Jump to content
Lenticulas

Glops Matchmaking: stats, fails, and suggestions

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MK_Regular said:

I like the 2nd suggestion as an option to balance Glops (and PvP in general) matchmaking. Yes, it might take a bit longer than the current system, but any matchmaking system will usually require a bit more time to make a fair match compared to an one-sided match. However, I'm not entirely sure what the current situation is respect to the internal workings of the matchmaker (especially with regards to the average time to get a match vs. the amount of time waiting in queue before the matchmaker loosens the matchmaking parameters and allows for a more one-sided match) so I cannot say whether or not implementing internal vehicle scores would have any effect.

Another possibility (if it hasn't already been implemented) for improving the matchmaker would be to make it so the timer for when the matchmaker can loosen its parameters does not start unless there are enough players to populate a match (this should help prevent the matchmaker from randomly cobbling together unbalanced teams the moment there are enough players to populate a match).

What you say is true. However, team assignment AFTER the matchmaker grabs the players of the pool and balance the teams with those resources, wouldn't slow down the queue as the resources are already taken in account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cpt_SmoothBore said:

If matchmaking could set an internal player score value and distribute players/platoons evenly based on that performance value, things will improve.
if matchmaking could set an internal vehicle score value and distribute class/vehicle score points evenly on both teams, things will improve. (everyone knows that meta vehicles as type10/ATDU/640/PL01/M48/ would outperform any LeoAX/X21/Centauro/T14/MGM or other weak tanks).

Your first proposal is called skill-based matchmaking.  AW had it for PvP for a while, and from everything I've heard it was horrible.  At the very least it was bad enough that they discarded it and have said repeatedly that they have no plans to re-implement something similar.  I also have experience implementing skill based systems, and from my experience they're much much more difficult to implement for multi-player games when some players can be grouped (i.e. platoons) while others are not.

Your second proposal is somewhat more workable, provided the back end allows for it.  The main thing to consider is that it absolutely 100% chance will slow down matchmaking.  Some allowance could be made in this system to increase the rank of vehicles that are in platoons, but the reality is that this whole proposal only changes the meta, it doesn't fix matchmaking.

The real problem with PvP (which includes GLOPS) is something that Flavio has said many times.  If you're not using a meta vehicle every single time you play, you're hurting your team.  You can complain that the other side had 6 x Type 10/CATTB/T-15/whatever the current meta is and your side didn't, but unless you were in one of those meta vehicles then you were part of that problem.  Asking the matchmaker to "balance the teams" is another way of saying that you want the matchmaker to correct for your poor choice of vehicle.

4 hours ago, MK_Regular said:

Another possibility (if it hasn't already been implemented) for improving the matchmaker would be to make it so the timer for when the matchmaker can loosen its parameters does not start unless there are enough players to populate a match (this should help prevent the matchmaker from randomly cobbling together unbalanced teams the moment there are enough players to populate a match).

As I recall, and not including off-peak play times, there are basically always enough players to populate a match.  Delays during peak playing times are caused by the matchmaker waiting for someone more appropriate to queue up, or for someone to have been waiting long enough that loosening the parameters makes them qualify for the current match.  So unless I misunderstand what you're suggesting, this is already how the matchmaker works.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, knutliott said:

You can complain that the other side had 6 x Type 10/CATTB/T-15/whatever the current meta is and your side didn't, but unless you were in one of those meta vehicles then you were part of that problem. 

So what can we do to encourage newer players (who don't happen to own a meta vehicle) to do GLOPs?  (OK, I suppose this might be a monetization mechanism to incentivize the purchase of prem meta vehicles, but then it degrades into P2W.

SS has already said the social component is the highest priority, so a biker gang of meta vehicles is going to totally rule. Maybe we need some black leather and studded collar skins for the next Raid challenge? 

QR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Quantum_Ranger said:

So what can we do to encourage newer players (who don't happen to own a meta vehicle) to do GLOPs?  (OK, I suppose this might be a monetization mechanism to incentivize the purchase of prem meta vehicles, but then it degrades into P2W.

SS has already said the social component is the highest priority, so a biker gang of meta vehicles is going to totally rule. Maybe we need some black leather and studded collar skins for the next Raid challenge? 

QR

The actual meta doesnt involve prem T10 exclusively. Now ATDU and M48 is what is everyone running in 0.33 (save type10).
While was surely prem T10 dominance in the CATTB era or 490 era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't play GLOPS so I don't know the meta, but I'd be surprised if there aren't non-premium meta vehicles at some tiers, especially some of the lower tiers.  But of course that would mean that you'd have to be able to get a GLOPS game going at those tiers, and as I understand things that's challenging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, knutliott said:

I don't play GLOPS so I don't know the meta, but I'd be surprised if there aren't non-premium meta vehicles at some tiers, especially some of the lower tiers.  But of course that would mean that you'd have to be able to get a GLOPS game going at those tiers, and as I understand things that's challenging.

Sure, there are lower tier meta progression vehicles (M113 ACAV at T3), but GLOPs is nonexistent at T6 and below, and a long queue wait if you are running T7. So we are really looking at T8 and up.  It would be really cool if we could get lower tier GLOPs going even half as well as lower tier PVE.

QR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...