Jump to content

- - - - -

Matchmaking Phase 4 - Feedback


233 replies to this topic

#1 Kyle Polulak

    <member/>

  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 584 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:14 AM

This thread shall serve as the official response channel for the following Command Chair post: http://mwomercs.com/...making-phase-4/

To help us keep forum organized and to help us ensure all feedback is read: Please keep your responses confined to this thread: Let us know any of your comments, concerns and thoughts on this matter.

Please also remember to keep your responses in line with the Code of Conduct and direct your comments to us (PGI/IGP) rather than arguing with other respondents. Let's keep it constructive!

View PostOmid Kiarostami, on 12 April 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

It's been two months since our last major update to matchmaking, where we introduced our first pass at Elo and saw a tremendous improvement in the quality of matches being kicked off. With the next patch we're bringing in a new round of changes, and we've got two big ones lined up: Weight Class Matching and Elo Rating Adjustment.


WEIGHT CLASS MATCHING

We're adding the ability for us, the developers, to adjust our weight matching tolerances on the fly. This is giving us a controlled way to tighten up the weight imbalance between teams that players are experiencing.

Fun fact: About 74% of games kicked off are within what we consider tolerable weight matching limits (the difference between a heavy vs. assault Mech on the opposing team). Of the remaining 26% of matches, about 7% are what we would call "horrendously bad" (i.e., they carry the weight difference of one or two full assault Mechs between teams).

When we tighten up the Weight Matching, we're going to drop our weight tolerance to 0 and see what happens. Teams will be almost equally built in terms of weight class, though they will draw from a wider skill range of players to compensate. We'll be keeping an eye on the system while doing this and will continue to tune it until we're happy with the match quality and wait times.


ELO RATING ADJUSTMENT

We discovered a bug that was causing player Elo values to become inflated. Players that would win a game against a weaker opponent were being rewarded as though they were the underdog in that match. This caused Elo values to increase by a lot when they should have increased by only a little, skewing the player Elo distribution so that it became top-heavy.

What we've done (beyond correcting the bug) is a complete re-simulation of Elo ratings for every player in the game. Using match history we've been logging since February 5th, we determined what every players Elo rating would have been if we were using the corrected algorithm. The difference we noticed is huge, and the new player Elo distributions look healthy. We're going to push these ratings to the servers when we patch on April 16th.

So, how will this affect things? Well, without going into the details of how Elo works, this significantly improves our ability to match similarly skilled players. The old algorithm had an unintended (although interesting) bias towards people who had played more games, whereas the new rating measures only how you're playing. The bottom line is that we can kick off more close matches.


ROLLOUT PLAN

So when will we get to see this stuff? You won't have to wait long; this goes live with the April 16th patch. Other fixes, such as better detection of disconnected players while matching are also going in at this time as well. However, we'll be staging the release of the Weight Matching tweaks to be sure the system is working correctly (and to give us time to collect a bit of data on the new operating conditions).

Here's the plan:
On Tuesday, April 16th, we'll patch as normal and will put in the adjusted Elo values.
On Thursday, April 18th (tentative date), we'll drop the weight matching tolerance to zero. This won't require a patch or an interruption of service.

We're excited to bring the next round of changes live and look forward to matching up with you. See you on the Battlefield!


#2 Mechwarrior Buddah

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 13,459 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:19 AM

does this mean all matchmaker discussions will be locked and funnelled here now like is being done with machineguns?

#3 Zyllos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,818 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:24 AM

I do have one question, I am assuming this does not effect the 8man queue?

#4 ObsidianSpectre

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 289 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:27 AM

I support this sort of experimenting, and I hope they do more of it.

#5 Jabilo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,047 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:29 AM

View PostMechwarrior Buddah, on 12 April 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

does this mean all matchmaker discussions will be locked and funnelled here now like is being done with machineguns?


Thanks for your input.

Personally think it sounds good.

Bound to be some teething issues but I trust that you will stay on top of them.

*Edit*

Just read a dev post further down that clarifies it is weight class matching and not tonnage matching.

Changes my whole outlook. Now very disappointed.

Edited by Jabilo, 12 April 2013 - 11:50 AM.


#6 Ravenspyre

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 126 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationBarking at the Moon

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:30 AM

I am hoping this does well, because I am tired of going up against teams with three to four assault mechs on it with our team being comprised of mostly mediums and lights.

#7 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:30 AM

Does the new weight balancing planned to go live on the 16th (here: http://mwomercs.com/...46#entry2228746) mean forced weight class balancing as we used to have it (IE: Bring an assault, the opposing team gets an assault), or does it mean total tonnage will be equal between teams?

I'm really hoping we're going to tonnage balancing, so the lighter mechs in a given weight class are an advantage instead of a hinderance.

It'd be nice to know if I take my Dragon, I'm giving those extra tons to another friendly player vs. if I'd dragged out a Cataphract.

Edited by Wintersdark, 12 April 2013 - 11:32 AM.


#8 HighlandCoo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 772 posts
  • Locationbehind you

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:31 AM

Looking forward to it! BTW - does ELO adjustment depend on the map you play? According to my stats I have a majorly lopsided win/loss on Frozen City compared to any other map.

Just wondering.

#9 FrDrake

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,086 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:33 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 12 April 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Does the new weight balancing planned to go live on the 16th (here: http://mwomercs.com/...46#entry2228746) mean forced weight class balancing as we used to have it (IE: Bring an assault, the opposing team gets an assault), or does it mean total tonnage will be equal between teams?

I'm really hoping we're going to tonnage balancing, so the lighter mechs in a given weight class are an advantage instead of a hinderance.

It'd be nice to know if I take my Dragon, I'm giving those extra tons to another friendly player vs. if I'd dragged out a Cataphract.


It seems implied that it's on a tonnage basis and not a chassis basis, so each side gets 500 tons of mechs instead of 4 assaults each etc.

#10 JudgeDeathCZ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 1,929 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:43 AM

<3
Weight balanced drops <3 . Thx <3

#11 Omid Kiarostami

    Member

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 35 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:44 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 12 April 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

Does the new weight balancing planned to go live on the 16th (here: http://mwomercs.com/...46#entry2228746) mean forced weight class balancing as we used to have it (IE: Bring an assault, the opposing team gets an assault), or does it mean total tonnage will be equal between teams?

I'm really hoping we're going to tonnage balancing, so the lighter mechs in a given weight class are an advantage instead of a hinderance.

It'd be nice to know if I take my Dragon, I'm giving those extra tons to another friendly player vs. if I'd dragged out a Cataphract.


To clarify, it'll be similar to the forced Weight Class balancing that we used to have. We're not doing any tonnage based matching at this time.

#12 MadPanda

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,054 posts
  • LocationSearching for a game...

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:46 AM

View PostOmid Kiarostami, on 12 April 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:


To clarify, it'll be similar to the forced Weight Class balancing that we used to have. We're not doing any tonnage based matching at this time.


So one team gets an Atlas DC, other team gets a trial Awesome, great, looking forward to it...

#13 One Medic Army

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,985 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:46 AM

Good to hear.
This probably explains why I was getting so high on the end of match scoreboards, since I don't play more than once or twice a week.

#14 Custom3173

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:46 AM

View PostOmid Kiarostami, on 12 April 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:


To clarify, it'll be similar to the forced Weight Class balancing that we used to have. We're not doing any tonnage based matching at this time.


Hopes = dashed

#15 Jabilo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,047 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:48 AM

View PostOmid Kiarostami, on 12 April 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:


To clarify, it'll be similar to the forced Weight Class balancing that we used to have. We're not doing any tonnage based matching at this time.


Ah, that sounds terrible. Sorry.

For my money tonnage matching is the one thing needed by ELO (apart from bug fixes).

If you are not introducing this then you may as well not bother.

Personally I would be happy to add as much as half a minute to the match finding time if it meant better match ups.

View PostCustom3173, on 12 April 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:


Hopes = dashed


Quite.

#16 hammerreborn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 3,063 posts
  • LocationAlexandria, VA

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:48 AM

Quote

Fun fact: About 74% of games kicked off are within what we consider tolerable weight matching limits (the difference between a heavy vs. assault Mech on the opposing team). Of the remaining 26% of matches, about 7% are what we would call "horrendously bad" (i.e., they carry the weight difference of one or two full assault Mechs between teams).



Hey, that's about what I saw doing this:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2220919

Cool to see that I'm at least someone close to the real numbers.

#17 Zerikin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 165 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:51 AM

Finally. These changes sound like a step in the right direction.

#18 jay35

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 1,597 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:54 AM

Quote

So, how will this affect things? Well, without going into the details of how Elo works, this significantly improves our ability to match similarly skilled players. The old algorithm had an unintended (although interesting) bias towards people who had played more games, whereas the new rating measures only how you're playing. The bottom line is that we can kick off more close matches.

To be honest, "meh". It's fine and all, but to be honest, I don't really want every match to be close. Close is stressful. I game primarily to have fun. To enjoy the game. Enjoyment naturally comes from winning. And I'm used to winning more than losing when it comes to FPS games. So to reduce my winning, as ELO inherently does by giving better than average players tougher than average opponents, will cause me less than a normal level of enjoyment.
It's not a huge deal. I'm not going to whine because I don't get to crush the enemy every round. But it must be pointed out that you are very directly reducing the fun factor of the game for above average players any time they're looking for relaxation and fun rather than competition and stress.

Edited by jay35, 12 April 2013 - 11:55 AM.


#19 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:56 AM

I still don't see a way Elo system can work properly in 8v8 (and soon 12v12) games (unless I'm missing something). It certainly does something, but I don't think that something has any advantages over random matchmaking. I guess that everyone who says that Elo ruined or improved his experience is subject to placebo effect.
Hope they will answer my ATD question to clarify this for me.

#20 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:58 AM

At least the new plus is this... they admit to having a bug in the code (long overdue) and the obvious "cluster****" matchups.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users