Separate matchmaking for clans?


(Falcon.PL) #1

And what if there are 20 ppl in a clan and only combinations of five plays are chosen for a match? Do you see any problem in it?

Having all-mixing matchmaking had a separate poll on this forum some time ago and vast majority of community was for a solely skill-based matchmaking, that is the one not at all based on friend-lists nor clan-lists. Therefore if there is a clan-matchmaking it shall be separate one.

Let’s bring some fresh discussion into the forum!

And have a good day.


(Rex) #2

No, can’t see it. Where is it?


(TacTicToe) #3

This is the third thread you started, why my eyes damn near rolled out of their sockets, and I sat there like “what did I just read”?

If youre drunk, then please step away from your keyboard till sober.

If youre just stuck on stupid, then please just format your HD, cancel your internet subscription, sell your system on ebay, and find a better use for your money and time.


(Mustang) #4

You could do something similar to this by integrating a custom tournament system, which would be pretty cool to see.


(Falcon.PL) #5

Would you tell us a bit more? How do you imagine such a system?


(prophett) #6

A competitive matchmaking system similar to CSGO would be great, as long as it was viable with a lower player base.


(Falcon.PL) #7

The problem in CS:GO matchmaking is the fact it is mixed, and therefore provides low balance of teams, and also seems to adapt in a way of kind of balancing sums of ranks of ppl selected, instead of taking the bunch of 10 “equally skilled” individuals.

The “play with friend” is a priority, it never fails on it while the balance is not really achieved often. Lately it even gained kind of extremum in my opinion.

There was a pool about that - ppl here had chosen the “skill-only” option mostly. And I believe it is the right approach, instead of compromising the base purpose for side “features”, like temporarily popular facebookization of everything.


(Mustang) #8

I’ve not experienced the CS:GO system but for me equally skilled teams are more imporant that equally skilled individuals.

So if every player has a “skill rating” and you are searching for a game on your own then it uses your rating and makes sure the sum of the ratings of everyone on one team are close to the sum of the ratings of everyone on the opposing team. That is to say one team might be 8 people all with 100 rating (total 800), where as the other team might be guys with 25, 50, 75, 100, 100, 125, 150 and 175 (total 800). Of course there could be a system that does try to match closely skilled players initially, then quickly expands the net if not enough are available, but always does a team “shuffle” before the match begins to keep things even. Of course even the above example isn’t the best because ideally each team would have a couple of the very high skill, a couple medium skill, a couple low skill, etc.

If you’re searching for a game as a group there is an appropriate multiplier applied depending on the number of people in the group. For example if everyone in the world had rating of 100 then two guys that aren’t in a group would have a combined rating of 200, whereas two guys in a group would be 220. And instead of 300 three guys in a group would be 340. Et cetera.

Of course groups should be kept together through any team “shuffles”, so the matchmaking system should account for this. Which is when it gets tricky trying to maintain even total team rating (800 in the example above).

Something along these lines would work well I think… on paper at least.

Then there is the whole debate on how to calculate a players skill, but that’s for another thread I feel. :smiley:


(Mustang) #9

By this I mean that not all tournaments that are integrated into the game should be run exclusively by SD. (N.B. I have no idea if there even is a tournament system planned, I’m just speaking about what I’d like to see implemented).

So an example (An example is worth a thousand words™), integrated into the game there could be automated monthly or quarterly tournaments (or cups or leagues or whatever) completely ran by SD systems etc. and all that jazz. What I mean by “custom” is that anyone (you or I) could come along and decide to start a tournament. Now the Mustang Summer Cup is going to be 4 groups of 5 teams in a round-robin with the top 2 teams from each group stage making it through to the triple elimination knock-outs. I can setup the tournament within DB, teams can sign-up within DB, results are automatically recorded within DB, teams have their own team page within DB, I can invite teams to join my tournament within DB, etc. you get the idea.


(Patriotqube) #10

Why not let Clanbase or similar take care of that?

This isnt a console game so really cant see the need for this?


(Falcon.PL) #11

[QUOTE=Mustang;456244]I’ve not experienced the CS:GO system but for me equally skilled teams are more imporant that equally skilled individuals.

So if every player has a “skill rating” and you are searching for a game on your own then it uses your rating and makes sure the sum of the ratings of everyone on one team are close to the sum of the ratings of everyone on the opposing team. That is to say one team might be 8 people all with 100 rating (total 800), where as the other team might be guys with 25, 50, 75, 100, 100, 125, 150 and 175 (total 800). Of course there could be a system that does try to match closely skilled players initially, then quickly expands the net if not enough are available, but always does a team “shuffle” before the match begins to keep things even. Of course even the above example isn’t the best because ideally each team would have a couple of the very high skill, a couple medium skill, a couple low skill, etc.

If you’re searching for a game as a group there is an appropriate multiplier applied depending on the number of people in the group. For example if everyone in the world had rating of 100 then two guys that aren’t in a group would have a combined rating of 200, whereas two guys in a group would be 220. And instead of 300 three guys in a group would be 340. Et cetera.

Of course groups should be kept together through any team “shuffles”, so the matchmaking system should account for this. Which is when it gets tricky trying to maintain even total team rating (800 in the example above).

Something along these lines would work well I think… on paper at least.

Then there is the whole debate on how to calculate a players skill, but that’s for another thread I feel. :D[/QUOTE]

In topic of skill distribution - let’s agree on some resonable mid-way conclusion: the teams shall best have corresponding skill distribution patterns.

As the matchmaking with friends and clans and skill and ping being found important for decisions of groups chosen, there might be a slight problem with laws of addition in that groups - one problem; there also must be(assuming ideal accuracy of choice in terms of balance = algorithm can find the best balanced set of groups) downfall of the accuracy due to the fact, the algorithm cannot match friends to different servers - they have to play together, so only in rare case when that was the case in the best balance set - it will not lose quality in terms of balance. Thus adding additional conditions will make things only worse or the same(in a best case scenario only).

That is why I oppose mixed matchmaking based on multiple factors. Simply when something is designed for everything - it’s often good for nothing. When it comes for the problem we spoke of - we can expect it to output worse balance, rarely it will output the same and never ever anything better. Unpinning the assumption of an ideal algorithm - we still can say, that if the algorithm makes sense at all, we still expect the results to be worse when the “facebook” factor is involved.

Then we have the addition laws in a group of players, considering skill. Is that the same to have 1 highly skilled and 4 unskilled against 5 semi-skilled, so the average is the same? What kind of average shall it be then? It’s hard to prove it, maybe statistically, but I’ve remember games when playing against higher skilled ppl we won due to some drastic change of tactics… There is a difference between two teams that avarages to the same arithmetically - in CS:GO universe 1 skilled can be in one place, so whole team’s skill is defending only one spot. It’s then enough to send two guys to check main routes to objectives and go behind the one that survived. It’s easier to defend some places than to gain the control of them. Therefore teams are equal when they have a corresponding distributions of skill. Trivially - when they are; that is the same in other words for our context here as we only care about skill level and number of ppl when comparing :D.

And finally about measuring the skill - I’ve read the thread you are alluding to, and I believe I don’t know which way is the best. In CS:GO it’s simply win-lose, with whom(ranks) and against whom. In the thread there were pretty many different propositions.


(Mustang) #12

So how do I run the Mustang Summer Cup on Clanbase?

Looks to me like it’s only their own tournaments that are present.

What I’m talking about is the ability to be able to see all available tournaments being run by everyone, not just from a single group.


(Falcon.PL) #13

[QUOTE=Mustang;456249]By this I mean that not all tournaments that are integrated into the game should be run exclusively by SD. (N.B. I have no idea if there even is a tournament system planned, I’m just speaking about what I’d like to see implemented).

So an example (An example is worth a thousand words™), integrated into the game there could be automated monthly or quarterly tournaments (or cups or leagues or whatever) completely ran by SD systems etc. and all that jazz. What I mean by “custom” is that anyone (you or I) could come along and decide to start a tournament. Now the Mustang Summer Cup is going to be 4 groups of 5 teams in a round-robin with the top 2 teams from each group stage making it through to the triple elimination knock-outs. I can setup the tournament within DB, teams can sign-up within DB, results are automatically recorded within DB, teams have their own team page within DB, I can invite teams to join my tournament within DB, etc. you get the idea.[/QUOTE]
Looks fine. I like the idea of technological support from the official services while the tournaments are community made. Kind of more substantial than word-only based or external webpage based approaches. Also official track of results in one place from all the events community made.

I believe SD is interested in such things since they’re developing a player-base services as… Fireteam.

http://fireteam.net/products


(Patriotqube) #14

[QUOTE=Mustang;456259]So how do I run the Mustang Summer Cup on Clanbase?

Looks to me like it’s only their own tournaments that are present.

What I’m talking about is the ability to be able to see all available tournaments being run by everyone, not just from a single group.[/QUOTE]

Im not sure what it is you want tbh,

Home made tournaments has always been possible to make in the games i usually play, we just uses the rules from 1 of the official sites and we make a site for the tournament like this --> http://www.tourney.cc/ then you can do the invites on gamerelated forums

Imho there is no need for what your asking.

again its a PC game


(Mustang) #15

Basically what Falcon.PL is talking about in the post above yours.

SD have expressed an interest in dipping there toes in these sort of waters, I’m just asking that if there is something done in this area let us run “custom” as well as “official”.

There are of course several advantages in running such tournaments with close integration to the game, rather than from an external site. For example automatic result submission and validation, player validation (is it the correct person, are they allowed to play for this team, have they been banned from the tournament, etc.), automatic server setup depending on tournament rules, automatic server allocation and turning on/off based on demand, etc.