Matchmaking

(Tom2160) #1

Matchmaking is still utter garbage. I’m always put onto a team full of level 1-6’s and they expect me to carry them? Whilst the other team is all levels 10-20. Even in the last game I played my whole team just ran out and died, like seriously one good player can’t always carry a match. I think that the only reason balancing is bad is because they depend on 1 good player and if that player can’t carry then it just turns into a stomp.

(SamillWong) #2

I am pretty sure that SD is aware of this and it has been brought up on the forums multiple times. Ranting about it won’t help, there is nothing in our ability to fix any of it.

(Cuck) #3

I am pretty sure that SD is aware of this and it has been brought up on the forums multiple times. Ranting about it won’t help, there is nothing in our ability to fix any of it.

[/quote]

how about mentoring system or spectate voice chat

so you can shout to that rhino whos hiding in the corner to man up and start revving that big gun.

spectator: EY! YOU THERE! YEA YOU! MAN THE FUG UP!

rhino: but the enemy teams are high levels!

spectator:DO YOU THINK THEY ARE ON HIGH LEVEL BECAUSE THEY FUGGIN HIDE BEHIND A WALL? NO! THEY SHOOT INCOMPETENT FUCCBOIS LIKE YOU!

or the more positive ones

spectator:come on guys! those EV arent gonna fix themselves!
Proxy: but im too squishy!
spectator: thats why i never buy proxy…

(Tanker_Ray) #4

Oh man. I agree this more than anybody.

This is why I really hate to be in normal pubs nowadays.

Well Asia servers got least population in this game so it is a bit better than US West and EU but still this is why I always activate min 10 or 20.

I shouldn’t be mad against newbies but playing with them is such a pain in the ass as much as how easy it is to earn meaningless Godlike and 50 kills Badge.

We all desire to play with PROPER team mates, not DECENT players. I simply need team mates who doesn’t stare at you as medic, can charge his healing pulse, resupply your ammo with fire support, and some red eye not blocking your shot with his smoke etc.

I may have less satisfying result at min 10 20, but gameplay is just so much safisfying in that level.

DB should make Max level 10 20 servers for them really.

(Szab95) #5

Oh man its soooo true. Yesterday I played a stopwatch match i was the only one with over lvl 10 and the other team had only one under lvl 10 and a bunch of lvl 20 and even over 70. Okay I’m lvl 50 but I’m not that good to face such a team. I’m more like a healer or objective player rather than a killer. I feel like the game balance games like: oh look there are two guys who are over lvl 50 they should be good so put one together with a bunch of lvl 6-8 and the other team is the remaining people whatever the lvls are.

(Black) #6

Even though the devs claim they have been taking more measure to make games balanced I feel like there has any real work into it.

It’s been floating around the forums but apparently how they rank people is by there recent games. So basically if i’m skillful and I do badly in a couple of games (which happens often), next time a balance takes place I would be placed on a team with other skillful players because my recent games were bad. Hence why we see stacking.

I don’t know what algorithm they use for balancing but it is clearly flawed.

(Pumpkiller) #7

Pretty sure there’s no need for a matchmaking algorythm at all i’f pepole can manually choose their servers.
Wouldn’t that feel pointless to have one for quick matchmaking ?

(Freezer_Boss) #8

Levels means nothing in some cases tbh, exemple: a good (rampage) fragger who was lvl 5 (asked him where he bought it, he said with base credits in the store). See ? Not all the players buy Vassili first ! (I bought arty first)

(SamillWong) #9

…which is very rare and probably are just alts of veteran players. Truth be told.

(neverplayseriou) #10

@Freezer_Boss pretty sure that the base credit fee is only 30k and that he couldn’t have had 50k at lvl 5 yet…

(BananaSlug) #11

[quote=“Rexitech;182060”]Pretty sure there’s no need for a matchmaking algorythm at all i’f pepole can manually choose their servers.
Wouldn’t that feel pointless to have one for quick matchmaking ?[/quote]

but what if server browser would be combined with matchmaking?

(Freezer_Boss) #12

@neverplayserious during the sales after ReV, 50k mercs were at 35k

(Amerika) #13

[quote=“Black;182019”]Even though the devs claim they have been taking more measure to make games balanced I feel like there has any real work into it.

It’s been floating around the forums but apparently how they rank people is by there recent games. So basically if i’m skillful and I do badly in a couple of games (which happens often), next time a balance takes place I would be placed on a team with other skillful players because my recent games were bad. Hence why we see stacking.

I don’t know what algorithm they use for balancing but it is clearly flawed.[/quote]

I’ve explained this numerous times. DB sorting does not factor in level AT ALL. And luckily your level won’t be displayed for much longer so people who insist that things are balanced based on a dumb number next to somebodies name and finally stop doing that (they’ll move to something else i’m sure).

The game has always given everyone a private ELO rating. In the past it only used your last 10 games for the sorting. But a while back it was changed to your last 25 games. Also, if you join a game in progress and both teams are missing a player, you’ll be placed on the team with the lower overall Team ELO rating.

So there is sorting/balancing done that is trying to factor in actual skill and not an account level number…which has little relevance after 10 or so since humans do not learn consistently with more and more time played at the same pace they did early on. See all other games and sports…30 year old basketball player does not dominate 20 year olds despite thousands of hours of difference in experience.

The problem with this system is that it leans too heavily on individuals. If you have an extremely high private ELO rating you will consistently get matched up with players of lower skill as the system is only comparing team ELO average to the other teams ELO average. So if you’re the higher end player you’ll consistently get the level 1-7 guys on your team and the other team will have the people who have been playing longer because it makes the team ELO’s match up. So, if you don’t carry, your team gets smashed. If you leave due to frustration, your team gets smashed. Even if you win the rest of the lower skilled players who haven’t learned enough yet get smashed. So despite winning, they have a bad time.

These are the flaws with that particular system and how it ends up producing a situation that can consistently end with less than good balance from a lot of players perspectives.

If it was instead changed to placing player with the highest ELO on team one, 2nd highest on team 2, third highest on team 2, 4th highest on team 1 etc. etc. you’d end up with solid players and not so solid players on both sides. The teams ELO rating might not perfectly match up but the chances of each team having competent players who do something other than sit on Vassili all day at the back of a map goes up drastically.

So the best way to balance is to try not to balance perfectly based on ELO. Hopefully the new queueing system fixes a lot of these issues…but I’m not sure. If it pairs a person with high ELO up with potatoes constantly it’s going to be much of the same problem but using a different system.

(Black) #14

[quote=“Amerika;182272”][quote=“Black;182019”]Even though the devs claim they have been taking more measure to make games balanced I feel like there has any real work into it.

It’s been floating around the forums but apparently how they rank people is by there recent games. So basically if i’m skillful and I do badly in a couple of games (which happens often), next time a balance takes place I would be placed on a team with other skillful players because my recent games were bad. Hence why we see stacking.

I don’t know what algorithm they use for balancing but it is clearly flawed.[/quote]

I’ve explained this numerous times. DB sorting does not factor in level AT ALL. And luckily your level won’t be displayed for much longer so people who insist that things are balanced based on a dumb number next to somebodies name and finally stop doing that (they’ll move to something else i’m sure).

The game has always given everyone a private ELO rating. In the past it only used your last 10 games for the sorting. But a while back it was changed to your last 25 games. Also, if you join a game in progress and both teams are missing a player, you’ll be placed on the team with the lower overall Team ELO rating.

So there is sorting/balancing done that is trying to factor in actual skill and not an account level number…which has little relevance after 10 or so since humans do not learn consistently with more and more time played at the same pace they did early on. See all other games and sports…30 year old basketball player does not dominate 20 year olds despite thousands of hours of difference in experience.

The problem with this system is that it leans too heavily on individuals. If you have an extremely high private ELO rating you will consistently get matched up with players of lower skill as the system is only comparing team ELO average to the other teams ELO average. So if you’re the higher end player you’ll consistently get the level 1-7 guys on your team and the other team will have the people who have been playing longer because it makes the team ELO’s match up. So, if you don’t carry, your team gets smashed. If you leave due to frustration, your team gets smashed. Even if you win the rest of the lower skilled players who haven’t learned enough yet get smashed. So despite winning, they have a bad time.

These are the flaws with that particular system and how it ends up producing a situation that can consistently end with less than good balance from a lot of players perspectives.

If it was instead changed to placing player with the highest ELO on team one, 2nd highest on team 2, third highest on team 2, 4th highest on team 1 etc. etc. you’d end up with solid players and not so solid players on both sides. The teams ELO rating might not perfectly match up but the chances of each team having competent players who do something other than sit on Vassili all day at the back of a map goes up drastically.

So the best way to balance is to try not to balance perfectly based on ELO. Hopefully the new queueing system fixes a lot of these issues…but I’m not sure. If it pairs a person with high ELO up with potatoes constantly it’s going to be much of the same problem but using a different system.[/quote]

What? I never said DB factors in levels.
I was referring to the private ELO rating when i said “skillful”.

Here’s the bottom line.

You can’t have a fully drop in and out of any lobby game with a ELO system like that. It just doesn’t work, and there is going to be a lot of unbalanced games. I’m sure you already know this.

If you ever played quake, you would see a similar system however it had a bit of a difference. In the server list, there were certain servers you just could not join because your skill(elo rating) was either too high or low in reference to the current ELO of the game. I’ve played quake live for years and i can tell you with this system MOST games were balanced.

It’s either that or we implement casual matchmaking.
You can’t have drop in/out servers and want balanced teams. It’s one or the other.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

(Amerika) #15

I was making a general comment to some people in the thread that was not directed at you when referring to levels. Sorry about that.

And yes, you could say I have some Q3/Quake Live experience. I’ve mentioned to the devs multiple times that the system Qlive used wasn’t perfect but it did work as well as public matchmaking possibly could.

(Teflon Love) #16

I suspect currently there still is a single Elo (not ELO btw) rating for a player. This works reasonably well in chess (where it originated from), which is a 1 vs 1 game with both players having the exact same “mercs”.

In DB however you would have to take into account which roles each player is comfortable with and factor this into building a team. The best teams I’ve played with in pubs had all the roles covered with players decent in their roles.

So each player would at least need Elo ratings for repairing/planting, healing, damage, ammo support, sniping, spotting, reviving and possibly even skill jumping. With that the matchmaking could attempt to build team Elos that have all the areas covered in a comparable way.