277 replies to this topic

[Johnny Reb]

Bring it on! My and my team elo be damned!

[KinLuu]

I have won around 70-80% of my matches since the last patch.

I wonder how the games will be for me after the next patch. I have nightmares of games consisting only of 3Ls, A1s, K2s and DDCs.

[Protoculture]

So, if I'm reading this right, I need to start ALT-F4ing and quitting matches a lot more to avoid the pre-mades as a PUG-Only player. Using ONLY W/L seems a little strange me. Good post.

[Johnny Reb]

Heh, then you go down....like d/k its nothing. So I play against lesser foes when i get my flea. The better!

[Jonathan Paine]

I've been leveling up Spiders in anticipation of the elo system. My darned team mates have carried my dead weight , and come Monday I'm doomed. Doomed!

[LethalRose]

80Bit, on 16 February 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

What has been verified by PGI:

2) Your ELO ratings will be hidden and you won't be able to see them.

Source?

[Wispsy]

Surely elite solo droppers have learnt to read the battle by now so do not really need teamspeak to be effective in a group. I mean there are only so many sensible options out there, so with a little awareness they should be able to figure out the plan and by keeping an eye out notice any surprises before they become too painful. I would imagine elite solo droppers would have very few problems fitting in with the elite teams.

[Fanatic]

Maybe we will get a ELO Hell too ?

[Wildflame]

Based on my understanding of similar systems as used in Microsoft's Trueskill (which is essentially an ELO matchmaking system), the reasoning behind not including any data other than win/loss is as follows.

It prevents perverse incentives from arising (if damage is rewarded excessively, people will tend to boat LRMs for damage rather than sniper builds, for instance). As long as kills, k/d, damage and assists are contributing to the overall goal of winning (which generally they are, cutting up disconnected 'Mechs aside), a player with better 'stats' is going to have a higher ELO than a player with lower stats. An added bonus is that non-damage-based contributions to the team (distraction, tanking, scouting) are also allowed for, which are very difficult to otherwise quantify.

My worry is that MWO's matchmaker will suffer from a phenomenon known as ELO hell. In essence, it is a situation where an overly conservative ELO implementation prevents players from reaching their 'true' ELO. This is particularly common in team-based games such as LoL, but even Starcraft 2 suffered from a form of ELO hell in 1v1 because the developers had not properly modelled the effect of their implementation on the bottom 10% or so of players.

In a similar vein, Halo 3 had a famous group of players who went 120+/1 W/L from fresh accounts in a ranked team playlist but could not move beyond the low 20s in a skill ladder of 50 (so just below average) because the matchmaker would not allow them to be matched against players with significantly higher ELO from whom they could extract significant skill points. In that instance the matchmaker was fine for individuals, but not for teams.

[Mackensen]

80Bit, on 16 February 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

1) Only match wins and losses effect your ELO. Kills, K/D ratio, damage numbers, etc, have no bearing.

I thought that Elo was based on damage. Is it confirmed that Elo is based on wins and losses?

[Redshift2k5]

Tryhard Mountain aside, this was a great post 80bit, I feel like you've really covered your based and expressed exactly how I feel about the upcoming elo system, but with much more detail and understanding than I could've mustered.

I do hope Elo pans out like your predictions, this is pretty much what I'm expecting as well.

[Vassago Rain]

Mackensen, on 17 February 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

I thought that Elo was based on damage. Is it confirmed that Elo is based on wins and losses?

It doesn't really matter what it's based around.

[Redshift2k5]

Mackensen, on 17 February 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

I thought that Elo was based on damage. Is it confirmed that Elo is based on wins and losses?

elo is a win:loss system. Elo is not the match score.

[Mackensen]

Vassago Rain, on 17 February 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

It doesn't really matter what it's based around.

Really?

[Goose]

The only problem I have with any of this is I'd asked about two weeks ago if I should sit in each of my 'Mechs a couple of times each during this "tryout" phase we are currently in: Didn't get a useful answer, and now it seems I should have given everything I own about 10 games. :-(

[Mackensen]

Redshift2k5, on 17 February 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

elo is a win:loss system. Elo is not the match score.

Who says it is?

Edited by Mackensen, 17 February 2013 - 06:10 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Mackensen, on 17 February 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

Really?

It needs to measure some kind of success, that you can improve/maintain. What it measures isn't important, just that it has a way to tell who's good from who's bad.

[Mackensen]

Vassago Rain, on 17 February 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

It needs to measure some kind of success, that you can improve/maintain. What it measures isn't important, just that it has a way to tell who's good from who's bad.

Damage should be a better measurement of individual performance than win/loss that depends on the performance of the team.

Edited by Mackensen, 17 February 2013 - 06:13 AM.

[Mycrus]

Vassago Rain, on 16 February 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

Illustrated.

where do joystickzzz belong?

[Wispsy]

Mackensen, on 17 February 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

Damage should be a better measurement of individual performance than win/loss that depends on the performance of the team.

Yeah lets put loads of really really bad players in with a few people who headshot a stationary mech every time they see it......Great thing to base matchmaking on!