All I’m doing is repeating myself on things that, as I said before, you seem to be glossing over lol it’s not my fault you’re incorrectly interpreting what I’ve clearly said.
I always play to win, no matter the playlist. Winning is fun, losing is not.
If that’s too sweaty for social playlists, oh well. lol
1 Like
I’m the same way, I just dislike carrying teammates that go 2 and 15 or some nonsense.
Oddly enough, I mentioned a guy’s terrible K/D in a match the other day and he said “he was just playing to have fun.” While I understand the sentiment, I don’t really understand how getting slapped every 5 seconds is fun either.
This is what I’m referring to with my issues with the SBMM in Social. When I’m paired against somewhat ok players, I have no problems getting 20+ kills. But in turn, to make the game “fair” they have to put low level players on my team, who then get slapped in return with 10 or even 15+ deaths.
It’s just not fun for either side from my perspective. Maybe the opposing team since they get to win most likely with easy free kills, but easy and free isn’t fun for me either.
It seems pretty balanced to me. I rarely get rolled when random matchmaking. Once in a while in tactical slayer or fiesta but fiesta is just rng magic.
I think the problem is moreso when you’re at the high end (Diamond to Onyx) and the low end (Silver to Bronze) the game has to compensate skill levels to make the match more “balanced.”
If you’re at the mid-levels (Gold to Platinum) it makes more sense you’re likely to get more actual balanced games, since there are more players in those ranks than the edges of the spectrum.
that’s bound to happen in any multiplayer game. I had a game with a teammate that went 2-17 yesterday, it’s just part of a solo queue experience. But you’ll also get games where you get one other good player and you’ll just roflstomp the other team too.
Without a skill based MM, you’ll get the wide margin games a lot more imo cause then the game has no parameters and you get matched vs 3 onyx and a bronze.
I’ll stick with sbmm
1 Like
I think a matchmaking preference like Halo 3 had would be good.
I’d gladly take a slightly longer search time to get paired up with people around my skill level than have to try and hard carry most of my games.
i didnt read everything because there is too much
but aside having disconnect player, afk and sometime player out of there league in the round, matchmaking should aim for 50/50 K/D, W/L
we can all agree, even while being defeat, having alot of fun in tight game and encounter.
sure dominating the opposite team is fun and stuff, but with same skill level its a WIN/WIN.
1 Like
What a garbage argument. Go play MCC and come back. Tell me the matchmaking system works well in this.
1 Like
Literally my quick play experience.
1 stud and 3 brain slugs can’t beat 4 average Joe’s.
2 Likes
How will the game judge you?
Through mathematical algorithms utilising player skill values assigned to them, with said mathematical algorithms, based on match outcomes, opponent skill values and probability. Before anyone has played, they start with a default value.
Over a period of matches your value will stabilise as the system recognize your skill level relative to those you’ve played against. The longer you play the more evenly distributed your wins and losses will be. When you improve you’ll start seeing more wins and gain a higher value. That’s not to say the value you are at is some sort of direct measurement of how good you are, if something happens and a lot of players above and below you improve, but you don’t, then your value will decrease even if you yourself haven’t gotten worse. The value you have is relative to everyone else.
If I’m not mistaken, I recall reading something about Australian Fighter game players’ values not really being comparable to the rest of the world as they were somewhat isolated in online matches. Like, a 1500 in australia wasn’t comparable to a 1500 in the US.
Anyway, the game should find players around your own skill level ( players sharing a similar value to yours ) and match you with each other. If you win your own value will increase while theirs decrease, and wise versa.
The idea isn’t that the game throws you curveballs left and right to “test” you against tougher opponents, because it isn’t a consistent display of skill, and they’re not tested either.
Anecdote: at the time of Quake 4, I bought it and played through the campaign and then some multiplayer.
With some friends I went to a big LAN party and signed for fun up to a 1v1 in Q4.
It was best of 1 but losing out you in a lower bracket to compete in and eventually get back in the game.
So, first match went great, was against a person of slightly lower skill than me. Second game was sweaty as a swimming pool, the match ended in overtime 25-24 in my favour, it an exhausting experience and I won on a twitch move. Opponent smashed his keyboard.
Third match was a blowout on me, I managed five kills to my opponents 25. Got thrown into the lower bracket and matched against the player I barely won against, who dominated me even harder than my third match, 25-1.
That player then went on to win the entire tournament.
Had my first match been best of 3 or 5, then I would’ve lost the remaining matches because I was the inferior player by a spectacular margin.
Just because I won one match, doesn’t mean I’m an amazing player. I end up with a great story and an example of how everything once in a while hit right. I had a superb run while he had a bad game, both factors overlapping enough to allow me the tiniest margin of a win. Other than that I’m a mediocre player.
People refer to “balanced” matches as players of similar skill values, and those then withing a certain margin.
However there are so many factors at play here, that it feels like it doesn’t work.
For everyone in a match to be properly ranked they need to have played a lot of matches. So early on matches will be unbalanced even if everyone’s values are equal, as many are still climbing the rank ladder.
Then playlist population density, a low amount of players automatically lead to a smaller selection of players to choose from, and thus a smaller amount of good players to match with.
Then we have the “bad game / good game” part. Not everyone is going to play their best in that specific game you’re in, but there are those who’ll go to the other side of the spectrum and play their “worst” game. Pretty sure a lot of those “bottom” players in many matches actually are decent, they just don’t happen to get into the game just then. That “trash” player going 2-10 K/D may as well be better than you, but things aren’t clicking at that moment.
1 Like
Yes. Social should be more chill.
I hop into fiesta the whole other team is Ghandi jumping and sweating their balls off.
Like cool it bros, you’re cool we get it.
Going hard in Fiesta. The fun & dumb playlist. Imagine that.
Some MLG kids never grew up.
I wish there was a post game lobby just so I could hear their heavy breathing.
Lmao. I have been both the stud and 1/3 of the slug gang ngl.
The dude you are replying to is a lvl 99 Troll. Do not feed him. I made that mistake and contributed to a post being locked.
I wish there was a way to report these accounts tbh.
1 Like
SBMM is one reason why i havent played the MP for weeks.
And that probably wont change until they lose or remove it
Why would you want more games where you dominate 50-4 or get dominated 4-50? That sounds like a horrible experience.
When the teams are balanced correctly, nobody is getting dominated. That’s called good matchmaking.
1 Like
I enjoy winning and trying my best mechanically. The only way I play ranked and casual differently is that in casual I will go into engagements that I normally wouldn’t in ranked and now and again doing something that will almost 100% fail, but is fun like getting on a mongoose with a sniper, driving through a grav lift, going to the passanger seat and trying to snipe someone. Those situation are very rare and outside of BTB basically non existent. The rest of the time, I try to win. Who are you to decide how I should have fun?
1 Like
I hate it and it is killing the game for me. I feel so drained from having to sweat my bum off every day. This game feels like a job. I can’t even break even anymore, feels like over the holidays every kid got several buckets of GFuel from their mommies.
1 Like
I never said how you should play.
You’re free to play how you want to. If that means sweating 24/7, all the power to you. If that means doing silly stuff like entering a mongoose with a sniper, again, all the power to you.
Similarly, I am free laugh at people trying way to hard in fiesta and other casual modes.
Fair?
1 Like
Yeah, I’m not a fan of this in social either. I’d rather get wrecked every once in a while than not be able to play with my friends because they’re not as good as I am. Literally they go 3-16 in my lobbies but 18-6 in theirs. The gap is too big but in social that shouldn’t be a problem. That’s what ranked is for.
You do realize he otherwise would be going way often 3-16 when he is not playing with you? SBMM especially protects everybody average and below. Without SBMM that part of the community will flee the game.
I am above average and i already get enough matches where 1 player is way way more skilled and ruins the entire game. It also ‘forces’ a lot of people to quit matches, because people just don’t like to be way outskilled. It basicly would ruin it for everybody, because most matches will eventually result in Bot Bootcamp, but then in PvP.
The amount of people who like to be cannon fodder for the pro’s is just that small, the rest will just hate the game. And it’s also no coincidence that the people who keep demanding to get rid of the already weak SBMM are the people who are higher skilled and will not feel the down side (that much) and only get easier matches, while the rest has to suffer in more and more unplayable matches. It is ridiculously selfish.
And you yourself already acknowledge that, since you claim that your friend doesn’t like to go 3-16. Problem is that your friend will go more often that when he’s not playing with you as a result, just to go close to even a couple of times when he does play with you. For him it would probably also be a net negative. And your friend deliberately chose to get into tough matches when he plays with you since you are clearly better. But you now want half the players to suffer this kind of matches, while they don’t chose to have tough matches?