Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] Matchmaking Feedback Update – March 20

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. ...
  6. 5
Is there anything that can be done about Team balancing? I just lost a game 50-5, go to check stats after the game and see that it was me (Gold 4) and two unranked players against a Diamond 2, Onyx 1617, Onyx 1771, and a Champion 50. Did make me feel a little better about getting beaten so bad, but I don't know why that ever should've been a match. I mean, their lowest ranked guy was almost almost 2 full rank tiers ahead of me (our highest ranked player). This was in Proving Grounds searching Balanced. Is the matching still that far off in Proving Grounds? I've gotten some lopsided matches before, but this was one of the worst.
Just a follow up, it's not just Proving Grounds. I just finished a FFA match in which I as a Platinum 4 matched an unranked player, an Onyx 1844, an Onyx1968, a Champion 88 and a Champion 24. I did manage to beat the Onyx 1968 and tied the Champion 88, but still. Are my MMR and CSR that far off that the system thought this was a fair matchup? I don't know whether to be mad that I was put in this game or kinda excited that I actually kinda held my own (tied for 4th with the Champ 88) against players so much farther ahead of me.
NOLEX4 wrote:
Still no real solution for quitters?
Is it too difficult to end the game if someone Quits/Lags out before certain period of time?

  • Punish Quitters.
The current Banhammer system is not hard enough with quitters. -- At least for Ranked (leave social alone it should be separate), quitting should be seen as a sever offense against the MM rules. Gradually take out a % of CSR from their next wins for the next day. Every quit -25% or something similar.
I think banning people from arena is not worth it, we just lose potential players and banning them should happen as a last resort.

  • Give us a forfeit match option.
Why do we have to go through 8mins of a 1-3v4? Tilts me out of the planet and I just want to play the game, relax and have some fun while still play competitive matches.
Immediately end a match if someone leaves the game before a short period of time has passed (0-2mins into the match maybe?)
I can't believe this is still something we have to deal with when the game is almost 2 years old.
If you think that will just incite players to quit when they think the other team is potentially going to win, then that's because the rules are not severe enough with those who quit.

Also, is there a way you can tell when someone actually loses connection vs someone quitting the build? If yes then there's no reason to not punish quitters the way they deserve.
On top of that you guys must know when someone lags out or uses the leave game option since they go back to the Halo menu.
Could you (zaedynFel) give your say on this? it seems like weird stuff like "SoloQ" playlist receive a response, but I'd like to know what is the reason to not include what I suggested.
Also, what is the chance of making SoloQs match SoloQ and Teams match teams in PG only?

Thanks
  • Forfeiting
I agree that there should be a forfeit option. I get annoyed when I'm playing a Ranked game and the score like 40-10 to the other team. Sometimes there's clearly been a mismatch of Skill and I just want to leave the game so that the unfairness of it isn't also harming my K/D. But I can't leave because I get banned for quitting - so at least let us forfeit these ridiculous matches.

  • Banning
The banning for quitting is already pretty harsh. Case in point, if I paid to play Halo, I don't expect to be stopped from playing it unless I'm doing something severe like cheating or being verbally abusive.

I don't think you should be banning for more than a few hours - but I do agree that excessively quitting games should automatically drop your rank or count as multiple losses on top of (short) bans.

There should be no punishments for quitting at all in social; social is supposed to be fair no-strings-attached fun. Quitting in social matches is a minor inconvenience but social games don't matter anyway in terms of outcome; they're about quick and fair fun.
Also please start matchmaking fairly in Social matchmaking.

I'm sick of being put in the same games as SR2 and SR147 players. When I'm SR40 with my matchmaking set to focused I shouldn't be in the same games as literal noobs, and literal pros.

I don't care about winning and losing, what I care about is having fun in Social - It's NOT fun to be matched with noobs and pros in the same game. I just want to play with people of a similar skill to myself in social.
@ZaedynFel

Why are you guys trying to figure out a ranking system formula when games like overwatch and League of Legends have one that already works and works really really well at that? Seems like a huge waste of time and resources trying to figure something out that's already been figured out.
True Yomi wrote:
@ZaedynFel

Why are you guys trying to figure out a ranking system formula when games like overwatch and League of Legends have one that already works and works really really well at that? Seems like a huge waste of time and resources trying to figure something out that's already been figured out.
I would assume it's because one game's ranking system formula may not suit the needs of another game.
True Yomi wrote:
@ZaedynFel

Why are you guys trying to figure out a ranking system formula when games like overwatch and League of Legends have one that already works and works really really well at that? Seems like a huge waste of time and resources trying to figure something out that's already been figured out.
I would assume it's because one game's ranking system formula may not suit the needs of another game.
What "needs" do you think those ranking systems couldn't suit for Halo 5? I think they hit everything and some.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Social MatchmakingIn case you don’t know, we still have a skill rating or MMR we use when matchmaking in social, and even Warzone. We just aren’t as strict on how tight the matches need to be. We are still really strict in the team balancing though, so in theory you should win about as often as you lose.
Social matchmaking needs to be stricter. We don't care about winning or losing, we care about having a good time. I can't have a good time when I'm not playing with people who are similarly skilled to myself.

I'm tired of being in a team of four where the other three are Halo pros, and I'm mediocre. I want to play casually with three other mediocre players.

If I'm a noob, I should only be in games with other noobs; regardless of whether I'm playing social or ranked. Especially if my search criteria is set to Focused.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • Pro, Pro, Pro, Noob versus Pro, Pro, Pro, Noob
Even though the two teams balance out in terms of skill, this is not a good match-up. The two noobs will have a really unpleasant experience getting hammered by all of the pros. This match-up only appeals to the pro players.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Pro, Pro, Pro, Pro versus Pro, Pro, Pro, Pro
  • Noob, Noob, Noob, Noob versus Noob, Noob, Noob, Noob
These are fair match-ups which appeal to everyone. No one wants to feel like they're a load of crap when they're playing the game; which is exactly how noobs feel when you allow them to be in the same game as pros.
Artecide wrote:
ZaedynFel wrote:
Social MatchmakingIn case you don’t know, we still have a skill rating or MMR we use when matchmaking in social, and even Warzone. We just aren’t as strict on how tight the matches need to be. We are still really strict in the team balancing though, so in theory you should win about as often as you lose.
Social matchmaking needs to be stricter. We don't care about winning or losing, we care about having a good time. I can't have a good time when I'm not playing with people who are similarly skilled to myself.

I'm tired of being in a team of four where the other three are Halo pros, and I'm mediocre. I want to play casually with three other mediocre players.

If I'm a noob, I should only be in games with other noobs; regardless of whether I'm playing social or ranked. Especially if my search criteria is set to Focused.
ZaedynFel wrote an extensive post addressing this, here. Unfortunately, high skill players have a different motivation for playing social, than do lower-skill players. There's no way to simultaneously make both groups happy. Honestly, if your priority is to play games with close skill matching and even teams, you should try ranked matchmaking on Focused setting. You'll potentially get better skill matches there than you will in social.
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Unfortunately, high skill players have a different motivation for playing social, than do lower-skill players. There's no way to simultaneously make both groups happy
No, no -- there is; do what I suggested above, and stop mixing the teams.

Put all the noobs in one match. Put all the high skill players in another match.

Make this be how "Balanced/Focused" matchmaking works. Make "Expanded" matchmaking use the current system.

You should never mix noobs and pros in the same game unless they specifically ask for it; the noobs have a terrible experience.
.
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Honestly, if your priority is to play games with close skill matching and even teams, you should try ranked matchmaking on Focused setting. You'll potentially get better skill matches there than you will in social.
Why can't I just play casual/relaxed games of Halo against people of similar Skill?

Why are my choices:

  • Play hard with people of my own ability in Ranked.
  • Play even harder with unbalanced matchmaking in Social.
Where's the option to play relaxed with people of my own skill? Having this option missing is fundamentally wrong for any multiplayer game. =/

And please don't suggest that I just play ranked casually (which others have done.) Ranked is about getting your ranking as high as possible; that's what everyone else is there for, and it is selfish of me to not tryhard in ranked because everyone else is; I let them down if I play casually.
Artecide wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Unfortunately, high skill players have a different motivation for playing social, than do lower-skill players. There's no way to simultaneously make both groups happy
No, no -- there is; do what I suggested above, and stop mixing the teams.

Put all the noobs in one match. Put all the high skill players in another match.

Make this be how "Balanced/Focused" matchmaking works. Make "Expanded" matchmaking use the current system.

You should never mix noobs and pros in the same game unless they specifically ask for it; the noobs have a terrible experience.
So I don't really have a dog in this fight - I'm just summarizing arguments I've seen others make. But lots of folks (possibly high skill players) complain that strict matchmaking parameters in social playlists lead to them having super tryhard high-skill games in those playlists - by definition, "not casual". To high-skill players, "casual" means a wide variety of skill types.

Sometimes this is because they want to be able to play on a team with their noob friends, and don't want to play ranked.

Sometimes the motivation is probably nefarious - they want to be able to play easy games where they get a lot of kills vs. lower-skill players. Now I personally think that second argument is ridiculous and selfish - why should those high skill players have fun at the expense of low skill players? But forcing all the high-skill players into social games together doesn't really work either... now those games become super tryhard (and not casual), plus there may be long wait times for high-skill players.

Anyway, my point is: lots of high-skill players want exactly the OPPOSITE of what you asked for. They want games with wide ranges of skills. As I said - there's no easy way to simultaneously please high-skill and low-skill players.
Artecide wrote:
Why can't I just play casual/relaxed games of Halo against people of similar Skill?
Honestly, if all you want to do is play casual or relaxed games, your best bet is find some like-minded people and fire up a custom game and screw around there to your hearts' content. With everybody, from noobs to pros, trying to win, you're going to be forced to play like you want to win in Social and Arena. There's just no getting around that no matter how teams are made up and matched up. Well, I suppose if it's a team of noobs vs. noobs, it'll feel like a casual game because no one's good enough.

True Yomi wrote:
What "needs" do you think those ranking systems couldn't suit for Halo 5? I think they hit everything and some.
I don't know. I was just speaking in general. And I haven't played either of those games, so I don't know how their ranking systems work.
My teammates​ are pissing me off already with this game. All the damn time I get the worst people. Like I'll be going down 5 ranks like really I just played a match with teammates in a party playing Slayer on CTF and we still lost. I'm a onyx and diamond and be going down to plat and even gold. WTH!!!!! IS THAT....
Spoiler:
Show
"Smurfing to Boost and / or Matchmake at the Champion Level"

I hit champ in a swat, now I can't even find games on expanded in that playlist. I can wait for hours trying to find games repeatedly and get nothing. It's pretty unfair that the only way I can find games in that playlist since hitting a high rank is by playing with players who have a lower rank. I play with friends who are golds and some even silver, I'd love to be able to find games on my own but when that isn't possible what else am I meant to do? I cannot play my preferred playlist because my rank got too high, it's not smurfing if the system is broken and that is the only way you can find a game. Please fix things so that even if I am a high rank I can actually find games, if there are no other champs, put me with onyx players, no onyx players, put me with diamonds etc. That does not seem to happen, people are being punished for hitting higher ranks. It really needs to stop. I've not been able to play my fave playlist for months because of rank, that's stupid. I'm from EU if that makes a difference.
Moda wrote:
Hey josh great update and info.

Just last night I tried MM in SWAT solo with search parameters set to expanded for about 10 minutes and just could find any spartans. Now I know SWAT is a pretty popular playlist maybe not as much when you are onyx but it's my favorite gametype and every season I play my 10 placement matches, get onyx, then can not find games playing solo. Any further help in getting games while playing swat would be very appreciated
My problem exactly!
Honestly, if all you want to do is play casual or relaxed games, your best bet is find some like-minded people and fire up a custom game and screw around there to your hearts' content.
I think you may be misunderstanding. I'm not asking to be placed into games where everyone is messing around and taking the piss like they do in Custom Games. =P

I want to play fair/balanced matches with other mediocre-skilled players like myself. (This is where people usually say "Go to Ranked.")

However, I don't want to play Ranked, because in ranked I have to worry about my CSR dropping when I lose the game; which forces me to tryhard. Similarly, everyone else playing ranked is also trying to get their CSR as high as possible, so it's selfish of me to not play my best when the rest of them are trying to up their CSR.

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
So I don't really have a dog in this fight - I'm just summarizing arguments I've seen others make.
That's good -- it's good that you make the time to contribute to community issues that don't necessarily affect you; it shows you care about the community of the game. =)

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
But lots of folks (possibly high skill players) complain that strict matchmaking parameters in social playlists lead to them having super tryhard high-skill games in those playlists - by definition, "not casual".
Honestly, no matter how you phrase this statement, it relates back to these folks being selfish. You have to consider what I'm asking for (a mediocre player), and what a high level player is asking for.

  • I'm asking to play against other mediocre players; a fair game. If all of us are equally skilled, then we all have to try hard to win matches as we're playing against people just as good as us.
  • High level players (from your interpretation) are asking for lower levelled players to be included in their matches; which is unfair to the lower-levelled players. No matter how this is phrased, ultimately the enjoyment of the high level players is at the expense of the low level players, which is the definition of selfish.
It's not selfish for me to want a fair game environment, but it's selfish for someone else to want to play against noobs for easy matches; which comes at expense of the noobs.

Note: I'm not saying there should never be mixed teams. In my opinion if your Search Settings are set to "Expanded" then the current system is fine. But the current system is not appropriate for "Balanced" or "Focused" settings (it's highly unacceptable for Focused.) At the very least, when your parameter is set to Focused, you should only be in games with people of similar skill; for me, that would be other mediocre players -- not a mix high level players and noobs.

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
To high-skill players, "casual" means a wide variety of skill types.
Which again, sadly, comes at the expense of lower-levelled players. Again, I'm not saying that this shouldn't exist at all (I'd be fine if this is how the Expanded setting worked), but by default it's highly unfair and detrimental to the experience of low levelled social players to be placed in the same matched as high levelled players.

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Sometimes this is because they want to be able to play on a team with their noob friends, and don't want to play ranked.
I think in these circumstances using a blend between the current matchmaking system, and a stricter matchmaking system, would work. I'll give a few examples of scenarios and how I'd want the matchmaking system to handle them.

High Level Player, Noob Friend are in a team and want to play together. Here's how I'd want the teams to be (brackets denote a FireTeam):(High Level | Noob) | Mediocre |Mediocre | vs. | (Mediocre | Mediocre) | Mediocre | Mediocre- High Level Player and Noob Friend kind of cancel eachother out into a Mediocre average (not perfect but it's a hard situation to deal with.)
- Noob friend still stands a chance of getting kills because the other team are all mediocre players.
- Both teams have a FireTeam so there's a balance of communication.

Again this obviously is a bit of an oversimplification, but I think this sort of matchmaking balance works well. It tries to keep the teams as evenly skilled as possible without giving in to extremes at either end. Currently, it's possible to see brand new players and pros in the same match -- which is broken.

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Sometimes the motivation is probably nefarious [...] But forcing all the high-skill players into social games together doesn't really work either... now those games become super tryhard (and not casual), plus there may be long wait times for high-skill players.
I don't think the motivation is important, the only thing I think is important is preserving the enjoyment of as many players as possible.

  • Low level players being placed in the same games as High Levelled players = highly frustrating for low levelled players.
  • Low level players being placed in the same games as Low level players = happy low level players and fair games.
  • High level players being in the same games as other high level players = potentially sweaty high level players, but still fair games.
Ultimately if the game is fair then I don't think you have any reasonable grounds to complain, because if it's purposely made unfair then it's at the expense of others.

RzR J3ST3R wrote:
Anyway, my point is: lots of high-skill players want exactly the OPPOSITE of what you asked for. They want games with wide ranges of skills. As I said - there's no easy way to simultaneously please high-skill and low-skill players.
I'm not saying the search parameters have to be as strict as ranked either, let me illustrate using five oversimplified levels of players:

- Brand New Player
- Low Level Player
- Mid Level Player
- High Level Player
- Elite Level Player

For social, you could run the algorithm so that your search parameter would be +/- between one or two tiers of rank. For example:

  • Elite level players with 'balanced' criteria would be placed in matches with other Elite level players, High level players, and ocasionally Mid level players.
  • Brand New players with 'balanced' criteria would be placed in matches with other Brand New players, Low Level players, and ocasionally Mid level players.
Again, Elite levelled players would have more competitive matches than Brand New players, and I understand this may make them feel like they never get easy games; but why should they? All that matters is that the game is fair.The only way the game could be "easy" for them is if they get matchmade with noobs; at which point their enjoyment comes at the expense of the noobs, which is unacceptable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ultimately, I'm a mediocre players who is fed up of being placed in the same games as Pros, or Noobs - I want to play other mediocre players in a social environment where I don't feel forced to tryhard (because there's no CSR.).

I see people often mention that the relaxed playerbase in Halo 5 is dwindling; the reason it dwindles is because of poor matchmaking systems like this one which ruins their experience.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. ...
  6. 5