Matchmaking overwork

adernath · July 2014

After having played many matches I finally have enough...

as soon as your rating increases, the current machmaking groups me with weak players so that I start losing again. It seems that the ranks are completely random. I urgent request that the current 'matchmaking' gets an overwork. Granted, it attempts to put players in the two groups so that they are 'balanced' but the problem is simply that the rating calculations leads to nonesense:

On my fresh level 60 TR who still cant hold points well enough with his 8k GS I am stable at around page 200 (overlord), while my main CW with around 14k GS will get grouped in a horrible team as soon as I get lower than 500. Almost EVERY match above page 500 I am clearly dominating my opponents, I killl almost everyone in a 1vs1 situation. Yet my teammates struggle and die like flys and it is simply horrible. I am loosing many many matches where I am on top chart with good kill/death ratio, yet my teammats fail and I lose the match.

I am sick and tired of these rating calculations. Please give us a matchmaking where your performance is rewarded better. I know very well when a match is close and intense, but as it is now I am clearly not in the league I supposed to be.

I expect that my fresh level TR is way below my main char! In his bracket I am CONSTANTLY facing opponents with soulforge, weapon enchants and ice gear. I have no idea what the heck is going on. This is no fun to face always players who outgear me. On the other hand, I am always grouped with 7k-10k GS ppl on my main toon.

Please do something before mod4 hits, it is not enjoyable and I am thinking of playing someting else instead.

adernath · July 2014

Please - at least - compute the rating only in relation to your performance with respect to your teammates. When I am the best on a losing team for example let my new rank be the same as the old rank. Only those who really did a poor performance should be punished in the losing team. Currently I am always losing ranks regardless of my performance in the losing team.

Please do something

Unknown · July 2014

This content has been removed.

adernath · July 2014

It doesnt really matter if there is an explanation (there is certainly one, because it is coded)... but I really dont like this: You get a 50-50 chance to win in the long run, regardless of your gear or skill (if it stays constant in the long run) or whatever. The point is matchmaking should take gear into consideration or disable enchants completely. Or performance in you own group (see above). There is really no way around this IMO.

galaxy1045 · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

)... but I really dont like this: You get a 50-50 chance to win in the long run, regardless of your gear or skill

Basically: isn't a 50-50 chance to win in the long run a sign that grouping works?

Not that I think it's working, mid you, its totally broken as the wins are 1000:40 and the losses are 40:1000

but a 50-50 chance for winning is - on a grand scheme - what is to be expected of a good algorithm.

adernath · July 2014

galaxy1045 wrote: »

Basically: isn't a 50-50 chance to win in the long run a sign that grouping works?

Not that I think it's working, mid you, its totally broken as the wins are 1000:40 and the losses are 40:1000

but a 50-50 chance for winning is - on a grand scheme - what is to be expected of a good algorithm.

Look... before we had matchmaking, we had the problem that there were very well equiped players who totally owned other teams / players. People started to demand that those geared players should fight in their own league and demanded to be matched against similar geared players.

This elo system however puts (for example) my undergeared toon into matches were I am constantly outgeared. It is no fun to face players who have around 2x the GS like you and kill you in 2 hits all the time. And it is also not fun for my party to have a weak teammate. The ranking calculations must be changed to reflect the gearscore someone has and put me in teams - and against teams - which have similar gear.

This will lead to a winning chance which is influenced more by your own skill. For example if you are very good, but keep crappy gear you would win alot more matches. If you purchase better gear, you will then measure your skill with better geared players as well etc.

A 50-50 winning chance is as boring as playing dice. The point is not to match players with the same overal performance against each other, but with the same gear. So the winning chance only depends on the skill of the team. This will lead to alot more open matches. What we have now is that players see that one 19k gwf killing one undergeared player after the other and simply give up and wait until the match is over. And this is very understandable. It is in most cases very pointless to fight an overgeared player with an undergeared toon. This entire system MUST be overworked.

galaxy1045 · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

A 50-50 winning chance is as boring as playing dice

Did you read my post at all?

And what chance of wining would you prefer? 110% wins I guess?
If you read my post, I say that the matchmaking is NOT working.
I did say that a 50-50 chance to win a match is what is to be desired. Are you just ranting or what?

Unknown · July 2014

This content has been removed.

adernath · July 2014

galaxy1045 wrote: »

Did you read my post at all?

And what chance of wining would you prefer? 110% wins I guess?
If you read my post, I say that the matchmaking is NOT working.
I did say that a 50-50 chance to win a match is what is to be desired. Are you just ranting or what?

I am wondering if you have read my post at all. Take for example counterstrike. All people have the same gear at the start of the game. Yet the win chances are very likely NOT 50-50 but they depend entirely on the player skills. It can be 70-30 for example if a team has strong players even after thousands of thousands of random matches. The problem here is that you get put together with players so that a match always have 50-50 chance (in theory) regardless of the individual skill of a player. I want to have a variation in win/loss chance but the same gear level. As in most other pvp games. Did you read that? Probably you understand this problem only when you play more (pug) matches, because it is ridiculous.

twilightwatchman · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

A 50-50 winning chance is as boring as playing dice. The point is not to match players with the same overal performance against each other, but with the same gear.

Actually, no. You have this backwards. The entire point of an ELO system is to match players with similar performance together, regardless of skill or GS. So you could fight a low skill player with top gear, a low GS player with mad skillz, or just someone who is extremely lucky. It doesn't matter. If ELO were working perfectly (and there were enough people in the queue to allow it) then in every fight you would face someone with roughly the same chance of winning that you have.

And this should NOT be boring because matches should then turn on an individual moment of brilliance, clever strategy, or a fluke of chance. Uncertainty of the outcome until the last minute should provide the interest.

adernath · July 2014

twilightwatchman wrote: »

Actually, no. You have this backwards. The entire point of an ELO system is to match players with similar performance together, regardless of skill or GS. So you could fight a low skill player with top gear, a low GS player with mad skillz, or just someone who is extremely lucky. It doesn't matter. If ELO were working perfectly (and there were enough people in the queue to allow it) then in every fight you would face someone with roughly the same chance of winning that you have.

And this should NOT be boring because matches should then turn on an individual moment of brilliance, clever strategy, or a fluke of chance. Uncertainty of the outcome until the last minute should provide the interest.

Elo is a system for 1-1 competitions (like two individuals or two partys). In case of rating individuals in teams there is no straightforward way to my knowledge. But this is exactly what I am critizing here: You get a personal rating based on the performance of your team. This calculation of your rating from the team to the individual and back again are IMO very faulty. I expect no loss in your ranking when you are the best in the losing team. On the other hand I expect no loss in your ranking when you are the worst in the winning team. Yet what we observe in the current state is that you can lose ranks when winning and lose ranks even if you are the best in the losing team.

galaxy1045 · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

I am wondering if you have read my post at all. Take for example counterstrike. All people have the same gear at the start of the game. Yet the win chances are very likely NOT 50-50 but they depend entirely on the player skills. It can be 70-30 for example if a team has strong players even after thousands of thousands of random matches. The problem here is that you get put together with players so that a match always have 50-50 chance (in theory) regardless of the individual skill of a player. I want to have a variation in win/loss chance but the same gear level. As in most other pvp games. Did you read that? Probably you understand this problem only when you play more (pug) matches, because it is ridiculous.

High GS does not make a good player. Taking GS into account would not change the outcome. You can just as well have high GS campfire sitters @500 points. A 50-50 win-loss ratio is to be expected if you are sent into combat against similar geared or skilled players.
Nevertheless, matchmaking is broken. BUT a 50-50 change is to be expected and preferred. if you want a 70-30 win chance there has to be someone playing the on the 30 side, meaning that matchmaking AND the win chance are broken.

PS: One might wonder why you PuG, being aware of what you can expect. Maybe that's the true ELO system - a person that is mentally agile enough to form a pre-made team in PE.

discriminating · July 2014

No matter what you do, it's going to be a HAMSTER shoot with PUGs. Do you honestly believe that a team of competent 14K GS PVE specced players are going to stand any kind of chance against a team of competent 10K-11K GS dedicated PvPers? Do you believe that if you have 4 really good PvPers on your side with one clueless PvE player that's there for the daily that you're going to beat a team of 5 bloodthirsty PvPers on the other side? This whole fixation on GS is ridiculous. If you broke it up by GS then you'd have longer queue waits and still no guarantee of evenly matched teams. Not to mention the people that would purposely deflate their gears scores just to get into lower brackets and wipe the field.

The current system is not perfect, but it's better than longer waits to get into matches that have the same result. And it's entirely possible to move up in the rankings purely pugging. I have never been in a premade, I'm not in a PvP guild, and as of last night I was on page 19 of the rankings. It just takes dedication and honing your own craft so you can help your team win.

frishter · July 2014

galaxy1045 wrote: »

High GS does not make a good player. Taking GS into account would not change the outcome.

There are plenty of people without a complete gear set getting matched with those much higher in gs. No matter how good they are, they can not compete and the system should not allow them to be matched up in such one sided matches.

Some people put an overemphasis on gs, but it still means something.

twilightwatchman · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

Elo is a system for 1-1 competitions (like two individuals or two partys). In case of rating individuals in teams there is no straightforward way to my knowledge. But this is exactly what I am critizing here: You get a personal rating based on the performance of your team. This calculation of your rating from the team to the individual and back again are IMO very faulty. I expect no loss in your ranking when you are the best in the losing team. On the other hand I expect no loss in your ranking when you are the worst in the winning team. Yet what we observe in the current state is that you can lose ranks when winning and lose ranks even if you are the best in the losing team.

Yeah I understand where ELO came from, but in fairness NW isn't the only MMO to adopt it. We just seem to have a poor implementation. I think that's partly down to the particular PvP mode (domination) and partly down to low population. My point was more that ELO itself doesn't HAVE to be a poor/boring system if implemented correctly and with a large PvP population.

adernath · July 2014

galaxy1045 wrote: »

High GS does not make a good player. Taking GS into account would not change the outcome. You can just as well have high GS campfire sitters @500 points. A 50-50 win-loss ratio is to be expected if you are sent into combat against similar geared or skilled players.
Nevertheless, matchmaking is broken. BUT a 50-50 change is to be expected and preferred. if you want a 70-30 win chance there has to be someone playing the on the 30 side, meaning that matchmaking AND the win chance are broken.

PS: One might wonder why you PuG, being aware of what you can expect. Maybe that's the true ELO system - a person that is mentally agile enough to form a pre-made team in PE.

Well, in the current system your gear doesnt play a role for the outcome chance of a match in the long run. But we have two different things:
1. How your rating is computed by the outcome of a match (I think there is something wrong going on here, at least not what I would expect, like not losing ranks when you are on top of the losing team - see my previous post).

2. How teams are set up by the matchmaking. IMO it would be alot more fun to have a matchmaking according to gear. Exacly for the reason you mentioned: good gear doesnt necessarily mean a strong player. But as long as these good geared people are not playing against similar geared players you will never really see this difference (or better: they will never see it

). But if we have a matchmaking according to gear, then your win chance is influenced by your skill and also from match to match differently, according to the participants. This would be alot better and also more interesting.

Again I would like to repeat: Currently there is a 50-50 chance for the outcome of a match in the long run. This sounds fair, but this is different to the theoretically 50-50 chance due to the same boundary conditions of a game. For example in chess you have in theory a 50-50 chance because everyone has the same figures on the table. But the outcome of a match will be highly dependent on the player skill and is almost never 50-50. The same goes for my example with counterstrike. But what we have here is we mix individual players of different skill so that the match outcome is balanced - always. So you actually know right from the start that it will be a balanced match if everyone is not changing his playstile.

For me this calculation individual-group is the problem. If you are over average strong, you will get grouped always with weak players. If you are weak, you are often have to play vs. a couple of strong players on the opposite team. This is not enjoyable for both sides. The outcome is - as I said - completely random and you will lose ranks again, just to gain the ranks in the next 3 matches back. Then you lose these ranks in the next 3 matches again and so on... I can give you a screenshot of my last 10 matches, it is really ridiculous. Its back and forth. And I am mostly still doing quite well (good kill / death ration or best points) when my team is losing, yet I lose further ranks until the system consider me as a weak player and group me with strong players again, then we obiberate the other team and gain ranks.

On top of all that CWs are currently very group dependent, so your ranking is hardly in your hands. As I said in my OP this leads to a result in which my HR and my fresh level 60 TR with partially blue items have way better ranking than my main char. Only this fact should be enough to see that something is going wrong here... I am definitively alot stronger on my main than on my alts. But you have no chance to turn the tide of a lost match as CW. You can not backcap effectively because you can not kite as good as HR or TR. And you can hardly defend a point on your own effectively.

twilightwatchman wrote: »

Yeah I understand where ELO came from, but in fairness NW isn't the only MMO to adopt it. We just seem to have a poor implementation. I think that's partly down to the particular PvP mode (domination) and partly down to low population. My point was more that ELO itself doesn't HAVE to be a poor/boring system if implemented correctly and with a large PvP population.

I am glad that we have the same general opinion

grogthemagnif · July 2014

The problem is that the ones who are on opposite teams would make it a close (1000 - 950+) match aren't always there to play when needed. The matchmaker does the best it can with what is available. PvP is doomed if the matches aren't consistently close. I play casually and used to win about 50-50 or so. Now, with too many trying for all the PvP gear and artifacts and Campaign those that play daily will have a definite advantage over those who play casually for the same goals.

Maybe the Leaderboard has to be changed in the following way:

Total score/Times played = Average score per game.

Total Glory gained/times played = Average Glory

Individual stats for Nodes capped, Kills, Assists, Revivals, Double Kills, Triple Kills, etc.

Then use Class, Average Glory and Average Score to make the teams as even as possible.

twilightwatchman wrote: »

Actually, no. You have this backwards. The entire point of an ELO system is to match players with similar performance together, regardless of skill or GS. So you could fight a low skill player with top gear, a low GS player with mad skillz, or just someone who is extremely lucky. It doesn't matter. If ELO were working perfectly (and there were enough people in the queue to allow it) then in every fight you would face someone with roughly the same chance of winning that you have.

And this should NOT be boring because matches should then turn on an individual moment of brilliance, clever strategy, or a fluke of chance. Uncertainty of the outcome until the last minute should provide the interest.

stainfurlag · July 2014

Yes, matchmaking needs to be looked, and i'm still thinking that the elo system it's not good for this game .... i might be wrong, but anyway.

IMHO. at leats, domination pvp (not the open area) should work as it work in guild wars 2, so but, that might need a complete overhaul of the entire pvp sistem

adernath · July 2014

grogthemagnif wrote: »

Then use Class, Average Glory and Average Score to make the teams as even as possible.

You have to understand that it is not required - and even very bad IMO - if you always balance the teams according to their overal performance (which includes their skill). You have to balance the teams by gear, i.e. produce this theoretical "50-50 condition" (as in chess or most other games, see my example above). There is no way around that. In this case the outcome of the match will be different and vary according to the players skill from match to match, i.e. the match win chances will be different from 50-50, because the system would not know if a player is good or bad skilled and may put good skilled players into the same group.

This will lead to inexperienced players be more often on the losing side than on the winning side, since their lack of skill will weaken their team. As they gain experience they are more likely on the winning side, as their experience with strengthen the team. As it should be. *)

Currently an inexperienced player has the same dumb 50-50 match outcome chance than an experienced player. He doesnt even have to improve his playstile... no learning curve required. You have always this chance. This is what I am critizising in point 2.

*) EDIT: For example assume that we have 2 good and 2 bad skilled players who are playing PvP and all have the same gear (we always have the same amount of good and bad skilled players). In a system which balances matches according to gear we would then have either 2 good players in the same group and they will likely be winning. Or we have 1 good player in each group and it will be a more balanced match. But the point is that An over averagely good skilled player deserve to win more often than a bad skilled player in the long run. And since you would balance groups according to gear there is no unfair aspect in this system. And the ranks, which will take the performance in such 'random' matches into account, would finally reflect the skill of the player.

galaxy1045 · July 2014

adernath wrote: »

An over averagely good skilled player deserve to win more often than a bad skilled player

What I read here is that you expect the algorithm to match you (as you are a better than average player) and that over the top guy to be put into a match against the 2 lowbees. As you both deserve to win more often than the bad skilled players.
Because a 50-50 win chance you would only get if you get a lowbee and the other good one gets a lowbee. But in your eyes a 50-50 chance is a broken matchmaking.

As for that gear HAMSTER:
you ever considered that some funny 19k dude might queue naked to get into a 6k match and just harass the others? Never considered that? There are very, very, very many persons out there that wallow in doing this. Just to feel good. Look at the stats exploit from last month by the so called top league PvP players. They don't want fair, they want I WIN. Even if it's queuing naked.

adernath · July 2014

galaxy1045 wrote: »

What I read here is that you expect the algorithm to match you (as you are a better than average player) and that over the top guy to be put into a match against the 2 lowbees. As you both deserve to win more often than the bad skilled players.
Because a 50-50 win chance you would only get if you get a lowbee and the other good one gets a lowbee. But in your eyes a 50-50 chance is a broken matchmaking.

No you have not understand my point. Please read again.

galaxy1045 wrote: »

As for that gear HAMSTER:
you ever considered that some funny 19k dude might queue naked to get into a 6k match and just harass the others? Never considered that? There are very, very, very many persons out there that wallow in doing this. Just to feel good. Look at the stats exploit from last month by the so called top league PvP players. They don't want fair, they want I WIN. Even if it's queuing naked.

I told this in another thread: Of course I mean the average GS during combat in these domination matches, so this cheap unequip / equip trick wouldnt work. That person would also have to be nacked during combat to cheat the system. Another (additional) idea is to simply disable all enchants as it is already done with pets. Never considered such a simple solution?

anesading · July 2014

People commenting on this thread that don't even que for pvp! Pvp que is not fun at all atm and what are the people that came to this game for pvp gonna do? How many topics have people expressed their dislike for this que system and it is still the same.

Obviously the developers are not queing for pvp so why should they care? Their gonna keep the fast que system so people like magenubbie can get their 2 matches a day in quick time.

twilightwatchman · July 2014

anesading wrote: »

Pvp que is not fun at all atm and what are the people that came to this game for pvp gonna do?

Maybe finally realise that this is not a PvP game? It's a PvE game with some limited PvP thrown in.

charononus · July 2014

anesading wrote: »

People commenting on this thread that don't even que for pvp! Pvp que is not fun at all atm and what are the people that came to this game for pvp gonna do? How many topics have people expressed their dislike for this que system and it is still the same.

Obviously the developers are not queing for pvp so why should they care? Their gonna keep the fast que system so people like magenubbie can get their 2 matches a day in quick time.

You weren't here back in march when they implemented ELO and had a longer queue time. There was mass outrage from 90% of the pvp "community" over this. There are many things that need to be looked into and adjusted but the backlash about 20 min queues was insane and I can't see them switching back to longer queues.

benskix2 · July 2014

People need to accept the fact that it is totally random. There is no matchmaking going on, the system isn't not working, it's simply been shut off because we don't have the volume of regular players necessary to support an ELO system.

adernath · July 2014

I think it is working, but since the algorithm is mixing everyone in two balanced teams, this leads to exactly these observed random match outcomes (like throwing a coin). Since your skill is included in the balancing algorithm, you can hardly change the tide of the battle using your skill.

What we need is a different matchmaking algorithm. If this leads to longer waiting queues (which I am certain of), then let us see the current number of people waiting in your bracket. As we had these longer queues in the past it was only not optimal because people didnt see their position in the queue and how many people already waiting for it. When they see it and all is more transparent, I bet that there is no such outrage anymore. I am also quite sure that the waiting times wont be that longer, but I admit that I dont have an overview about the number of people who play regularly in PvP.

anesading · August 2014

charononus wrote: »

You weren't here back in march when they implemented ELO and had a longer queue time. There was mass outrage from 90% of the pvp "community" over this. There are many things that need to be looked into and adjusted but the backlash about 20 min queues was insane and I can't see them switching back to longer queues.

I started playing last summer so I know of all that. They should have the option for fast ques for the AD/daily farmers and then have que for serious pvpers. Carrying multiple low gs players so that they can get their AD while we all sit in base because they can't last 2 seconds against moderate players is ridiculous. Or they are the ones being camped and I'm there drinking tea with them. I que for pvp not for dailies. It's all good though I stopped queing as of yesterday if they want their pvp like that and keep it like that go for it cause that's a waste of my time.

asterotg · August 2014

My 5 cent to matchmaking. When I went premade/ semipremade I had some decent fights and was ranked somewhere in the first 10 pages of ELO.

Running PUG dropped me some 100 pages and got me teammates with 6-9k GS who seem to think, that their char gets autodeleted, if they spent more than 5 sec on the node. Combine this with up to 3 sec lags and for some reason my willingness to do PVP went down the drain.

This should be a PVE game, but who wants to do the xxxth CN farmrun for some AD? PVE just got boring for long time players.

charononus · August 2014

asterotg wrote: »

My 5 cent to matchmaking. When I went premade/ semipremade I had some decent fights and was ranked somewhere in the first 10 pages of ELO.

Running PUG dropped me some 100 pages and got me teammates with 6-9k GS who seem to think, that their char gets autodeleted, if they spent more than 5 sec on the node. Combine this with up to 3 sec lags and for some reason my willingness to do PVP went down the drain.

This should be a PVE game, but who wants to do the xxxth CN farmrun for some AD? PVE just got boring for long time players.

Not to mention even if you roll a new character right now there is no point to pve other than booning because dungeon chests are broken and you can't work on gear.

sv3t1ana · August 2014

asterotg wrote: »

My 5 cent to matchmaking. When I went premade/ semipremade I had some decent fights and was ranked somewhere in the first 10 pages of ELO.

Running PUG dropped me some 100 pages and got me teammates with 6-9k GS who seem to think, that their char gets autodeleted, if they spent more than 5 sec on the node. Combine this with up to 3 sec lags and for some reason my willingness to do PVP went down the drain.

This should be a PVE game, but who wants to do the xxxth CN farmrun for some AD? PVE just got boring for long time players.

^ This game in a nutshell

Matchmaking overwork

Comments