I think this will make matchmaking better

So I haven’t been able to try out the game since I’m still waiting for my PC to come home, but I’ve seen people complain about how the match making gives you like only 1 point for beating a bronze team or opponent and then takes away 50 for losing. Well the new match making also tries to place you with equally or close to equally skilled opponents but it takes a while to match make ya since sometimes those opponents could be in a game already or offline, so a way to fix this? Well I think we should take away the process of trying to matcake you with equally skilled opponents since that limits your options of who you verse and thus leads to longer wait times. Also the point system as I’ve seen from other peoples’ input, isn’t right. Here’s how I think the point system should be:

When the Bronze wins
Bronze vs Bronze = 10 points
Bronze vs Silver = 20 points
Bronze vs Gold = 50 points

When the Silver wins
Silver vs Bronze = 5 points
Silver vs Silver = 15 points
Silver vs Gold = 60 points

When the Gold wins
Gold vs Bronze = 1 point
Gold vs Silver = 30 points
Gold vs Gold = 50 points

Now we go into the point deductions for losing.

When Bronze Looses
Bronze vs Bronze = -20 points
Bronze vs Silver = -15 points
Bronze vs Gold = -5 points

When Silver Looses
Silver vs Bronze = -25 points
Silver vs Silver = -15 points
Silver vs Gold = -10 points

When Gold Looses
Gold vs Bronze = -75 points
Gold vs Silver = -40 points
Gold vs Gold = -30 points

You see from what I’ve heard, this game’s current state punishes you way too much for loosing. I’m a competitive player, but this isn’t how it should be. You should encourage people to be better, no matter what rank they are. They still get punished for loosing, but not so severely it makes it a rage fets for when you do loose. The points for winning should equal a greater amount than that of loosing. That’s how you encourage people to keep going. Make their accomplishments out way there mistakes. It shouldn’t be where you gain 1 point for winning and loose 60 for loosing. The match making should also allow people from All ranks to verse all ranks, that way they can become better at the game and learn from their mistakes, but don’t make it so the loosing side gets a crazy punishment for loosing. That only encourages rage, distaste, and utter quitting. Make people want to do better. I’m not finished with this whole point suggestion, so bookmark it so you guys can give me suggestions and input and stay up to date. Thanks for reading guys. Have a good one. LIVE LONG AND GAME ON!

6 Likes

You have no say in this patch yet >:l
no but really…

6 Likes

I’m going by what people say and in watch videos on it’s current state. I have a rough idea of how it is. This is a rough guess basically on how it could be balanced better. Like I typed, I’ll be updating this thread and focus on coming up with better ideas. It’s a start. That’s all that matters

I know but, sorry, you can’t really make suggestions until you’ve played the patch yourself, Rusty. You can’t just go off videos because every game is, obviously, different. I’d wait until you can play the patch yourself.

5 Likes

I was able to play with a full team of Silver Skilled, we played 6 matches. We got matched against like constant Silver Expert and Silver Master monsters. We won 5 and got 1 point for each. We lost one and lost like 20 points.

Point system NEEDS to change. Gaining 1 pt for beating people divisions higher, and losing 20 for losing to them is a bit ridiculous.

Your system is too simplistic to work. You have 4 people on a hunter team. What happens if a gold hunter loses with 3 bronzes on his team? What happens if a bronze hunter wins with 3 golds on his team? What happens when a monster/hunter takes a narrow defeat by the smallest of margins? ETC ETC

EDIT: Also this:

1 Like

I can make suggestions. I observe through more scenarios than a lot of people fail to observe. It’s how I’ve always been. People have asked me how I come up with ideas and such and how I would spot things they didn’t see until I’ve pointed them in the right direction. Suggestions are merely predictions and there’s no way to be right or wrong since predictions are always a 50/50 chance or right and wrong. I can make suggestions, I’m just making a prediction is all.

Yeah, the problem is that this isn’t about climbing up to gold if you play enough.
It’s about finding a rank that you actually fit in.

It isn’t supposed to be grindable with a lack of a better word.

1 Like

Well I wasn’t thinking in that way. I just came up with these rough estimates to give an idea of where to start. When I have more time, I am going to update it with a hunter point system and a monster point system based on their ranks after I have played it for about 2 weeks to get a more educated opinion. If the hunter team has like a mix of ranks, then the monster should get a medium of the rank’s total point winnings. The hunters should get the points for what rank of monster they versed. I think that’ll be fair since the hunters need to work together to get a win, and the monster should be penalized since he doesn’t have the disadvantage of relying on team mates, thus leading to the medium aspect. I have a lot if research to conduct before I can make a more accurate post.

Tbh I have trouble seeing a method that could work. It’s sad how the more accurate the system is to your performance, the more processing power and tracking tools it requires.

This does not address losses only victories. To rephrase my previous statement: How punished should a gold ranked hunter be when they lose after being forced to group with people of a lesser rank than they?

That is true, but people shouldn’t loose so many points for loosing 1 game. That could lead to an endless placement of rank, especially for the hunters since they have to rely on others. There have also been reports of this problem through the forums to back up my statement.

As for the ‘fitting in’ part, the system shouldn’t just try and restrict you to only people your rank or close to your skill. It should try to place you in that order, but it shouldn’t make you wait forever to find those matches. It should have a timeout mechanic that causes it to place you I. A random game like it did before.

As for the grindable part, did you not look at how I proposed the point system? It’ll be far from grindable. The lower the rank you verse from yours, the less the point winning you get. If you loose to them, those points will go into a negative factor since the winnings points are far less than the winning to those of lower level. As for the Silver, since it’s in the middle, I made it so a loss is equal to a win, that way if you won one and then lost one, it’ll be like you never won in the first place and vice versa.

Funnily enough, I lose a game? -2 to -4 points.
I win? +1.

Good question! That should probably be accompanied by the medium factor like for the monster. That way they don’t loose too much when they loose. Like if that Gold hunter gets paired up with 2 bronzes and a silver, he’d get the result of a medium made up of results from those 2 to more than himself and the Silver

I don’t know if the “medium factor” is adequate. The feared situation is that the high ranked player is in a game that he can’t win because his team mates are too far below par to win against the monster he is faced up against. If you lost half as many points than you would if your team was all gold, that would still be too many.

That’s just one of the unfavorable consequences that the higher ranked players will have to face. As a higher ranked player, you win more but then that means you lose more. But to make it so they don’t loose an unfair amount, the overall total should be based on a medium with all the levels made up in that team.

A Gold shouldn’t be getting matched with Bronze. Maybe high Silver, but not Bronze.

It’s not that they shouldn’t, it’s just unfavorable. But sometimes you might run into those Bronze players that once you take command and lead them, they’ll start playing like a Gold player. A team needs a leader. Sometimes you might have to be that leader.

No I am pretty sure that a gold player should never be forced to match up with a player in bronze. Hunt 1.0 excluded players of lower lvls from being matched with lvl 40’s. Hunt 2.0 does not. Not only would it be possible that the bronze player would be lacking in skill, it is also possible that the bronze player would also lack perks and masteries. I played with a guy who claimed that he only played 2 matches of evolve before his match with me. A good player shouldn’t be forced to be matched with a player with that much inexperience with the game.

I see what you’re saying, but if you dont get challenged by a game, then how would you ever expect to get better? Experience does play into account, but if you only match bad players with bad players, how will they really grow in skill level if they aren’t pushed to surpass their limits? Like I said, for the matchmaking, it should still try and put you with people in equal rank and/or skill level, but there should also be a timeout mechanic that way you don’t have to wait forever for a single match in case those players that match up to you are offline or playing another game or in a full game already.