- ivanisovich
- |
- Exalted Heroic Member
"When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning." -Reiner Knizia
So, we've got a lovely new rank in each playlist? I fail miserably to see the point. Now when we enter a match, we have to select each opponent to see what level of play they really are.
This still fails to solve the true-skill problem. Matchmaking would be great if it did one thing: judged a book by its cover. If someone is a 45 in lone wolves, they can shoot. They can melee. They can stick like a god. Why, then, in god's name would someone who's a legitimate 25 get matched against them? Oh, yeah, because they're only a 25 in team doubles.
The current system punishes the many because the few don't play every playlist to get their skill level up to the highest it can be. Again, look at big team battle. Wonder why we don't play it? Because we keep getting matched up against generals.
The second problem is when going into matches with mixed parties. I have a bunch of friends that don't have time to play like i do. When I do get to play with them, it always matches us up against someone close to my rank, around the mid-30's. That's fine, except both players on the other team are in the mid-30's. Yet, my friend is a lowly 15. He can't keep up. He can barely put his armor on. We get torn up...and it's just not fun.
Instead, the system should do an average skill level. You say that true skill is working in the background, but I've yet to see it work right, particularly with mixed parties. The truth is easy to spot when my party of 5 gets matched up against a party of 2 generals, 2 brigadiers, and a colonel, when the highest skill level on my team is a 40, the lowest a 20. Tell me how true skill is working then? The only reason we'd match with them is it's a social match, or because the highest player on our team is a 40. The game should at least average the party's highest skill level in any playlist to come up with a party average...then match equivalent parties.
For instance, you've got a party with a 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 in it. It averages to 25. This would balance with a 5 person party where everyone is a 25. AND, it must take into account their highest skill level. Some who's a 50 in team slayer is still going to dominate in team skirmish even if he's only ever played it twice.
The third problem is handling new gamertags. You guys could come up with a algorithm that boosts a player's skill level faster when they dominate in matchmaking. For instance, some gets a new gamertag. This newbie play lone wolves and wins by a spread of 15. Uhmm...that's a clue. Then, the second game they win by a spread of 13. Another clue. The game accounts for this and boosts him 3 levels instead of one. In short order, he's going to fly up the level lists.
I've played against lieutenants in team slayer matches who could win by a spread of 20 or more. Considering his skill was an 18, mine a 35, do you think this is balanced? Nope. So when matchmaking again links up my mixed party with another mixed party of new gamertags, we get destroyed. Buy guess what? Because both are mixed parties, the ranks don't move much. We don't go down. They don't go up. So, often we get matched up again! What happens the second time? Total destruction of our team.
After having this happen three or four times my friends who don't play often quit out. It's not fun for any of us. I don't mind losing, but the number of times we get destroyed is absurd. And, I don't like playing against a team that i can destroy with my little toe. It gets boring fast.
We have come up with a work-around. Nothing original. I'm going to get a second gamertag that i can use when playing with my low-ranked friends. That way we're more likely to get matched with people his skill level. Too bad that dilutes the effectiveness of matchmaking. You guys have the best matchmaking system around. Please make just a little bit better.
Thanks for letting me vent.
Btw, I've been waiting for objective games in Doubles...Thanks for bringing it!