Jump to content

Gameplay Balance Through A Revised Matchmaking


5 replies to this topic

#1 Caspian111

    Member

  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationEurope

Posted 06 September 2013 - 08:12 AM

Hello,

I just wonder if some of you have already noted that the matchmakings were some times crazy?
After being crushed a few times (with pugs or in team), i have started to make printscreens of games in order to calculate the tonnage and the mechs classes distribution, because i was convinced that sometimes the matchmaking made the game "not fair". Even if we played well, we add no chance (...)

I do agree that my sample is maybe not enough, but the trends i can see tend to confirm the ones i had in mind.

Posted Image


From this chart and with my experience, I observed the following trends:
  • With a tonnage difference ≥ 20%, the heaviest team will tend to win
  • The team with the a difference of assault mech ≥ 2 will tend to win
  • If mechs assaut difference ≤ 2, but heavy mechs difference ≥4, this team will tend to win


In conclusion, i would like that PGI set a cap to the tonnage difference (max 15%), and also a cap to the assaults and heavies differences.
Example : Assault difference ≤1 & Heavy difference ≤3

Open questions to this thread are:
A . Have you also noticed this kind of matchmaking differences?
B. Would you agree to change and to add some constraints to the matchmaking?
C. Have you noticed other trends ?
D. Would you add other constraints to the matchmaking?

I thank you in advance for your answers and your participation.

Caspian111

#2 Shae Starfyre

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 1,429 posts
  • LocationThe Fringe

Posted 06 September 2013 - 08:52 AM

My experience in every Mech, from a pub perspective, lone wolf... the longer I play a single Mech, the more even everything is in the long run with the current match maker (K/D and Win/Loss ratios being close to 1).

As for the questions:
A.) Yes, but in the long run, I think it doesn't matter.
B.) The only contraint I believe is fair is to eliminate pre-mades to 2 only in pub matches; All others must have a seperate queue (number of players not factored in).
C.) Aside from what I already stated, and not accounting for pre-mades, and the current Meta, no.
D.) Only as specified; If enough players get on board, I would have 4 seperate queues.

Separate Queues:

1.) Cadet Queue (first 25 games with only other single player cadets).
2.) Lone Wolf Domain: 2 man pre-mades and cadet graduates only.
3.) 4 man and 8 man (possibly intermingles with 2 man for fillers - 2 man pre-mades should have a choice to enter queue 2 or 3.
4.) 12 mans (really organized competitive play only).

Edited by Aphoticus, 06 September 2013 - 08:53 AM.


#3 Caspian111

    Member

  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationEurope

Posted 10 November 2013 - 10:03 AM

No one want to share his opinion?

#4 Deathlike

    Member

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

Posted 10 November 2013 - 10:44 AM

View PostCaspian111, on 06 September 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Open questions to this thread are:
A . Have you also noticed this kind of matchmaking differences?


It happens all the time, at least more often than not.

Quote

B. Would you agree to change and to add some constraints to the matchmaking?


Yes and yet no. One of the problems the MM faces is that it is at the mercy of who is in the queue. That is, it depends a lot on the # of people that play this game. The more people that play this game (and that stay to play this game and not disappear for whatever the reason), the more MM will work better. Adding more constraints makes this infinitely more difficult.

Quote

C. Have you noticed other trends ?


If you keep hitting the Launch button after leaving a completed match, you'll find many of the same players in the next match and subsequent matches.

Quote

D. Would you add other constraints to the matchmaking?


I'm not sure what you can add w/o making it worse. What should actually be adjusted is HOW the teams are being constructed which is the probably only the best solution. The starting point or possibly the end point is likely the point of contention.

Edited by Deathlike, 10 November 2013 - 10:44 AM.


#5 Screech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 2,290 posts

Posted 11 November 2013 - 10:26 AM

View PostCaspian111, on 10 November 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

No one want to share his opinion?


Read Ask the Devs #45. I think it will have the answers you were looking for in regards to how PGI is going to handle tonnage.

#6 Caspian111

    Member

  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • LocationEurope

Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:06 PM

Ok thx your Screech. I copy/past the Ask the Devs# 45 http://mwomercs.com/...vs-45-answered/

Along the same lines, from Pendragon: In AtD 44, Paul mentioned that the ability to launch in groups of any size could come out shortly after launch. The response suggested that the matchmaker would only have to consider tonnage limits, Elo, and “team player counts”. The last point is somewhat ambiguous. Does this mean that matchmaker would simply be trying to fill the 12 slots on each team? If so, does this mean that a full group of 12 could potentially be matched against a non-full group? In that case, do you have faith that the Elo system will prevent the lopsided matches present before Phase 2 of Matchmaking?

Answer from Paul: The 12 man queue resulted in a decrease in fail rate. I don’t have the exact numbers for you but it’s safe to say approximately 5-10%. It’s not due to some magic we’re pulling on our end, it’s just that people are more willing to try 12 vs 12 with bigger teams. This decrease should not indicate to you that we are happy where it’s at. We need to add proper limitations to 12 player launches in order to make the 12 vs. 12 queue a lot more balanced as to what teams bring to the battlefield.

As for launching in any sized teams, this requires the feature indicated in the above paragraph. Our end goal for Match Making is to introduce a tonnage limit for teams trying to drop. For example (please note these numbers are for DEMONSTRATIVE purposes only):
Group Size Minimum Tonnage Maximum Tonnage 2 40 125 3 160 180 4 210 245 5 265 305 6 315 365 7 370 425 8 420 485 9 475 545 10 525 605 11 580 665 12 630 730


While you’re group is preparing to launch, depending on the number of players, the team will have to figure out which Mechs they can bring and their total tonnage must fall between the minimum and maximum tonnage level. An example of this is if a team has 6 players and tries to launch with 6 Atlases, the group interface will not allow this because their total tonnage is 600 and the min/max allowable is 315-365. If the group however brings a Raven(35t), a Spider (30t), a Blackjack(45t), a Centurion (50t), a Jagermech (65), and an Atlas (100t), their team total tonnage would be 325 which falls in the min/max allowable. The team can now successfully launch. If a team tries to bring all lights, their tonnage would be under the minimum allowable and the team would not be able to launch. As you can see, this system requires teams to be very aware of their tonnage and make very conscious decisions as to which Mechs to bring.

Now that teams are launching within tonnage limits, the Match Maker can match players based on Elo for skill matching and just grab from the pools of teams/players that are in the Elo bracket and as long as there’s enough room in the match, the players will be added. You will notice that if all players took the maximum weight per group size.. a team of 10+2 = 730 tons. This is the same as a full 12-man.

This feature alone will greatly diversify what Mechs will be showing up on the battlefield as personal preference in the weight classes will also be part of the group building process.

That being said, this is not a simple feature to pop in. It requires backend verification that Mechs are viable and that they meet the launch requirements. It also requires UI support for building the teams and verifying the launch requirements. It also requires a revamp of the Match Maker to take into account the various sizes of teams and their weight limits. There is no timeline for this at the moment but there are engineers working through each of the requirements listed here.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users