198 replies to this topic

[RalphVargr]

I think we need more information before the MM decides a team.

So, before entering any match, each player must deposit a genetic sample into the analyzer, take a breathalyzer test and full drug screen, and pass a sixty word per minute Morse Code test!

[DukeDublin]

League of Legends took elo out, that should be evidence enough.

Just an example don't hate.

[Rhaegor]

I feel like they changed something with the matchmaker even after the rollback. I have been getting much more balanced and fair games.

[Darth Futuza]

Rhaegor, on 09 October 2014 - 04:57 PM, said:

I feel like they changed something with the matchmaker even after the rollback. I have been getting much more balanced and fair games.

The initial hotfix did not work, that is probably why you noticed it. Rather the roll back hotfix wasn't scheduled till today, the initial one was for other things (even though they said they were going to hotfix it that day). You can find patch notes here: http://mwomercs.com/...1-hot-fix-13341 and the later one here: http://mwomercs.com/...2-hot-fix-13343 That's why they put out another hotfix patch today.

Edited by Darth Futuza, 09 October 2014 - 05:23 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Darth Futuza, on 09 October 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:

The initial hotfix did not work, that is probably why you noticed it. That's why they put out another hotfix patch today.

That is not correct. The hotfix on the 8th was to fix bugs, nothing else. Today's hotfix was the rollback. They initially said the rollback would happen on the 8th but then changed it to the 9th.

[Darth Futuza]

Dock Steward, on 09 October 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

That is not correct. The hotfix on the 8th was to fix bugs, nothing else. Today's hotfix was the rollback. They initially said the rollback would happen on the 8th but then changed it to the 9th.

Which is why I said it didn't work, your explanation is perhaps more accurate, but based on what he said it sounds like he was expecting the roll back with the first hotfix.

[Dock Steward]

Darth Futuza, on 09 October 2014 - 05:08 PM, said:

Which is why I said it didn't work, your explanation is perhaps more accurate, but based on what he said it sounds like he was expecting the roll back with the first hotfix.

Gotcha. Sorry. It sounded like you were saying they tried to roll it back but failed somehow.

My bad.

[Darth Futuza]

Dock Steward, on 09 October 2014 - 05:14 PM, said:

Gotcha. Sorry. It sounded like you were saying they tried to roll it back but failed somehow.

My bad.

You're right my explanation was pretty awful, I think I'll go in and edit it so when he comes back he won't read it and be confused.

[Koniving]

About counter play...something that is still very poorly done here.

About random elements.

And on ELO...
http://extra-credits...php?f=41&t=6226

Edited by Koniving, 09 October 2014 - 05:31 PM.

[Featherwood]

As if it hasn't been discussed before. PGI had already invested too much resources into current MM system and will not reject it entirely, so starting point in any productive discussion about future of MWO MM should be: how to improve current system.
After that one can move to suggestions. For example, I think that current per-weight class Elo-based mechanic should be added with kind of BV system, such combination should allow to match players taking into account both skill in exact weight class and exact Mech and thus, after all, cancel compulsory 3333 system.

[MischiefSC]

Another issue people have with Elo is the erroneous assumption of their own importance -

"I did well, so I should win"

"I did poorly so we'll probably lose" or more typically "I did poorly and it's someone elses fault, because I always do well"

You are about 4% of the total performance in any match you drop in. In every game you play you're really not a big deal. You're not the focus of the match. Your teammates are not there as filler for your heroic rise to glory and victory. The enemy is not there to be overcome by your skills and amazing mech build.

You are about 8% of the impact your team has in a match. So even if you quit every match you play you'd only see a change from ~50% to ~42%, and then only for a few matches as the MM recognizes you're dead weight and starts putting you in lower Elo pools and Elo effectively balances for the fact that you're worthless.

Elo has nothing to do with anything other than:

Based on how often you have won in the past in this environment (12v12 MW:O in this instance) how likely is your TEAM (with your calculated input) likely to beat the other TEAM (with its calculated skill level). That includes an estimate of how well you'll carry your 8%.

So we'll ask this one again -

If someone is a great player, do they win more than 50% of pug matches?

If someone is terrible, do they lose more than 50% of pug matches?

Are they still both pretty close to challenged most games? As in nobody hits 500 matches in a weight class with a win/loss average of 5.0 or 0.02?

That's because Elo works and works well.

If you balance Elo with mech buildout and team dynamics (which would absolutely help) you're still going to be limited by available player pool. You're also still going to have stomp matches and games with people playing like idiots on one side or the other.

The real flaw is people wanting to think that there's some magic trick that will suddenly make every match an 11/12 nail-biter. Won't happen. Humans don't work that way. Your skill moves up and down the curve in any given day based on calories, focus, sleep, energy level and mood.

Given that there won't be Elo in CW it is is also of dubious value to rework Elo at this point to take in more specifics in build and loadout. The biggest impact would be more players in the pool.

[RalphVargr]

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:

If you balance Elo with mech buildout and team dynamics (which would absolutely help) you're still going to be limited by available player pool. You're also still going to have stomp matches and games with people playing like idiots on one side or the other.

The real flaw is people wanting to think that there's some magic trick that will suddenly make every match an 11/12 nail-biter. Won't happen. Humans don't work that way. Your skill moves up and down the curve in any given day based on calories, focus, sleep, energy level and mood.

You can only use the people who show up. In rock, the old joke is you get the fans you deserve.

So *no* match-making system will ever work to everyone's satisfaction. MM is not a fixable problem. You can treat the symptoms, but the basic problem is the same as the one on Match.com: Lots of bad dates.

[L Y N X]

Koniving, on 09 October 2014 - 05:29 PM, said:

And on ELO...
http://extra-credits...php?f=41&t=6226

"The problem occurs when you do not take into consideration player performance and assign the change in Elo / Rating to the entire team. It is possible for a team, to be full of good players and have one "feeder" and still win the match. The feeder gets a free lunch. It is entirely possible for the team to be full of bad players and one good player gets dragged down no matter how well he plays and he can even be a better player than all other players in that match."

QFT.

[Karl Streiger]

OK - i have created a formula to calculate player performance:

[Meters moved] * 0,1 + [shots fired at you] ^{(Shots at you that missed)} / 44.75 + [Damage Taken]*100 + [Shots Fired that missed]*10 + DamageDealt *50 + Kills*3 + Assist*1 + [Numbers your loadout get known to the enemy - and did include AC 20; NARC, SRM] + 500(if in a DireWhale) - 500(when in an Awesome) + 3000 when ECM - 3000 when no ECM + 100 when AMS - 200 when no AMS + weird stuff + what ever you want / [Number of Forum Posts]

Or in other words i don't see a method how to measure player peformance. Because the current Matchscore is similar to the always loved game (i did hate it) "Musical chairs" also known as "Going to Jerusalem". When you have 12 equal players in a team its obvious that some won't get a chair.
For example his ping is 10ms slower or faster -> If you and a team member both went for the head with you Dual AC 20...you fire in the same instant....who get the kill who don't?

[PhoenixFire55]

Diablobo, on 08 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Until PGI ditches Elo and uses some sort of Battle Value system...

Having separate Elo for each mech variant instead of just mech classes might help. Because currently same player in Awesome and DireWhale is treated equally in terms of contribution he is supposed to bring to his team. Same thing for Spider 5D and Spider 5V etc.

On a side note, Elo is **** and probably the worst thing that happened to the game if you don't count the no-more-than-4-friends-in-a-team-game period of MM'ing. Currently due to multiple factors it isn't any different in what it eventually results in from a totally random MM we had prior to Elo.

[NocturnalBeast]

Diablobo, on 08 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

You guys do understand how Elo works don't you? It takes two players who are assumed to have the EXACT SAME STARTING CONDITIONS AND CAPABILITIES, and then makes predictions on who should win when player X competes against player Z.

Have you figured out the flaw with using Elo for MWO yet? It's not too hard to see....if you don't see it, then you have no business even trying to comprehend the intricacies of Elo in the first place.

Elo assumes both players have the same basic starting point. Apart from white getting the first move, chess is an extremely balanced game. Both players have the same pieces, and both players' pieces can do the exact same things.

Is that what happens in MWO? Does someone who takes a zero unlock Commando with 3 small lasers, a standard engine, and single heat sinks stack up against a fully mastered, fully optimized Spider? No. They do not. Neither do the other mechs that come into the matchmaker that are not as powerful as the fully optimized meta builds. Using Elo with a game that has such widely divergent starting positions is just a recipe for disaster. It turns out that PGI has cooked up a wonderful dish of one-sided mismatch stew.

Until PGI ditches Elo and uses some sort of Battle Value system, there can be no matchmaker that is anything other than random, luck of the draw crap. The sooner they acknowledge this fact, the sooner we can all get on to enjoying our epic well matched battles we were promised. Instead, we have to be saddled by noobs on our team who think it is fun to pilot an Atlas with a couple of med lasers and some LRMs with single heat sinks and no unlocks, while the other team has fully unlocked and optimized meta builds and pilots who know how to use them.

There will never be a decent matchmaker as long as we use Elo. It is supposed to be used for teams that have identical starting positions. As we all know, that is not the case with MWO.

Sorry buddy ELO is for MWO too; has been for a while! Do you get beat up in MWO allot? Do you cry and think crying makes things better? Sorry...it doesn't! Not hope and change (LOL), just play lots of games and find a unit that works for you.

[DAYLEET]

Diablobo, on 08 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Elo Is For Chess, Not Mwo

I completely agree with OP title and i would prefer servers but at the end of the day this game is about grinding cbills and xp in a free to play environement, not providing a fun balanced and fair gameplay. In a F2P game where grinding is the essence of the gameplay, you can't let the players decide who is on which sides or which maps they play and stuff like that because they will stack it on one side like they do in other fps but in other fps you can say TEAMS and get some players to switch side, in mwo everyone is starving for cbills.

Im realizing this kind of free to play games can never be balanced or fair because they are not about the gameplay but about the grinding of resources. Well it was a good game to learn that and ill be careful regarding playing other f2p games of this genre.

[MadcatX]

Praetor Knight, on 08 October 2014 - 10:38 PM, said:

Dunno about Battle Value, but could somehow utilizing accrued Match Scores for each weight class be possible?

So maybe using the mode of accrued Match Scores, where each player would have one value each for Lights, Mediums, Heavies and Assaults instead of (or maybe in addition to) the current Elo value based on W/L?

The reason I throw out the idea of using the mode is if a player consistently gets Match Scores in the 60s, but then gets a stinker in one match or gets 100+ in another since most are around 60 that would be the base line for that player. Gotta explore this further but hey, at least it's something that could be test-able.

At any rate, I too feel alternatives to Elo at least should be explored.

I agree, but sadly from what I see here, the only alternative is apparently Battle Value, which I too disagree with because it lacks the human component. Plenty of PvP games out there using all sorts of different systems.

On the flip side, could be worse, could be using a static tier system like WoT where really good players can play with newer players at any given time or really good players just decided to stick at a particular tier.

And stock tanks vs a fully upgraded one with fully trained crew...

There are better, and worse, thing then elo out there.

[Thorn Hallis]

Are we asuming that a player with a high ELO score would enter a battle with a subpar chassis? If this player does, would he really expect to be successful?

Any battlevalue system that does not include player skill would be ripe for abuse.

[Haji1096]

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:

The real flaw is people wanting to think that there's some magic trick that will suddenly make every match an 11/12 nail-biter. Won't happen. Humans don't work that way. Your skill moves up and down the curve in any given day based on calories, focus, sleep, energy level and mood.

The other flaw is people are not thinking correctly. ELO works by measuring a match result (win or loss) against the predicted outcome of a match. Over a large sample size, the impact of random noise is reduced. You are the only constant among all the matches played.

The math behind the ELO system is sound.

The argument against ELO would be is it actually good for gameplay:

What ELO should be assigned to new players ?

If two teams have the same ELO, one is composed of above average veterans, and the other are elite players+new players ? Are the teams really equal ? Is the match outcome prediction accurate ?