sc2 match making style

(Cankor) #141

[QUOTE=tokamak;265024]I don’t know if that’s what you mean, but I think it’s a brilliant idea to ‘weigh’ victories according to the average amount one side wins the map.

If the defenders win 60% of all the (full) matches played on container city, then they should get only 80% of the rating increase, whilst the attackers should get 120% if they win.[/QUOTE]

How about just re-balancing the map (changing completion times for various objecftives) so wins are 50/50 for both attack and defense? (old discussion I know).

[QUOTE=Anti;264977]What we might do for Brink, unfortunately, I don’t think I can tell you about, not without Badman hunting me down :wink:

As for what might be better for players, that’s a matter of opinion and depends on the platform. Personally I’d suggest matchmaking does actually result in better matches for players because of the way it tends to use ELO style systems to find closely skilled opponents for everybody. The problem is many PC players reject the idea of matchmaking and want full control over their own servers, custom settings, server selection etc. Matchmaking hides those details from them a lot of the time which means they lose trust in it, which they really shouldn’t.
[/QUOTE]

Sure we want full controll over our own servers, why would you host a server if you hardley ever played on it due to matchmaking? I can see how individual player matchmaking would result in better games, but peeps want to play with their friends and clanmates who might be different skill levels, so there’s a negative side as well. But it could be done both ways where you click “find me a game”, put in your preferences and one of them is “match me with players of similar skill”. If you want to go to your clan’s server you can do that too.

That said, I thought the the idea here wasn’t about matchmaking for individual players in the game, it was about an optional matching making system for teams playing in a ladder that you could join.

(LyndonL) #142

Going on from Cankor, and OT a bit sorry but cbf making a new thread… Can we start a Campaign game for example, but force it to use a certain Server?

(Cankor) #143

If the server were empty you probably could :slight_smile: Although if servers are set up with fixed rankings you’d have to be in the right rank category too.

Seems dubious you’d be able to do it. To me clans will set up campaign servers as recruiting tools or pointers to their playnow (it feels weird to say that) servers instead of having any hope of actually being able to play on them.

(Nail) #144

are there matchmaking mechanics for PC dedicated servers ?

(Cankor) #145

I think it’s optional on a “playnow” server, so you could set up “beginners park” or “no noobs” servers for instance if you wanted to.

I am guessing (inferring really) if you want to set up a campaign server it would have to have default settings.

(Nail) #146

I’ve never played a PC game with matchmaking so I have no idea how it can affect servers

(Cankor) #147

OK, I probably mis-stated, I don’t know about the matchmaking part.

I was talking about the ability to limit players by rank, and used that synonymously with matchmaking (I guess it is in a way, but obviously different than how it’s being used in this thread).

(Nail) #148

I realize ded servers can set limits, I just wondered if there was a matchmaking mechanic for PC ded servers. Probably a dev question, I don’t think this has been explained yet

(wazups2x) #149

The PC version needs a simple server browser. No matchmaking.

(LyndonL) #150

Including both is a winner in my books.

(system) #151

You have books? OMG

(Bullveyr) #152

I can’t agree on that.

Close matches are more fun, I think everyone will agree on that.

Therefore a system that tries to get people with a similar skill level on a pub server is a good thing, you just have to eliminate the problems and keep the benefits of the usuall dedi server system.

With multiple accounts letting a friend try the game won’t affect your rank.

As Etek allready wrote playing a few matches drunk won’t have a big influence.

The minority of people/accounts with a high variations of performance (for whatever reasons) shouldn’t set the used system for the majority anyway.

It can be optional where the game searches a server with the right skill level for you but you still can join every other server.

The server owner could set a skill range, people not in that range can only join the server with a PW (for friends).

If you want to take it to next level you will still a join a clan, you don’t join a clan to have more fun on pubs.

@Coolaguy

If I understand your post correct we are on the same page, it would be good to take personell performance into account but nobody really figured out how it really could work in a game like Brink (TDM is much simpler).

[QUOTE=Cankor;265677]
That said, I thought the the idea here wasn’t about matchmaking for individual players in the game, it was about an optional matching making system for teams playing in a ladder that you could join.[/QUOTE]
That is still a good idea and should be implemented.
The normal leagues could also benefit from that.

(tokamak) #153

You don’t have to chose between both. Of course the 50/50 is the direction you want to work towards. But modifying the rewards based on the odds of your side winning the map, is just there to keep the rewards fair.

(Atavax) #154

[QUOTE=Bullveyr;265727]I can’t agree on that.

Close matches are more fun, I think everyone will agree on that.

Therefore a system that tries to get people with a similar skill level on a pub server is a good thing, you just have to eliminate the problems and keep the benefits of the usuall dedi server system.

With multiple accounts letting a friend try the game won’t affect your rank.

As Etek allready wrote playing a few matches drunk won’t have a big influence.

The minority of people/accounts with a high variations of performance (for whatever reasons) shouldn’t set the used system for the majority anyway.

It can be optional where the game searches a server with the right skill level for you but you still can join every other server.

The server owner could set a skill range, people not in that range can only join the server with a PW (for friends).

If you want to take it to next level you will still a join a clan, you don’t join a clan to have more fun on pubs.

[/QUOTE]

If everyone agrees that close matches are fun, why do we need a built in system? people will naturally gravitate towards communities of similarly skilled players.

if my friend wants to try the unlocks, he would most likely want to play on my main account instead of going through the hassle of unlocking everything himself on an account he is only trying.

yes, a few matches won’t have a drastic effect. But lets use the drunk example here. If you’re drunk, and you’re playing significantly worse then you normally are, you are matched with how you usually are and you are going to be ruining your team’s chance of having a good time with a close match. If i am drunk, i should be able to pick a more casual server where my drunkenness isn’t going to prohibit me from being a constructive teammate.

there are tons of things that can impact performance. For example, friends over, or if its really late, you could be tired, or the area could be noisy, or maybe your GF is asleep so you don’t want to wake her with your mic, so you don’t use it when she’s sleeping. I don’t think anyone only games under the most ideal of circumstances, the gamer is best person to judge how well he is going to perform and anything else is just getting in his way.

you also ignore people getting better in the game… If someone has been playing casually for a year, then starts really trying to improve, he is going to have to overcome the year of poor performing. While he overcomes the year of bad performing, he is going to outclass the people he’s playing against, and his quest for improvement is going to be hampered because he isn’t playing against good people, so he’s going to develop bad habits against bad people while he’s lvling higher to play better players.

If people are ranked, they are going to be afraid of losing their rank, so they will try to only play in the most ideal circumstances so as to not lose their rank. SC2 is the perfect example. I haven’t played in ladder since 2 weeks after it launched. I don’t want to lose my rank in the game, so i am not playing any ladder game unless i research before what the most up to date builds and strategies are then i have to practice them to get the muscle memory down and my apm up, then i could play a ladder. But i don’t want to do all that, so i don’t play the game.

players should not be ranked… I am totally for servers being tagged as one of several tiers so as to attract certain types of players and help players find servers right for their skillset and their current state.

(tokamak) #155

I know a few people who have that paralysing perfectionism as well. That’s why it’s important to always keep non-ranked games open.

(Coolaguy) #156

[QUOTE=Atavax;265788]If people are ranked, they are going to be afraid of losing their rank, so they will try to only play in the most ideal circumstances so as to not lose their rank. SC2 is the perfect example. I haven’t played in ladder since 2 weeks after it launched. I don’t want to lose my rank in the game, so i am not playing any ladder game unless i research before what the most up to date builds and strategies are then i have to practice them to get the muscle memory down and my apm up, then i could play a ladder. But i don’t want to do all that, so i don’t play the game. [/QUOTE] Even if I am an advocate of enabling matchmaking, I must admit that this is a legitimate issue that game communities face when ELO rankings are used.

Some potential solutions are to offer casual or practice environments where your ELO ranking will not be affected.

To counter the stigma of ELO and ELO matchmaking, ranks (based on ELO) could simply be completely hidden from players or only enabled when selected. In this case, ELO matchmaking would still establish the best matchmaking conditions for players (in terms of balanced teams) and allow for a more casual approach to the game. Likewise, the hardcore ELO-ranking-visible mode would be able to satisfy the competitive urge (to achieve the highest skill-based rank possible i.e. for bragging rights, competition, etc.) in a significant a subset of your player-base.

If I’m not mistaken, the system mentioned above most-closely resembles Halo:Reach. Starcraft 2 also has less competitive game modes like ‘Custom Games’ in ‘Use Map Settings’ and also pvp options (to play with people on your friend’s list, for instance).

(Bullveyr) #157

Did you miss the part where I wrote it should be optional?

Because finding a server with the right skill level isn’t that easy for everyone, not everybody has a couple of fav severs where he knows the people who play there. They just open the server browser and pick the first server.

if my friend wants to try the unlocks, he would most likely want to play on my main account instead of going through the hassle of unlocking everything himself on an account he is only trying.

You could have the option to dublicate your account and still it’s minority that shouldn’t dictate the game for the rest.

yes, a few matches won’t have a drastic effect. But lets use the drunk example here. If you’re drunk, and you’re playing significantly worse then you normally are, you are matched with how you usually are and you are going to be ruining your team’s chance of having a good time with a close match. If i am drunk, i should be able to pick a more casual server where my drunkenness isn’t going to prohibit me from being a constructive teammate.

Join a non ranked server.
In general in such a system (if it’s good) you don’t have a specific skill value but a skill range, it takes deviations in your performance into accout, some play more stable than others.

there are tons of things that can impact performance. For example, friends over, or if its really late, you could be tired, or the area could be noisy, or maybe your GF is asleep so you don’t want to wake her with your mic, so you don’t use it when she’s sleeping. I don’t think anyone only games under the most ideal of circumstances, the gamer is best person to judge how well he is going to perform and anything else is just getting in his way.

Again, your rank isn’t determined by your best possible performance, it’s your average performance.

you also ignore people getting better in the game… If someone has been playing casually for a year, then starts really trying to improve, he is going to have to overcome the year of poor performing. While he overcomes the year of bad performing, he is going to outclass the people he’s playing against, and his quest for improvement is going to be hampered because he isn’t playing against good people, so he’s going to develop bad habits against bad people while he’s lvling higher to play better players.

I don’t know how good the current systems are in recognizing your improvement but the system could for example only take the last x games into account.

If people are ranked, they are going to be afraid of losing their rank, so they will try to only play in the most ideal circumstances so as to not lose their rank. SC2 is the perfect example. I haven’t played in ladder since 2 weeks after it launched. I don’t want to lose my rank in the game, so i am not playing any ladder game unless i research before what the most up to date builds and strategies are then i have to practice them to get the muscle memory down and my apm up, then i could play a ladder. But i don’t want to do all that, so i don’t play the game.

E-penis is a problem but ranks don’t have to be public.
You could also give the players some kind of training account.

players should not be ranked… I am totally for servers being tagged as one of several tiers so as to attract certain types of players and help players find servers right for their skillset and their current state.

That would be highly abuseable (“noob bashing”).

Edit: = what Coolaguy wrote :slight_smile:

(tokamak) #158

[QUOTE=Coolaguy;265848]Even if I am an advocate of enabling matchmaking, I must admit that this is a legitimate issue that game communities face when ELO rankings are used.
[/QUOTE]

It’s also exactly the reason Blizzard hides the ELO so it doesn’t rub people their poor performance in their faces.

(Atavax) #159

Bullveyr, you kept saying how the problems i gave wouldn’t be problems because of how large a selection of games it takes into effect, and then for the last problem you stated that the number of games that it looks to could be relatively small… well it can’t be both… either its small enough where several bad performances will significantly lower the skill of the people you’re playing or it will take many good performances to significantly increase the skill of the people you’re playing.

as for my idea for ranked servers is significantly less abusable then any ranking system i’ve seen…

(Coolaguy) #160

[QUOTE=Bullveyr;265851]Edit: = what Coolaguy wrote :)[/QUOTE]lol

[QUOTE=tokamak;265859]It’s also exactly the reason Blizzard hides the ELO so it doesn’t rub people their poor performance in their faces.[/QUOTE]Most definitely.

[QUOTE=Atavax;265860]Bullveyr, you kept saying how the problems i gave wouldn’t be problems because of how large a selection of games it takes into effect, and then for the last problem you stated that the number of games that it looks to could be relatively small… well it can’t be both… either its small enough where several bad performances will significantly lower the skill of the people you’re playing or it will take many good performances to significantly increase the skill of the people you’re playing.[/QUOTE]A little clarification:

  • Initial placement can be somewhat accurately achieved in very few games i.e. 7-10
  • Every time you win or lose there are subtle shifts in your ELO rank, the magnitude of which depends on how many games you’ve played (i.e. more games played makes the system more certain of your actual skill, so your rank won’t fluctuate as wildly as it would if you had played only a few games)

Beyond that, it depends on the parameters, calibration, tuning, etc. of the ELO system in question.