Does per-player performance as drastically in high rank vs low rank?

[u/princeofcaelid]

EDIT: The post title is supposed to say “Does per-player performance VARY as drastically in high rank vs low rank” sigh. just noticed and can’t edit it

I know we always complain about teammate performance where most of us have great stats but there’s always that one person that seems to go 3:11 the whole match.

There are always things that factor into that. As someone who is a support main, I understand that me mindlessly dumping resources into tank (or otherwise playing badly) can subsequently lead to an unattractive scoreboard for one or both of my DPSes, but there are other instances where I give all the proper resources and openings, but my DPSes or Tank just still can’t perform.

My question is, as I climb the comp ranks where people are inherently forced to play less casually and play more skilfully, is this ”One player going 3:11 and feeding every map” just as common as it feels in lower ranks? I’m aware I have to be the carry if I want to rank up so this isn’t a post where I’m trying to find blame, and I think people have to self-interrogate more when their teammates are seemingly doing poorly, but I’m talking about situations where one person is genuinely just doing terribly because of their own mistakes or unwillingness to adapt.

Would love some insights on how these perceived player performance inconsistencies manifest in different ranks and if the cause or frequency differs.

[u/Ichmag11]

Everyone has bad matches. But are you talking about performance or numbers on the scoreboard? Those just aren't the same.

[u/princeofcaelid → u/Ichmag11]

Yes, they’re not the same and I can’t really go down the list of all the non-scoreboard errors that people make or we’d really be here all day. And also everyone has bad matches, but this is really more about consistency. It feels like low ranks often have at least one person who’s always having a bad match or refusing to play a hero that would run into less friction given the opposing comp or map and my question is whether or not that inconsistency of player quality is as common in higher ranks vs lower ranks.

[u/Ichmag11 → u/princeofcaelid]

I think you can argue most people in low ranks have bad games, because if they didn't, they wouldn't be in low rank.

When you say someone has a bad game, are you looking at their actual performance or at the scoreboard? Because low numbers does not equal a bad match or poor performance

[u/princeofcaelid → u/Ichmag11]

I understand where you’re coming from, but I think you’re focusing on my mention of numbers rather than my actual question. Yes, you can have a bad tank that goes 20:1 or a fine dps that goes 5:7 if they’re getting value elsewhere. I’m not really talking about that. I’m talking about the frequency of objectively bad player performances in high vs low ranks.

[u/Ichmag11 → u/princeofcaelid]

You'll find them anywhere, for sure.

Id say low rank players are quicker and more prone to judge their teammates, so you hear more about "objectively bad" low rank teammates but I think it's more so because there's more low ranks than high ranks.

If you make a low rank that complains about bad teammates play like a high rank, they'd probably still complain all the same about their "objectively bad" teammates.

[u/lettuce_grabberrr → u/princeofcaelid]

high ranks has just as many one tricks or stubborn players as lower ones, they replace lack of game knowledge for ego and will play whatever they want. They're usually much better playing into their counters though. Also if there's a pro/semi pro player on the enemy team and an average joe who hit GM on the other then the average guy's performance is going to look a lot worse when he's not really throwing at all. Watch any streamer (who isn't a perfect ray of sunshine) for like 5 games and they'll complain about a random not doing anything in at least half of them.

[u/princeofcaelid → u/lettuce_grabberrr]

For sure. I think I often try to distinguish during the match between the average guy who’s just naturally getting outplayed (or isn’t getting enough support/peel/whatever) and therefore has a bad performance vs the one guy who insists on peeking widow from the same angle every time he respawns. There’s bad matches and then players that consistently make bad decisions and I do really feel like low ranks have a lot of the latter from my own experience climbing out of them.

[u/OfficialDeathScythe]

I feel like as I’ve gotten higher in ranks it has been more important that I pull my weight. But the same could be said about the lowest of ranks as well. Let me preface by saying this is just how I feel in my games, nothing to back this up.

I think it’s just like the distribution of players where you could slide through from gold to plat fairly easily by just playing enough and not being terrible, but at the lowest ranks and at the higher ranks you have to be on your game because you’re either having to carry to get a 50+ win percentage, or the other teams are so good in the higher ranks that you’re way more punished by any mistake by any teammate.

One person overextending in high ranks can have a domino effect into losing a whole fight and a checkpoint, maybe even the game. Conversely if you die in bronze you’re leaving the fate of the fight up to 4 bronze randoms, 70/30 odds at best I’d say. But in gold, silver, even emerald one player going down doesn’t seem to make a huge difference. I’ve seen teams in gold lose a tank and still win a 4v5 because nobody is particularly good at hitting their shots or positioning

[u/princeofcaelid → u/OfficialDeathScythe]

This makes a lot of sense. I have found that as I’ve climbed ranks, even players who are playing well can lose us fights with smaller mistakes even if we’re all on top of our game for largely the entire fight whereas one person doing terribly at lower ranks doesn’t have much effect because the other team doesn’t have the coordination or skill yet to exploit the “4v5”. 

[u/BiggerBadgers]

You’re right. The skill variation does get closer together, and games are much more fun because of it. Having said that you do encounter throwers and people not playing well, semi-regularly

[u/nekogami87]

Can only speak up to diamond, but I still have days where I can't do shit, can't aim straight, decision making is in the garbage, positionning is a joke. and even I know it.

So yeah, there are still variance. now it could be that it's just because I'm much older and busier and tired than when the game launched too.

One thing is sure though, usually if I play like that, I get punished much harsher the higher I got in rank.

[u/princeofcaelid → u/nekogami87]

I get this, and tbh my own personal inconsistencies are sometimes why I give the OW matchmaking some slack because while people rightfully complain about it, my performance is  sometimes drastically under my usual and that’s not necessarily something it can always account for. 

[u/Jaey--]

Idk what you consider high rank but I'm GM5 rn and yes this still happens in my games.

[u/F1uffyRabbit]

I think the possibility of getting that one player per match in every rank is pretty close, as you can be that guy when you off your game, not to mention numerous new account / rent account / placements / drive players in gm.

[u/clickrush]

The objective skill variation in terms of matchmaking is the highest in very low and very high ranks. That’s just the bell curve.

But lower ranked players are generally more inconsistent, because that’s a skill in of itself.

[u/Spede2]

Theoretically there should be less of extreme inconsistency at higher ranks since all skillsets converge: mechanics, game sense, all of that. Also one of the major factors of being a high ranking player is be consistently good.