9 replies to this topic

[Eternal Hunter]

I've been in some unbalanced matches, but this one takes it all - so i have to do some QQ

[Fides]

Thats not bad, ordinarily dropping with pugs and a 4 man group the pugs run off and die anyway and we are playing 4vs8.

There are only so many 8 man drops I can stomach and 4 man is still more fun that 8, largely because the games are shorter.

That said, lately the match maker has been skipping out adding the pugs in at all and we start off with 4 of us vs 8,

I suppose these are pretty even odds anyway, but its not always fair, sometimes our 4 man runs into 2x4 man sync drops.

Edited by Fides, 03 May 2013 - 09:56 AM.

[Biffer]

I also have seen a lot of un-balanced matches lately gaging by weight only. I know there are other metrics in the 'match maker' to make matches, but when you have 5 x DDCs + a few lights vrs 6 light mechs, 1 med, & 1 heavy, something isn't right.

I would like to see mech weight and total weight in the battle summary screen. Shouldn’t total weight per team be close? by my calculation the above screen shot is 630 tons to 420... not fair, not fun.

Is the teams total weight used in match making?

If a pre-made team has 5 atlases and 3 lights (for 630 tons) and they can't find a match they should be able to figure out why.

Edited by Biffer, 07 April 2013 - 12:28 AM.

[Fides]

As far as I know weight is no longer used in this current version of match making, would be nice if they would use it as one of the variables, maybe also limit type of mechs too, I have seen 6 Raven 3Ls all on one team.

Edited by Fides, 07 April 2013 - 02:06 AM.

[Hotthedd]

If a matchmaking system does not account for weight or class, is it really a matchmaker at all?

[Deamonition]

I was logging onto the forums to start a thread about the matchmaking system. When I started playing this game, it seemed OK. Now, it is just horrible.

I have been in many games lately where players admitted they just started playing this game... And sometimes we were against 4 men premade.

On some other occasions, we had 1 assault in our team, they had 4. Tonnage was not balanced at all. Somebody in this thread says that weight is not accounted for, but it really should. Doesn't make sense to have a team full of assaults against a couple of heavy, medium and lights (which happened to me sadly...)

And in some other occasions, I am in teams that are clearly made out of people with a lot of experience, against complete noobs that are clearly playing their first games.

I have played many games with broken matchmaking systems... I just hope this one doesn't fail as well.

In my humble opinion, these factors should be considered in the matchmaking process (I know some, if not most of those, are already considered in the current matchmaking system) :

1- Premade groups. Of course, don't put premade groups against pugs.
2- Stats of the players/Quality of the player/Elo. Just so that a team full of great players isn't going against bad players.
3- Experience of the players/amount of games played. I know that "skill" is not directly linked with experience, but 90% of the time, it's a good indicator. Rarely you will see a guy playing his first game ending up at the top of the damage done chart.
4- Tonnage/Classes. Balance the weights, tonnage, classes in both team.
5- ECMs. Right now ECMs are quite powerful and the team with the most ECMs has better chances of winning. Of course the team with no ECM can still win, but they start with a strike.

[RoboPatton]

Fail teams gonna fail.

More than just skill in piloting, and weight are on the line in matches. We've all seen noobtacular players eat up that 100t slot, and not even know how to manage heat, let alone turn on night vision.

Better than early closed beta days, but I still long for something better.

[Deamonition]

RoboPatton, on 08 April 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

Fail teams gonna fail.

More than just skill in piloting, and weight are on the line in matches. We've all seen noobtacular players eat up that 100t slot, and not even know how to manage heat, let alone turn on night vision.

Better than early closed beta days, but I still long for something better.

You say Fail team will fail... Yet often just 1 or 2 ppl are complete noobs in the team, which gives a major disadvantage to that team. It's not the full team that fails, but just 1 or 2 players.

But this type of game easily snowballs. 2 noobs is enough to ruin the chances of winning most of the time, just because of the snowball effect

[RoboPatton]

Deamonition, on 08 April 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

You say Fail team will fail... Yet often just 1 or 2 ppl are complete noobs in the team, which gives a major disadvantage to that team. It's not the full team that fails, but just 1 or 2 players.

But this type of game easily snowballs. 2 noobs is enough to ruin the chances of winning most of the time, just because of the snowball effect

I guess that's what I was getting at.

Also, that the MM has improved, and that PGI has mentioned something about drop in replacements for DC'd players etc (dont ask me for a link im too lazy).

[Deamonition]

RoboPatton, on 08 April 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

I guess that's what I was getting at.

Also, that the MM has improved, and that PGI has mentioned something about drop in replacements for DC'd players etc (dont ask me for a link im too lazy).

So we both agree.

But, MM should place noobs together. Or at least balance the amount of noobs in each team to even the chances.