18 replies to this topic

[Zolaz]

So ... tell me how you feel about the Match Maker in MWO.

[xenoglyph]

millimeters are fine. inch fractions are okay too, but give me mm any day.

[Monky]

It's better than it was prior to matchmaking, but it is far away from what it could be.

Too often, people who haven't figured out to unlock arms from torso, run stock trial mechs, etc, end up in games vs customized mechs run by great players. This is not good for the newbie as they get annihilated, and is not good for the veteran as they basically don't face a challenge. Combined, this is not good for MWO as one player leaves out of frustration and the other leaves out of boredom.

Edited by Monky, 24 August 2013 - 09:36 PM.

[xenoglyph]

In 8v8 the matchmaker was pretty damn solid IMO. Yes, a lot of people complained, but the number of fair matches far outweighed the unfair ones.

Matchmaker honestly isn't a huge issue for me to begin with. I'll play against anyone, I don't really care. I will say though that in 12v12 there just doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to the matching.

[That Dawg]

Incredible. 100% think MWO has screwed the pooch on this.
The only thing, really..worse than the "new exciting 12 man" matches is the lag that 50% more computers trying to play introduced. Fing amazing. unplayable.

[John MatriX82]

Elo ranking and the current matchmaker are off nearly everytime. No class matchmaking leads to a team composed by lights/mediums/heavies with 1 or 2/3 assaults to end up against like 8 to 10 assaults and a few different classes that wouldn't make any difference in the outcome of the battle.

Then too many times I end up in matches where I have in my team players that are using trial mechs/champion mechs with things like arm lock on Atlases with LL in the arms or jenners, stalkers etc with arm-lock on; when I spectate I often run into improbable builds and several times my team or the enemy team ends up having virtually one less lance, since often 4-5 players barely reach 100-150 dmg or die within the first very minutes of the match.

Later on gaming experience is clearly fubar (at least for me), to me there are less and less players for the matchmaker to choose from, so the results are often hilarious and the "user experience" ranges from a few balanced and good fights (those that you don't mind to lose) to a majority of 2/3-12s where no-one gets back for the base or it's really useless even to bother about telling people what to do, they won't listen or to total wipeouts for your own team.

Later on my will to keep playing this game is really going away from me, this along with the absolutely "gg" choices that PGI is making make me really think that the next month's launch isn't going nowhere where it should.

It might be that a lot of people are in vacation, but later on team speak servers looks to be pretty deserted, even by the hardcore players..

[Jman5]

What do I think? It's much better than having no Elo, but it could be improved. People who want to completely abolish it either don't understand how it works, or want to go back to the days of 4-man steamrolls.

My biggest area of concern is making the weight matching more robust and introducing a strict tonnage limit to reduce the number of assaults per team. I believe that the high number of slow mechs is leading to much more passive games because they don't want to commit to pushes they're too slow to run from. This is why you generally see mediums and lights being much more aggressive.

[Devilsfury]

The match making is freaking incredibly stupid. I have 6,000 matches and Im teamed with a guy yesterday that is firing his AC5 and Medium lasers from over 1500+ meter out. To top that off, he ran off by himself to the opposite side of the map. At the end of the game, he managed a whopping 17 points of damage while being the last man to die. Really? REALLY?? This guy is obviously new and has no reason being in an experienced group of players. MM is garbage...just....GARBAGE!

[Jman5]

For those curious, yes, I am the lone positive vote on the poll. Not because I think it's perfect, but it would be a disaster to get rid of it. So yes, it could be improved, but it's vastly superior to not having it at all.

[DegeneratePervert]

Can't vote. My experience with matchmaking is as follows:

Scenario A.) I have 11 brain-dead companions, who are a stone around my neck. They force me to make every push, every decision, because they simply have no idea what they are doing. I lose these battles often, if not 100% of the time. Enemy team seems to consist of veterans or a pre-made group who brag about their "skill" as they stomp us into the ground.

Scenario B.) I have 8 brain-dead companions, but my lance can follow orders and they are all running half-way decent builds. Not bleeding-edge meta stuff, but not horrible builds. The four of us can sometimes overcome the 8 zombies if we can coordinate enough. Win rate is about 33% on these, unless we run into a premade, where it drops to 25%.

Scenario C.) I only have 4-6 comatose teammates. The team moves as a blob, with lances branching out to cover positions as needed. Win rate is around 75%, unless we come across a pre-made team, where it drops to about 50%.

Scenario D.) Team is full of intelligent, well rounded players who know how to work as a team. Win rate is 100% against pugs, 80% against a premade of 4+.

My conclusion? I am on the edge of either really high, or really low ELO. Matchmaking for me is a frustrating experience half the time, with unsatisfying stomps occuring often. About one in ten games results in an extremely sweet matchup where both teams have an equal number of competent players... that's when this game shines brightest.

[General Taskeen]

Too many 3PV blinking light bus drivers backing up. They should emit a beeping sound too as they go in reverse.

Edited by General Taskeen, 26 August 2013 - 08:43 AM.

[Voivode]

ELO creates a lot of {Scrap} matches. Been in matches where team had a Victor and an Awesome for assaults and the other team had three Atlas', a Stalker and two Highlanders. How does that even happen?

[Gallowglas]

This is a flawed poll having only two polar opposite options. My opinion falls somewhere in the middle.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

It's dumb. ELO doesn't work, so I just assume all matches are random.

Give us 1-50, Bungie.

[Angel of Annihilation]

DegeneratePervert, on 26 August 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Can't vote. My experience with matchmaking is as follows:

Scenario A.) I have 11 brain-dead companions, who are a stone around my neck. They force me to make every push, every decision, because they simply have no idea what they are doing. I lose these battles often, if not 100% of the time. Enemy team seems to consist of veterans or a pre-made group who brag about their "skill" as they stomp us into the ground.

Scenario B.) I have 8 brain-dead companions, but my lance can follow orders and they are all running half-way decent builds. Not bleeding-edge meta stuff, but not horrible builds. The four of us can sometimes overcome the 8 zombies if we can coordinate enough. Win rate is about 33% on these, unless we run into a premade, where it drops to 25%.

Scenario C.) I only have 4-6 comatose teammates. The team moves as a blob, with lances branching out to cover positions as needed. Win rate is around 75%, unless we come across a pre-made team, where it drops to about 50%.

Scenario D.) Team is full of intelligent, well rounded players who know how to work as a team. Win rate is 100% against pugs, 80% against a premade of 4+.

My conclusion? I am on the edge of either really high, or really low ELO. Matchmaking for me is a frustrating experience half the time, with unsatisfying stomps occuring often. About one in ten games results in an extremely sweet matchup where both teams have an equal number of competent players... that's when this game shines brightest.

This is pretty much my conclusion as well. It seems my ELO score likes to bounce me around all over the place like it doesn't have a clue what to do with me. It is always asking itself, "Do I move him up or down a ranking? Do I place him with a bunch of newbies to offset his skill? Do I place him with players of equal skill?" Basically I never get a consistant gaming experience. I mean I know I am not at the top of the skill chats because sometimes I get matched against players that run circles around me but it is like I am right on the edge that top ranking and the MM spazzes out because of it.

[Zphyr]

It's not awesome but I don't really hate it. Just find it worthless from time to time and in dire need of more devs' time. Your poll does not reflect my opinion. It's too extreme.

Edited by Zphyr, 26 August 2013 - 05:56 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

I voted that it is awesome. I do not hate it, so you left me no choice. Combat is supposed to be unpredictable. This is a combat game and therefore the outcome should not always be a toss up.

[Deathlike]

I swear the MM has made my contribution limited to "having no impact in overwhelming loss" and "occasionally having no impact in overwhelming win" and "why am I the last one alive while everyone else manages to run into their deaths like lemmings".

I feel that in most matches, my contribution to the success or failure in a match is closer to < 25%, so the MM is literally deciding the fate of the match more often than not.

[Hexenhammer]

Quick question.

Has PGI ever explained ow ELO works? I mean do they they have a target ELO for each match, mixing and matching high and low ELO players to reach the target or do they try to match teams combine ELOs?