7
This is a thread built on data and statistics, not blind accusations.
This is a thread built on concrete numbers provided to us by the leaderboards.
Premise:
There was a time many moons ago where we had to accept the results given to us by the great matchmaker overlords. Often there would be 12-0, 12-1 and 12-2 stomps and often folks would chalk it up as bad luck or whatever. Sometimes accusations would be thrown around, things such as, "I got a team full of terribads," or "The matchmaker stacked me with awful players and put nothing but average players on the other team!" or, "Screw you all, I just lost 20 games in a row and I'm uninstalling!"
Whatever the case was, the variety was immense. But there was speculation. There was speculation as to what was really happening.
The big question being... Was the matchmaker really fair? Was it doing its job? Was there a reason beyond "Brantlebot got stuck on a rock and stubbed his toe as a Myst Lynx explored a new side of himself on said stuck Brantlebot, up close and personal..."
At the time we did not know. We had no idea what was going on. We could only assume.
But the leaderboards have given us opportunity! Now we can truly know if the team we were put on was fair--and if the odds were stacked against us from the start!
Goal:
Share bad games you've had plus data you collect.
Format:
Screenshot with names blanked out
Four columns of data collected from the leaderboards:
a. Match Score
b. KDR
c. Win/Loss Ratio
d. Games played
Plus an average beneath.
For the sake of understanding, I will provide examples at the bottom of this thread.
In one brief anecdotal observation from a game I picked at random, I have coined a new phrase. I call it"chronicbad."
We've heard the expression "terribad" passed around on the forums, and I've often used the word "terriscared," to describe those players in games that cost a team the win due to hiding.
The name should be self explanatory.
I have great interest in this data as I PUG only these days due to time constraints and all the hours I work and write. I want to be able to click "play" and get fair games, every time. I think PGI is not doing enough in regards to making these games fair. But they need data! They need facts to back our case up!
And we need to make a case to them in a logical, substantiative manner from a new angle (one we must figure out) so it makes sense.
The matchmaker CAN be better!
So, here's the first example:
And the stats:
Bad team
MS KDR W/L Games
202 .65 .79 422
212 1.03 .72 50
200 .75 1.05 174
184 .62 .75 515
200 .97 .93 492
186 .89 .92 75
240 1.35 1.03 79
239 1.27 .78 91
343 3.22 1.59 171
213 1.12 1.06 337
219 .84 1.07 141
195 .68 .80 652
228 1.12 0.96 266.6 (3199) AVERAGES
Good Team
MS KDR W/L Games
298 2.00 1.35 169
179 .76 1.08 306
217 2.31 1.20 88
262 1.21 .97 136
266 2.14 1.16 147
241 2.07 1.32 109
245 1.55 1.29 250
143 .33 1.13 279
417 3.72 2.76 97
267 1.09 1.27 145
205 .92 1.04 191
197 .73 1.08 331
245 1.57 1.3 187.33 (2248) AVERAGES
Let's break down the data above...
Winning team had an average match score of 245
Losing team had an average match score of 228
Per PGI, that's only a 17 point difference. This works out to be a difference of 7.5%. Per their words in the past, "not a big deal."
OH, BUT IT IS A BIG DEAL, PGI!
The average KDR was 1.57 versus 1.12
The average Win/Loss ratio was 1.3 versus 0.96
Let that sink in. The players on the winning team on average win 35.4% MORE GAMES than the losers.
That means they have a 35.4% higher chance of winning, every single time.
The KDR illustrates a 40% differential. 40% more likely to kill something BEFORE THEY DIE.
Wow.
Now, back to one of my first remarks, way up top. I used the term "chronicbad." What is a chronicbad?
Well...
In the game above the losing team had 3199 games under their belts versus the winning team's 2248 games.
The losing team had way more experience! But they lost! And their statistics illustrate they lose far more often and do far worse!
This... is the classical case of chronicbad.
What does this mean?
It means some players are chronically terrible at the game and no matter how much they play, they're just... bad. Chronicbad players should not be stacked together on the same team versus players who have on average far superior statistics. By stacking chronicbads together on a single team (and maybe throwing one or two players on that same team with decent statistics) versus good players or even average players, you SET SAIL FOR FAIL!
There is no excuse for this. This should NOT happen. But... that's just ONE GAME. I don't know how often this happens... yet.
And we need your help!
Let's help PGI find a better way to arrange the games.
WHY?
Better Games for EVERYONE.
The chronically bad players do not like being clubbed like seals. The good players do not like clubbing seals, either! Everyone is more likely to be happier when the games are close knucklebiters.
So the goal is to let the chronically bad players play with the chronically bad giving them a chance to eventually rise from their pool and jump into the pool with everyone else--and to let them do so in an environment that fosters enjoyment of the game and a reason for them to keep playing.
You know those threads that people love to complain in? The ones where they say stuff like, "I just lost 20 games in a row and this sucks! I'm out!"
That's a problem. And the solution can be found through matchmaker data.
Fixing the matchmaker means HAPPIER players and MORE REVENUE for the game!
So please, consider contributing to this thread so we can make sense as to what is going on.
Thanks!
Edited by Mister Blastman, 09 July 2016 - 07:38 AM.
