Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

[Locked] Matchmaking Feedback Update – March 27

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
Veto and or Not playing the same stuff over and over. How are the map and mode chosen?
I’ve spoken a few times on veto, but I’ll reiterate again a little, and give more details about how we choose the map and mode.
We don’t hate veto, but we currently feel like if we can instead prevent you from playing the same thing twice, that probably solves the majority of complaints that lead to a desire to veto.

This is how we currently pick what is played:
  • Every hopper has a list of map-mode combinations (e.g., CTF on Coliseum)
  • Each combination is assigned a unique number
  • A combination CAN appear twice or even more in the list. This effectively doubles or triples the weight of that combination
  • We track, for each player, the last unique combination number they played, and which hopper it was on.
  • After we have a group of players ready to play, we pick the “number” least recently played by everyone.
So here some situations not protected by this method that will cause the same thing twice:
  • A combination appears twice in the list, so has two different unique numbers. The system doesn’t realize it’s doing the same thing twice. We can improve this for sure.
  • You join a match already in progress. In this case, the system did not involve you in the decision process – this is the same with or without veto though.
  • You play a different hopper and then come back to this one, at that point, the system has “forgotten” your last map-mode combination in the hopper. We could also improve this, though it doesn’t feel like as high of a priority.
It is a lot more efficient for us to decrease how often you see a given combination than it is to implement veto, so we would rather start there and see if that solves the problem most of the time. The biggest complain we see isn’t so much “I just wish I could veto” as it is, “I hate seeing the same thing over and over”

Quitting, Forfeit, and Soft Forfeit
We’ve also addressed these topics a few times in past posts, so please go back and read those as I won’t go into as much detail here. Just in summary:
  • We like the idea of a forfeit, but we won’t see that in Halo 5. As a rule of thumb, you probably won’t see any changes to Halo 5 that have to alter the UI.
  • We have to be careful how we balance punishing quitters because most of the time, it’s a one-off, not habitual.
  • We may add a “soft forfeit”. Basically, you can quit if someone else on your team quit first without a penalty. You would still lose the normal amount of CSR as if you lost the match, to prevent exploits and collusion (see previous posts), but wouldn’t be marked for banning. This accomplishes the same as a Forfeit without the explicit feature. You vote to forfeit by leaving. It would also mean you don’t have to sit around 1v4 waiting for them to kill you 50 times to avoid the higher CSR loss / ban risk.


Social Matchmaking
There was some back and forth this week on tight vs. loose matchmaking in social. We’ve looked at this quite a bit and trust me when I say we understand the pain on both sides.

The above average players likes to come “relax” in Social and not have to try. Which, yes, seems really silly coming from a “fair” point of view, but regardless of how silly it is, that represents a significant portion of the population that consistently stop playing if their matches get too “sweaty”

On the other side, the opposite happens to lower end players who just want fair matches. They perform poorly against the upper end and also stop playing.
The much larger group in the middle are mostly fine either way, though they unfortunately also bias more towards the “looser” than tight matches. So the “net” desire is for the looser matches.

We do still try for a decent amount of time to match tightly in social, but depending on who is searching when you do, it will eventually give up and allow something looser.
My personal feeling on this, which I think agrees somewhat with the comments in the thread, is to give a mix of both types of matches. Some really tight, some really loose, which perhaps making the proportion somewhat depend on your skill. We have to be careful with that though because it’s really easy to spike wait times. This approach is on my current list of things to try in the somewhat near future. I would make some matches much tighter than they are today, and some possibly much looser. That way, everyone gets what they want, some of the time, and there’s also a nice variety.


Wide Skill Spread in FFA and Proving Grounds, Long wait times in High Skill SWAT
These two issues are related. I loosened FFA and Proving Grounds matchmaking because higher end players weren’t matching at all. The result is players who couldn’t play the game at all are now matching in those hoppers, but they are also seeing examples of wide skill spreads --- Plat to Champ, etc., within the same match.

At the same time, high end SWAT players are still struggling to find matches, perhaps especially in EU. We could loosen the matchmaking in SWAT which would let some of you find matches.

This is a classic matchmaking trade-off. Certain hoppers will struggle to create matches for higher-end players at certain times of the day in certain regions. If we loosen the matchmaking enough to accommodate those players, you will see more wide skill gap matches. So you high end players may start getting matches easily again, but some of those matches will lack competition. At some point the trade-off becomes: “We just don’t have any interesting matches for you right now on this hopper”

So the question to you folks also is, “Are you willing to play a non-competitive match if that’s the only one you’re going to get?”

Letting higher skilled players match lower will sometimes make those Platinum players sad, but:
  • there are much fewer high-end than low end players so it won’t happen often
  • when it does happen, you don’t lose much CSR if you lose
  • you get to observe how the game is played on a higher level

That said, I do plan to tweak those settings more in the weeks to come.
CSR and 1-50 Equivalencies
I’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
It’s like this:
  • We use the same exact system as Halo 3
  • This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did
  • We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank:
    • 1-6: Bronze
    • 7-18: Silver
    • 19-31: Gold
    • 32-44: Platinum
    • 45-50: Diamond 1-3
  • Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50:
    • 51-57: Diamond 4-6
    • 58+: Onyx
    • Top 200 Onyx: Champion
Examples:
  • The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43.
  • The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard.
  • The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.
Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.

Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”

Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.

Also keep in mind:
  • Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime.
  • Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.
Hey Josh, one question - After a match has concluded, why is it faster to find the next Match by backing out to the playlist selection screen and searching as opposed to letting the game search normally?
I love the idea of the soft forfeit. If I'm going to lose a 2v4 slayer, and I'm going to lose CSR, I like the idea of being able to end it sooner and move on to the next game without having to worry about getting banned.
Quote:
So the question to you folks also is, “Are you willing to play a non-competitive match if that’s the only one you’re going to get?”
I understand this question are for highly skilled champs struggling to find matches but as for me as a platinum player, i would agree and at the same time disagree. first of, matching high skilled players is a good opportunity to see how actually feels to be against competitive players, you learn from it and in addition of not loosing much CSR is acceptable.

the bad side of this is that it will make more people complain about the matchmaking system in my opinion. it would make solo players rage quit and possibly complain on waypoint as of on this section, you can see nothing but complains about people matching champs and people quitting.

as for me, it would be OK to match high skilled players but not as often as you mentioned josh, its understandable that due to the low count of high ranked players means it will not happen very often but this is just my opinion and im sure there will be more people who will 100% disagree on this.
ZaedynFel wrote:
.
Wide Skill Spread in FFA and Proving Grounds, Long wait times in High Skill SWATThese two issues are related. I loosened FFA and Proving Grounds matchmaking because higher end players weren’t matching at all. The result is players who couldn’t play the game at all are now matching in those hoppers, but they are also seeing examples of wide skill spreads --- Plat to Champ, etc., within the same match.
At the same time, high end SWAT players are still struggling to find matches, perhaps especially in EU. We could loosen the matchmaking in SWAT which would let some of you find matches.
This is a classic matchmaking trade-off. Certain hoppers will struggle to create matches for higher-end players at certain times of the day in certain regions. If we loosen the matchmaking enough to accommodate those players, you will see more wide skill gap matches. So you high end players may start getting matches easily again, but some of those matches will lack competition. At some point the trade-off becomes: “We just don’t have any interesting matches for you right now on this hopper”

So the question to you folks also is, “Are you willing to play a non-competitive match if that’s the only one you’re going to get?”

Letting higher skilled players match lower will sometimes make those Platinum players sad, but:
  • there are much fewer high-end than low end players so it won’t happen often
  • when it does happen, you don’t lose much CSR if you lose
  • you get to observe how the game is played on a higher level
That said, I do plan to tweak those settings more in the weeks to come.
I believe I'm a Gold 3 or 4 in Proving Grounds and consistently match high Onyx and Champion players. I understand that wider search parameters helps higher level players find games, but it also makes it incredibly frustrating for those of us low ranking players who get stuck in these games. And it's not just a once every now and then thing, it's been like that for me personally at least the last 2-3 times I've played the playlist. It doesn't help that these matches almost always end up 4v1 or 2 because people get tired of getting crapped on and quit. I'd be ok with matching higher ranked players if the teams were even, not a gold, and two unranked vs a Diamond, 2 onyxes and a champ or 1 Gold, 3 unranked vs 2 diamonds, an Onyx and a champ (these are actual ranks from my last two Proving Grounds games). In order to learn something from higher ranked players you kinda have to be alive for more than 10 seconds at a time which is hard to do when your outskilled AND usually outnumbered. This honestly makes me avoid Proving Grounds which is a shame since I do want to test out the different settings, but it's hard to do that when you're in such lopsided matches.

I've had really mismatched games in FFA as well (Platinum 4 against high Onyx (1800+) and champs (as high as 24) but I don't really mind those as much. I usually am able to make my way up to Onyx in FFA, so eventually end up matching high-ish level Onyx players by the end of the season anyway, so I guess it just doesn't feel much different. Also, for some reason I can hold my own in FFA (tied a champ 88 and beat an onyx 1968 in one game) not sure why it doesn't seem to work that way in Proving Grounds. I guess it's harder to do when you have 4 players who are much better than you, working together to kill you as opposed to every man for himself.

i wish there was a way to see not only how many players are in each playlist, but also approximately how many players are in that playlist that are close to your rank. At least that way you'd know whether to expect a long wait and could determine whether you wanted to play that playlist or try something else where you might get a faster and more competitive match. I talk about that a little more here (https://tannertesports.wordpress.com) as well as some other suggestions.
The thing about the current ranking system in Halo 5 that I hate is that there is/was no grind. Back in Halo 3 you started at 1, and you worked your way up to 50. Halo 5 I played my first 10 games and was placed into Champion. Which from your post I went from level 1 to level 58+ in 10 games. When I get on Halo 3 and see my 50's in 7 playlists with 4000+ ranked games I know that I earned those because of the hard work, and dedication I put into the game to get better. When I get on Halo 5 and see that my ranks got reset, and I have to play 10 games to get back into Onyx for the 10th+ time I don't feel that satisfaction like I used to, I don't feel like I've earned this rank. Please Josh! Bring back the grind in Halo!
So if this is literally the same system as Halo 3, does that include the ability to be "locked" into a rank as your Sigma (uncertainty) value gets lower and lower?

One of the primary abuse cases in Halo 3 was that a brand new account could move really quickly, and by queueing with an account with both a low Mu and low Sigma but lots of games played (a "boosting account") you could greatly increase your Mu gains for a period of time.

However, if you were an older account with many games played, it became almost impossible to actually get your Mu to change from a 46 to a 47 -- because your Sigma was so low it essentially gave you zero gains for wins or losses.
I don't really think the purpose of veto is to avoid playing the same map twice. Typically in the ranges I end up playing in on most Halo titles there are maps and modes that the majority of competitive players find less than appealing and/or competitive. We veto them because we don't like them. H5 has the same problem where nearly every single time I match overgrowth or mercy in the proving grounds playlist people quit out of the lobby before it starts. We want veto so we can just say no without having to dashboard out of the game or quit in progress because people on our team already left. Its silly.
Also, could a Join In Progress feature be used similar to games like Overwatch and Call of Duty?

Give players the option to additionally search for JIP matches, with the caveat that they cannot lose any CSR from the match and will only gain CSR based on their contribution to the match (based on time in that specific match). This would assist in lowering search times and also help prevent further players quitting from matches once one of their teammates leaves.
PeterAK91 wrote:
Quote:
So the question to you folks also is, “Are you willing to play a non-competitive match if that’s the only one you’re going to get?”
I understand this question are for highly skilled champs struggling to find matches but as for me as a platinum player, i would agree and at the same time disagree. first of, matching high skilled players is a good opportunity to see how actually feels to be against competitive players, you learn from it and in addition of not loosing much CSR is acceptable.

the bad side of this is that it will make more people complain about the matchmaking system in my opinion. it would make solo players rage quit and possibly complain on waypoint as of on this section, you can see nothing but complains about people matching champs and people quitting.

as for me, it would be OK to match high skilled players but not as often as you mentioned josh, its understandable that due to the low count of high ranked players means it will not happen very often but this is just my opinion and im sure there will be more people who will 100% disagree on this.
I agree, I really don't mind playing against higher skilled players. Shoot, that's how I started in Halo 3, all the friends I played with had already been playing for 2-3 years before I started, so we're a lot better than me, but playing with them helped me go from a complete noob to someone who could actually contribute to a team fairly quickly. But like I mentioned in my comment, I think this is most effective when the teams are more balanced so you at least have a chance to be competitive. I'm not complete garbage, but when I'm playing 1v4 against champs and onyxes, it definitely makes me look like I am, but when I actually have teammates that won't get mad and leave because the teams are so uneven, I can hold my own.
I don't really think the purpose of veto is to avoid playing the same map twice. Typically in the ranges I end up playing in on most Halo titles there are maps and modes that the majority of competitive players find less than appealing and/or competitive. We veto them because we don't like them. H5 has the same problem where nearly every single time I match overgrowth or mercy in the proving grounds playlist people quit out of the lobby before it starts. We want veto so we can just say no without having to dashboard out of the game or quit in progress because people on our team already left. Its silly.
Exactly. It's also important for the developer to receive feedback on which maps are being vetoed the most so they can either tweak them or remove them completely.
Just want to chime in that I really love these updates. Thanks.
Ye FLuFFy wrote:
The thing about the current ranking system in Halo 5 that I hate is that there is/was no grind. Back in Halo 3 you started at 1, and you worked your way up to 50. Halo 5 I played my first 10 games and was placed into Champion. Which from your post I went from level 1 to level 58+ in 10 games. When I get on Halo 3 and see my 50's in 7 playlists with 4000+ ranked games I know that I earned those because of the hard work, and dedication I put into the game to get better. When I get on Halo 5 and see that my ranks got reset, and I have to play 10 games to get back into Onyx for the 10th+ time I don't feel that satisfaction like I used to, I don't feel like I've earned this rank. Please Josh! Bring back the grind in Halo!
This this this please make the Dream true... we want to Grind from 1-50. this is halo... thats life
I get what you're saying about the different map and gametype combos not being played back-to-back, but this doesn't seem to work in SWAT. I may not play two of the exact same mode on the same map twice in a row, but playing SWATnums (which I hate by the way) 5 times in a row still isn't enjoyable even if it's on 5 different maps. It's gotten to the point where it's actually rare to get a just plain old SWAT game (H5 BR start) because you're constantly getting SWATnums, H1 SWAT or DMR SWAT. Extremely frustrating.
Ye FLuFFy wrote:
The thing about the current ranking system in Halo 5 that I hate is that there is/was no grind. Back in Halo 3 you started at 1, and you worked your way up to 50. Halo 5 I played my first 10 games and was placed into Champion. Which from your post I went from level 1 to level 58+ in 10 games. When I get on Halo 3 and see my 50's in 7 playlists with 4000+ ranked games I know that I earned those because of the hard work, and dedication I put into the game to get better. When I get on Halo 5 and see that my ranks got reset, and I have to play 10 games to get back into Onyx for the 10th+ time I don't feel that satisfaction like I used to, I don't feel like I've earned this rank. Please Josh! Bring back the grind in Halo!
1) this whole post is a euhpamism for "i like to pub stomp for the first 45 levels"
2) most people DONT want to grind. They dont have the time to. I know i dont. I want fair matches in ranked as soon as possible.
I don't really think the purpose of veto is to avoid playing the same map twice. Typically in the ranges I end up playing in on most Halo titles there are maps and modes that the majority of competitive players find less than appealing and/or competitive. We veto them because we don't like them. H5 has the same problem where nearly every single time I match overgrowth or mercy in the proving grounds playlist people quit out of the lobby before it starts. We want veto so we can just say no without having to dashboard out of the game or quit in progress because people on our team already left. Its silly.
So much this ^^. I dont mind playing the same game a couple times as much as i mind playing Overgrowth period. Or 6 slayers in a row in a playlist that is mostly objective.
PeterAK91 wrote:
Quote:
So the question to you folks also is, “Are you willing to play a non-competitive match if that’s the only one you’re going to get?”
I understand this question are for highly skilled champs struggling to find matches but as for me as a platinum player, i would agree and at the same time disagree. first of, matching high skilled players is a good opportunity to see how actually feels to be against competitive players, you learn from it and in addition of not loosing much CSR is acceptable.

the bad side of this is that it will make more people complain about the matchmaking system in my opinion. it would make solo players rage quit and possibly complain on waypoint as of on this section, you can see nothing but complains about people matching champs and people quitting.

as for me, it would be OK to match high skilled players but not as often as you mentioned josh, its understandable that due to the low count of high ranked players means it will not happen very often but this is just my opinion and im sure there will be more people who will 100% disagree on this.
The MM might be a bit too lose at the moment. I played some proving grounds last week. It is the best playlist at the moment, but i got matched against the same To4 with 2 onyx and 2 champs in it multiple times in a row (which is how i know they were a To4). Admittedly it was 8 am on a weekday and my experience at other times of day has been totally fine, so im sure the population was tiny but it still seems like a mid-plat matching champs shouldn't be possible regardless.
I love the idea of the soft forfeit. If I'm going to lose a 2v4 slayer, and I'm going to lose CSR, I like the idea of being able to end it sooner and move on to the next game without having to worry about getting banned.
This would be amazing. I know no UI changes are coming (which is said because H5 is a far cry from the H3 and Reach UIs) but how would you notify players that a soft forfeit is available? I would hate for it to be an option in game and have players still get pissed they can't quit just because they dont read this forum or the updates when they start the game.
ZaedynFel wrote:
CSR and 1-50 EquivalenciesI’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
It’s like this:
  • We use the same exact system as Halo 3
  • This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did
  • We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank:
    • 1-6: Bronze
    • 7-18: Silver
    • 19-31: Gold
    • 31-44: Platinum
    • 45-50: Diamond 1-3
  • Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50:
    • 51-57: Diamond 4-6
    • 58+: Onyx
    • Top 200 Onyx: Champion
Examples:
  • The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43.
  • The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard.
  • The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.
Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.

Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”

Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.

Also keep in mind:
  • Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime.
  • Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.
Never understood why you didn't just keep the system as the numbers, seeing as that was a better indicator of ones skill, is it that important to mimic LoL ranks because that's a more popular game?
Fair enough, I have no problem with the equivalencies in rank between halo 3 and halo 5 that you speak of. The issue is that in halo 2 and halo 3 everyone started at 1. Achieving certain ranks (10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 45, 50) all felt like big accomplishments and milestones to be proud of.

In halo 5, there is no reward for seeing your rank increase. Players are often overplaced or underplaced and ranks feel cheapened, since you don't have to work for them. At a high level, there's little incentive to keep playing ranked. If you're an onyx player, what are you trying to achieve, a higher rating in...onyx, the same division? Champion is just a reflection of which high onyx players can play the most in a given month.

The whole ranked experience feels cheap and hollow compared to older halos. I would prefer going back to a system where everyone starts at the same level, ranks don't reset every month or two, and there is some sort of ranking cap so that a high rank is about skill rather than how many hours you have in a certain month to play.
Mzrshy wrote:
Hey Josh, one question - After a match has concluded, why is it faster to find the next Match by backing out to the playlist selection screen and searching as opposed to letting the game search normally?
Because we automatically match you after another match, we give some intermission time to review the match results. That's the only difference. If you back out, you are skipping the intermission and jumping right back into matchmaking. We could streamline that I suppose, by letting party leaders skip the intermission. Party members might get irritated, but they could take it out on their friend.
I've had really mismatched games in FFA as well (Platinum 4 against high Onyx (1800+) and champs (as high as 24) but I don't really mind those as much. I usually am able to make my way up to Onyx in FFA, so eventually end up matching high-ish level Onyx players by the end of the season anyway, so I guess it just doesn't feel much different. Also, for some reason I can hold my own in FFA (tied a champ 88 and beat an onyx 1968 in one game) not sure why it doesn't seem to work that way in Proving Grounds. I guess it's harder to do when you have 4 players who are much better than you, working together to kill you as opposed to every man for himself.
Proving Grounds is kind of "Hard mode" in general right now, especially compared to FFA, because:
  • It's a brand new playlist so skill estimates are still settling down
  • It's popular among more elite players, so overall the average borderline Gold/Plat player in PG is better than a Gold/Plat in other lists
  • FFA is overall still a little too liberal in how it gives out Onyx. I'm still working on a tweak for that.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8