Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] Matchmaking Feedback Update – July 24

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
Make HCS microphone required please. Or give me a search option for microphone only matches. If you're going to have a "pro" playlist, there should be a way to filter out the, to put it nicely, less dedicated.
To put it not so nicely, scrubs that can't afford a microphone have no business rolling with the big boys; gtfout of my pro circuit
So apparently, I am a scrub.. That is kind of offensive. I just don't use a microphone. I can afford one, but I choose not to purchase one. I'd rather buy something else that is worth the money... like another xbox game or something. BTW, Swearing bugs me and I just don't prefer mics right now. Also, it's kind of distracting... :P
Please remove slayer from Arena and add koth, assault, and oddball to Arena. And bring back 1 Flag.
Meh, I hate Assault. It was so annoying to get on TA. I'm so glad it's not there anymore. whew!
Is there a thread about the apparent refresh/update recently made to FFA? My internet was down for a while, so I've only been online for about a week. I've kept an eye on waypoint in between and I don't remember seeing anything about FFA HCS settings or a refresh, so I just want to vent my frustration in the right place, but my current/trending opinion is it still sucks!!!
Redacted*
Populare wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Hey folks, no big updates since I’ve been out of the office for a bit. Smaller post this week.
Fireteam Restrictions Just a quick update here. We have heard mixed feedback on the restrictions. Some are loving it, some are a bit frustrated by the longer wait times and resulting larger skill gaps in matches.
Part of this is just that the matchmaking change has made it necessary to retune our matchmaking parameters. We are keeping an eye on each playlist individually and tightening some of the matchmaking back up where possible to balance against the new settings. We have done this already in HCS, Team Arena, and Slayer and have already noticed improvements in matchmaking quality.
We have another update coming down the road that should drastically reduce the possible skill gap between full fireteams and their opponents for the cases where we still have to match against non-full fireteams. This should result in more fair matches when this happens.
We also may soon be able to stretch the search out over a longer period of time, allowing us to maintain party restrictions for longer than 2.5 minutes, and also expand the allowed skill gap over a longer period as well. This should trade-off wait times for tighter matches overall.
Fireteam Size Limits in WarzoneWe’ve heard the request that now that we have party restrictions, can we allow full fireteams of 12 players to queue again for Warzone rather than have Warlords.
We currently feel the experience could be more frustrating than enjoyable with the trade-offs it would require.
  • In Arena, we eventually give up on the party restrictions and allow non-full parties to match against parties of 4. We couldn’t do that in Warzone.
  • Fireteams of 12 have a massive advantage in Warzone. So massive, that if we allowed them back in, we would have to restrict them to matchmaking only ever against other fireteams of 12, we couldn’t drop the party restriction after long wait times.
  • If a fireteam of 12 queues up to matchmaking, there’s a possibility there are zero other fireteams of 12 to matchmake. That fireteam could wait indefinitely for a match, not knowing that there aren’t any other fireteams to play with.
We feel the experience of waiting indefinitely, not knowing there aren’t any opponents to play, wouldn’t be great for those Warzone teams, and that it would be more enjoyable compromising with queuing in a fireteam of 6 and definitely getting a match, than trying over and over in a party of 12.
Thank you for the update, ill try not to hold it against you personally.

I'll try to digest your comparison of how a full fireteam in warzone is by any means different in comparison to any other lateral comparison of a solo que lobby having to contend against any other full team in ANY other playlist....also while simultaneously considering your mention of how many teams would even be present to match against seven months after 343 dropped the bomb with the monitors bounty update...if there are no teams left, that's on you guys....id say obviously there must have been enough of us to present a problem? Right? Surely 343 didnt impose a fireteam limit because a handful of teams, and surely wouldn't have given much consideration to warlords either..

I feel this limit is preventing players from playing how they would choose to play warzone with their friends, in exchange for how 343 wants the players to play...

But just because we might not agree I respect you making specific mention of the barriers and limitations that you have for making this a possibility, it at the very least makes me think that you have seriously considered what we have said enough to research the options...its my hope someday that would change...

Having teams match only teams is far too restrictive for warlords to have ever been a successful playlist and it only being once a month didnt provide other teams with an opportunity to practice or implement strategy...much less did it ever attract enough incentive for other players to build a team with respect to it's frequency

It's a real shame when some of these warzone teams were smashing teams of well known professional halo 5 players and we still didnt get any respect or credibility for it as far as it's consideration as an actual honestly competitive playlist....
Not because it should be competitive, but because it could've been competitive...

At the very absolute least perhaps a fireteams restriction of at least 8/10 players could be implemented, for the sake of giving some of these games an element of direction....
@ZaedynFel: Thanks for that explanation.

However, this one is a bit of a mystery:

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/mode/arena/matches/0d31eb82-5f43-476a-84ea-bbf8fd217fbf/players/radar3301enigma?gameHistoryMatchIndex=4&gameHistoryGameModeFilter=All

AndresGSpartan was not in our fireteam (or our party), so how did we pull 2 platinums on the other team?
So ironically, since no one had searched Focused, and AndresGSpartan --- who was searching from another continent --- had waited 166 seconds already, was able to pull in any type of match within a fairly wide skill margin.

So he pulled in your party of 3, which was similar in skill to him, and then the only thing left was a party of 4 that was unfortunately much higher skilled than the 4 of you.

The feature I mentioned previously would prevent this type of gap, but is still in progress and requires the cooperation of two other major groups here outside of 343. But it's coming.
Anion wrote:
2.5 minutes pass then they match solo players who are significantly worse than them. If the game waited until they matched a team of equivalent skill, more players would play solo or with a to2 since they do not want to wait that long for a match. This would result in more even matches across the board and a healthier playlist population. Let's be real, it is too late with Halo 5. You guys dropped the ball when the game released half finished with a poor matchmaking system on top of it. For Halo 6, teams matching teams needs to be what the standard is at the beginning of the game. No exceptions, teams must match teams of somewhat equal skill. This helped keep Halo 3 thriving in its ranked playlists because the games were actually fair. I know the Halo population will never be as great as Halo 3 anymore, but at least make the experience fair for the players that stick around and you would be surprised how many more people stay with the game and actually enjoy it when it is launched. Solo Q vs teams needs to go though. It just doesn't work and it deters A LOT of players from the game. Including me if the next Halo launches with a similar matchmaking system as Halo 5. Basically, fair matches = more fun. So many people complain about this because it is a problem and you guys are trying to go around it instead of fixing it. I know this because this is something I've followed closely in Halo 5. Don't even attempt to tell me I don't know what is going on in the game because I do. I have logged over a month of gametime on this game and I see its flaws. Me consistently matching champs and high onyx with plats on my team after less than a minute of searching is a problem. Reason I cannot play ranked without a full squad tbh.
You'll want to read previous updates where I've already explained this.

I'll summarize just a little.

In our approaching billions of matches worth of data, MOST players do WORSE in a party of four, NOT better.

There is a SMALL section of players at the top of lists like HCS and maybe Team Arena who play BETTER in a party of four, but that's about it.

So we have to be very careful in any tuning that assumes parties of 4 are always better, because they definitely are not. SOME are, but not all.

We have millions and millions of matches that show parties of four LOSE more than they WIN against equally skilled teams.

Which is why, if you've read previous posts in this thread, we have mid-level parties of four who are actually UPSET with the simple party restrictions we have already added, and are getting worse matches. Both in their experiences, and this is also showing strongly in our data.

So, no, it's not as simple as just "match parties with parties"
To add to my above comment, if you don't want to see a party of four you can still do this:

  1. Search Focused
  2. Quit before 150 seconds.
Josh, are you at all involved in data crunching on REQ weapons or decisions about modifications to their REQ energy cost or weapon balancing? I ask because there are several REQ cards in the sandbox now that seem to get almost no use at their current energy cost, but people would probably enjoy using them if they were cheaper (lower level).

A few examples of "overpriced" REQs (in my opinion):
  1. All the damage boosts (the 3 tiers in order should be L3-4, L4, L5)
  2. CE pistol (should be L5)
  3. Didact's Signet (should be L4)
  4. Appetite for Destruction (should be L4, but maybe with less starting ammo)
  5. Lightrifle (Should be L3)
  6. Heartseeker (Should be L6)
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Josh, are you at all involved in data crunching on REQ weapons or decisions about modifications to their REQ energy cost or weapon balancing? I ask because there are several REQ cards in the sandbox now that seem to get almost no use at their current energy cost, but people would probably enjoy using them if they were cheaper (lower level).

A few examples of "overpriced" REQs (in my opinion):
  1. All the damage boosts (the 3 tiers in order should be L3-4, L4, L5)
  2. CE pistol (should be L5)
  3. Didact's Signet (should be L4)
  4. Appetite for Destruction (should be L4, but maybe with less starting ammo)
  5. Lightrifle (Should be L3)
  6. Heartseeker (Should be L6)
I'm not, but I'll pass along your suggestions.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3