Jump to content


XP based Balance of matches ? thoughts

balance queue match maker

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

dityboycom #21 Posted 09 April 2015 - 06:53 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014
Why is this in the newcomers forum?

losttwo #22 Posted 09 April 2015 - 08:01 PM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 3124 battles
  • 13,539
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

View Postdityboycom, on 09 April 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

Why is this in the newcomers forum?

Reason 1

it was suppose to be about player experience and the differences.

Kind of got off track

 

Reason 2

 not enough coffee when I started it

 

Reason 3

 Have not bothered to ask the Mods to move it



backseater60 #23 Posted 09 April 2015 - 09:58 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1142 battles
  • 237
  • Member since:
    07-17-2014

 

Ok we have seen many threads on this subject about that we need population, Population, POPULATION.  But for the sake of argument what if it doesn't grow anytime soon.  Are we willing to just keep playing it the same way, having the same discussions on it.  What can we ask for if the game population stays the way it is?

Topsight your a great pilot but I disagree with the two tier spread across all Tiers.  The bottom tier of a two tier system will make people leave this game.  They get destroyed before getting started and like many have said, it takes time to learn the basics of the game, their plane, etc.  Now I will agree of the tier 2 spread in the upper tiers because we know they aren't as populated and most of the players are better and should be able to handle this spread.



ArrowZ_ #24 Posted 10 April 2015 - 12:22 AM

    Captain

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 1049 battles
  • 3,274
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013
You might not like this but for a solution towards MM to work with a stagnant population, something like locking the tiers during off peak hours will force people to populate the lower tiers and compress the the spread in numbers. A MM merge if you will. To be honest this idea is crap but its one way to make people play the same range of tiers.

That Ozi Client Side Lagger


ViolentAngel #25 Posted 10 April 2015 - 12:31 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

@losttwo - a skill based mm should not separate players by skill into separate battles. As mentioned, it should do what it can to distribute the available players on the teams in the same battle.

 

@THEMARCO - always pitting flight v flight is not a good idea. There are many flights that are not nearly as skilled as others. A flight v flight balance may always put a lower-skill flight against a higher-skill flight and that would be zero fun for the lower skilled flight. This would give the good flights a consistent advantage.

 

Matches do not need to be 100% balanced by number of planes either. The current MM will try to balance a match with additional planes by TIER. This is silly. What's one extra tier 6 going to do for the team that is outnumbered in T8? And especially so if the opposing T8 is a good player?

 

Win rate + games played, IMO is the best metric to use for balancing teams. I have some very old posts on this I don't care to search for, but the MM could use each player's w/r - and number of games played as the weighting factor - and attempt to keep teams in the 53-47% range. This is called a "weighted average". For instance, my 56% w/r at 11k games would have a much larger affect on the team's average w/r than say a player with 70% or 46% w/r and 300 games. The weighted average w/r of each team would provide a rough estimate for the "probability" of winning that particular match up.  I would even go so far as saying that the players' w/r and battle count in the plane they are currently flying would be even better than using their overall stats.

 

Flights should not even be part of the decision process. Each pilot's "skill" - however determined - should be considered individually whether they are in a flight or not.

 

The old 1.4 MM would attempt to balance teams by plane type (among other things). I do not think this is necessary if there is a skill-based MM involved.

 

 


"Fiery the Angels rose, & as they rose deep thunder roll’d"

-- William Blake


Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Chokai #26 Posted 10 April 2015 - 03:57 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 15 battles
  • 951
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    12-13-2012
A skill based MM would increase que times alot IMO, even with double the population. My suggestion would be, if we did this, and I do NOT advocate for it, to balance either via K/D or Damage Ratio at a +/- 10-20%. That still gives one team alot of advantage. Then you have to figure different plane types in. The only thing that really needs balancing is attack planes- by that I mean an equal number on both sides. All in all people will complain no matter what the MM. I know I personally do, even though I know I should not.

The (not so) amazing Chokai is back! And he's hit all his personal goals sans one! Seriously though, nice to be back, looks like he game is improving. I continue to try to recruit new people.


ViolentAngel #27 Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:12 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

Not really. All it needs to do is distribute the available players as equitably as possible in a short enough timeframe. If I choose to fly my T2 premiums, I would expect to be on an outnumbered team (due to the number of battles and win rate I have), and would accept a 2 minute wait for the match.

 


"Fiery the Angels rose, & as they rose deep thunder roll’d"

-- William Blake


Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Chokai #28 Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:19 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 15 battles
  • 951
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    12-13-2012

View PostJekyll_n_Hyde, on 10 April 2015 - 04:12 AM, said:

Not really. All it needs to do is distribute the available players as equitably as possible in a short enough timeframe. If I choose to fly my T2 premiums, I would expect to be on an outnumbered team (due to the number of battles and win rate I have), and would accept a 2 minute wait for the match.

 

 

Hmmm I didn't even think about changing up the numbers for more experienced players. Still I feel like (and trust me I love my T2 Ar 68, Hawk III, A4N, AND XP-31) it would not be a fair match.  If it was 3 v 4 with say you on one side, its likely the extra player would be a t1 or t2 that thinks his Ar 65s job is to shoot ground targets all day. Easy kills :playing:. Or, alternatively, they could have two aces, and two noobs on one side vs one "super ace" and two noobs, or a mixture. And no I a not using the word noob derogitively. I am in essence still one in many ways. All in all, MM can never be fair. We can guide it closest to be fair. And again, whilst i will gripe, it will all even out on getting on good and bad teams.

The (not so) amazing Chokai is back! And he's hit all his personal goals sans one! Seriously though, nice to be back, looks like he game is improving. I continue to try to recruit new people.


ViolentAngel #29 Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:32 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

That is why a weighted average would be best. If all the other players in the match are new (i.e. low battle count), then a weighted average could produce a match that is HORRIBLY imbalanced in terms of team size (me versus 8 new players), but more equitably balanced in terms of skill.  That is the question that losttwo raised: how to develop a skill-based mm that ACTUALLY WORKS regardless of population size.

 

[Edit: why you make me post while I'm inebriated?]


Edited by Jekyll_n_Hyde, 10 April 2015 - 04:34 AM.

"Fiery the Angels rose, & as they rose deep thunder roll’d"

-- William Blake


losttwo #30 Posted 10 April 2015 - 11:01 AM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 3124 battles
  • 13,539
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

thanks J-K for getting back on topic :

 MM being skill based on W/R ( overall ) would be a fallacy.

  Example : losttwo sits at 61% W/R which mean his team wins 61% of the matches for him.

                   sure i contribute to a team but in reality my W/R should be in the 30's .

                  When it comes time to carry a team I often times blow it from some mistake.

                  My win rate is more based on LUCK and a skilled MM based on this fact would change the luck.

                  I am actually less of a hero than my Win rate states I am.

Like wise I feel that many pilots suffer from this same concept.

 

Balancing a team by games played is just out of the question. Looking at the Hall of Fame you can see

 some ( few ) players have 3000 battles with a 70+ W/R. That would certainly not be fair to a 3000 battle count at 45% W/R.

 

Proficiency rating: I think this would be a good balancing tool but I am still investigating the idea via screen shots.

 

Per plane balancing based on how well a person flies an individual plane, could be an interesting option.

BF-109B with a 60% W/R + 1.4 K/R could be an interesting match versus a I-16(L) with a 60% / 1.2 K/D.

 

One of the biggest issues of course is match  size.

 

The original algorithm waited for 30 players between 3 tiers then would drop a match. Now it is waiting for 6 players.

This is of course before patch 1.5

1.5 to 1.7 some sort of "skill" was thrown into the mix and increased queue times.

As well matches size was altered resulting in 1 vs 1 matches after a length of time.

The fix was to get rid of the " skill " idea and make the drop at 6 players instead of returning it to 30 players.

 

What would happen if the match maker would do a 30 count, drop a game based on the current " no skill "

Similar to the original match maker ?

 

Here again going back to 15 versus 15 matches still having a fast queue time. Then a re evaluation of

what might be needed suggestions for tweaking



Tonzzo #31 Posted 10 April 2015 - 05:15 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 585 battles
  • 3,052
  • [-WS-] -WS-
  • Member since:
    11-14-2013

View Postlosttwo, on 10 April 2015 - 11:01 AM, said:


 

 

Here again going back to 15 versus 15 matches still having a fast queue time. Then a re evaluation of

what might be needed suggestions for tweaking

 

 

 

True but.....

 

I read your posts and come away thinking 1 + X = ?


 

 

I certainly agree that this game would retain more "new" players if the MM was a skill based MM (ladder) type set up....  But as it has been said since the dawn of WoWp.....  We need a bigger population.....  Certainly this game would also retain more players with fast que times....  But that means again we need a bigger population....  AND absolutely this game would retain more players if EVERY match was 15 v 15 as YES these games are random but the bigger the battle the more balanced it is plane wise....  But duh....  We need a bigger population......  Also the Que Screen gaming is and has always been a source of intelligent gaming.... AKA UP TIERING....  The question is how can we solve all of this?.....


 

Bots maybe the only answer to all of this....


 

A skill based MM is possible where bad players get BOTS and decent players are equally matched against other decent players Great Players are pitted against other great players the gaps are filled with bots....  Now that doesn't mean that they are segregated....  A battle could contain bad, decent and great players....  Only that a equally bad, decent, great players is on the other team....  If a match isn't found...  Bots....


 

This would allow for the Skill based MM with fast que times however the current 30sec flash game is crazy....  I can handle waiting a min or two...  AS LONG AS WE ARE GETTING BIG MATCHES....


 

Also with this in mind the need for a Que screen would be less needed...  We could use this screen time for training videos, tactics and so on based on the players skill level....  Just a idea there......


 

I know that BOTs is not a well received idea....  But I think its simply a shot in the arm....  Given time if it works BOTs can be phased out.... or back in as needed.....


 

Just my crazy thoughts.....


 

 



 


dityboycom #32 Posted 10 April 2015 - 06:14 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014

View Postlosttwo, on 09 April 2015 - 04:01 PM, said:

Reason 1

it was suppose to be about player experience and the differences.

Kind of got off track

 

Reason 2

 not enough coffee when I started it

 

Reason 3

 Have not bothered to ask the Mods to move it

 

It's more entertaining that they haven't taken it upon themselves to move it. Considering that's their job and all.. You know? To moderate.

dityboycom #33 Posted 05 July 2016 - 05:05 PM

    Colonel

  • Member
  • 1 battle
  • 9,287
  • [BAGG] BAGG
  • Member since:
    08-23-2014
o fo sho





Also tagged with balance, queue, match maker

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users