If that size difference limit was set to 4 players, that would mean :
- A 4man group can always launch.
- A 8man group can't launch unless there's a 4+ man group queued against it.
- A 12man group can't launch unless there's a 8+ man group queued against it.
If that size difference limit was set to 8 players, that would mean :
- A 8man group can always launch.
- A 12man group can't launch unless there's a 4+ man group queued against it.
This doesn't prevent 12man groups from completely bypassing any form of matchmaking, by filling it's team up to the top with nothing but hand-selected top players...
But it does guarantee it is at least matched against a (same or smaller sized) group, that is a whole lot more likely to provide the minimum amount of audio leadership and group cohesion it's side requires, to make that kind of group match at least remotely fun and playable for the ungrouped players dragged into it.
Because the problem is that there are plenty of groups available, but the current matchmaker is programmed to throw them straight into the next match before another group gets a chance to queue up against them.
And introducing a limit to the "biggest group" size difference allowed, would certainly introduce a missing minimum match balancing feature where there is none, while increasing the amount of popular group vs group matches at the expense of less unpopular group vs ungrouped matches.
Also a bonus could be added to incentivize grouping, such as a +1% bonus Cbills per grouped player, for each player in a group.
Put together these two features could greatly increase the amount and quality of group vs group play, without making the matchmaking as ridiculously unfair to ungrouped players as it is now.
Edited by Humble Dexter, 23 March 2020 - 02:51 PM.