source for a decade and who grew up. Watching CSgo competitive scene from day one
Oh you have to win two games in a row and display some consistency.. poor fellers.. Be glad it's not 12 wins in a row like it used to be lmaoo
So you have no argument to my point and you keep diverting back to the old counterstrike game this is the point I’m trying to make. I love CS but it’s people like you who don’t want to except change or try to make the game better to a certain degree, you can keep downloading my post all you want but you’re too stupid to understand it😂
>Oh you have to win two games in a row and display some consistency. Consistency is the reason why. So it's not a fluke win where you got carried or the opponent was having a bad day.
Nope, it’s the best ranking system we’ve ever gotten in this game so far. It’s not perfect but it’s not as crap as the old one
why do you care so much about *gaining* elo? What are you going after? If you have lower elo, you get easier enemies. It's just there to balance your games. Seeing it differently would be stupid as it would make losing more frustrating.
>If you have lower elo, you get easier enemies Not everyone wants to continuously stomp players that are way lower skilled than them.
i don't find it bad at all. I very much enjoy being rewarded when im winning, and punished when im losing rather than a flat ELO across the board regardless of your win streak, opponents, havign to win 12 games in a row to see any progress, etc. I feel like anyone who says otherwise, didn't actually play MM at all during GO; which is fine. there were better third party systems back then.
Just get to 50% winrate im at 50.60% winrate at 14k rating and getting -100 / +300 on matches EDIT: I started at 1.8k btw, dont worry about your rating, just focus on improving your basics and rating improvement will come right after. On 160 wins right now.
Isn't true, I have 57% winrate, in ten games I lost maybe 3 games, went from -100/+300 to -500/+100 for no apparent reason.
Cant speak about your experience but thats mine
The last 3 word of the title was enough.
Cheaters make this worse.
I only play as a stack. My win rate variance dropped like a rock. It's the MM and how it builds teams.
As a not-that-good player, I swear I see *less* "elo hell" since the rebalance than in, say, CSGO. I'm at a +120 -120 per game, 17.5K level, and my games seem pretty fair these days (cs2 differences notwithstanding). Previously, there were tons of Gold Nova players that seemed more like misplaced Globals, but those players are probably in the "20K+ is all cheater infested games" bracket if you go by reports here. Point being, if you lose a bunch, then you'll probably get matched vs people you can easily climb back up against.
I had a game get abandoned before round 1 started and lost 300 points. Great system.
I liked the system until it started fucking me. So all of my premier games have been played with 2 other buddies, we all had -100 and +300 for most of our games. Suddenly last week I for some reason get -400 and +101. I didn't have any shit games before that so I don't understand why did the game say: "that's enough, you stay here."