Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

SBMM - Why it is both good and bad

OP HaloBungie343I

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 6
Darwi wrote:
my entire gripe of how ranks are determined are solely on wins or how difficult the win was (CSR) and has nothing to do with a persons skill.
It's difficult. I can see why they simplified it and just focused on team wins. And the bonus is it's accuracy - the expected team pretty much wins by the predicted margin.

The gripe comes when you are a solo player joining random teams. This exposes you to fluctations in team coherency. Sadly this is me pretty much every game :(
This means the idea of having onyx, platinum, gold, silver on each team is technically ‘fair’ for the team overall, it is not fair skill wise for the gold or silver ranks on each team to be going against much higher skilled players
The important part is that the teams are evenly matched. The lower ranked players aren't expected to have positive K:D - they just need to do their part. It may not be a lot of fun for them though if they are just damage sponges for the grown ups.

And the issue is really only brought to a head by low population numbers.

It seems that most of the matchmaking is based on wait times reading further down which is fine for finding quick matches in social but personally I’d rather have evenly matched players on evenly matched teams across Arena and wait an additional 10-20 seconds. Of course the wait time is based on the games population so that’s understandable.
It's tricky. You want every match to be even... but at some stage you just have to get a game started. The important part is that the game knows that you are mismatched - so you don't lose as much rank when you lose (but you could go up heaps with an upset win).

Also that entire FAQ leads me to believe that the matching system is specific to H5 only as well.
It's written from the perspective of Halo 5 - but the lead match making team has been around for a while (multiple games - but not sure if back to Halo 3). I don't have the link anymore but they gave some interesting talks at GDC a couple of years ago.
The system is fine for social but fact of the matter is that it is not as fine tuned for arena. I would estimate 95% of players aren’t going in with a team of 2,3,4. I would also hazard a guess that those in arena would rather have people of similar KDA in the match than ‘tiers’ of lesser and higher ranked in their matches. Essentially this matchmaking is picking a winner before the game even begins according to its own algorithm/admission.

Nothing in there has made me believe “oh this is the best we can do” and I believe people would agree if they check it out. The whole idea of going into a match is to win...it seems less likely when you throw people in together that clearly have different skill levels and then a system that picks teams and “predetermines” a winner if everyone plays according to their abilities. Furthering the point, if matched with similar KDA’s then essentially the opponents matched would be a toss up, also not predetermined who will win or lose. Of course that brings us to the rando’s who are matched into this system performing well and still de-ranking because the whole system is based on win or lose...it’s garbage.

the same system requirements for connection can be applied as well as taking KDA into account which the current system does. Once again I honestly don’t believe that the vast majority of the population is walking into games with a full team and even if they are...a computer setting matches and predetermining a winner based on its matchup is kinda messed up. It defeats the whole idea of having an even playing field for all players involved.
Spam8358 wrote:
HX made a vid about this literally yesterday, I don't really have much knowledge, or any strong opinion, but I found it rather interesting, if anyone missed it, here it is
Saw it too, the Halo 3 system was just so perfect
Cold War took it WAAAAY too far. As of now the game will choose a worse connection to even out the game. The system should go off what possible matches are within a good connection to you THEN choose based on what's left on skill.

Again though this should be ranked only. Only thing I'd advocate for social is a party size Matcher but not for skill.
I'm fine with skill based matchmaking how it is, it's overall a good thing to me. But Halo 5's version was a slight turn-off for me. I really resented how I could play 3 matches and still be in the same placement but as soon as I lose one, I'm down a rank depending on who you're paired with. If they go back to the number system prior to Halo 5, I would be content with that.
Ken Journo wrote:
I'm fine with skill based matchmaking how it is, it's overall a good thing to me. But Halo 5's version was a slight turn-off for me. I really resented how I could play 3 matches and still be in the same placement but as soon as I lose one, I'm down a rank depending on who you're paired with. If they go back to the number system prior to Halo 5, I would be content with that.
Halo 5 does have the same number system as before but with a different skin to allow for ranks beyond 50. (High diamond+)
The system is fine for social but fact of the matter is that it is not as fine tuned for arena. I would estimate 95% of players aren’t going in with a team of 2,3,4. I would also hazard a guess that those in arena would rather have people of similar KDA in the match than ‘tiers’ of lesser and higher ranked in their matches. Essentially this matchmaking is picking a winner before the game even begins according to its own algorithm/admission.
I kind of view it from a different angle.

The system is always trying to grab 8 identical players for each match.

But when time and population are against it, it does it's best to bring together the two closest teams it can.

And I guess you can't ask much more from it.

It's actually very clever that it can then take these two, possibly mis-matched teams, and predict with such accuracy who is going to win or lose. And it's actually a good thing because it can use that data to decide how much to reward (or penalise) you for the win (or loss).

It's probably as fair a system as you can get.

But I do agree. When you are left high and dry by a highly ranked dud (I literally just played a game today where someone three ranks above me went 2 and 17) it is so frustrating. More so if the algorithm pegged you as the likely winner and you lose a chunk of rank yourself.

But I'm not so sure there is a better way to do it.
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
I think it’s the opposite — as you improve you play tougher opponents so you can continue to improve. If you play people way less or more skilled than you, you’re unlikely to learn much.
SBMM should ONLY ever be put in a ranked playlist. Social playlists have no place for SBMM. As you can see with Cold War, you either reverse boost to have fun or sweat 24/7.
DIlzZzY wrote:
SBMM should ONLY ever be put in a ranked playlist. Social playlists have no place for SBMM. As you can see with Cold War, you either reverse boost to have fun or sweat 24/7.
Wrong, you need MM in social to order to keep some semblance of balance otherwise matches will be incredibly wild with most being one-sided.
Casual MM should prioritize connection speed and THEN average skill with large margins.
DIlzZzY wrote:
SBMM should ONLY ever be put in a ranked playlist. Social playlists have no place for SBMM. As you can see with Cold War, you either reverse boost to have fun or sweat 24/7.
Wrong, you need MM in social to order to keep some semblance of balance otherwise matches will be incredibly wild with most being one-sided.
Casual MM should prioritize connection speed and THEN average skill with large margins.
Well, it can't be wrong because it's an opinion. So in that case, wrong, sbmm should be in ranked playlists only.
DIlzZzY wrote:
DIlzZzY wrote:
SBMM should ONLY ever be put in a ranked playlist. Social playlists have no place for SBMM. As you can see with Cold War, you either reverse boost to have fun or sweat 24/7.
Wrong, you need MM in social to order to keep some semblance of balance otherwise matches will be incredibly wild with most being one-sided.
Casual MM should prioritize connection speed and THEN average skill with large margins.
Well, it can't be wrong because it's an opinion. So in that case, wrong, sbmm should be in ranked playlists only.
It can be wrong since SBMM has never been an issue until Cold War, all Halo games before had it and nobody had an issue.
Apparently all it took was one bad egg to ruin the recipe forever.
SBMM has no place outside of ranked playlists.
SBMM in Arena and current H5 system in social. Skilled needs to pair with equal skill not a mix of equally skilled/tiered players on each team) while social can have a larger pool/variety of different skills and balance them accordingly to each team.
DIlzZzY wrote:
SBMM should ONLY ever be put in a ranked playlist. Social playlists have no place for SBMM. As you can see with Cold War, you either reverse boost to have fun or sweat 24/7.
Can't agree with you there.

For every player having 'fun' stomping around... there is another player being stomped upon - and I doubt they are having much fun.

I don't consider myself particularly 'sweaty' (whatever that means) but I've never derived any enjoyment in being a flat track bully. In games where my team is dominating I often start practicing routes and jumps - there is no honour in buffing your K:D with marshmallows.

SBMM should be in every playlist. Sure, it can be relaxed a bit in social scenarios. But to go in completely random is madness.
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
Strict SBMM is great for ranked matches. The stricter the better! And there is no better way to improve than to play against your peers (or those slightly better than you). At some stage, when you max out YOUR skill level - you will start to struggle and plateau. But this just means the system is working. You can't expect to just keep winning - that would be insane.

A perfect system would produce a 50% win rate (every match going down to the wire at 50-49) and a personal K:D of 1.0.

Relaxed SBMM is better for social matches. You can't have no SBMM at all - there would be chaos.
Darwi wrote:
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
Strict SBMM is great for ranked matches. The stricter the better! And there is no better way to improve than to play against your peers (or those slightly better than you). At some stage, when you max out YOUR skill level - you will start to struggle and plateau. But this just means the system is working. You can't expect to just keep winning - that would be insane.

A perfect system would produce a 50% win rate (every match going down to the wire at 50-49) and a personal K:D of 1.0.

Relaxed SBMM is better for social matches. You can't have no SBMM at all - there would be chaos.
Im not talking about ranked it is obvious that any ranked playlist in any game must have strict sbmm that’s the whole purpose of ranked
Darwi wrote:
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
Strict SBMM is great for ranked matches. The stricter the better! And there is no better way to improve than to play against your peers (or those slightly better than you). At some stage, when you max out YOUR skill level - you will start to struggle and plateau. But this just means the system is working. You can't expect to just keep winning - that would be insane.

A perfect system would produce a 50% win rate (every match going down to the wire at 50-49) and a personal K:D of 1.0.

Relaxed SBMM is better for social matches. You can't have no SBMM at all - there would be chaos.
Im not talking about ranked it is obvious that any ranked playlist in any game must have strict sbmm that’s the whole purpose of ranked
The jist of it still holds true. The only thing that is going to get better stomping on lesser players is your K:D.
Darwi wrote:
Darwi wrote:
Strict sbmm is the worst thing that has ever happened to multiplayer gaming (other than cheating which is not intended by developers). It takes away the incentive for people to actually get better at the game, which is just insane. So the more you improve the harder your matches get and the worse you will do. I think 343 is smart enough not to include this garbage in halo infinite.

Keep it old school and fun, do not ruin this franchise like CoD and BR games have been ruined
Strict SBMM is great for ranked matches. The stricter the better! And there is no better way to improve than to play against your peers (or those slightly better than you). At some stage, when you max out YOUR skill level - you will start to struggle and plateau. But this just means the system is working. You can't expect to just keep winning - that would be insane.

A perfect system would produce a 50% win rate (every match going down to the wire at 50-49) and a personal K:D of 1.0.

Relaxed SBMM is better for social matches. You can't have no SBMM at all - there would be chaos.
Im not talking about ranked it is obvious that any ranked playlist in any game must have strict sbmm that’s the whole purpose of ranked
The jist of it still holds true. The only thing that is going to get better stomping on lesser players is your K:D.
Yea that’s kinda the point. You practice and play a game and get stomped until you become good. Then you get to stomp other people because you put in your time and learned the game. This cycle is ruined by sbmm and it becomes doing ok even if you’re trash, and doing just ok even if you’ve put in the time to become good. That is a garbage and unrewarding system. The games should be easier as you get better not harder
Yea that’s kinda the point. You practice and play a game and get stomped until you become good. Then you get to stomp other people because you put in your time and learned the game. This cycle is ruined by sbmm and it becomes doing ok even if you’re trash, and doing just ok even if you’ve put in the time to become good. That is a garbage and unrewarding system. The games should be easier as you get better not harder
I can't imagine how you could model population numbers to fit this pretence?

You want the game to wait until you've hit a skill ceiling and then just serve you up damage sponges to stomp all day?

How is that workable?

Where does this constant supply of stompables come from? Presumably as they improve towards your level they also get to their chance to do some stomping. Which is going to require even larger influx of stomp fodder.

And how does the game decide that you are a stomper... and shouldn't just be fed to better players all day. Or are you just assuming you are the apex?

And the game should get easier as you get better? I would have thought the essence of a good game is to constantly provide a challenge.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 6