Matchmaker Algorithm Feedback Thread
-
@battlemoose said in Matchmaker Algorithm Feedback Thread:
For example, a 500 rating difference from 800 to 1300 represents a much greater level in skill than does 1900 to 2400.
Assuming the same number of games, an 800 has the exact same chance of beating a 1300 as a 1900 has against a 2400.
-
Honestly @BlackYps that sounds like good work. I've partly given up playing 2v2 due to bad experiences, but will have to try some more.
Slightly off topic: will the 3v3 and 4v4 queues share the 2v2 ratings or use new ratings? I can see why 1v1, 2v2 and global use separate ratings (team communication/coordination being a separate skill, and half of global games being gap/setons/canis), but TMM games are probably similar enough to share ratings?
-
I’m not 100% up to date on what the plans for ratings are but afaik, 4v4 will definitely have a different rating, and 3v3 will get bundled in with either the 4v4 one or the 2v2 one. There will also be a queue that uses global rating.
-
Last night's game (https://replay.faforever.com/15370273) showed another issue with the TMM ratings: my opponents were both rated around 580. In reality, one was a much better player than the other; presumably they always played 2v2 together thus always won/lost (rating) together. Perhaps one could call the result "balanced" (1248 + 16 vs 580 + 584), but their ratings still massively misrepresented the players (the better of the two is 985 on 1v1 and 1100 on global, the other ~500 on global).
-
People having inaccurate ratings is a problem that the matchmaker can't do anything about.
For specific players it should go away over time when they play more. -
@cyborg16 I thought this too... After being initialized at the wrong rating and then playing always with the same friend I feared I was still massively overrated. I am 1100 he was 600
Somehow though, my winrate is pretty close to 50% when queuing up solo. Apparently I really am as good in 2v2 as my rating suggest (now at least).
-
my opponents were both rated around 580. In reality, one was a much better player than the other; presumably they always played 2v2 together thus always won/lost (rating) together
Yeah no rating system in the world can really fix that (if they indeed always play together), unless it measures other things than win/loss, which would open the door to people trying to game the rating system (potentially grieving their teammates to gain points) instead of trying to win.
-
Inaccuracy is built into prebuilt teams. If we wanted a perfect system you would prohibit premade teams, but that’s a less fun experience for lots of people.
-
The server update on Friday fixed the bugs I mentioned earlier in the thread. So from now on you shouldn't see games with extreme imbalances anymore.
-
Just got 2vs1 TMM game
15626927-Eternal-.rar
15626927-GingerbreadMan.rar -
Is there anything being done further in regards to the map chosen is biased towards maps on the lower rating player’s pool?
-
@Morax I asked you about this before making the last server release. You told me to leave it as is.
-
Yep, and I’m asking if anything is being done about it now.
-
Because you said to leave it as is, I guess the answer is no?? Do you want us to do something about it?
-
Not what happened, but per our zulip convo we figured it out ...
-
I wouldn’t call that “figuring it out”. I would say we deferred the conversation to a different medium, in which hopefully things can be communicated in a way that don’t just make everyone confused…
