I am a very average player. (Gold) Please stop pairing me with high Diamond / Onyx players

I am a Gold and just quit a game (where I was top slayer on my team) in Solo/Duo, because its the same thing every time I play ranked.

I checked the ranks for this game.

Our team

  • Gold 5
  • Gold 3
  • Gold 5
  • Silver 6

Enemy team:

  • Diamond 4
  • Plat 1
  • Gold 6
  • Silver 6

And the Diamond 4 was Onyx pre-reset.

How tf is that fair? What even is that?

Why can’t 343 just apply a bound so that players greater than X ranks apart can’t play together?

This happens to me all the time now. I used to play 10-20 rounds a day and almost never quit, now like 2/3rds of my games are like this so I play at most 3x a day, and quit all the time, because I know its unfair.

Y’all fixed the nonstop crashing, thank you for that. I can now get a smooth 144fps, so the game is playable, but this is just torture.

8 Likes

It’s 343’s amazing matchmaking system that everyone hates.

I’m sure it won’t take long for someone to come and tell you how you just don’t understand it and it is actually working as intended.

14 Likes

I like and agree with this but in reality it wouldn’t work well at all for obvious reasons…mainly being that it would ruin the gaming experience for many groups of friends that enjoy playing together (ie most of us have friends that aren’t very good at the game but we enjoy playing with them because they’re our friends, and this would prevent us from playing with them).

I’m not even sure if this kind of thing has even been done in other games (?), so I don’t see how it could work well in practice without causing longer queue times in matchmaking…but may be it could work in a solo “lone wolf” style social playlist in both social and ranked.

This kind of thing would also cripple a game that is already suffering with a declining player population, and I would also hazard a guess that this kind of rule wouldn’t work alongside their matchmaking algorithms which they have already admitted do not find matches in the same way as other games (see their lame excuses for the geo filter patch for details).

Edit: also we should mention that 343i have also stated that matchmaking is based on players hidden MMR rather than the shiny badge associated to your visible rank.

For the particular game and list of players you provide in OP, they also referred to outliers…so I can only assume that given the declining population, this game (and games like it) was the best match available against your team or group of players assembled in matching with the outlier being the D4 player. Either way, the matchmaking system and implementation isn’t good at all…and I’m sure we can all agree on that.

That is where social is for? Ranked is not meant for this.

6 Likes

You make a valid point and again I would agree…but then there’s the other side of the argument which are the players that want to play with their friends in ranked despite their varying skill levels but wouldn’t be allowed to do so.

Apex does it. Once you hit platinum you can only play with a person one tier lower or higher eg gold or diamond.

2 Likes

Fair enough. I’ve never played Apex…so it’s the grand total of one game that does do this?

That’s their problem.

Ranked is for competitive games with competitive players, social is (supposed to be) for casual/relaxed games with casual/relaxed players.
Although, with this tight SBMM, that is virtually impossible.

2 Likes

Well that’s not a great solution is it…and the end result would be more smurf accounts. Fixing the broken matchmaking system would be the best approach in social and ranked, but I genuinely think 343i are totally clueless and out of their depth with this sinking ship of a game.

3 Likes

Personally, I think ranked should match the players, not the teams.

team 1
gold 6
gold 6
gold 5
gold 5

team 2
gold 6
gold 6
gold 5
gold 5

Or, if you’re playing with friends that are bad

team 1
Onyx
Platinum 5
silver 3
Gold 4

team 2
Onyx
Platinum 4
Silver 4
Gold 4

And then social playlists should either have zero SBMM, or just a soft version.

I agree…but I don’t think their matchmaking system is capable of consistently finding suitable matches like that, and we also don’t have the data to say how many teams would match that search criteria…and then also the data to say how many teams would match that search criteria on our local servers.

I’ll give you a real world example of personal experience with my friends that no longer play…I was D1 but all my friends are G3, G1 or S4…and some lower than that. I would only play Social playlists with them most of the time but sometimes they would want to play Ranked in order to complete challenges. The games would pretty much always pan out with me carrying the team so we’d lose some and win some…but it was never a fun experience for them, and only got worse as i levelled up.

In the scenario of level barriers, I would never be able to play with my friends and that would mean that I would always be forced to queue solo if I wanted to play Ranked (which isn’t an enjoyable experience in itself). As such, the matching player system would work better for my situation but the question marks of suitable player matches due to player population and server locations remain unanswered.

To be honest, I don’t think there is an right or wrong answer that would suit everyone…and SBMM just throws another spanner in to the works, even though that is supposed to be designed and implemented to be the answer to all our problems…but it clearly isn’t.

1 Like

This is literally the standard for any competitive ranked game. Apex, CS, SC2, ect. This ridiculous system is only being used by awful console games.

3 Likes

Welcome to the world of awful console games!

1 Like

Of course, that wouldn’t be able to happen all the time, so the matchmaking would move more towards what we have now where they balance the team, but still try to balance the players as best it can.

team 1
Onyx
Onyx
Platinum 4
Platinum 1

team 2
Onyx
Platinum 6
Platinum 6
Platinum 5

ect ect.

Sure, some matches wouldn’t be as evenly balanced, but we already gets those and this would have matches that are more balanced a lot more

I’m actually not talking about level barriers, I just want the matchmaking to match the players, not the teams

1 Like

I honestly don’t think there is a simple answer.

It is hard enough to balance two similar groups let alone adding in a wide skill differential.

You can’t just match on players. For a start it doesn’t help the lower ranked players. You may have this ideal picture of them spending the game going toe to toe and enjoying themselves - but the reality is that they are just cannon fodder for the big guys. Highlight reels for their killing sprees.

And if one squad has an Onyx and a Silver - you can’t simply match the other side with a random solo players of the same level. Can you imagine how miserable the solo Silver player is going to be? At least the squadded Silver player has a buddy looking for out them.

Our weekly Halo nights had a range of players from Silver to Onyx - and even knowing the strengths of each player, it was still very hard to get evenly matched teams. Almost impossible. And to tell the truth the main way I managed it was asking the really good players (my sons) not to use the power ups or power weapons - and sometimes to not kill certain players!

But what we did find is that multi-teams worked a lot better. 3v3v3 always seemed to work out more balanced (closer games) than 4v4.

And it was even better when we had handicapping. We had a script that applied different shield traits depending on how far off the lead you were. eg. if you were 3 points off the lead you got +50%, 6 points off +100%, 9 points +150% etc.

And we had a Forge version of Beaver Creek where we played Shotties. We put a bunch of Overshields in the middle that only designated players were allowed to use. Again - had some wonderful, balanced, matches.

So I think the keys are;

  1. Have a minimum range on CSR for ranked. Leaving it open just doesn’t work (for either team).

  2. Introduce better types of games for people who just want to play together across a wider range of skill. Definitely consider multi-team - but also explore games that allow handicapping of players so that everyone can run around on an even playing field.

My group of 8-10 friends also used to play custom games whilst BTB was broken, and we found that the game itself would automatically create relatively balanced teams after a few games. The outlier would always be myself, however after each game the lobby would adjust itself to balance the teams based on performance in the previous game…sometimes the game didn’t make this lobby adjustment but it worked well when it did most of the time. Obviously this is a lot different to matchmaking in Social and Ranked playlists but the basic for customs is there and does seem to work.

1 Like

You mean the game itself started to try and split into balanced teams? I just assumed it was random. That’s actually quite cool!

We used to alternate between FFA games and team games. The finishing order in the FFA game set up the teams. Odd placings onto Red and Even placings to Blue.

Plus or minus some changes if one side appeared a bit stacked.

Yeah that’s my understanding of what was happening rather than it just being random. We’d play a series of games, and rather than try to balance the teams ourselves the game would make the balance changes in the lobby without any manual intervention from myself as fireteam leader.

I wonder :thinking: if it has anything to do with population… Majority of players who play ranked often are high platinums and above. There aren’t many bronze players for example as they mainly stick to social.
Halo Infinite’s numbers are going down on steam and I would not be surprised if a similar trend occurs on all platforms.
I’d imagine the population is in part to blame, but not all variables causing the problem.
My recommendation to you is to try to get a full team with players around your skill level.