Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] Matchmaking Feedback Update – March 13

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 9
PeterAK91 wrote:
Im stuck on platinum 1 due to solo queue and i admit thats part of a players fault, but based on what i understand on "proving your rank" in which my case is platinum 1 means i will be forever platinum or have a chance on moving forward?
You are not stuck. Play like a Diamond and you will get there.

Matchmaking tries to make everyone as close in skill as possible, but gets less picky over time.
How do you balance this appropriately? Like, how do you balance rewarding players on the losing team that do well but keep them from going for personal stats at the cost of the team objective?
There are a few ways. Maybe the most obvious is to have two Ranks. One just like today's CSR, and a completely separate one based on individual performance.

So you could, in theory, be Platinum both and Diamond.

Then, you could use your Diamond individual perf stat to convince a Diamond team to recruit you.
ZaedynFel wrote:
How do you balance this appropriately? Like, how do you balance rewarding players on the losing team that do well but keep them from going for personal stats at the cost of the team objective?
There are a few ways. Maybe the most obvious is to have two Ranks. One just like today's CSR, and a completely separate one based on individual performance.

So you could, in theory, be Platinum both and Diamond.

Then, you could use your Diamond individual perf stat to convince a Diamond team to recruit you.
So like a team rank based off W/L (aka the current rank) and an individual rank as well?

That'd be interesting! I wonder how that would play out long term. I envy your access to the stats and information you have. We had a ride along with the XOC and saw some of their graphs and all we did was stare at them and geek out. It was the best day ever. :D
ZaedynFel wrote:
How do you balance this appropriately? Like, how do you balance rewarding players on the losing team that do well but keep them from going for personal stats at the cost of the team objective?
There are a few ways. Maybe the most obvious is to have two Ranks. One just like today's CSR, and a completely separate one based on individual performance.

So you could, in theory, be Platinum both and Diamond.

Then, you could use your Diamond individual perf stat to convince a Diamond team to recruit you.
There are already people who play for their stats only and I feel like this or having individual performance affect your rank would make more people play like that.
ZaedynFel wrote:
How do you balance this appropriately? Like, how do you balance rewarding players on the losing team that do well but keep them from going for personal stats at the cost of the team objective?
There are a few ways. Maybe the most obvious is to have two Ranks. One just like today's CSR, and a completely separate one based on individual performance.

So you could, in theory, be Platinum both and Diamond.

Then, you could use your Diamond individual perf stat to convince a Diamond team to recruit you.
There are already people who play for their stats only and I feel like this or having individual performance affect your rank would make more people play like that.
Yeah that's sort of my concern. That's what happened in Reach's arena since it was based off individual performance. It's great if a teammate goes 30-4 in CTF if they're also helping to cover the flag, keep spawns in check, etc. But when they're going for kills because they want to be on top of the team leaderboard to rank up, that's bad.
There are already people who play for their stats only and I feel like this or having individual performance affect your rank would make more people play like that.
We can include wins in this to balance that. So if everyone on the team performed about the same, you would all still go down on a loss. But if someone stood out, they could go up a little.

So playing greedily won't help if you don't win.
Willko wrote:
Will we ever be seeing a classic playlist in Halo 5, with sprinting and abilities turned off?

I understand that it won't be the most balanced thing in the world, but having it is still better than not having it. It is literally the only thing that will get me to ever re-install Halo 5.
I wouldn't hold your breath. If you really want to play classic settings you could probably find customs in the custom browser or set one up yourself I'm sure the lobby would fill up.
I appreciate the suggestion. But, I can't justify re-installing the game and using up 90+gb of hard drive space, only to be told that I don't get to enjoy matchmaking and that I have to go sit in the corner, playing customs.

A classic playlist isn't some obscure, weird thing. It's been heavily requested by many people since day one. It's something that should have been in the game since day one. At this point, I honestly don't know if this is the actual case or not, but it comes across as though 343 is actively trying to force the long-time fans of Halo away from the franchise by holding onto this insistence that every single playlist has to be an ability-riddled sprint-fest.
Yeah that's sort of my concern. That's what happened in Reach's arena since it was based off individual performance. It's great if a teammate goes 30-4 in CTF if they're also helping to cover the flag, keep spawns in check, etc. But when they're going for kills because they want to be on top of the team leaderboard to rank up, that's bad.
CTF is actually a really good example. You would think that flag captures would be the most important thing in winning.

But when we analyze millions and millions of CTF matches, and see what stats are the most important to winning a match, it's not flag captures. It's killing and not dying. By at least 10 times.

Which I think makes sense because in order to cap a flag, you kind of have to first kill almost the entire other team without dying, maybe twice.

Of course, if you just sit there and kill and never grab the flag, that's not helpful, but that doesn't happen enough in real matches to matter. Instead, by far, the teams that slay the best win in flag.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Yeah that's sort of my concern. That's what happened in Reach's arena since it was based off individual performance. It's great if a teammate goes 30-4 in CTF if they're also helping to cover the flag, keep spawns in check, etc. But when they're going for kills because they want to be on top of the team leaderboard to rank up, that's bad.
CTF is actually a really good example. You would think that flag captures would be the most important thing in winning.

But when we analyze millions and millions of CTF matches, and see what stats are the most important to winning a match, it's not flag captures. It's killing and not dying. By at least 10 times.

Which I think makes sense because in order to cap a flag, you kind of have to first kill almost the entire other team without dying, maybe twice.

Of course, if you just sit there an kill and never grab the flag, that's not helpful, but that doesn't happen enough in real matches to matter. Instead, by far, the teams that slay the best win in flag.
Oh no, I totally agree. Slaying is incredibly important in CTF matches and I understand that. But in objective games in particular it's very easy for people to go for stats over objective.

I'm sure that by and large most people play the game as intended but there ARE players that don't want to help (and I'm guilty of this at times as well - I think we all are to an extent) and instead just want to make themselves look badass which is just frustrating. :)
ZaedynFel wrote:
I've been frustrated by the win/loss only determination of rank. If I am on a team as a solo or maybe party of two (99% of my games) and I do well but the others on the team do not then why can't I get at least a small bump in ranking provided I played well.

This way when the system matches players the good players still float to the top the bad ones to the bottom and maybe we will get some more fair matches? If this is how it works in the backend but just not on the visible rank then can we fix that to reward players who play better but may not be on a team of individuals who caused them to lose the match?
Yes, I agree. It's not something we can fairly represent in Halo 5, but my personal design philosophy agrees with you that we should have a way to both:
  • Make it clear that winning as a team is still the highest bar to achieve.
  • Reward and account for great individual performances, even when you lose
How do you balance this appropriately? Like, how do you balance rewarding players on the losing team that do well but keep them from going for personal stats at the cost of the team objective?
I see your point when I look at WZ and the Achilles grind... The motivation to achieve stats such as vehicle kills outweighs for many the objective to destroy the enemy core.

I wonder though in the absence of some larger goal to farm stats whether this would be as bad a thing in Arena. For me it is sort of like realizing the negative effects of habitual quitting in a progressive ranking system and then cutting that out... just the other way around. Here, it's not material perks. Rather, it's just another legitimate component of your ranking.

Edit: yes. like having two ranks... am i off or aren't we getting into MMR territory here?
ZaedynFel wrote:
I have a bit to add that I meant to put in the original post:

Why hasn't party imbalance been addressed up till now?This is a fair question. There are a number of reasons, many of which are beyond my area of expertise and relate to general game production, and I won't go into those. Just know that you can't always get the features you want into a game when you want them. Game development requires a lot of patience and balancing with many parts of the team, and hoping things turn out the way you want. For a little personal history, I left 343 a year before the Halo 5 shipped, and recently returned. When I left, I didn't know how many of my features still in flight would get still get done. From past experience, I knew to only expect a handful of them to make it in. Well, almost all of them got in, which is more than you can usually get in game development. I was impressed with how well features I had designed got done without me there. Really impressed.

So back on the topic. We do a thorough analysis of any proposed major changes or new features because they impact millions of players. In the case of party matchmaking, we've been testing solutions to this problem for years using the millions and millions of real matches that we have from several Halo games, and we've found major problems with almost every solution. Problems would negatively impact the majority of the population. Until now, we haven't had a solution we felt fair enough to all the players. We now think we have a good one in the works.

For an example of the type of analysis we do, we looked at the win percentages of players who play in all different party sizes, including those who play solo. You would expect that players who play in parties always win more.

This is wrong.

In fact, in real data, if you were to look at what happens when the majority of our population plays in a party of 4, they lose more in parties than when solo. You may have a hard time believing this, and so did we, so we dug deeper.

We found some interesting things:
  • By far, most players don't play in parties
  • Players who aren't used to playing in parties actually play much worse when they party up than when they play solo. They win less.
  • The much smaller group of players who commonly play in parties do play much better than solo players
Which means, yes, we need to address parties vs. solo, but we need to be very careful in how we do it. We need to make sure the players who are actually worse in parties aren't given crazy hard matches and get destroyed by those who always play in parties.

Because according to this data, if I just take, any e.g. to4 and give them harder matchmaking, I will be affecting millions of players who are just occasionally partying up with friends, and they will get owned. This is what I've seen happen in many games:
  1. Friends are online for once! Sweet, let's party up!
  2. Matchmaker gives us a much harder match since we're in a party (either forces vs. another to4, or 4 super good solo players)
  3. Whoah, we got owned
  4. This game isn't as fun with friends
  5. Guess I'll play solo
  6. Eventually wash out
This is not acceptable. Playing with friends should never be worse than playing solo. Playing with friends should keep you playing. This situation represents the majority of our players by far. So we can't just do what may seem obvious.

The solution we are putting in can account for these differences, and make sure in the majority case where casual friends group up, they get a fair, fun match, and don't get owned.

Likewise, when a true to4 parties up, it will make sure they only play either another to4 of similar skill, or much much better solo players whose skill makes up for the organization of the to4. In the case where it's not possible to find a fair group of solo players, it will only match vs. to4.
Here's my question regarding the party issue. I have since moved to playing mostly FFA. I love it and think I have found MY place in H5 ranked. I get rewarded well, as long as I don't finish dead last, and perform well, and if that's because of you then thank you. I got tired of playing in Team Arena (Gold-Plat) and Slayer (Gold-Plat-1 time Diamond) due to what I was matching against. I kept seeing more and more high level CSR players teamed with people around my level and sometimes even below that. I'm talking about an Onyx player teaming with a Silver to match in Gold and Plat. Or a Diamond teaming with a Gold to match in the middle of the road where I was. I understand the party restrictions and the issues that come with it, but I can't help but think that the people doing this are doing it deliberately. Or they got a friend to play on a new account, get matched low, team up and then match games together. So I guess the question I am asking is there anyway to look at this issue and come up with some solutions to work around it or make the system a bit more easier. I would guess that others have encountered this issue and find a way to match the correct opponents. Thanks for posting these and responding to the feedback and talking with the community! Really appreciate it!
HighMeLow wrote:
Here's my question regarding the party issue. I have since moved to playing mostly FFA. I love it and think I have found MY place in H5 ranked. I get rewarded well, as long as I don't finish dead last, and perform well, and if that's because of you then thank you. I got tired of playing in Team Arena (Gold-Plat) and Slayer (Gold-Plat-1 time Diamond) due to what I was matching against. I kept seeing more and more high level CSR players teamed with people around my level and sometimes even below that. I'm talking about an Onyx player teaming with a Silver to match in Gold and Plat. Or a Diamond teaming with a Gold to match in the middle of the road where I was. I understand the party restrictions and the issues that come with it, but I can't help but think that the people doing this are doing it deliberately. Or they got a friend to play on a new account, get matched low, team up and then match games together. So I guess the question I am asking is there anyway to look at this issue and come up with some solutions to work around it or make the system a bit more easier. I would guess that others have encountered this issue and find a way to match the correct opponents. Thanks for posting these and responding to the feedback and talking with the community! Really appreciate it!
Yes, this is one of the classic forms of smurfing that we are going to improve.
ZaedynFel wrote:
HighMeLow wrote:
Here's my question regarding the party issue. I have since moved to playing mostly FFA. I love it and think I have found MY place in H5 ranked. I get rewarded well, as long as I don't finish dead last, and perform well, and if that's because of you then thank you. I got tired of playing in Team Arena (Gold-Plat) and Slayer (Gold-Plat-1 time Diamond) due to what I was matching against. I kept seeing more and more high level CSR players teamed with people around my level and sometimes even below that. I'm talking about an Onyx player teaming with a Silver to match in Gold and Plat. Or a Diamond teaming with a Gold to match in the middle of the road where I was. I understand the party restrictions and the issues that come with it, but I can't help but think that the people doing this are doing it deliberately. Or they got a friend to play on a new account, get matched low, team up and then match games together. So I guess the question I am asking is there anyway to look at this issue and come up with some solutions to work around it or make the system a bit more easier. I would guess that others have encountered this issue and find a way to match the correct opponents. Thanks for posting these and responding to the feedback and talking with the community! Really appreciate it!
Yes, this is one of the classic forms of smurfing that we are going to improve.
Couldn't we just develop a simple "outline" detection algorithm? So if one (or two) player's CSR is too far above the average CSR of the team, they will automatically be matched against higher than the average of their team? I am sure, you have sufficient data to make fair limits for the outline detection, so casual players will not be touched by this. :-)
Krog001 wrote:
Couldn't we just develop a simple "outline" detection algorithm? So if one (or two) player's CSR is too far above the average CSR of the team, they will automatically be matched against higher than the average of their team? I am sure, you have sufficient data to make fair limits for the outline detection, so casual players will not be touched by this. :-)
We have something a lot smarter in the works.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Krog001 wrote:
Couldn't we just develop a simple "outline" detection algorithm? So if one (or two) player's CSR is too far above the average CSR of the team, they will automatically be matched against higher than the average of their team? I am sure, you have sufficient data to make fair limits for the outline detection, so casual players will not be touched by this. :-)
We have something a lot smarter in the works.
MY MAN!!!!!
I read this and it was interesting and nice to see the support from you guys. But my question is how/when do you guys plan to give us some insight on warzone/btb full parties searching? When will WZ be back to 12 as it was intended from launch? I know its a tough issue to address, but some info/transparency on it would be nice.

I understand the difficulty with matching full teams together and keeping search times down. But the way it was fixed seemed to only punish people & companies who want to play with a large group. I would assume you are aware of all the complaints from players now that all the parties have moved to BTB as its the only playlist left to play with a party of 7+.

Thanks again, its nice to see you guys in here making yourself be seen.
Does the MMR reset?
I don't really have anything to add, just wanted to say that regardless of the success or failure of these incoming changes, I personally really appreciate the level of honesty and transparency being displayed here. This kind of communication goes a very long way, and I hope the studio continues to embrace it.
ZaedynFel wrote:
PeterAK91 wrote:
Im stuck on platinum 1 due to solo queue and i admit thats part of a players fault, but based on what i understand on "proving your rank" in which my case is platinum 1 means i will be forever platinum or have a chance on moving forward?
You are not stuck. Play like a Diamond and you will get there.

Matchmaking tries to make everyone as close in skill as possible, but gets less picky over time.
If you have a headset it'll help you get higher in the ranks. Even as a solo queue player
ZaedynFel wrote:
Social vs. RankedIn general, I agree with eLantern’s philosophy on social vs. ranked. That said, there’s this funny paradox that occurs between Ranked and Social which I’ve come to accept over the years:
  • Competitive players play social to relax. They expect looser matches so they don’t have to try as hard.
  • Casual players (especially lower-skilled ones) get the opposite experience. They get owned in Social, and have the impression that Ranked is the only fair place for them. That, or they just stop playing the game because they may think Ranked is going to be even worse.
  • When Casuals get driven to Ranked, this ironically annoys competitive players who sometimes get “casuals” on their teams.
This is a tricky problem to solve. I personally think Social should have a mix of tight and loose matches, treating the worst Casuals carefully so as not to lose them and keep the population healthy. Even Ranked could benefit from the occasional looser match to add to the variety.

Some of the community have suggested we increase the Social offerings to get casuals out of Ranked, but I don’t think Casuals are in Ranked because of a lack of offerings. I think they’re there because the perception is that’s where fair matches are.

So, ironically, Social ends up being where the competitive players go to chill and play mostly vs. each other, and Ranked ends up being where Casuals go almost all the time for more fair matches, and Ranked players go when they want to “lean forward”

CSR vs. MMRA few more suggestions were given on how to communicate the matchmaking choice vs. the visible CSR. We’re listening to those, and looking at a number of ways to make this more clear, but we won’t see this in Halo 5.

I think it would be cool to tell players their exact performance after a match in CSR terms. For example, a Gold player might see “even though you’re Gold, you just played like a Diamond player, so don’t be surprised if you see Diamond opponents! Keep it up and you’ll get to Diamond!” Stuff like that.
ChallengesA few of you have asked about having some set of daily goals to hit in the form of “quests”. Halo 4 had this in the form of rotating Challenges. We also like this feature and would love to improve on it even further, though we won’t be seeing it in Halo 5.
Will there be any changes or tweaks for social and ranked playlists?

I think that would be a great idea to show the csr for how you've played for the match. I'm constantly below my rank because of quitting, so it would be nice to see that I played a diamond or oynx level game despite being gold or platinum.

Challenges would be great!!

Thanks for the dialog on this, very interesting and complex topic
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 9