268 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

Matthew Craig, on 18 September 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

Another thought is to allow players to help determine how long they are willing to wait, so you can elect to wait 5 minutes for a good match knowing your guaranteed a tight game vs. electing for short wait times and taking the trade-off yourself that there's a chance it won't be that well balanced. At least each user can decide for themselves. Another potential was if you could ready multiple Mechs in multiple weight classes and have the one kick off into a game that finds the best match first.

I would really, really love to be able to select a Maximum Wait Time, knowing that on a longer wait time I'll get ever tighter matches, and with short wait times more random ones.

Sometimes, I want a tense, awesome battle and have no issue waiting for it, but there are other times (oh, the life of a father with two very young children) when I've only got a very limited time to play and want to fight NOW.

Alternatively, how about a single alternate launch button - the normal one giving you the standard matchmaker try, the alternate launch's goal being to cram you into a match right now. Maybe hold shift while you click? Right click? Option in the Launch Type menu alongside Assault, Conquest, Training Grounds? Seems reasonable that you can't pick a specific battle type; you just want into a battle immediately. Have it just drop you into the oldest battle in the matchmaker's queue.

Matthew Craig, on 19 September 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

Yes it's something that will be discussed if we can do that behind the scenes. Something that was noted internally is that if you were able to continue to make changes in mechlab to other Mechs (not the one dropping) while you wait that would potentially help ease the strain of longer wait times?

I'd definitely like this. Also, allow us to continue using chat functionality while waiting for a drop, please.

[Inkarnus]

i would really thank Matthew Craig for his engagement and communication with the community

i would support too the abillity that the player
can control what matches he want.
Slow searching
or
Fast matches
would solve the issues discribed in This thread
all along the way too

[Deathlike]

Here's my thoughts:

It shouldn't be that there are more lower ELO players than there are higher ELO played in a match... it's just wrong on many levels.. because it's honestly frustrating to watch incoming newbies in their trial mechs not being where they need to be...

Since I don't know what the average ELO happens to be, let me just lay out how teams should be constructed ELO-wise (while attempting to match weights):
4-6 average ELO players (or wherever the highest ELO distribution happens to be)
2-4 high ELO players (usually a constructed premade first, and/or high ELO solo players as needed)
2-4 low ELO players (usually a constructed premade first, and/or low ELO solo players as needed)

Instead of trying to "place a high ELO played to their predestined fate" towards the end, try to satisfy them first, because it assumes they are a smaller population generally (because, we're supposed to get lots of new players yes?). Filling in the gaps would be easier to do with average ELO players, but also trying to "satisfy" any weight balancing criteria...

In other words, add the "harder to match players" first, then add in the "easier to match players" afterwards. Filling a match with "easier to match players" first with "harder to match players" afterwards would probably breakdown into some lopsided game more often...

[Theevenger]

Matthew Craig, on 18 September 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

We monitored the data throughout the day yesterday and made adjustments to maintain a reasonable average wait time, that said we suspect it is right that very high or very low elo players are probably suffering longer than usual wait times. Reason being that Elo distribution looks like a bell curve so naturally players in the middle of the curve have more players they can match against.

We're looking over the data today and will continue to make adjustments that try to maintain as much of the restriction while maintaining our goals for wait times.

Please feel free to post your feedback on how long you are willing to wait to find a good match, and potential failed to find a match. A quick note on that, the failed to find a match can be a good thing for the match maker e.g. say 48 players trickle into the matchmaker the buckets fill up in the order the players join, now there might be two good matches between them but both buckets have only part of the players they need (like playing a game of cards where you are holding each others cards). When the failed to find a match triggers everyone hits launch again and now the buckets can grab the right players. So bear in mind that it does introduce a dynamic that helps the match maker, that simply extending the timer, or altering ranges does not.

Interested to hear everyone's thoughts as we continue to tune.

I'm completely willing to wait the full 3 minutes each match if it meant that each match I played would be nail-bitingly close or otherwise extremely satisfying. I wouldn't be willing to wait more than 3 minutes, but I'd MUCH rather wait for 3 minutes and have a wonderful match that I will remember for when I am old than have an instant launch and a bad match.

[SgtKinCaiD]

Matthew Craig, on 23 September 2013 - 09:15 AM, said:

Match making thresholds have been returned to pre-patch levels for now, we've learned a lot from this attempt to tune them.

Thanks, now i know why i was seeing new players again in my team and why roflstomp matchs were on the rise.

This single feature is really turning me off this game. Several of us have been complaining about matchmaker since the introduction of ELO ratings back in march and the problem is still here.

Now, from my personnal opinion, you won't be able to adjust the matchmaker because you are mixing competitive players and normal ones. That's two differents mindsets. On one hand, you have experiences players, coming with the current meta cheese build and trying to win at all costs, and on the other hand, you have normal/new players, trying to learn the game, leveling new mechs, grinding cbills, or just gooffing around.

You need to separate them. We need a competitive/hardcore mode and a skirmish mode as it exists in every single game that try to be a little competitive. A hardcore mode balanced on ELO/tonnage with a ladderboard for example, and a skirmish mode balanced on tonnage.

Another problem is that the ELO ratings should not be based on W/L only as you can carry your team and still lose the match or on the opposite, do 0 damage and still win the match. It should be based on you participation in the fight, aka your match score, regardless of the outcome : your match score is higher than the average of your team, you gain some ELO ratings and vice versa.

Sorry, i have troubles to explain this properly but it's really bugging me off.

Edited by SgtKinCaiD, 26 September 2013 - 02:43 AM.

[Wispsy]

I would prefer infinite wait with a cancel button.

It would be nice if one could still chat and edit every other mech except the one in queue.

[Inkarnus]

SgtKinCaiD, on 26 September 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

Thanks, now i know why i was seeing new players again in my team and why roflstomp matchs were on the rise.

This single feature is really turning me off this game. Several of us have been complaining about matchmaker since the introduction of ELO ratings back in march and the problem is still here.

Now, from my personnal opinion, you won't be able to adjust the matchmaker because you are mixing competitive players and normal ones. That's two differents mindsets. On one hand, you have experiences players, coming with the current meta cheese build and trying to win at all costs, and on the other hand, you have normal/new players, trying to learn the game, leveling new mechs, grinding cbills, or just gooffing around.

You need to separate them. We need a competitive/hardcore mode and a skirmish mode as it exists in every single game that try to be a little competitive. A hardcore mode balanced on ELO/tonnage with a ladderboard for example, and a skirmish mode balanced on tonnage.

Another problem is that the ELO ratings should not be based on W/L only as you can carry your team and still lose the match or on the opposite, do 0 damage and still win the match. It should be based on you participation in the fight, aka your match score, regardless of the outcome : your match score is higher than the average of your team, you gain some ELO ratings and vice versa.

Sorry, i have troubles to explain this properly but it's really bugging me off.

dude He said no to FP que and TP que so no it wont happen sigh
even if that would have nicely solved that newbbashing alot
since HC players with high elo would go FP
and ppl with high elo wouldnt find most of the time
no matches in TP que fixed everything
i know its very simplified but at its core true

Edited by Inkarnus, 26 September 2013 - 05:28 AM.

[Doktor Totenkopf]

Just to chime in one the whole thing. Changing it back was a very bad idea, the weight imbalance you get now in drops is just stupid.

To be fair everyone who was complaining was prolly just running the most heavy FOTM meta gaming build. So you got yourself into the problem. While I can see your frustration, why break if for everyone else?

I am sorry to say, but it is again an example of bad planning.

[Villz]

Why it doesnt tell you your groups ELO is beyond me

and matchmaker tell you what ELO groups are que so you get an idea of whats going on and know your place in the world of matchmaking.

Just have ranked unranked que's then if ppl want to play casually its their option

Edited by Villz, 26 September 2013 - 09:28 AM.

[Chronojam]

It doesn't even tell you your own Elo

[Burke IV]

Why cant we just have 12 man servers? the player gets to see a server list, could even have space for comments/requests for certain mechs to make a team. The player can then select the best server for their game taste ranging from "noobees frag fest - everybody welcome!" to "this server is password only to keep noobs out"

This gives the player a great deal of choice and at the same time will allow a degree of filtering so players of equal skills will play together. Also groups of player will become regular on servers and this will create an atmosphere of skilled play and communication that will be instilled into the random noob that wonderd in by mistake. Its tryed and tested.

Edit: i hate to give PGI any ideas but you migth even end up with a situation where clans (or whatever MWO calls them) would pay a small monthly fee to rent a server where they have limited admin powers. Clan logo on the splash screen and everything

Edited by Burke IV, 26 September 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[Matthew Craig]

Thanks to:

(CSA)Mister Blastman
DragonsFire
(DV8)Lord Steel
(DV8)Wispsy
(AS)GrimlockONE
Savage Hero

For helping out with the tuning, values are tuned back to a happy medium with user feedback, hope everyone's games improve

[Five by Five]

Matthew,

Just curious if there's a chance ya'll will do a command chair post detailing how ELO and Matchmaking are currently working (actually, I mean the algorithm in use) and what some of the envisioned changes are on the horizon. I have a feeling that the matchmaking system is one of those conceptually straight forward things that gets devilishly complicated as you delve into the details. I think it'd be interesting to see what approaches ya'll have taken.

Edited by Five by Five, 26 September 2013 - 12:27 PM.

[Matthew Craig]

I'd be happy to but not for a while, as you can imagine there are changes coming to the match maker to support community warfare so this is probably best discussed after that work is in place.

[Chavette]

Real sorry I wasn't around, time zone and sleep cycle didn't let me see the message in time.

Match finds only marginally better, about ~1 out of 4 compared to ~1 out of 6 before.

[Chronojam]

Matthew Craig, on 26 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

I'd be happy to but not for a while, as you can imagine there are changes coming to the match maker to support community warfare so this is probably best discussed after that work is in place.

Those sound interesting. Tell us about them.

We haven't heard anything about community warfare in so long.

[Doktor Totenkopf]

Matthew Craig, on 26 September 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Thanks to:

(CSA)Mister Blastman
DragonsFire
(DV8)Lord Steel
(DV8)Wispsy
(AS)GrimlockONE
Savage Hero

For helping out with the tuning, values are tuned back to a happy medium with user feedback, hope everyone's games improve

Great job guys! Good to know, Ill have a look on the weekend.

[Arete]

Matthew, great work on this. PGI are lucky to have you :-)

[Black Templar]

It is totally normal for high ELO players to sit in queue for long times, if they expect to be matched against players of their skill. A good game needs two ingredients: enough players and the right ELO to be matched with. I remember that in the good old times of the League of Legends ELO system, people sometimes had to wait up to 60min to be matched against another group of players. When nobody was online, there would also be no match soon. End of story.

Now this is not a bad thing. It basically shows that the matchmaker is strict and works as intended. However nobody wants for wait that long for a game. The current implementation of the "Launch" button isn't even a real queue. Neither does is give me feedback on my actual time in "queue" nor does it give me an "estimate time to match". When it can't find a good match, it just kicks you out of the "queue".

What Riot Games did to decrease the overall waiting time and make the ranking system overall better, was to introduce an acutal ladder with leagues and division. The individual divisions are big enough to provide every player with a good match. Players are matched against each other with an invisible value called "MMR" or "Match Making Ratio". This is a number, invisible to the player, that determines the players your are matched with/against, based on your performance during previous matches.

I guess it will take much more time for MWO to get to a good matchmaking system, since ladders and leagues are still far down the road. In the meantime we have to work with what we have now...

[Villz]

Matthew Craig, on 26 September 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Thanks to:

(CSA)Mister Blastman
DragonsFire
(DV8)Lord Steel
(DV8)Wispsy
(AS)GrimlockONE
Savage Hero

For helping out with the tuning, values are tuned back to a happy medium with user feedback, hope everyone's games improve

I would have helped but i am banned off comastar NS by ghostbear one of the bAdmins. Ps my group broke up for that so fu

ps check my account history we had alotttt of failed to find matches about 2 hrs ago

Chavette, End Crescendo, Delta Spectra and me

TY Mathew <3

Edited by Villz, 28 September 2013 - 02:56 AM.