Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] MATCHMAKING FEEDBACK UPDATE – FEB 20

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
Why do I see a large skill gap in my match?
First, matchmaking is based on MMR not CSR. If you are seeing large gaps, it means someone is changing in MMR faster than their CSR can catch them. Going by MMR, matches are always tight, so they should be reasonable in how they play out, regardless of what CSRs you see. The exception to this is Champion-level players that are so good we have to match them vs. high-Onyx players who they usually destroy. Fortunately this is rare. The other exception is when higher-skill players create a fireteam with much lower-skilled ones, but I’ve addressed this elsewhere.


Number of Placement Matches
Some of you have asked about reducing the number of placement matches. If I can confirm the skill system is confident enough in skills early on, we could change this. It's something I'm investigating.


If you mess with Elo’s math to force Onyx to be smaller it’ll mess everything up
I don’t need to touch the math, just the boundaries on the raw numbers that are used to decide your ranks. For example, right now, 1500 is the boundary for Onyx. Maybe that needs to be 1700. But your raw CSR and the math behind it would stay the same.

As a side note, I reserve the right to mess with Elo’s math as much as I want since I've published academic papers in that type of math(s).


Demotions
I’ve read some concerns about getting a promotion and then an immediate demotion in the next match. The reverse also happens. Right now, we both promote and demote immediately when a player’s CSR crosses the boundary for the higher / lower rank, and we don’t do anything to slow that down. We could consider adding a buffer if this is too jarring, though it’s not a high priority. One way to do this would be to add or subtract a few extra games worth of CSR when you cross a boundary. For example, when you get promoted to Gold, we add an extra 15-30 CSR so you would have to lose at least 2 or 3 in a row to get demoted. If we did that, we would also need to subtract an extra 15-30 CSR when you get demoted to remain balanced. It does have the drawback of slightly over- / under-estimating the CSR, though not enough to matter much in my opinion.


Placement
Some of you have expressed the concern that you always start behind where you ended last season. We intentionally place you a bit back from where your MMR would place you. If you ended last season after just getting into the next higher rank, you will always fall back to the previous one and have to work your way up again. Two reasons we do that:
  • To require some time investment this season to earn your rank back
  • To prove to the system you deserve that rank
I understand this can feel frustrating if you fought all season for that final good rank. I think a good solution to this would be to make your last rank more rewarding. I don’t think that we can do anything about that right now, but I feel your pain. We may consider lowering the amount of investment we require to catch back up.
We may be improving the placement accuracy in the coming months, but not in the short term.

Keep in mind when you have an unranked player in a match, they may have been ranked previously, so don’t assume they’re terrible. The system tries to place unranked players into the right place faster than we give them a CSR.

Shouldn’t FFA give a win for 1-3rd place?
Yes, I agree with this. I’m not sure I can do it soon, but I’ll check. Note: CSR gains are usually positive for 1-3, negative for 4-6.


Not Using the Average Skill in Party
I’ve heard people suggest that we should use the max skill of a party instead of its average in order to discourage partying up with smurfs. I’m not opposed to that and may try it in the future, but:
  • It discourages playing with legit worse friends. It will make it painful for them, frustrating for the good player, and drags the good player CSR down in cases where your friends are legit bad. We’re careful about putting up barriers to playing with friends since it’s so fun. But also understand that maybe ranked isn’t the place for that if your friends are bad.
  • I want to first to see how well the skill improvements alone can mitigate this problem.
  • If still needed I may do it for only Team Arena
  • A softer option is to force your CSR to move towards your fireteam’s average after every match rather than your personal MMR. For example, in the case of an Onyx player playing with Bronze, both will see their CSR drift towards Gold over time. This will have the result of discouraging smurfing since it will drag the better player’s CSR down. In cases where your friends really are bad, it also will still give the more balanced matches for everyone that we have today. It does have the downside that when you play with bad friends, your CSR goes down. But so does matchmaking on the max. I think this option is better overall.


Team Rankings vs. Personal
Yes, I like the idea of having a Personal Ranking that moves based on individual in-game performance, and one that is based on winning. I would want these both separate and want to make it clear that the winning version is more important.

Keep in mind we don’t use Arpad Elo’s method for Ranks. We use something more advanced. We can integrate Kills, Deaths, Assists, Headshots, Objectives, etc., into your skills. We can also create a win-based one CSR separate from your individual performance-based one. I’m constantly evaluating which would be best for each part of the game.


Champion Ranks Rewards Follow-up
A few of you have suggested we have different rewards for each rank each season. While I think that’s super cool, let me be more clear why I gave the design I proposed.
At this stage in Halo 5’s life cycle, I only have so many rewards left I can give. If I had unlimited reward content, I could have something for every rank for every season, but I don’t.

Instead, I have a limited set of cool rewards and a goal to make Champion feel exclusive. This means some of you will have a harder time getting these rewards at first, and I know that’s sad. But my focus right now is how to first make it worth the fight for the Champions for a few seasons, and secondarily to have something else for the lower Ranks.

One compromise is to let Champions get the current season’s reward, Onyx the previous season’s reward, Diamond the reward from 2 seasons ago, and so on down the chain. So everyone can eventually get them all, but better players get them sooner.


Aren’t people quitting because they don’t like the Map and / or Mode?
For most playlists, there’s no pattern on which maps and / or modes people quit the most. It’s equal. This is the case in team arena. This means removing a map-mode combination wouldn’t make a difference in quit rates. Neither would vetoes because players are just as likely to quit the alternative as they are the vetoed map.


Do you only talk about arena? What about Warzone / Warzone Assault
No, not just arena. I will address Warzone questions. I haven’t seen many yet though, and sorry if I’ve missed them. I did address Warlords recently.

( 1 / 2 )
Why is there a wider variety of skills in my FFA matches?
There are two main reasons, I believe, for this:
  • MMR moves much faster in FFA than CSR. This means the system knows much sooner where to match you than is visibly represented in CSR. So you may have what appears to be a Gold player in your match, but the matchmaker already knows he’s really Bronze. In these cases, rest assured that the matchmaking itself will be fair despite the ranking appearance. The matchmaker will not allow more a GAP of roughly 1 whole CSR rank. (e.g. Gold to Silver) in terms of performance. You’ll see larger gaps when a Bronze player still looks Gold before he’s been demoted, etc.
  • Higher-skilled players in FFA are more likely to wait longer for a match, and more likely to give up on trying to find close matches. Because of this, you’ll see them more in your games. Players that are near the top and bottom will also get matches that are a bit too hard / easy because we won’t have enough players at the ends to match. Note: this isn’t a population size issue, no matter how large your population, you will have sparseness at the ends.


Ranks and Win %
Every now and then I hear comments like, “Why do they outrank me if I have a higher win %?” The whole point of a CSR-type system is that because of matchmaking, win percentage is just wrong. It’s not a good measure except for maybe the top 10 or so players in the whole world. If you have a higher win% than someone with a higher CSR than you, it means by definition that they have played harder matches. The harder the match, the more CSR you get for winning, and then less you lose for losing. So if you dodge or play with noobs and get a lot wins vs. other noobs, you’ll have a high win%, but a lower CSR.

Can I show the bell population of the ranks?
I won't at the moment, but since enabling demotions, it’s smoothed out quite a bit. The amount of players within each rank among those who have completed placement is at the intended distribution, except for perhaps Onyx being larger than intended, which I spoke on last week.


Can I tell how popular the playlists are?
Maybe in a future post, but this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy if we’re not careful. I’ll think about it. I can say that we monitor playlist popularity weekly if not daily and it does inform our decisions. It’s not the only thing we look at, of course. As designers we also have more creative reasons for how we set up the playlists.


Why so few players Ranked vs. Placed? Where did they go?
I hear this concern now and then from people who see get a glimpse of the stats and notice how many people don’t finish their placement matches. This is totally normal. All games look like this, no matter how new or popular the game and regardless of the ranking system. This is because of casuals who just try a game here or there each season. There are almost always more players who play 1 game than who play 2, more who play 2 than 3, etc. In fact, there are way MORE players who play “0” games if you include everyone in the world. That’s an extreme example, but that’s the main idea on why this happens. A lot of players will try something just once a season, it’s the more dedicated players who play their 10 games, and even more so who play a full season. Remember, the casual audience dwarves the rest by far, and they do come and play a game here or there.

Breakout Shotgun
I’ve read a few concerns about starting with shotguns in breakout. First, keep in mind my primary design role isn’t weapon and mode balancing, so I’ll listen to your comments but I won’t personally argue the merits either way. My understanding of why we have shotguns is to increase lethality now that we have shields. So like the original breakout, a player still has a chance of winning 1v3, etc. whereas that would be much harder with the standard loadout.

Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
( 2 / 2)
Thanks for keeping us up to date, but when will any of these improvements actually make its way into the game?
ZaedynFel wrote:
Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
minion
Thanks for this post
I've learned a lot from your posts. I think the most important thing I can say right now is in reference to this part:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Team Rankings vs. PersonalYes, I like the idea of having a Personal Ranking that moves based on individual in-game performance, and one that is based on winning. I would want these both separate and want to make it clear that the winning version is more important.

Keep in mind we don’t use Arpad Elo’s method for Ranks. We use something more advanced. We can integrate Kills, Deaths, Assists, Headshots, Objectives, etc., into your skills. We can also create a win-based one CSR separate from your individual performance-based one. I’m constantly evaluating which would be best for each part of the game.
The entire point is winning. Even if the ranks are separate people will grind for the solo rank instead of the team rank, especially in lower e̶l̶o̶ mmr matches. I think a good compromise would be to allow for the progression system to be based on in-game performance, while the mmr system is still based on win/lose. Even adding any sort of weight to stats when it comes to the ranking system would be detrimental in my opinion. If you ask any pro they'll tell you that the mvp of a match or how well you perform in a match can never be determined off stats. It just can't be. If there was a way to do it then of course. But there is no way to determine performance off stats. Not even close. Just my repectful opinion. Obviously you know what you're doing, this is my thoughts as a long time competitive player. Thanks for the back and forth with the community. Really glad you're back. Also the idea for the rewards that you posted above was a good idea.
Have you considered XP payouts based on season placement? My biggest complaint is busting my butt all season for a rank, only for it to disappear and all I get is an emblem I'll never use.

This could work per playlist, so say, 50k XP per "Champion" rank, 35k per Onyx rank, 10k per "Gold" etc. These would stack, so at the end of the season you could have earned a decent 100k XP "reward". This would also encourage people to actually get rated in every playlist, and work towards a higher rank. All while providing a worthwhile "reward" as opposed to an emblem, which I doubt many people use.

As for "smurfing" I think the level requirement for ranked play is the best option, although is it possible to tweak it to where it is only required if they are playing with Onyx players? So to play ranked with an Onyx player you must be say, Level 50+? That way it doesn't penalize true noobs, just those clearly playing with a highly competitive/skilled player? Sure, people will "smurf" their way to Onyx 1500 if needed, but it doesn't let those players boost Onyx ranks, which is where it becomes an issue.

Just some thoughts.
ZaedynFel wrote:
In cases where your friends really are bad, it also will still give the more balanced matches for everyone that we have today. It does have the downside that when you play with bad friends, your CSR goes down.
I think people should expect to lose or have a higher probability of losing if they're playing with friends who are bad especially in ranked unless you're suggesting that you lose CSR even if you win like poppin pointed out.

You talked about having two separate stats for individual and team rankings, but my question is why are social and ranked stats integrated together (you have that big KDA on the stats screen which is for both)? Shouldn't those be completely separate?

Since you asked about Warzone, it's supposed to be social, but why is the win/loss ratio plastered in huge font on the stats screen? Doesn't that promote less social play since there will be people who care about that?

Edit: I know those aren't the most important issues, but just curious.
With regards to CSR trending downward because of playing with bad friends, if this suggests losing CSR after a win then that definitely doesn't sit well. I could understand not ranking up, but to go down would be a bad idea and cause frustration IMHO.

I play with bad friends sometimes, or even a friend's bad friends, it would be pretty discouraging to carry us to a win, only for me to go down. Effectively punishing me for carrying bad kids, or just trying to play with lesser skilled players.

Just say it out loud, "You win, so you lose." it doesn't make sense. If it's a smurfing deterrent then I definitely would prefer the Level Requirement for Onyx+ play which I mentioned above which would weed out most smurfers but still allow you to play with legitimate "bad" friends.

People complain enough already about only gaining 1CSR per win, I can only imagine the outrage when they are ranking down each game regardless of the outcome. Not very enticing IMHO.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Why is there a wider variety of skills in my FFA matches?There are two main reasons, I believe, for this:
  • MMR moves much faster in FFA than CSR. This means the system knows much sooner where to match you than is visibly represented in CSR. So you may have what appears to be a Gold player in your match, but the matchmaker already knows he’s really Bronze. In these cases, rest assured that the matchmaking itself will be fair despite the ranking appearance. The matchmaker will not allow more a GAP of roughly 1 whole CSR rank. (e.g. Gold to Silver) in terms of performance. You’ll see larger gaps when a Bronze player still looks Gold before he’s been demoted, etc.
  • Higher-skilled players in FFA are more likely to wait longer for a match, and more likely to give up on trying to find close matches. Because of this, you’ll see them more in your games. Players that are near the top and bottom will also get matches that are a bit too hard / easy because we won’t have enough players at the ends to match. Note: this isn’t a population size issue, no matter how large your population, you will have sparseness at the ends.
Ranks and Win %Every now and then I hear comments like, “Why do they outrank me if I have a higher win %?” The whole point of a CSR-type system is that because of matchmaking, win percentage is just wrong. It’s not a good measure except for maybe the top 10 or so players in the whole world. If you have a higher win% than someone with a higher CSR than you, it means by definition that they have played harder matches. The harder the match, the more CSR you get for winning, and then less you lose for losing. So if you dodge or play with noobs and get a lot wins vs. other noobs, you’ll have a high win%, but a lower CSR.

Can I show the bell population of the ranks?I won't at the moment, but since enabling demotions, it’s smoothed out quite a bit. The amount of players within each rank among those who have completed placement is at the intended distribution, except for perhaps Onyx being larger than intended, which I spoke on last week.
Can I tell how popular the playlists are?Maybe in a future post, but this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy if we’re not careful. I’ll think about it. I can say that we monitor playlist popularity weekly if not daily and it does inform our decisions. It’s not the only thing we look at, of course. As designers we also have more creative reasons for how we set up the playlists.
Why so few players Ranked vs. Placed? Where did they go?I hear this concern now and then from people who see get a glimpse of the stats and notice how many people don’t finish their placement matches. This is totally normal. All games look like this, no matter how new or popular the game and regardless of the ranking system. This is because of casuals who just try a game here or there each season. There are almost always more players who play 1 game than who play 2, more who play 2 than 3, etc. In fact, there are way MORE players who play “0” games if you include everyone in the world. That’s an extreme example, but that’s the main idea on why this happens. A lot of players will try something just once a season, it’s the more dedicated players who play their 10 games, and even more so who play a full season. Remember, the casual audience dwarves the rest by far, and they do come and play a game here or there.

Breakout ShotgunI’ve read a few concerns about starting with shotguns in breakout. First, keep in mind my primary design role isn’t weapon and mode balancing, so I’ll listen to your comments but I won’t personally argue the merits either way. My understanding of why we have shotguns is to increase lethality now that we have shields. So like the original breakout, a player still has a chance of winning 1v3, etc. whereas that would be much harder with the standard loadout.

Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
( 2 / 2)
If u want people to able to survive a 3v1 in breakout then maybe take shields back off and go back to standard loadout rather than adding a power weapon start out to a ranked playlist. Rockets could do the trick too....... don't fix it if it's not broken
Seeehawks wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Why is there a wider variety of skills in my FFA matches?There are two main reasons, I believe, for this:
  • MMR moves much faster in FFA than CSR. This means the system knows much sooner where to match you than is visibly represented in CSR. So you may have what appears to be a Gold player in your match, but the matchmaker already knows he’s really Bronze. In these cases, rest assured that the matchmaking itself will be fair despite the ranking appearance. The matchmaker will not allow more a GAP of roughly 1 whole CSR rank. (e.g. Gold to Silver) in terms of performance. You’ll see larger gaps when a Bronze player still looks Gold before he’s been demoted, etc.
  • Higher-skilled players in FFA are more likely to wait longer for a match, and more likely to give up on trying to find close matches. Because of this, you’ll see them more in your games. Players that are near the top and bottom will also get matches that are a bit too hard / easy because we won’t have enough players at the ends to match. Note: this isn’t a population size issue, no matter how large your population, you will have sparseness at the ends.
Ranks and Win %Every now and then I hear comments like, “Why do they outrank me if I have a higher win %?” The whole point of a CSR-type system is that because of matchmaking, win percentage is just wrong. It’s not a good measure except for maybe the top 10 or so players in the whole world. If you have a higher win% than someone with a higher CSR than you, it means by definition that they have played harder matches. The harder the match, the more CSR you get for winning, and then less you lose for losing. So if you dodge or play with noobs and get a lot wins vs. other noobs, you’ll have a high win%, but a lower CSR.

Can I show the bell population of the ranks?I won't at the moment, but since enabling demotions, it’s smoothed out quite a bit. The amount of players within each rank among those who have completed placement is at the intended distribution, except for perhaps Onyx being larger than intended, which I spoke on last week.
Can I tell how popular the playlists are?Maybe in a future post, but this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy if we’re not careful. I’ll think about it. I can say that we monitor playlist popularity weekly if not daily and it does inform our decisions. It’s not the only thing we look at, of course. As designers we also have more creative reasons for how we set up the playlists.
Why so few players Ranked vs. Placed? Where did they go?I hear this concern now and then from people who see get a glimpse of the stats and notice how many people don’t finish their placement matches. This is totally normal. All games look like this, no matter how new or popular the game and regardless of the ranking system. This is because of casuals who just try a game here or there each season. There are almost always more players who play 1 game than who play 2, more who play 2 than 3, etc. In fact, there are way MORE players who play “0” games if you include everyone in the world. That’s an extreme example, but that’s the main idea on why this happens. A lot of players will try something just once a season, it’s the more dedicated players who play their 10 games, and even more so who play a full season. Remember, the casual audience dwarves the rest by far, and they do come and play a game here or there.

Breakout ShotgunI’ve read a few concerns about starting with shotguns in breakout. First, keep in mind my primary design role isn’t weapon and mode balancing, so I’ll listen to your comments but I won’t personally argue the merits either way. My understanding of why we have shotguns is to increase lethality now that we have shields. So like the original breakout, a player still has a chance of winning 1v3, etc. whereas that would be much harder with the standard loadout.

Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
( 2 / 2)
You actually have 37 pages of concerns over shotgun starts. If u want people to able to survive a 3v1 in breakout then maybe take shields off and go back to standard loadout rather than adding a power weapon start out to a ranked playlist. Rockets could do the trick too....... don't fix it if it's not broken
I just recently start playing halo and in Rank I am able to gt up to silver 6. After that I am always paired with people below skill level in my team and 4 higher skill people in other team resulting loss. I don't think that fair. Please do tell me what I am doing wrong?
Seeehawks wrote:
Seeehawks wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Why is there a wider variety of skills in my FFA matches?There are two main reasons, I believe, for this:
  • MMR moves much faster in FFA than CSR. This means the system knows much sooner where to match you than is visibly represented in CSR. So you may have what appears to be a Gold player in your match, but the matchmaker already knows he’s really Bronze. In these cases, rest assured that the matchmaking itself will be fair despite the ranking appearance. The matchmaker will not allow more a GAP of roughly 1 whole CSR rank. (e.g. Gold to Silver) in terms of performance. You’ll see larger gaps when a Bronze player still looks Gold before he’s been demoted, etc.
  • Higher-skilled players in FFA are more likely to wait longer for a match, and more likely to give up on trying to find close matches. Because of this, you’ll see them more in your games. Players that are near the top and bottom will also get matches that are a bit too hard / easy because we won’t have enough players at the ends to match. Note: this isn’t a population size issue, no matter how large your population, you will have sparseness at the ends.
Ranks and Win %Every now and then I hear comments like, “Why do they outrank me if I have a higher win %?” The whole point of a CSR-type system is that because of matchmaking, win percentage is just wrong. It’s not a good measure except for maybe the top 10 or so players in the whole world. If you have a higher win% than someone with a higher CSR than you, it means by definition that they have played harder matches. The harder the match, the more CSR you get for winning, and then less you lose for losing. So if you dodge or play with noobs and get a lot wins vs. other noobs, you’ll have a high win%, but a lower CSR.

Can I show the bell population of the ranks?I won't at the moment, but since enabling demotions, it’s smoothed out quite a bit. The amount of players within each rank among those who have completed placement is at the intended distribution, except for perhaps Onyx being larger than intended, which I spoke on last week.
Can I tell how popular the playlists are?Maybe in a future post, but this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy if we’re not careful. I’ll think about it. I can say that we monitor playlist popularity weekly if not daily and it does inform our decisions. It’s not the only thing we look at, of course. As designers we also have more creative reasons for how we set up the playlists.
Why so few players Ranked vs. Placed? Where did they go?I hear this concern now and then from people who see get a glimpse of the stats and notice how many people don’t finish their placement matches. This is totally normal. All games look like this, no matter how new or popular the game and regardless of the ranking system. This is because of casuals who just try a game here or there each season. There are almost always more players who play 1 game than who play 2, more who play 2 than 3, etc. In fact, there are way MORE players who play “0” games if you include everyone in the world. That’s an extreme example, but that’s the main idea on why this happens. A lot of players will try something just once a season, it’s the more dedicated players who play their 10 games, and even more so who play a full season. Remember, the casual audience dwarves the rest by far, and they do come and play a game here or there.

Breakout ShotgunI’ve read a few concerns about starting with shotguns in breakout. First, keep in mind my primary design role isn’t weapon and mode balancing, so I’ll listen to your comments but I won’t personally argue the merits either way. My understanding of why we have shotguns is to increase lethality now that we have shields. So like the original breakout, a player still has a chance of winning 1v3, etc. whereas that would be much harder with the standard loadout.

Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
( 2 / 2)
You actually have 37 pages of concerns over shotgun starts. If u want people to able to survive a 3v1 in breakout then maybe take shields off and go back to standard loadout rather than adding a power weapon start out to a ranked playlist. Rockets could do the trick too....... don't fix it if it's not broken
I am with you man all the way. Shotgun starts are ridiculous. The original Breakout or bust.
Guys, we get it. You don't like the new Breakout. Use the feedback thread for that at this point instead of co-opting every new thread for your soapbox.

Thanks!
Guys, we get it. You don't like the new Breakout. Use the feedback thread for that at this point instead of co-opting every new thread for your soapbox.

Thanks!
I will gladly do that right after I point out that Shotguns and Breakout were brought up in the one dudes update. If you do not want people to respond to something do not bring it up. Now I will go back to my soapbox and dream of a world where I can play the original Breakout.
These are all valid arguments to speak about.

But I really wish some day in these updated we will talk about all the implication of a matchmaking system like this (with all or some these solutions) combined with a region/datacenter selection system (like titanfall 1 or 2 yo be clear).

I read a very old Josh Holmes where he explained how the promised datacenter selection was abandoned due to some conflicts with the matchmaking system, leading to long search times.

This cannot happen again with H6.
Personally I think it's vitally important in Ranked to make sure that High Rollers can't just dong on folks by teaming with their spud tier friends. If you want to team with spud tier friends then surely thats what the social playlist is for.

Full disclosure - I am spud tier level so I mean no disrespect to my fellow spuds.
Glad to see a lot of these issues being talked about. I can tell this will result in massive improvements in the ranked matchmaking experience over time if those changes come to fruition. However
ZaedynFel wrote:
Aren’t people quitting because they don’t like the Map and / or Mode?For most playlists, there’s no pattern on which maps and / or modes people quit the most. It’s equal. This is the case in team arena. This means removing a map-mode combination wouldn’t make a difference in quit rates. Neither would vetoes because players are just as likely to quit the alternative as they are the vetoed map.
This part, I don't think is 100% accurate. Sure, DNFs tend to be equal across the board, and people tend to just leave games when getting stomped or matching a pro team that makes them scared, but there's a significant amount of map dodging in certain hoppers, just based on maps alone. Unfortunately, in things like FFA where the population is low at high ranks, dodging means a significant increase in search times. I'd recommend looking into this further for hoppers where the experience hasn't been as refined as Team Arena, such as FFA, Doubles, Snipers, etc.
I don't know if you did anything or if it was just pure coincidence, but the matching in BTB was much better last night. The win/loss ratio was more balanced compared to the entire last week.
Edit: Might've just been a coincidence.

Vetoed is right though. Sometimes the maps are just bad which causes quitting the build. More feedback threads and taking action on suggestions would help minimize this.
Seeehawks wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Why is there a wider variety of skills in my FFA matches?There are two main reasons, I believe, for this:
  • MMR moves much faster in FFA than CSR. This means the system knows much sooner where to match you than is visibly represented in CSR. So you may have what appears to be a Gold player in your match, but the matchmaker already knows he’s really Bronze. In these cases, rest assured that the matchmaking itself will be fair despite the ranking appearance. The matchmaker will not allow more a GAP of roughly 1 whole CSR rank. (e.g. Gold to Silver) in terms of performance. You’ll see larger gaps when a Bronze player still looks Gold before he’s been demoted, etc.
  • Higher-skilled players in FFA are more likely to wait longer for a match, and more likely to give up on trying to find close matches. Because of this, you’ll see them more in your games. Players that are near the top and bottom will also get matches that are a bit too hard / easy because we won’t have enough players at the ends to match. Note: this isn’t a population size issue, no matter how large your population, you will have sparseness at the ends.
Ranks and Win %Every now and then I hear comments like, “Why do they outrank me if I have a higher win %?” The whole point of a CSR-type system is that because of matchmaking, win percentage is just wrong. It’s not a good measure except for maybe the top 10 or so players in the whole world. If you have a higher win% than someone with a higher CSR than you, it means by definition that they have played harder matches. The harder the match, the more CSR you get for winning, and then less you lose for losing. So if you dodge or play with noobs and get a lot wins vs. other noobs, you’ll have a high win%, but a lower CSR.

Can I show the bell population of the ranks?I won't at the moment, but since enabling demotions, it’s smoothed out quite a bit. The amount of players within each rank among those who have completed placement is at the intended distribution, except for perhaps Onyx being larger than intended, which I spoke on last week.
Can I tell how popular the playlists are?Maybe in a future post, but this can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy if we’re not careful. I’ll think about it. I can say that we monitor playlist popularity weekly if not daily and it does inform our decisions. It’s not the only thing we look at, of course. As designers we also have more creative reasons for how we set up the playlists.
Why so few players Ranked vs. Placed? Where did they go?I hear this concern now and then from people who see get a glimpse of the stats and notice how many people don’t finish their placement matches. This is totally normal. All games look like this, no matter how new or popular the game and regardless of the ranking system. This is because of casuals who just try a game here or there each season. There are almost always more players who play 1 game than who play 2, more who play 2 than 3, etc. In fact, there are way MORE players who play “0” games if you include everyone in the world. That’s an extreme example, but that’s the main idea on why this happens. A lot of players will try something just once a season, it’s the more dedicated players who play their 10 games, and even more so who play a full season. Remember, the casual audience dwarves the rest by far, and they do come and play a game here or there.

Breakout ShotgunI’ve read a few concerns about starting with shotguns in breakout. First, keep in mind my primary design role isn’t weapon and mode balancing, so I’ll listen to your comments but I won’t personally argue the merits either way. My understanding of why we have shotguns is to increase lethality now that we have shields. So like the original breakout, a player still has a chance of winning 1v3, etc. whereas that would be much harder with the standard loadout.

Fun Facts
  • Many of you have referred to the “ELO System”
  • There is no such thing.
  • ELO is Electric Light Orchestra, a rock band.
  • Arpad Elo was a Hungarian American and a physics professor
  • Arpad created what we call the Elo system, named after him.
  • CSR uses a form of Elo’s system that I have adapted, but it is anchored in the MMR system which is more efficient and accurate at tracking skill.
  • ELO the rock band, will be playing at Wembley Stadium June 24, 2017
  • Wembley Stadium is where the Halo World Champion 2017 EU Qualifiers just took place over this past weekend.
  • So, in some weird way, Elo and ELO have become related
( 2 / 2)
If u want people to able to survive a 3v1 in breakout then maybe take shields back off and go back to standard loadout rather than adding a power weapon start out to a ranked playlist. Rockets could do the trick too....... don't fix it if it's not broken
Exactly. Add shields and then add a power weapon to counteract the shields. Doesn't make much sense. The chances of trading in a shotgun vs shotgun battle is pretty high
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5