Quick fix for unbalanced ranked / stopwatch matches

(Gi.Am) #1

Ok today and yesterday I was in very unbalanced ranked matches once on the weaker side once on the stronger. both weren’t much fun (the one on the stronger side a bit more tho :smiley: ). Anyways till skill balancing is sorted out for good.

How about making the stronger Team (higher average rank / XP lvl / numbers of premade) always attack first.

Right now the stronger team often ends up on defense first. Result is that they will fullhold one objective (in the extreme the spawn) for 15 unpleasent minutes. And then rush the first objective in record time.

If they attack first there is a high chance, that the full map gets played (not only one objective / and because of spawnforwarding no spawncamping) . They will set a short time if they are indeed stronger. Because of that the presumable following fullhold / spawncamp will be over quickly.

(GregHouseMD) #2

A major obstacle to that is the fact that servers currently tend to empty out and then refill during the intermissions. Attackers fill up first, so unless you’re going to assign people to a specific team based on, say, their rank, there’s really no way to control for which team is the stronger before the match.

(Gi.Am) #3

I’m talking about ranked (competive matchmaking) teams are set beforehand usually.

(Tomme) #4

The ranking system already tries to get similar ranked players playing against each other. You don’t have a set rank till after 10 placements matches though and with the recent release, teams will be one-sided till the influx of new players settles down and the ranks have a good selection of players in.

Just give it time :slight_smile: Every single matchmaking system has had this issue.

(Gi.Am) #5

Tnx I’m aware of that.
I know it will get better over time and I don’t mind waiting. But on the other hand look at games with bigger playerbases and very good matchmaking routines even those have to resort to unbalanced matches once in a while, if they can’t find a suitable match in time.

My proposition simply would make a match less painfull/boring in those situations. And since the system already has the needed numbers to figure out which team will propably be stronger. It should be easy to implement, just make them attack first.

(GregHouseMD) #6

My bad, I missed that you were talking about comp.

I have to wonder, though. Wouldn’t that skew results, and potentially lead to a lot of quitting, just on the basis of people being put on defense first? Like, “Oh, we’re the weaker team, I’ll just quit”.

I don’t know. Just putting it out there.

(Gi.Am) #7

Hmm good point didn’t thought about that.
Lets see.
First off. If the matchmaking is even remotely based on the venerable ELO rating. You would have an interest to be the weaker team. If the stronger team wins they get less rating points compared to a weaker team winning. The larger the teams are apart the more/fewer points you get for a win.

Also as the matchmaking system improves teams will overall be closer, so quite often you will be on defense first because the other team has just a 0.2 XP lvl advantage (one player is one level higher). Because of that starting side will become less and less an indicator for the outcome of a match.

Obviously you are right tho.
There are always those that flee as soon as they perceive a disadvantage.
But those are the same people that will leave an ongoing match as soon as it goes south (robbing themself and their team the chance for an Epic comeback).

While this is personal preference I’d rather have them flunk out before the match starts and replaced with people that say “oh ok weaker team. Let’s put up a good fight. Let’s organize and maybe we beat them”.