This could work as well, since many casual players play the game as if it’s a " team deathmatch," completely ignoring the capture point.
1 Like
That’s still doesn’t matter. If you manage to increase your win rate, you got harder fight, than if you lose a lot, back to normal.
Not really, because you’d end up fighting people who tend to desert once the enemy team gets the first objective.
It would be quite bizarre tbh.
The most hardcore queue would be around 60% WR.
well i was talking about his idea of gear+player rating cause it would not give proper player rating.
also basing skill based on WR would also not be good, cause if you are playing against equally skilled players, WR will go towards 50%. like i said this is solved problem and you could easily implement ELO rating if you actually wanted SBMM. difficulty of introducing SBMM has nothing to do with SBMM, but with game not having enough players for faction vs faction MM and BR MM and SBMM.
1 Like
just near 50%
player with better skill still have more probability to win, so their win rate will be just above 50%
Why that’s not good
This would be helpful, as well!
To be honest, there probably isn’t a single quick fix. It’s probably going to take a combination of ideas to improve matchmaking (MM): The devs started the process with the current BR system. In this thread, I suggested two very different game modes—play to win & casual game play—to separate the different styles of play to reduce frustration during game play and to help games flow more readily. Separating stacks of players would help, as well. Finally, an additional still-based matchmaking (SBMM) system could shore up the remaining issues.
That’s a combination of four different systems to resolve a good percentage of the problems we are still experiencing.
1 Like
i didnt say it wasnt good, just that you cant base skill based on WR. low skill player playing against other low skill players will get 50% WR. high skill player playing against high skilled player will get 50%. if you have skill based on WR then you will have low skill player playing against high skill players making rating pointless.
1 Like
As I mentioned in my previous post, I don’t think there’s a singular solution. SBMM would help, but it’s not THE solution: Why? On what skill are you basing the person’s level of skill? K/D? This is the metric that (unfortunately) many players argue is the best measure of success in the game. Unfortunately, they’re wrong!
For example, if your team is attacking and the other team is defending… your team could kill 10,000 enemy troops and still lose the game if they’re not capping because the defending team has unlimited lives—which I don’t think everybody is aware of. In addition, many players never step foot inside a cap point because all they care about is their K/D. So, what about the person who is ALWAYS on point to cap, but has a low k/d? How do you rank them?
Thus, still-based match making will only take you so far—depending on the metrics you use. A combination approach is the only real solutiom—which I outlined in my previous post here.
Everything about WR is continuous, if your skill is poor, you will mostly fight other bad player, makes your WR a alttle closer to 50%, but generally it will still hovering around a number <50% .
In theory, WR reflects player skills on a large sample, but the player abilities of WR45 and WR55 may be very different.
a rough simulation of 100 player play 500 1v1 match each
Winning a game should NOT be part of any individuals statistical assessment of their skill level. Winning a game is part of the TEAM’S effort, not any individual’s effort. This would only skew an individuals level data.
2 Likes
Winning a game should NOT be part of any individuals statistical assessment of their skill level. Winning a game is part of the TEAM’S effort, not any individual’s effort. This would only skew an individuals level data.
For example, there are 10 players for each game in Enlisted. Let’s say 9 of those players averages 100 kills per game, and the10th player averages 10 kills per game. What’s the average number of kills for all the players on the team if you combine all of their data?
For ALL players it’s 910/10 = 91. So the 10th player slightly brought down the other nine players’ average by nine points from 100 to 91; however, the first nine players DRAMATICALLY IMPROVED the 10th players average by 81 points, from 10 to 91.
So, is the 10th players average 10 kills or 91 kills? It’s 10! This is why you can’t combine a team’s effort into an individual’s statistical assessment.
idk why you are trying to invent new SBMM(that doesnt work) when you already have ELO rating that can perfectly represent player skill. you factor in victory/loss in a match and your contribution in the match. your rating goes up or down based on factors. really simple stuff.
What’s ELO? Just a reminder for everyone, It’s usually helpful to spell out what an acronym means when first using it—I’m guilty of not doing this myself at all times, as well.
ELO is really bad for team games - I’ve wasted enough time in dota and that crap was annoying
that’s why the battle awards are there. Uncapping the rating you get from them would let players skill influence the rating they end up with. The battle awards aren’t perfect, but on average good players get more of them than bad players. And “best sniper” + “ranged master” would not be enough to offset 25% winrate of grayzone campers either
And mass desertions should just result in a timeout. SBMM or not. I’m sick of half the scoreboard churning at the start of the match as people leave and others get placed in to replace them. Or being a latejoin quite often
there are adaptations of ELO(and other SBMM algorithms) suitable for team games.
here is one quick idea: on win you can have ELO rating proportionally distributed depending on player score. so someone that has gotten first place and 10k score gets 10x rating(or loses 1/10th of rating) compared to someone who has earned 1k score.
you could also have people not lose rating if they outscore average team score by 50% etc.
that way good players would gain(or not lose) rating while bad players would lose or slowly gain rating.
eh. I still like my idea better - a person trying hard to win will easily get more than 5 battle awards (unless the match is omega unplayable) - their skill will influence their rating pretty hard. Obviously it depends on slighly changing the mechanics of how the player rating is calculated (uncapped - someone with 11 battle awards gets +11 extra, loss/win counts for a bit more)
Encouraging score farming would make the game worse - a grayzone tank that farms a billion meaningless kills (remember, defenders have infinte tickets) or people chasing bombing runs (especially after they dumped their bombs already) or even the most elite of sNiPerS won’t achieve anything unless someone else walks into the damn objective and does things for them lol
I guess at the end of the day the score idea would roughly do the same?
i could debate perfect SBMM, but like i said problem is not in SBMM. there are simply not enough players to include current MM rules and SBMM. unless devs decide to sacrifice one of the current MM rules, SBMM is simply not possible.
Put population limits on factions.
I’ve been advocating for at least having uncapped queue times
If some people insist on playing only one faction (and somehow, mysteriously, often the ones with highest winrates) the should have to wait until a decent enemy team can be put together to play against them. If there is 3x as many Japanese or German players than opposing factions…then they have to wait in queue…or just be normal and random
Nothing infuriates me more when I get one of those games where my team is just completely incapable of doing anything of value (basically new players, no gear, no experience, nothing) and the enemy team is completely loaded…why do people who actively make the game worse get rewarded with easy game after easy game? It’s not even about losing…matches like that are just a total waste of time, they often take forever when “attacking” (newbies love to just climb first tower they see and go afk there until the match times out) or you just get constantly farmed when “defending” because there is no one else helping so you just get shot from 50 directions all the time