It would be great if we could toggle off specific maps we’d prefer to or not to play. I notice a lot of the same content coming up game over game, and many maps (a lot of which I’d really like to play) simply never come up. I understand you couldn’t give complete control over to the player, but including personal preference as an additional factor within the overall matchmaking algorithm doesn’t seem like it could hurt. If this option could be added to the matchmaking selection criteria, I think it’d go a long way towards improving player retention, not only longterm, but average time spent playing in a single session. Is this something y’all’re noticing as well?
8 Likes
Yes. I play Reach exclusively, and I always seem to get the map Zealot so freaking often. Now if a system like this was to be implemented, I would probably only deselect that map (or any map it was happening to) if I noticed that it kept being chosen. Otherwise I’d permanently leave a map I despise such as Select or Synapse toggled off.
6 Likes
I was actually going to make a post on this, and I might still with some tracked data.
A few weeks back I got back into MCC and have been mainly running H3 with all 4v4 game types selected. It feels like every other or every three games is Team BRs on Heretic… the rest are basically Narrows, Pit, Assembly, or Citadel. Granted I get the different Sandbox maps too, but it has been so long since playing Isolation, Epitaph, Construct, High Ground, Snowbound, etc…
I know this is just my experience, and it’s all random, but man am I getting tired of the same rotation of maps (especially Heretic). Does anyone else feel like there are maps they rarely get the chance to play?
5 Likes
Yeah, I feel like every time I matchmake reach I have about 50% chance of playing on Anchor 9 and I’m pretty sure in the past 100+ Reach games I have only played ONCE on a Forge World map and it was Pinnacle.
I was never a fan of the random map picker, you’d think you would play a wide variety of maps but that is far from the truth, I still play the same few maps over and over again except half of them are maps that I really despise of.
6 Likes
again… i must say, TF2, an 2007 game, did this in the most perfect way possible. though in a late update, but i digress. 343 really ought to take a page from that preference system and put it into halo. allowing the players to choose what maps, and what modes for each map, that they want to que up for… a shame 343 clearly aren’t player first
The simple answer to prevent matchmaking from either getting stuck on or dieing off completely for specific maps and modes is to leave it as is and bring back Veto.
Reworking the matchmaking to add yet more toggles would only cause more maps, modes, and games to become less played than they already are. The reason certain maps come up so often already was due to the majority of player feedback during the seasonal flights adjusting the map weighting so that other less popular maps wouldn’t show as often as they used to; The issue now being there is no way to skip passed the high weighted maps and modes when they become stale.
If the problem is not being able to matchmake a specific map with a specific gametype on a specific game, then the issue is not matchmaking, its choosing not to host a CGB lobby. I will add though that a preference system would be nice addition for CGB Quickplay, just not for matchmaking.
1 Like
100%. I think this is an issue the majority of the playerbase has complained about at one time or another. The way the game selects maps is not well explained but everyone agrees through firsthand experience that we are consistently seeing the same maps come up in MM, and there are various maps that never enter the rotation.
3 Likes
What are the rarest maps for you in each game that you matchmake in? For me, and as I said I only play Reach, it’s Ellul. I literally get it like once every 90 days or something. It’s so rare. Solitary is probably the next closest, albeit nowhere near as rare, but still very infrequent.
Been asking for the composer to be expanded to turn maps on/off and even game types on/off. That would make MCC almost perfect. No we don’t need veto/voting. All that does is make maps repeat even more. Not to mention players dashboard quit as soon as they see it’s a game the don’t want then you either have to restart the search or worse start short handed. Halo has been so much better without veto/voting.
3 Likes
Introducing a simple thumbs up/thumbs down system on maps (even if it didn’t initially actually influence MM) would give the developers far more insight into player feedback than having to rely on a handful of very vocal fans (a small and generally unrepresentative sample set). The data 343i collected from direct player interaction would be incredibly useful in map weighting.
I also think a system that would try to prevent players from playing the same map for at least 2-3 matches of the same game would go a long way towards fixing the issue. If that makes sense.
2 Likes
Except the system you’re now suggesting is what they did during the flights when they were weighing the maps, putting us in the current situation of only a small number of maps being used on loop for many players with no way to mix it up and get something different.
I disagree, we just need veto back. But 343 is too stubborn to listen to the community so they won’t do it… sigh
2 Likes
I think the weighting for the maps changes weekly… some weeks i play on certain maps way more than others and vice versa
1 Like
Veto actually leads to less diverse map selection, and higher quitting rates
2 Likes
Well that’s your opinion, where is the proof?
1 Like
I don’t have the key points at the top of my head, but it’s been a topic that’s been discussed at length on the forums. I was originally in favor of veto too as I thought it would diversify map selection by placing the power back into the hands of the gamers, but there’s enough evidence out there to have changed my mind. I’m sure if you google it you can find a reddit post or something. Sorry I know that’s not a satisfying answer. But I think it can be generally agreed upon at this point.
Veto is toilet… The only reason people want it back is to dashboard quit as soon as they see it will be a game they don’t want. Also why take that step backwards in gaming… Being able to turn maps on/off along with game types on/off should be in the composer. That is the only way to guarantee all players they will get the games they want on the maps they want. Of course that would be tough to make work more likely but should be very do able at this point in gaming. It probably should have been a thing in online multiplayer awhile back really.
1 Like
I might actually play 4v4 H3 if I could get rid of the pit.
Once again you’re saying “Veto Bad” when what you really mean is “Match Lobby Bad”
Which i will once again point out is nonsense when quit bans can extend to repeated lobby disconnections. Quitting to dashboard in a full matched lobby because the Veto didn’t go your way would still give you a quit ban as if you quit from gameplay. Having an insane amount of toggles for every minute detail would force dominant strategy on players queuing, leading to matchmaking dieing off in favor of just using the CGB.
1 Like
Veto is still bad because it doesn’t mean you will get the maps and games you want. It still leads to players trying to get the same popular maps over and over. It doesn’t lead to more map variety at all. The game has been way better since going to just getting games. If the composer had map and game on/off selection if you were tired of a certain map or game just turn it off and you won’t get it. Veto doesn’t guarantee you won’t have to play a map or game you don’t like at all.
1 Like