Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Matchmaking and rankings needs an overhaul

  1. #1
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40

    Matchmaking and rankings needs an overhaul

    To train new units effectivly I just had found out that you must go back to rank 1 and fill your units with rookies. Otherwise new units have as good as noc chance to make kills in a high rank team.

    Problem: I have >50 matches done now and when i play with a rank 1 training squad I get new rank 1 players as opponents. They have no chance at all. Since the cahnce to get newbies that way is quite big you could climb up the ranks quite fast and train new units very effectively. But thats no fun for beginners!

    So I would like to suggest that it has to count too how many matches you made so far. At the moment it seems only rank is important in matchmaking.

    I have no idea how this could be done, but there should be something like a "Handicap" in golf. Something like
    Higher Count of Matches / Lower count = some handicap you get

    Example (rank 1)
    60 matches (experiences player) / 3 matches (newbie) = Handicap 20

    The Handicap could be divided / 2 (in this example 10) and this is armor AND strenght malus the better player gets.


    I have no better idea at the moment and I will not exploit the system but I will train new units in rank 1 teams because otherwise it takes ages. it would be nice if new players would have a fair chance, at least in their first 20 fights.

    What do you think?

  2. #2
    Right now, team power (sum of unit ranks) has a lot of weight in determining whom you're matched with (as it should). But I agree that maybe something should be added to the matchmaker to make newcomers far more likely to be matched with each other than with old hands. I haven't really used zero-level units beyond my first couple dozen games, so I don't know how important this issue is.

    I think just applying something special for n < 20 fights, as you say, makes sense and might help a lot (as opposed to making n matter for everyone). Stoic could do this by making a 0-1 for whether n < 20 and making it worth, say, 200 Elo in terms of their expanding "best match" window.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "rankings need an overhaul" in addition to matchmaking. That doesn't seem to come up in your post.

  3. #3
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40
    I mean the highscore lists with ranking. I think you can exploit the fact that you will get matched with a newbie when you build a rank 1 team and so you can win much more easily.

    So maybe you should not get any points in highscore terms and much less renown when you match someone that has 1/10 of games than you (or even less). A Handicap would seem better since then every match really is a challenge.

  4. #4
    Ok. I think a cleaner solution is just to eliminate the exploit by making those matches less likely. Besides, you're not going to get a very good ranking that way; the elo gain from victory naturally falls off with the difference between your elo and your opponents (and new players start at 1000).

    Global solutions (like checking whether n1 > 10*n2) penalize those who have played a lot of games. I think it's better to treat all people above some n, like 20, the same.

  5. #5
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40
    I thought more in terms of "Matches Won", "Win Streak", "Win Ratio" and so on. And most of all it should be fun for new players and not frustrate them with loosing again and again. Had the same guy right after my first match again, he was devastated to have to fight me again. I tried to help him get inot the game but with 30 seconds rule I can only type so much

  6. #6
    Factions veteran stoicmom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oak Ridge, TN
    Posts
    290
    okay, fellow warriors, for what it is worth from a senior citizen, about all i can do is play base units. when i tried to upgrade even to 1, i was trounced nearly every time. yes, i have played many games, but won very few comparatively. even when i win and remain with whatever mix of base units, very few players are using complete 0 lineup. have won some against noob's, but more times than not, those who are practicing with base units at 0 come back and are victorious the next time we meet. so, all this to say, there is something for everyone in this game and i'm having fun. about the only achievement that i can reach probably now and forever is the number of games played. don't use 30 seconds cause i can barely do 60. i am sure that i am in the minority of why one would even play this game without some strategy skill or tactical plan, but i am learning little (very little) by little. thanks for the opportunity to play

  7. #7
    Backer KRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    #worms|irc.gamesurge.net
    Posts
    53
    To my understanding, this is already implemented. An experienced player (with an Elo rating to show for it) training new rank 0 units is going to get matched against other experienced players doing the same, because both team power and Elo (as well as using the tournament timer) determine what the preferable opponent is for you.

    The problem you describe only crops up when the matchmaking cannot find an appropriate match for you because at the time, there aren't any other experienced players queuing at that team power tier. And so because the game prefers to match you against equal power opponents rather than equal Elo ones, as it should, these uneven matches do happen. Still, isn't the alternative worse? At least this way, new players get to see low rank units played effectively, speeding up their own progression, at the cost of very little Elo in case they do go on to lose.

    Edit: Whoops, didn't see your post there, stoicmom!
    Last edited by KRD; 03-02-2013 at 07:15 PM. Reason: Oop.

  8. #8
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40
    Ok, if its only occasionly its ok. Since I only had newbies I had the impression something is not right with matchmaking.

    I clearly do not want any handicap with players that have rank 4-6. Just played against a rank 6 and he complained that my rank 6 was overpowered. It was his 4th match, he bought the units and had no idea what he did or how to adjust stats. Such players should not get any mercy in a honorable fight

  9. #9
    Backer KRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    #worms|irc.gamesurge.net
    Posts
    53
    I'll drink to that!

  10. #10
    Factions veteran stoicmom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oak Ridge, TN
    Posts
    290
    ok, so i'm starring at my units in Proving Grounds and thinking how great they all look (upgraded and in color variations). However, i'm not using the upgraded units because i get so soundly defeated whenever i try to use them and frankly get overwhelmed. i continue to think, maybe i would better understand how to use these units if i were matched up with like upgraded units,i.e., if i have a level one backbiter, then i could be matched with a level one backbiter opponent. Could be very wrong in my thinking, but i believe i could handle that and learn from it as opposed to another level one unit being introduced into the frey by my opponent. Please help me understand if this is skewed thinking or a real possibility. Thanks!

    raven and Gud understand my mentality, good luck to the rest of you!

  11. #11
    Senior Member Jorgensager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    115
    First let me comment that playing many games in itself doesn't make you a good player. Most people will improve with a good amount of games, but statistically speaking, some people have to lose if we are to have over 1000 ELO. I.e. this modifier should

    • Only kick in over a certain ELO threshold (this could be floating ~ say on the top 30% or so ~ to assess general skill levels as we climb in ELO).
    • Be based on an ELO/<game count> relationship, rather than just the game count. A player achieving 1300 ELO in 50 games is likely better than a person achieving 1300 ELO in 100 games.



    Quote Originally Posted by KRD View Post
    To my understanding, this is already implemented. An experienced player (with an Elo rating to show for it) training new rank 0 units is going to get matched against other experienced players doing the same, because both team power and Elo (as well as using the tournament timer) determine what the preferable opponent is for you.

    The problem you describe only crops up when the matchmaking cannot find an appropriate match for you because at the time, there aren't any other experienced players queuing at that team power tier. And so because the game prefers to match you against equal power opponents rather than equal Elo ones, as it should, these uneven matches do happen. Still, isn't the alternative worse? At least this way, new players get to see low rank units played effectively, speeding up their own progression, at the cost of very little Elo in case they do go on to lose.
    In my experience this is not the case. Matchmaker reliably matches me up with new players after only few seconds of waiting when I play with 4/5 basic units to get kills. It is probably a slight advantage for them to face good opponents who can give them tips on how to play the game, but likewise - too much of this is bad for the experienced players when they don't have to think about what they are doing.

    I.e. the matchmaker should stay strict on the team power matchup, but also be stricter on ELO difference (and additionally account for the ELO/game count ratio for the players where that is active)... For all I know, I could be the only semi experienced player training basic units for kills, so that I wouldn't get any games with the above suggestions... so take it with a grain of salt. I have to trust Stoic on this one.

    Quote Originally Posted by stoicmom View Post
    ok, so i'm starring at my units in Proving Grounds and thinking how great they all look (upgraded and in color variations). However, i'm not using the upgraded units because i get so soundly defeated whenever i try to use them and frankly get overwhelmed. i continue to think, maybe i would better understand how to use these units if i were matched up with like upgraded units,i.e., if i have a level one backbiter, then i could be matched with a level one backbiter opponent. Could be very wrong in my thinking, but i believe i could handle that and learn from it as opposed to another level one unit being introduced into the frey by my opponent. Please help me understand if this is skewed thinking or a real possibility. Thanks!

    raven and Gud understand my mentality, good luck to the rest of you!
    A problem with this idea is that teams would face equal teams, so part of the strategy aspect of building a good team disappears; Your team should be built in a way so that you're comfortable using it, and know the units you're using and how their abilities can best be used in different situations. The whole idea of trying new builds to counter what is typically used (to get an advantage) would no longer be viable in this situation.

  12.   This is the last staff post in this thread.   #12
    Art Director Arnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    319
    Matchmaking looks first into Team Power (we need to start using correct terminology) which is the sum of all the ranks in your team. THEN we try to match you with the closest Elo opponent.
    So in a perfect scenario we will find you a match with an equal Power team AND Elo rank.

  13. #13
    Backer KRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    #worms|irc.gamesurge.net
    Posts
    53
    I haven't played enough yet to be able to say one way or another from experience, Arnie, but Jorgensager believes that the matchmaking should perhaps wait longer than it does currently after it has found an opponent perfectly equal in team power, but of a vastly higher or lower Elo rating.

    Might warrant looking into after John's recovered from the hectic launch week?

  14. #14
    Senior Member Jorgensager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by KRD View Post
    I haven't played enough yet to be able to say one way or another from experience, Arnie, but Jorgensager believes that the matchmaking should perhaps wait longer than it does currently after it has found an opponent perfectly equal in team power, but of a vastly higher or lower Elo rating.

    Might warrant looking into after John's recovered from the hectic launch week?
    In the matchmaker's defence, there is [AFAIK] no way I can know my opponents' ELO [should be on the banners/matching screen in my opinion, to give a sense of whether you should brace for impact or not], but I highly doubt they are all up there, judging by the way some of them play (they're not all completely fresh, but some are, and there is no notable waiting difference on my side).

  15. #15
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40
    I still think a hadicap system would be a very good solution. Extremeley rewarding to new players that can beat on old one through fair gameplay. Like in golf (what I do not play btw).

  16. #16
    A handicap based on something like Elo instead of # games played makes more sense - otherwise someone who plays a lot but isn't the best player is just going to get murderized by the handicap, while someone who catches on quickly is going to get an advantage.

    The question is, when you already have Elo and team power affecting the matchmaker, and the underdog renown bonus... well, I question if we would really better off layering ANOTHER new system over that, versus just trying to better tune what we already have.

  17. #17
    Backer Morgenstern72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    40
    Erom, you are completely right, it has to be based on Elo.

    And maybe it is affecting it already, but I only got newbies for a rank 1 match and they all lost very frustrated.

  18. #18
    Does the underdog bonus only apply to Team Rating?

    Perhaps there should be a ELO difference that it applies to as well, if there isn't already.

    A handicap to playing might be too complicated a solution. Perhaps a penalty to earned renown if your ELO is significantly higher would help act as a deterrent to farming (in addition to the measures already in place -- ie low elo returns).

    So at the moment you can average 7 or 8 renown or something per win, but with a renown penalty, if I have a elo rating more than 200 higher to my opponents then I receive the renown penalty of -2 or something. So I end up getting 5 or 6 instead. Whatever the number needs to be to make it less than playing at my own rank.

    I can still play that way if I choose, but I earn less renown for doing so and I am being encouraged by the system to seek out matches of equal strength in both Team Rating and ELO.

    Saying that, I actually think the system is working pretty well at the moment.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Jorgensager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by Finjinimo View Post
    Perhaps a penalty to earned renown if your ELO is significantly higher would help act as a deterrent to farming (in addition to the measures already in place -- ie low elo returns).

    So at the moment you can average 7 or 8 renown or something per win, but with a renown penalty, if I have a elo rating more than 200 higher to my opponents then I receive the renown penalty of -2 or something. So I end up getting 5 or 6 instead. Whatever the number needs to be to make it less than playing at my own rank.

    I can still play that way if I choose (...)
    The matchmaker chooses matches for us, so why would it pealise us if there are no other equal strength members online?

  20. #20
    Hi,

    I also thought that it might be good to break out of the "equal team power" requirement earlier based on ELO differences (while I know that there were a lot of complaints in the other directions before).
    When the tourney started last week I was basically not able to play the first days because of server issues. Therefore I decided to not join it but rather collect some kills for new units to be prepared better for the next tourney to come. For that I mostly used a mixture of 3 base and 3 promoted units. While it worked well for me in terms of collecting required kills, I think I won those matches too easily. And that was not because my opponents were bad players but just inexperienced players (it was clear from looking at the kills of their units that I played by far more than they did). So I thought that those matches would have been more fun for both of us when they had a team power of 4 compared to my 3.
    Another thing that came into my mind related to this are the rankings. While the ELO is probably OK as it is now (I did not gain much because of these wins), it is a different story with e.g. the Win Streak. I am now at ~20 and I do not feel that I deserve it to be listed in the Top20 rating because I got that streak mostly in those "kill farming" battles. I do not feel really bad about it since I am still far away from the "all time win streak" Top20, but I still thought that it might make sense to only count 6vs6 wins in this streak statistic? However, I don't know if this still makes sense once we see level 2 and 3 units, so it is probably not a good idea...

    Bottom line of my thoughts:
    - With a much greater ELO rating it should be more likely to be matched with a team with higher team power (but probably just 1 higher)
    - While ELO rating has a way to deal with wins of experienced vs inexperienced players this in not the case for e.g. Win Streak statistics

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •