Skill based match making. This should be added as it will improve the experience for everyone that plays the game.
There are next to no downsides to adding a SBMM system. All players would have more fun, fair, and satisfying matches. Of course, the main downside of this system (and one of the only downsides) is a longer queue time. I would suggest that the matchmaking service only relies upon the rating system for the first 30 to 60 seconds of queue time, after which it simply tries to create any match possible to keep queue times short. Players could also be given an option to use “rating based matchmaking”, if they prefer to get lower quality matches with shorter queues.
There are no other downsides to SBMM, do not believe the propaganda of streamers on Twitch. They are telling you SBMM is bad for selfish reasons (they want to farm noobs for content, oh woe is them to have to play fair matches against players of their own skill level.)
Every player would receive a new rating (INVISIBLE to everyone). No judging eachother. This rating would PURELY be affected by wins and losses. Everyone would start fresh at the same position (1000 rating) and go up or down based on winning or losing against higher or lower skilled opponents
Winning against a lower rated player would give you less points than defeating a higher skilled opponent, and vice versa etc.
There would only need to be a few loose matchmaking brackets, maybe 3-5 buckets for;
New Players
Inexperienced or casual players
Average performers
Veterans
Super-Tryhards
This system would alleviate the need for players to desert matches they deem “unfair” and ruining the enjoyment for other players.
I’ma casual gamer and I’m praying that sbmm isn’t added. I find that sbmm often makes it hard go enjotly games because I always need to sweat. Sometimes I just want to chill.
I disagree, 1st, enlisted does not have a big enough player base. If enlisted had 2 million players like cod or halo that would be different. 2nd, as soon as cod added sbmm it completely ruined the franchise. Cod before that was really fun to play but as soon as sbmm was added it went from fun to every match was sweaty (now I understand more then just sbmm ruined cod but as an example). Enlisted really is not a sweaty game even on br5 add sbmm I’m willing to beat it will be come sweaty every match. Maybe not as much as cod, but still.
While I do think SBMM would be a good step in the right direction, it needs to be left to cook yet.
For example the system you described,
There will 110% be a large group of sweats that will fudge their wins just to seal club, among other issues. I do think their could be alleviated by having a ranked and casual queue, though if there is enough of a playerbase for that is another question.
So while SBMM could exist, I think atm, it would be best to focus on either, or ideally both a solo only queue and making sure stacks are matched vs equally sized stacks.
So, we have 5 “skill levels” for each BR. 25 queues for each faction ?
That’s quite a lot… sometimes I wait 2+ min for a single game, this would be awful…
Also Enlisted is a casual game, I play when I want to chill not when I want to suffer. There are many competive shooter games in the market for that already.
I used to play Destiny 2 from 2019-2023. The single change that made the biggest negative change to PvP at all skill levels was skill-based matchmaking. Since there was so much more weight to wins over losses, and everyone was of relatively equal skill, every player had to resort to every tool in their arsenal to eek out a win. This results in sweat and annoying tactics at all levels of play.
I think a better system involves making a defeat less punishing compared to a win (My initial thoughts involve making a win 25% more rewarding than a loss; keep wins at their current reward scale and bring losses up from 66% to 80% of a win), as well as increasing rewards for both objective play, and battle hero medals.
We should strive for an ecosystem where players are incentivized to perform from a variety of factors and reward multipliers.
And what criteria we can set for those people. how could a player end up in one of those groups? Is it score per minute/per match? Is this just KDR? Is this WR? Or just X matches played or X kills total?
Are we going to try to find for example for 20 veteteran players with 2.5KDR+ in a MM? Divide it by 3 servers 4 nations 5 BR bracket it will turn 5-60sec que into 20-30min que. I ain’t have time for that this is not CS2 or Dota 2/LoL i just want to play the game and not find perfect 50% WR commie matches.
Some kind of SBMM would be fine but not as super strict as this. Just make sure both teams have 1-2 competent good players + few guaranteed rally/apc spawners in each match and that should be more than fine to make game more blanced and not stale with one team stomping instantly. Stacks also need to play against other stacks and not ruin normal matches.
Biggest issue with your SBMM would be newbie clueless players that have received BR4/5 gear from events/lootboxes and are going to play those matches despite being in new players/casual bracket how your MM system would react to them? There barely any low skilled BR5 players in que.
You can simply find the answers to your questions in the post brotha
This could be a cool idea, but I think enforcing that you play against a “top” player every game is kinda what you dont want? This creates essentially stomping grounds every game rather than seeing a highly skilled player fairly rarely.
They would start at the 1000 rating, as I mentioned in the post. If they are under-geared and under-levelled, they will be protected from experienced players, not lambs to the slaughter, and have more fun in their own matches. High tier players would also not be upset (look at T60 reddit posts for example) seeing a Tier 1 Player in their game with a singular BR5 item from an event or box or something
And what WR% would be required for each bracket? Smurf players would love that system as they could abuse losing so they could have easy lobbies constantly.
Those soft rules could only work with my idea of only matching a few good players for each team as my next suggestion otherwise finding 20 bad/good/very good/tryhard players with each of similar skill level would be practically impossible especially within 30-60secs which makes that system non existent
Both teams would have those leading players so it would be fight against titans while you could learn something from them and since 1-2 players can’t win entire match on their own they will still need their team to support them.
How many matches do you need to play to move out of newbie island? Or do you want them to unlock BR2 as the real requirement? Realistically not more than 20 matches will be with newbie protection as Gaijin wants them to play in real matches.
These systems have existed within games for the past 20+ years. It’s not as easy as you think to “game” them. We also do not need to discuss the in-depth scenarios in how they work. A simple Win/Loss ELO system is good enough for every other game on the planet right now. The buckets system was more to help demonstrate and allow others to understand. You’d just tune the numbers appropriately, which is the developers job in this case.
You can play any other game, these MMR and ELO and SBMM systems are incredibly robust, and not easy to exploit. You can do your own researches on these systems as it would take too long to explain everything here, and its not relevant to this discussion.
But every game, including all casual games, have SBMM systems in place. Even in non-ranked uncompetitive modes, you still separate players from eachother based on skill.
This would have a drastically poor effect on people that want to queue up with their friends. They would be constantly pitted against high-tier player deathstacks and get farmed.
Its really not. Arguing that 99% of players would not benefit from this system is asinine and shows a lack of understanding on the topic and how these systems operate. You can’t name a more casual game than Call Of Duty which literally survives based on its heavy skill based matchmaking systems.
All 100% of the playerbase would benefit from a SBMM system in different ways, outside of queue times (opt out if you want quicker matches).
Even casual shooters use SBMM, and this would not mean you have to sweat more. If you are a casual player, you will in fact only be matched against other casual players. You will fight players of your skill level, leading to closer and more exciting games, even if you are “chilling out” - Whatever you mean by this.
Another benefit of something like that would be it hopefully reducing the amount of unfun stomps (where your team wins by a large margin). I would that like a lot as those matches are often quite boring, especially on defense matches where it just turns into spawn camping the enemy until they run out of tickets. I don’t really and never have played many shooters or other games with SBMM so I can’t speak on that.
I really like your ideas, especially the solution to Queue times, well thought-out. I’m pretty casual and I play on console-only, also I see others have worries of a sweat-fest, but that’s already happening anyway, bruh.
I see MULTIPLE matches a day where there usually is a SEVERE one-sided beating, sometimes it’s my team, sometimes it’s the enemy team.
When a team loses badly, a STOMPING, is anyone really satisfied? Both won’t get much points or on the scoreboard for finishing a game so fast, boosters are slightly wasted in swift victories.
Another addition to your idea of SBMM, if several groups are waiting in queue, they’re rated by a calculation of the group (players playing squads together and if there is not squads that match up competitively, then they’re just calculated in SBMM against similar enemy players of their queued group.
Also, if the SBMM is too strict or too loose on impact of the player base, it can always be done away with. I think we should try it, if it sucks, it can be removed and tweaked, or done away with if there are not enough players to calculate SBMM.
