Nooo, I haven't been talking about this for ages and been called a fucking idiot for it.
To me it was pretty clear much before Volvo declared that bhs matters and yes, the thing you noticed I noticed it too. It's ridiculously evident.
"The thought has always interested me particularly because I was recently sitting at F behavior score for quiet a while, and recently with the introduction of turbo and me not being retarded and using my weekly abandon, I was able to climb to normal behavior score in a week."
I guess I really am a fucking idiot then lol, from C to D to F now.
i dropped from normal to F when my 2nd acc got into ranked because i got reported by the enemy team all the time, recieving mutes etc
i am honestly surprised it is this bad, i've never been on F (or super low bs) before but it literally is the case (in 4k), ppl just feed every 2nd game, destroy their items, abandon etc, without an exaggeration
i always thought ppl are overreacting/making excuses, but yeah, if you are at a super low bs i can totally understand why you are tilted from playing dota
My BS score still normal everytime i check throu console... is there anyway i could get an exact value of behavior score such as A to F?
When this was first introduced I noticed people are equally retarded on both sides, but as time went on, something changed and I began to notice that my team is generally more retarded. As someone who has F behavior score due to the "free weekly abandon" you speak of, I really did not belong there. I have more than thousand commends, I barely get any reports, I just used my "free abandons".
If what you postulated here is true (low bhs vs high bhs matchmaking) is true, it is absolutely fucking retarded, especially for people who are actually unfairly put into low BHS (my behavior is just as bad as people who pick prophet and TP fountain? nice one valve).
I wouldn't be surprised though. Because I mean what's stopping them from doing that?
Lower behavior score is to be punished, as valve's recent updates have shown exactly that intent. So what if part of the punishment was to be matched with higher behavior score teammates? What if the punishment was to force you to play against the teams that you had once played with before your behavior score dropped and now you get to watch your games get thrown as the enemy team works together with no issues?
They have had a lot of people working on the psychological aspects of it and this theory supports exactly something that someone working on this would do.
Negative reinforcement.
They don't reward good behavior with anything, instead, you are rewarded by not being pooled with low behavior score players.
Moreover, low behavior score players are then pushed to behave better as they would rather behave better than to keep getting matched with low behavior score players.
Now of course when we say "behave better", we refer to good behavioral actions as outlined in the metrics used to calculate such score.
Example:
So far ALL NINE of my past solo games have gone exactly the same way (coincidentally starting around the same time my behavior score got brought back to normal.
The enemy team ALWAYS fell apart, they ALWAYS had a person who gave up and fed, they ALWAYS played the blame game.
And you might say "well that happens for any team any where".
ALL of those games, my team never raged, never fed, never argued.
NOBODY had even shown any signs of negativity in the past NINE games since i got normal behavior score.
i always thought ppl are overreacting/making excuses, but yeah, if you are at a super low bs i can totally understand why you are tilted from playing dota
thanks
I don't know if that's a thing Volvo does on purpose tho. I mean, it might be like you say, but my theory was that since there are less people with low behavior score than people with high behavior score, the system is just forced to match people with low bhs vs people with high bhs when necessary, because maybe in that specific moment there aren't enough low bhs players in game with that exact mmr. That's what I've always thought, even tho now that I think about it how is that even possible if there are always 300k+ people playing at least. If it's like you then fucking gj Volvo for playing this Saw-like kind of mind games. Instead of "learning to behave" I basically lost every bit of patience and mental sanity I had in this game and why, 'cause my internet is trash and I got tons of abandons.
Does Behaviour Score effect your MMR? I started in "D" and continouslyngrown up after 10 games I was in A+ behaviour score until today for my 61 games..
It is a completely fucking stupid idea. And if it were true (which I doubt) valve has to be batshit insane. Just use some logic mate. It's not that hard
But it is logical. The only thing they care about is giving players the enviroiment they deserve, and by doing this toxic people and leavers would still be matched WITH players like them and nice people would still be matched WITH nice players. The low VS high bhs does nothing but reinforce this idea of giving people what they deserve: give toxic players another disadvantage (a coordinated and nice enemy team = even less chance to win) and good players another advantage (a fucked up and toxic enemy team = even more chance to win). I'm sorry to say this but Dota is really not based on skills first, it's based on matchmaking first. It's a 5v5 game and that "you can win 1v9 if you're better" is a myth, or works only if your skill level is much higher than the avg mmr of the game. We're all good at carrying the shit out of our 2k teams, but when it comes to our bracket good luck climbing with this system literally holding you back. Like I always said it's no excuse 'cause I don't need them, it's what it is.
that I think about it how is that even possible if there are always 300k+ people playing at least
That's the thing though. I said it prioritizes low/high behavior matchups. That doesn't mean it will always get it.
Consider a hypothetical matchmaking scenario for a low behavior and a high behavior individual. This is a possible way they might do it that I would think of.
Low Behavior Score Matchmaking Process
>low behavior score player starts queue
>matchmaker looks for four low behavior score players, that is, four players within a subset of the total players that have behavior score F
>matchmaker finds said four players after a long queue time since this subset is considerably small in size
>matchmaking now can look for a team to match you up with
>matchmaker now looks for teams consisting of players in the entire set of players of all behavior score as behavior score is likely not considered in matching against
>because the subset of positive players is significantly larger than the subset of F players, the matchmaking system will be more likely to match you against high behavior score players
>match found
High Behavior Score Matchmaking Process
>high behavior score player starts queue
>matchmaker looks for four high behavior score players, that is, four players within the subset of players with normal behavior score
>matchmaker finds said four players after a short period of time, as this subset is particularly large
>matchmaker now looks for a team to match you up with
>because behavior score is not a factor in matching against, the matchmaker will look for teams within the entire set of players of all behavior scores
>because there are already some lower behavior score teams in the queue, the matchmaker will likely want to pair high behavior score teams that are already looking for teams to the low behavior score one, as to free up the queue
>match found
The key here is that high behavior score teams do not have to be matched with low behavior score teams if there are no behavior score teams available, similarly, low behavior score teams do not have to be matched with high behavior score teams if there are no high behavior score teams available.
But which is more likely? Is it more likely that there are barely any low behavior score teams or barely any high behavior score teams?
Therefore I hypothesize that because the case is always leaning towards the former, low behavior score teams are significantly more likely to be matched with high behavior score teams than with low behavior score teams.
Of course now that I think about it it could always be unintentional by valve, and this a mere consequence of the small size of the F pool.
Thank you for the indepth explanation, I was about to hypothesize the same thing.
It does not matter if the idea is stupid, it is very viable from a technical standpoint, and it could be an oversight in the system as well. Still, considering how long the queue times for F bhs are, I'd say it is likely it just tries to match you against low bhs players as well. But who knows.
If u are F,you get matched with and against other F.If you are normal,you get matched with and against normal behaviour score.
If you are 7k, you get matched with and against other 7k.
....except not. So many 7ks are complaining about being matched with 4ks and 5ks because there are not enough 7ks. Likewise, there aren't enough F bhs people, which is why average queue time is over 10 minutes (for me at least). Now, asking for the other team to be full of F bhs people is asking too much perhaps.
🍩🍪Cookie🍪🍩 3 months ago
there's no such thing as behavior score/hidden pool giving you bad teammates, nor was it ever demonstrated nor proven.
it's just that idiots like these up here need any excuse, because dunning kruger hits hard.
The only thing it does is simply tell you how close you are to getting low prio due to reports/abandons.
There wouldn't be low priority if there was a hidden pool, nor has any evidence that BS is anything other than the score of how close you are to getting LP
Behaviour score C but I still get complete retards way outa my skill level. I understand how to play support and understand that lanes need to be pushed to win the game. However my teammates are idiots. They actually blame you for picking a support hero and not a carry when everyone else has picked a carry. I swear to fuck! Idiots that aren't interested in the teamwork needed to win a game should be impacted on behaviour score. I shouldnt be reported in a game if I was the only one who picked support and the rest picked carries. The majority of players are fucking kids only playing to make comments on your mum. Retards!
maybe lay off pot for a bit at leastThe pot is used for medical reasons. Nothing to do with this. Do you have any constructive advice?
you are never going to learn to play the game if you assume you understand anything while your skill level is this low
your teammates have nothing to do with games at 1.4k you can win them on your own while jacking off with one hand
Yup basically, i'm at C- now, after falling from Normal (which is the highest you can go) to D-, I basically lost 700 mmr. I think the only way is to play unranked and ask for commends and not get reported, then go play ranked is the only way you'll climb easily. The thing about loss streaks though is that it's really hard to be positive when you're on low behavior loss streak, you get reported for ANYTHING by raging shitters. When I hit 5K in may, I was on a win streak, and literally had the most amazing teammates every game, like I could legit do bad, and still be carried in some of those games. Games are getting a little better though.
Before it used to prioritize recent behavior, not sure what it does now.
It's funny you make this topic, cause I was literally thinking of it yesterday when I kept getting paired with the same people, and they were all fantastic teammates in those games, while the other side had the same raging shitter that I just beat twice in a row already. I remember queing and hoping I didn't get him on my team each time.
You can get to 5K super easy if you're well behaved and just play support every game from my experience, and seeing others, you'll basically get carried most games cause people are 10x less likely to tilt when they have a support every game.
I also think if you get commended alot, your reports tend to have a stronger effect on people you report, but of course that's just my intuition talking, I got no evidence. But if you're losing in those high behavior score games then you probably belong at that mmr.
Whenever I have team mates that actually want to play I win games.. I lose focus myself when there is 3 guys on your team feeding constantly and doing stupid shit like not defending or not pushing when you have an advantage. I have the ability to do these things and understand how they are done. This is a five man team game. Not one pushing the lanes to win, not one guy defending towers to win and certainly not one guy playing support while the rest play mid or safe lane. It needs teamwork. Not all 1k players are trash. Some have an understanding of the game but somehow get reported for picking support or not giving a tango. They have the ability to improve but as I say you can't win with 1 guy playing properly and the rest farting about without a clue as to what they have to do.
^In fact you DO NOT have to support in that trash bracket, why would you support retards that won't be able to carry anyway.
Cappa, the issue is that if you were really better than your teammates you would have over 80% winrate in that bracket, instead you have 43% and that means in no uncertain terms that you are actually worse than your teammates and enemies on average
this acc was originally 1.1k but I self-boosted it to about 3k with over 70% winrate by playing jungle every game of all things, and jungle has a shit winrate, if I actually bothered to lane I would dumpster those people even harder because I had an ambition back then, to get to 3k
if you have an ambition to get MMR you actually need to get better at winning the game, and you look absolutely clueless as to what you need to do in order to win more than you lose
Sometimes I question the balance of teammate selection, but then I remind myself, that there are smurf accounts like these https://www.dotabuff.com/players/107663097/matches?hero=broodmother and that no, it's not the team, I am just dogshit.
People, who play with 80-90% winrates up to 5k exist == it isn't impossible and highly depends on player's individual skill.
I don't know, how you can brag about your team (unless because some shit is absurdly funny) in 2k17.
I am a mod at the channel of a guy, who boosts 5-7k MMR ranges (high MMR boosts only) for a ton of money on stream, he plays almost exclusively Brood. I see him shitting at 6k players with 17-0 and realise that Dota is much less about teamplay, as long, as you play proper heroes and know what you're doing.
Also, I had an account with 1 behaviour score before patch (yes, 1, not 1000, plain 1).
It wasn't mine, my friend gave it to me for shits and giggles.
I couldn't play ranked, because it wasn't linked to any mobile number and I was too lazy to get through that shit.
Anyway, I played unranked there (Brood games before these games weren't mine, but of my friend).
https://www.dotabuff.com/players/188337737/matches?date=3month&hero=broodmother&enhance=overview
I had teammates screaming, threating to feed and feeding, going dual jungle, enemies abandoning and raging, feeding couriers, buying insane items, etc.
STILL, you may tell me it's unranked, but I've played with insane game ruining parties and managed to maintain a stable ~80% winrate w/my hero at NS/HS, because team doesn't fucking matter. It literally does not matter at Normal/High skill. You just pretend you play with bots and shitwreck everyone, if you have just a piece of brain.
Honestly i have 5+ Reports on every Single summary and my behaviour score is still normal. I have No idea how to even get f behaviour.
I had a read of all of your posts, take a look at my profile, all my games were absolute garbage picks, people who farm jungle rather than push the lane, ez tilts, never tp to fight, Overtalking by mic and flaming, the usual.
Games are White or Black on this aspect, either i have the absolute perfect NA'VI strat. or the enemy haves it and you end up with the shitty team because you got reported 1 time? Maybe by a salty enemy? Give me a break dude...
I don't get it why valve haves to play FUCKING GOD with their system.. we have mute, we have report, we have Low priorirty, now we have matchmaking based on reports and commends, when you know how volatile a dota player is... it becomes so predictable that makes you wanna smash your head against the monitor srsly.
Please sign in to post comments.
We all know that matchmaking is definitely based on behavior score, and that you will almost always be guaranteed to be matched with players of a similar behavior score, but what can we say about the players you will be matched against.
The thought has always interested me particularly because I was recently sitting at F behavior score for quiet a while, and recently with the introduction of turbo and me not being retarded and using my weekly abandon, I was able to climb to normal behavior score in a week.
What I had noticed was almost a role reversal compared to what I was used to.
In F behavior score games, I had expected it to be easier to tilt the enemy team using the secret tilting techniques I learned while training in the uninhabitable wasteland that is the 4k bracket, but I noticed that in general, it was significantly more difficult to do so, whereas my teammates (as expected) would get tilted and feed because their team held them back and forced him to miss a cs in a free lane. Eventually the trend was clear that the enemy team was consistently more "mentally stable" than my own, so I came to the conclusion that I was consistently being matched against high behavior score teams.
Conversely, I am currently normal behavior score, and my solo pubs have been an absolute breeze. The enemy team is always easily tilted, 2-mid, 5 core, peruvian, etc. Granted, my normal mmr is low so these are usually 3k avg games so of course they'd be a breeze :v. But even then it just feels like I am on the other side of the situation and now I am matched with positive peruvians and matched against negative nancies.
Anyone else getting the same experience?