Forged Alliance Forever

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-03-09T00:32:22+02:00

briang wrote:
Haven't the mods removed 5 or so of those posts Lich? It is kinda comical how you react when nobody agrees with you.

This is really one of those times where your suggestion is just truly ridiculous, trust me.

No, none were removed. And I will post this kind of picture when I mean to say that I am done with the conversation.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 09 Mar 2016, 00:32

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-03-05T22:18:02+02:00

Haven't the mods removed 5 or so of those posts Lich? It is kinda comical how you react when nobody agrees with you.

This is really one of those times where your suggestion is just truly ridiculous, trust me.

Statistics: Posted by briang — 05 Mar 2016, 22:18

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-03-04T23:14:43+02:00

I'm done here.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 04 Mar 2016, 23:14

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-02-24T00:41:15+02:00

LichKing2033 wrote:
briang wrote:That is ridiculous. As someone who rarely plays ladder but is on FAF a lot I can't imagine having to constantly reject being queued into 1v1s. Surely you don't think something like that could ever work. Maybe if you could out out of it entirely it would be OK, but then it is a big coding hassle for something nobody wants.

What I suggested (guess not enough explanation) is that if a player is sitting in aeolus just not doing anything, he will be transported into ladder. If for the first 5 minutes his ACU doesn't move at all, then it system would consider it as a person being AFK and would not throw him into ladder again. Or, if the person rejects the offer, do the same thing.

so if i dont like the map i playing i can just afk for 5 minutes and not lose ratings?

srsly tho, you would play 1000089739583465987367459877346987 games where someone was afk and like 2 actual games, dont force people into playing because you cannot find some games for a bit, just go do other stuff while you wait for one

Statistics: Posted by biass — 24 Feb 2016, 00:41

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-02-24T00:34:01+02:00

briang wrote:
That is ridiculous. As someone who rarely plays ladder but is on FAF a lot I can't imagine having to constantly reject being queued into 1v1s. Surely you don't think something like that could ever work. Maybe if you could out out of it entirely it would be OK, but then it is a big coding hassle for something nobody wants.

What I suggested (guess not enough explanation) is that if a player is sitting in aeolus just not doing anything, he will be transported into ladder. If for the first 5 minutes his ACU doesn't move at all, then it system would consider it as a person being AFK and would not throw him into ladder again. Or, if the person rejects the offer, do the same thing.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 24 Feb 2016, 00:34

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-02-10T03:30:11+02:00

That is ridiculous. As someone who rarely plays ladder but is on FAF a lot I can't imagine having to constantly reject being queued into 1v1s. Surely you don't think something like that could ever work. Maybe if you could out out of it entirely it would be OK, but then it is a big coding hassle for something nobody wants.

Statistics: Posted by briang — 10 Feb 2016, 03:30

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-02-10T00:10:36+02:00

LichKing2033 wrote:
3) What needs to be changed about the system is it finding matches quicker. Meaning force those that are not in the game lobby waiting join an automatch. If they reject - their problem.

what's that ? you want to force games on people who havn't asked for one ?
Even Dark Souls doesn't force you to play ...

Besides that would lead to some pretty annoying situations. If I'm afk... or gone to work with FAF open, how many players would "play" against my immobile ACU ...

Statistics: Posted by Zoram — 10 Feb 2016, 00:10

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-02-08T03:38:11+02:00

Romual wrote:
Okay, my burned ass cooled a little bit and I'm back here with my new attempt at global RTS games. And I'm gonna answer some suggestions that were made.

1) I GOT qualified. Those games I was talking about were like ~15-17 ones, not the first.
2) I know the game (Both game storylines done and some skirmish with AI few years ago), I see my mistakes most of the time. My main flaw is the thing, that any trainer will fail to cure - I have tunnel mind somewhat. I can't hold in my brain too many aspects at the same time IF I'm required to do things in real time. TBS are fine, but I'm comparitevly new to RTS multiplayer. In singleplayer I always went turtle+fortress mode. That way I can build good deffence and won't need to think about: rebuilding lost units, adapting my eco on the run, mobile deffence forces, kiting and stuff. I just can build 600 tanks and steamroll AI to the kingdom f***. It doesn't work with people. Well, f***.

So there is the point - yeah, I need to practice. I need to practice using nubmer of different assets at the same time. And, as I told already - people just crush me. How am I supposed to learn how to use 2-3 groups of unit while building my eco at the same time when people I was matched at instantly wiped out my forces with way better macro and I instantly was trapped in my base with barely and thing to controll, and any attempt to fight back was easily brashed aside with their newly obtained resource domminance.
3) My outrage was a marker. A marker that this system is FAR to cruel to green noobs. That said - If I would simply keep silent and keep on torturing myself/leave the game people would never understand that this system is flawed. Large numbers of outrages like mine are indicator that something needs to change.

Romual,
1) No one forces you to play 1v1.
2) I lost 10 out of 11 games I played in total. So you are not alone.
3) What needs to be changed about the system is it finding matches quicker. Meaning force those that are not in the game lobby waiting join an automatch. If they reject - their problem.
4) If you want to get better at duels, you NEED to watch your replays. I did. It helped me and I stopped turtling. Yes, I still make mistakes. But for a person who joined FAF just a month ago (same time as you), I would say I made some progress. From a useless turtle-noob I grew into a medium who tries to be aggressive and has certain strategic knowledge.
5) If you play custom games, they will teach you to not make rookie mistakes. They did teach me to expand, not sit in my base and fortify against armies that still break through. My Open Palms games and team Rohans would be very useful.
6) You need to strengthen your nerves. Most of the people don't like those that lose their mind over their own mistakes. You may think that I do that (if you every find yourself playing with or against me), but if I am outraged over a defeat - it is usually not my fault that my team lost.

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 08 Feb 2016, 03:38

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-31T18:14:39+02:00

If it was after your qualification matches then it was simply because there were too few people online searching for a game. The way the system works is that it start looking for someone to match you with but if no one is found it widens the rating range for searches. Search for long enough and it can give crazy matches.

It doesn't have to be you waiting for the game, it can be the other person also.

An option where it asks you: "No one of your skill level has been found, do you wish to broaden the search?" could at least restrict it from doing the craziest matches without approval. This is how it was done in C&C 3, for example.
This will also initially decrease the number of games on the ladder obviously but might actually help keep/draw more players in the long run. And possibly mitigate the need to plan ladder searches in Aeolus

Statistics: Posted by JoonasTo — 31 Jan 2016, 18:14

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-30T00:05:07+02:00

Okay, my burned ass cooled a little bit and I'm back here with my new attempt at global RTS games. And I'm gonna answer some suggestions that were made.

1) I GOT qualified. Those games I was talking about were like ~15-17 ones, not the first.
2) I know the game (Both game storylines done and some skirmish with AI few years ago), I see my mistakes most of the time. My main flaw is the thing, that any trainer will fail to cure - I have tunnel mind somewhat. I can't hold in my brain too many aspects at the same time IF I'm required to do things in real time. TBS are fine, but I'm comparitevly new to RTS multiplayer. In singleplayer I always went turtle+fortress mode. That way I can build good deffence and won't need to think about: rebuilding lost units, adapting my eco on the run, mobile deffence forces, kiting and stuff. I just can build 600 tanks and steamroll AI to the kingdom f***. It doesn't work with people. Well, f***.

So there is the point - yeah, I need to practice. I need to practice using nubmer of different assets at the same time. And, as I told already - people just crush me. How am I supposed to learn how to use 2-3 groups of unit while building my eco at the same time when people I was matched at instantly wiped out my forces with way better macro and I instantly was trapped in my base with barely and thing to controll, and any attempt to fight back was easily brashed aside with their newly obtained resource domminance.
3) My outrage was a marker. A marker that this system is FAR to cruel to green noobs. That said - If I would simply keep silent and keep on torturing myself/leave the game people would never understand that this system is flawed. Large numbers of outrages like mine are indicator that something needs to change.

Statistics: Posted by Romual — 30 Jan 2016, 00:05

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-29T07:45:10+02:00

I posted about this in another thread a couple of months ago.

The way it currently works is seriously flawed and you guys are seeing the results of this. Probably the reason that FA does not have a large enough community to keep the server busy is caused by noobs getting mercilessly stomped in ladder.

Take a look at this post by Sheeo about how the matchmaking code works:
http://forums.faforever.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11002&start=30#p113251

TLDR; The way it works right now, a fresh noob could get matched up with Zock(I'm not exaggerating). Clearly that's not right.

I like the suggestion in the podcast of providing a new FAF user two options.

Option 1:
"I'm a new player. I've never played Forged Alliance online before." - initial rating 0 with 200 deviation

Option 2:
"I've played Forged Alliance online before. Match me up with skilled opponents." - initial 1500 with 500 deviation (this is the current default setting)

This way everyone gets what they want. Experienced players find their true rating quickly and noobs don't get pwnd so hard and rage quit.

Statistics: Posted by Eric_Lesch — 29 Jan 2016, 07:45

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-29T06:41:21+02:00

No, compulsory games vs AI before playing ladder for real is a bad idea. People don't join a multiplayer community to play vs AI. You would definitely dissuade people from playing, and not just smurfs.

Statistics: Posted by JaggedAppliance — 29 Jan 2016, 06:41

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-29T05:23:10+02:00

I think the podcast brought up some nice stuff. I think for someone with 0 games, it should treat them as a complete newbie at first. A compulsory entry period is triggered: You must face and defeat a series of AIs in order to begin gaining ladder rating: Easy, Medium, Hard, Sorian, Sorian Rush. If you can't beat the easy, you rematch it up to 5 games in a row. If you're still losing, you get rated at an appropriate number. We implement code which detects the killing blow on your ACU, and forces a rematch if the ACU didn't die from enemy damage. We do this to, along with the fact these into games are there, heavily dissuade smurfing, as the smurf account would have to go through 5 AI games every time, and there's no way to just ctrl-k your way through. Easy, yes, but tedious.

Statistics: Posted by IceDreamer — 29 Jan 2016, 05:23

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-28T16:09:49+02:00

only issue is that we have to deal with the people who are searching.
your system if viable if you want to wait 2h searching per game. Your call.

Statistics: Posted by keyser — 28 Jan 2016, 16:09

Re: About Matchmaking

2016-01-28T15:30:04+02:00

Copying here from another thread:

NEW PLAYERS MATCHMAKING:
While pondering on this an improvement on the new players matchmaking came to mind. Instead of starting with the raw trueskill method, which is brutal on total noobs but fitting on returning players why don't we have a set of five placement matches that first estimate the starting point for their trueskill rating?

First game vs 300 rating, if win match against 600 if lost match against 0.
Second game vs 600 if win match vs 900 if lost match vs 400.
Third game vs 900 if won match vs 1200 if lost match vs 700.
Fourth game match vs 1200 if won match vs 1500 if lost match vs 1000.
Fifth game match vs 1500 if won, start trueskill rating adjustments at 1500 if lost start at 1300.

That would be the ultimate case for someone like Zock smurf account.
A regular dude would look something like this.

First game vs 300 rating, if win match against 600 if lost match against 0.
Second game vs 600 if win match vs 900 if lost match vs 400.
Third game vs 900 if won match vs 1200 if lost match vs 700.
Fourth game match vs 1200 if won match vs 1500 if lost match vs 1300.
Fifth match vs 1300 if won start trueskill rating adjustments at 1400 if lost start trueskill adjustments at 1250.

And an actual newbie would look something like this.

First game vs 300 rating, if win match against 600 if lost match against 0.
Second game vs 600 if win match against 900 if lost match vs 400.
Third game vs 400 if win match against 500 if lost match against 350.
Fourth game vs 350 if win match against 375 if lost match against 337.
Fifth game vs 337 if win start trueskill adjustments at 344 if lost start trueskill adjustments at 333.

This should enable the system learning phase to start at a more accurate level than it currently does and ease the new players frustration at ladder.

Statistics: Posted by JoonasTo — 28 Jan 2016, 15:30