DUST Search - Quick Idea On Matchmaking: Thoughts?

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Quick Idea On Matchmaking: Thoughts?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 1120	Posted - 2013.10.19 01:38:00 - [1] - Quote Quick idea on matchmaking, V1. Please try to keep this thread constructive and clean, I'd like no de-rails and no hate here. If you see a flaw, point it out, and we can think of a fix for it, using our friendship (Copyrighted by Mango And Friends). So I was playing Ghost Recon Online, and I know they have this really actually smart Ranking System that isn't actually in play (At least not as a matchmaking system), but is still a good place to start. So we keep the whole "You have X SP, You Can Get X Skill" system, BUT have it also so that depending on your combat effectiveness or overall performance of that match, you gain (or lose!) a rank. Example: Based on your performance, you gain (or lose), a certain amount of points towards your "Standing" with the Faction you chose at character creation. When you hit a certain point, you gain or lose a rank. But there's a problem with a Ranking matchmaking system. If two people are at Rank X, and one has 5000 more "Standing" than the other guy, that still means he's better! And that's why Standing is there in the first place. The Matchmaking system will look for anyone that has 3000-5000 Standing with the faction of their choice. Honestly, the Rank Title is there just for formality and to make players of other FPS's feel more at home (However, losing a rank makes them snap out of CoD mode and into DUST mode). Quote: "sup3r1337play3r is Rank 3, Standing 6000" "aw3sumN00b3412 is Rank 3, Standing 3000" They will NOT be paired together. However, if aw3sumN00b3412 is Rank 3, Standing 4000, they WOULD be paired together. I think it goes without saying that if "Player1" is Rank 3 and "Player2" is Rank 1, they wouldn't be paired together. When losing/gaining Ranks, you have a 1-Match "Grace Period" (For lack of a better term). Because of the fact that you have REALLY good matches and REALLY bad matches, just because of luck and/or a failure in matchmaking, losing a rank and/or gaining a rank may be accidental, and if you have a REALLY good match, and then get stuck against full-proto, that would suck. You also could not lost more than 2 Ranks in one match, so the chance that 2 bad matches in a row won't obliterate your rank. More to come when I'm less lazy! :D Feedback appreciated, but please don't get all hate-y and start the name-calling. That's not nice.
Varjac Theobroma Montenegro M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command Lokun Listamenn 17	Posted - 2013.10.20 21:00:00 - [2] - Quote +1 We need a ranking system some how. Today I wondered if a self assigned rank would work? You pick a number between 1 and 10 to rank your self according to play style, murderousness, equipment used, etc. The system would then pair like numbers. Some may take advantage of this, but the fact is we don't know how many would until such a system is implemented. In general honesty, you would encounter players that have a similar idea to how good they are. You would find the challenge appropriate. If you feel like the opponents are too tough, you could adjust your rank to play with more like skilled players. With great responsibility comes great reward.
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 1126	Posted - 2013.10.22 20:00:00 - [3] - Quote *Self assigned ranks: I hate to be "That Guy" (But not really), some CoD players that are used to neck-snapping Aim Assist will think they're super-pro-MLG. Making people that are actually TERRIBAD at anything other than a twitch shooter play in a game that is very far from a twitch shooter AND on a Proto-Level. It also works both ways. A proto-level player could rank himself at 1 to save himself some ISK AND bump his K/D. Rule 1 in matchmaking design: Never let the players do matchmaking for you. If the players get their hands on any time of switch or button or whatever that allows them to control what level they're placed with, bad things happen.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 427	Posted - 2013.10.22 20:25:00 - [4] - Quote gear restriction would feel better...
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 1126	Posted - 2013.10.22 20:31:00 - [5] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: gear restriction would feel better... EVE is a sandbox game. Bring anything, anywhere, and face the consequences when you **** up. The same principle should follow DUST. If you get a proto-type suit into a low-level pub match, then every tactical mistake, and every suit you lose, and generally anything you do wrong, should be your consequence. I've seen people (Not even lying) that have run FULL PROTO for an entire match, and I've killed them almost every time I see them. They leave the match about 500k+ ISK short because I managed to destroy their clone 12 times, and they didn't think "I'll run free-fits now! :D". TL;DR, don't restrict the players, just make it so that if they do something wrong, make them realize that they deserve the consequences. Besides, using this system, IF you somehow managed to get a proto-type suit into a super-noob match, that's only 2 matches before you're sent back up to whatever other rank. That's including the grace period btw.
CLONE117 Planetary Response Organization Test Friends Please Ignore 427	Posted - 2013.10.22 20:34:00 - [6] - Quote its not really a massive restriction though. and that proto player u killed 12 times and ran proto for that entire match? he probably has more where that came from. and the money to waste. so its not a major loss for him on that end. the gear restriction i had in mind would be some what simple. it would go from mlt only all the way up to proto. so mlt nubs who want to go into a match filled with proto bears r allowed to get destroyed in that match.
Vyzion Eyri The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 1537	Posted - 2013.10.22 21:18:00 - [7] - Quote How about this: Make the average win rate for players, hmm... Let's say 46% in the long term. Players below the average win rate are matched together and people above are matched together. In squads, the average win rate of all members is the value used. I don't want to go beyond splitting the playerbase in two, with the limited numbers we have currently.
Lanius Pulvis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 23	Posted - 2013.10.22 21:24:00 - [8] - Quote Vyzion Eyri wrote: How about this: Make the average win rate for players, hmm... Let's say 46% in the long term. Players below the average win rate are matched together and people above are matched together. In squads, the average win rate of all members is the value used. I don't want to go beyond splitting the playerbase in two, with the limited numbers we have currently. +1 To you and AG, do you think perhaps a combo rating system like the Dust Stats site uses might be beneficial?
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 1126	Posted - 2013.10.22 22:43:00 - [9] - Quote Vyzion Eyri wrote: How about this: Make the average win rate for players, hmm... Let's say 46% in the long term. Players below the average win rate are matched together and people above are matched together. In squads, the average win rate of all members is the value used. I don't want to go beyond splitting the playerbase in two, with the limited numbers we have currently. I like this idea, but I think that any type of working matchmaking system should be put in place before this, and then make this a part of that matchmaking system. As it stands, people are getting destroyed because of terrible matchmaking, so they might be really good normally, and when put with newbies, they would dominate the field. I also think maybe make a middle-ground, just in case a small handful of Proto-users drop to JUST below 46%. Middle-ground should be large enough to make the lower section look like a second (And more advanced) academy, but small enough to not make the end-game have a small player-count. If this is put in AFTER a good matchmaking system (Like my own, perhaps), that's brilliant. But if it were put in in the next hotfix, it'd have little to no effect on the system. Or, rather, it would later on, but for a fairly lengthy amount of time, it'd be the same. CLONE117 wrote: its not really a massive restriction though. and that proto player u killed 12 times and ran proto for that entire match? he probably has more where that came from I don't think you have the right mind-set here. Think long-term. Whenever I run my ADV Logistics, or Duvolle AR, I say I'm losing money. Instantly, I have a couple people from my squad telling me, "You have 30 million ISK, I'm sure you can pay that one match off." Now think, if I was losing ISK every match, and kept playing like that for a month, how much ISK would I have by the end? This is the reason Dropship Pilots and Tank Drivers are constantly broke. Even if they're loaded, an average Pilot or average Tanker loses ISK pretty quickly. The same applies to Proto-suits. Plus, if he's bad enough to be killed by me in a Standard Scout with a Standard AR and Standard SMG, he shouldn't be running Prototype anyways. This is what I'm saying. Realize your skill, see how much your dying, and see how much ISK you're losing. If whoever is losing ISK still decides to run Proto-type in a match, he gets what's coming to him, because it's his fault. New Eden (And EVE in general) is brutal, and unforgiving. If DUST is different, just take away the "EVE Online" sticker that's on the DUST logo.DUST should be just as brutal as EVE. It is the same universe, after all. Maybe if there was a server system, where you could create your own match with your own rulesets (Such as banning Proto-gear). Like in Tribes: Ascend or Blacklight: Retribution.
Galendani Villore Joint Task Force Villore Accords 0	Posted - 2013.10.23 01:54:00 - [10] - Quote Vyzion Eyri wrote: How about this: Make the average win rate for players, hmm... Let's say 46% in the long term. Players below the average win rate are matched together and people above are matched together. In squads, the average win rate of all members is the value used. I don't want to go beyond splitting the playerbase in two, with the limited numbers we have currently. Doesn't the long term average win rate of all players combined have to be 50%, by math and such?

Meeko Fent expert intervention Caldari State 1256	Posted - 2013.10.23 04:33:00 - [11] - Quote Squad-Less Game mode. Ta-Da. The actually good players can now shine in an environment not clogged with proto stompers and death squads from the higher tier corps. Having numbers tell how good somebody is is a bad idea, cause what if the guy had some bad games and was put with some newberries to make jam with, or did every good in a match so is set up with some Outer.heaven, Red Star, and Teamplayers. People are less likely to pull some high tier gear out in the middle of a battle with nobody who is definitely going to rev them, so newberries are going to be able enjoy some decently balance matches where skill is valued over being able to use more proto.
Text Grant Death Firm. 188	Posted - 2013.10.23 05:00:00 - [12] - Quote This system is still allowing players to sometimes proto stomp. A system isn't needed. What can make matches closer are tiered battles https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115150&find=unread
Garth Mandra The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 171	Posted - 2013.10.23 05:08:00 - [13] - Quote You should check out Elo rating system that is used for chess and League of Legends - wiki.
Lanius Pulvis Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 23	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:27:00 - [14] - Quote Garth Mandra wrote: You should check out Elo rating system that is used for chess and League of Legends - wiki. The problem with Elo ratings is the data necessary to compute it. It would require an initial subjective rating of player skill, and then determining the points you get if you defeat them based on the disparity between your skill levels; this could be misleading in a situation where a teammate whittles down an enemy's health and you fire the kill shot by pure luck. I could see it used to rate corporations for PC, if you rate the corp as a single entity like they do for football teams.
Artificer Ghost Bojo's School of the Trades 1126	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:12:00 - [15] - Quote Text Grant wrote: This system is still allowing players to sometimes proto stomp I would like an explanation. Prototype = More kills, less deaths. Meaning rank and Standing goes up, meaning you get put in with more Prototype users. What we could also do to prevent one-sided matches is either by going with Meeko Fent's idea and making a no-squad gamemode (I'd play it, at least), and/or make it pair based on squad size. Currently, it sees if you're in a squad, and regardless of size, it will put you with some pretty tough people. I go into matches in a locked squad of my own (Or with a friend or 2), because having the green marker on my vehicles and whatnot is a little more helpful than having to guess that the Madrugar being dropped down now is mine, and not someone else's. About 70%+ of the time, I get put into a terrible match. This is partly matchmaking, but it also seems like the system thinks "Oh, hes in a squad? Well you can have ALL of the Murder Taxi Co. then! :D", instead of "Oh, he's in a squad of 1? Well, here's some randoms for you, little guy!". I like the second option better because I get a gentle pat on the back instead of a rather hard slap across the face. When I'm OUTSIDE of a squad, I normally get put into nice matches. Actually, playing on Gallente FW solo has gotten me some great matches. The last couple battles I've played were in my all-standard gear, netting no more than 2-3 deaths and 12 kills for the first match, over 20 for the second. So yea, solo play isn't too bad, in my opinion. But it could still be better. We still need some good matchmaking for squads and on the chance that you get a bad solo match.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.