QM Matchmaking is still shit and it's not okay

[Well]

I just made an account and I don't believe I can post pictures yet, but I had a match last night with an abysmal QM comp too
Zeratul
Nova
Murky
Tassadar
Abathur
V
Muradin
Arthas
Butcher
Tychus
Lili

I honestly couldn't believe it.

Oh wow. Trash. Absolute trash for sure.

[AeneasBK]

I dunno, I guess I'm wrong because its an unpopular opinion but tbh throughout the "Matchmaking is shit" threads I've seen so many screenshots where I'm not sure what the complaint is "Oh noes they have 2 specialists, a support, warrior, and assassin; and we have 2 assassins a support warrior and specialist!"

Not seeing it. Cho'gall is a curveball sure, but individual skill and much more importantly "TEAMPLAY" will win over crappy comps. Hero league maybe a different kettle of fish but I've played QM since alpha; pls don't try to tell me that it's a haven of coordinated plays there.

Again, sorry to voice an unpopular opinion. Its no good saying "Matchmaking is crap" if your teammates are using dogshit builds and trying to 1v3 their team etc. (literally in one game 3 of my teammates went 1v4 against the enemy while I was dead, after the three of them had died one after the other the Tyrande says "MM is so shit". Sorry MM didn't make you suicide into their team one after the other, stop blaming game mechanics for you being shit at the game.

[Wrathonia]

http://www.heroesnexus.com/news/1535...meplay#changes

Matchmaker
Rebuilt from the ground up - the original matchmaker came from Starcraft 2, and it works fine there. Not as much with multiple heroes and all the variance in player skill fo each.
New matchmaker builds games differently - likely to be implemented in the next few weeks.
Should greatly improve how balanced/fair matches are and queue wait times as well.
In Quick Match it's gonna try to mirror compositions better (hero categories, not necessarily same heroes).
Per Hero MMR variation for players.
Performance can affect MMR adjustment - unknown which in-game metrics will affect this!
If the new matchmaker is good enough, there's a chance they will bring back 3-4 man parties for Hero League!
No MMR reset plans for this year (source).

It's coming. Their problem is that they started using the SC2 matchmaker, which is woefully inadequate for the complexity of heroes MM. In SC2, other than rank, it doesn't matter how you match players. In heroes, rank is part of it, but so is comp and level. It just wasn't built for heroes, so they had to build it from scratch. Arguably they should have done this from the beginning, but at least they learned and it's coming out soon. If we are lucky, it should be coming with the Lunara patch in December.

[Mormolyce]

http://www.heroesnexus.com/news/1535...meplay#changes



It's coming. Their problem is that they started using the SC2 matchmaker, which is woefully inadequate for the complexity of heroes MM. In SC2, other than rank, it doesn't matter how you match players. In heroes, rank is part of it, but so is comp and level. It just wasn't built for heroes, so they had to build it from scratch. Arguably they should have done this from the beginning, but at least they learned and it's coming out soon. If we are lucky, it should be coming with the Lunara patch in December.

Hmm okay they did mention comp there. I remember them talking about the SC2 matchmaker on the live stream but most of the emphasis was on relative skill level. I'll wait and see.

- - - Updated - - -

I dunno, I guess I'm wrong because its an unpopular opinion but tbh throughout the "Matchmaking is shit" threads I've seen so many screenshots where I'm not sure what the complaint is "Oh noes they have 2 specialists, a support, warrior, and assassin; and we have 2 assassins a support warrior and specialist!"

Not seeing it. Cho'gall is a curveball sure, but individual skill and much more importantly "TEAMPLAY" will win over crappy comps. Hero league maybe a different kettle of fish but I've played QM since alpha; pls don't try to tell me that it's a haven of coordinated plays there.

Again, sorry to voice an unpopular opinion. Its no good saying "Matchmaking is crap" if your teammates are using dogshit builds and trying to 1v3 their team etc. (literally in one game 3 of my teammates went 1v4 against the enemy while I was dead, after the three of them had died one after the other the Tyrande says "MM is so shit". Sorry MM didn't make you suicide into their team one after the other, stop blaming game mechanics for you being shit at the game.

How dare you voice an unpopular opinion!

Honestly some of the batshit crazy matchups might actually work if you were queueing together as a team. But in a pug environment not really.

[AeneasBK]

How dare you voice an unpopular opinion!

Well as far as I can tell this is the single most contentious issue facing HotS atm, so people have their jimmies pre-rustled, just trying to make my point without escalating too severely. But I was very annoyed at the attitude of that Tyrande "We are playing like dogshit so I'll blame the matchmaking system" GTFO.

Honestly some of the batshit crazy matchups might actually work if you were queueing together as a team. But in a pug environment not really.

To be fair, the team work thing is the biggest factor but it is evened out by the other team having the same issue presumably. Mostly people don't want to even adjust their builds to compensate. No support? Consider vampiric attacks this game, maybe... etc.

[Tziva]

Matchmaking is stupid, everyone knows this including Blizzard. They've acknowledged this and said they have serious plans and a strategy for addressing this, but unfortunately I don't think they're even going to start rolling out the changes until after the new year.

[ttak82]

I dunno, I guess I'm wrong because its an unpopular opinion but tbh throughout the "Matchmaking is shit" threads I've seen so many screenshots where I'm not sure what the complaint is "Oh noes they have 2 specialists, a support, warrior, and assassin; and we have 2 assassins a support warrior and specialist!"

Not seeing it. Cho'gall is a curveball sure, but individual skill and much more importantly "TEAMPLAY" will win over crappy comps. Hero league maybe a different kettle of fish but I've played QM since alpha; pls don't try to tell me that it's a haven of coordinated plays there.

Again, sorry to voice an unpopular opinion. Its no good saying "Matchmaking is crap" if your teammates are using dogshit builds and trying to 1v3 their team etc. (literally in one game 3 of my teammates went 1v4 against the enemy while I was dead, after the three of them had died one after the other the Tyrande says "MM is so shit". Sorry MM didn't make you suicide into their team one after the other, stop blaming game mechanics for you being shit at the game.

Unpopular or not, I second your opinion.

- - - Updated - - -

Well as far as I can tell this is the single most contentious issue facing HotS atm, so people have their jimmies pre-rustled, just trying to make my point without escalating too severely. But I was very annoyed at the attitude of that Tyrande "We are playing like dogshit so I'll blame the matchmaking system" GTFO.





To be fair, the team work thing is the biggest factor but it is evened out by the other team having the same issue presumably. Mostly people don't want to even adjust their builds to compensate. No support? Consider vampiric attacks this game, maybe... etc.

Most people don't even group up when needed. Sometimes if you are in a group of 5, you can pull off some crazy stuff, or at the very least try and gank someone in the other team who is out of place. At the same time you can get stomped if you are grouped up as 5 less skilled players - but that still takes some setup to do on the other team's part.

[Deleted]

How about you play hero league if you want balanced team comps? Where else are players meant to try out new/different heroes if not for quick match? And no, playing vs bots is a joke, it's not really an option of fooling around with a fun hero.

[RH92]

Yesterday I noticed an interesting thing while losing a pointless game in Cursed Hollow.

You can see who is with who in a party by mousing over their names. I was already worried about the game because on a loading screen I could see a level 14, two 40s and rank 7 on my team against three 40s, level 26 and rank 1 on enemy team. Our Raynor was AFK from the beginning and Muradin, Valla and Kael'thas left after losing first two Tributes. For the remaining of the game I was just clearing waves to not be flagged as a leaver, after 10 minutes all players, but Raynor, came back just to avoid leavers queue (It pissed me off so I reported them).

Anyway so I checked who was in party. Muradin, Valla and Kael were in group together, both Muradin and Kael being level 40 and Valla level 14. Then I checked enemy team, Rank 1 and level 40 playing Cho'gall and another player level 40 (All three having around 1200 games played). The matchmaking tried to balance both teams, but the problem is 3 coordinated friends of same experience are going to crush enemy team of 3 randomly grouped players or even friends with different game experience.

Problem is when being grouped the matchmaking might have problem finding another group of players with a similar experience and might put somebody witha greater experience to balance the game out in terms of hidden rating. Which can result in a similar scenario, but I am not sure how to prevent it if pool of players is not big enough.

Anyway I think matchmaking should include:

• Overall experience
• Experience with a chosen hero
• Average experience of a group

[ttak82]

Anyway I think matchmaking should include:

• Overall experience
• Experience with a chosen hero
• Average experience of a group

So how do we break down the required metrics and assign them a priority?

• Overall experience (Account level, total games played)
• Experience with a chosen hero (Hero Level, total games played on hero, total games played as role of hero)
• Average experience of a group (priority: total games played > total games played on role > other two metrics from above)

Note that another thing that needs to be considered is winning/losing streak and winning percentage.

The more parameters you add, the longer the queues will take, for he sake of accuracy ofc.

Edit: I'll also add that in case a game seems to go downward, I always try to kill forts / minions or just stall the opposition to get some consolation experience. Especially in QM with friends as the bonus can add up significantly. So sometimes we lose and still get around 90-100K xp, sometimes even more. AFKing through a match actually hurts your xp.

[Muis]

Could just be me , but eventho I dislike the QM matchmaking in terms of hero selections (doubl sup vs no sup or triple tank vs no tank teams) , most my matches seem more skill then comp related.

Ive won with the weirdest comps. On Towers of Doom when they had specialist and we didnt. On others wherewehad no support and they did and still wreck.

Sure, I get some bad ones but majority isnt really that bad. Even if people in enemy team are in party. They are usually clingy and less team supportive then 2randoms that dont have issues splitting up.

[RH92]

So how do we break down the required metrics and assign them a priority?

• Overall experience (Account level, total games played)
• Experience with a chosen hero (Hero Level, total games played on hero, total games played as role of hero)
• Average experience of a group (priority: total games played > total games played on role > other two metrics from above)

Note that another thing that needs to be considered is winning/losing streak and winning percentage.

The more parameters you add, the longer the queues will take, for he sake of accuracy ofc.

I am no engineer, so I have no idea how to do it. I just listed factors I find important to give you a good match.

Overall experience
It is self-explanatory, the more games you play the better your instinct is.

Experience with a chosen hero
This one is interesting, having a lot of games played on a certain role and playing a new hero of this role certainly gives you an advantage. However, let's say I have MMR of 2400 and I decide to play a Hero I never played before. Of course I can't be matched with other players of the same rating. Sure I have some experience with that role, but I have no insight into mechanics of this hero. Most likely I will have a build in my mind when playing him, but you know, what sound good on paper might be entirely different thing in practice.

However that does not mean I should start at rating of 1500 (or what is the starting number) when playing him. Just give me a slightly lower ranked opponents so I don't feel like hindrance to my team. It is mainly because I reached higher rating by a continuous playing, it was a natural development of my skill with a certain hero.

For example I usually play Warriors, but I suck so hard at Valla, I have no idea how to be effective at her. It is out of my comfort zone, I reached high rating playing heroes like Johanna or Leoric so obviously I can't be playing the same opponents as I normally do.

Average experience of a group
I think I already explained it. However when queuing as a group, I think experience with a hero should be a lower priority because as a group you have control over your composition to cover weaknesses of your heroes despite having lower experience playing them (What a long sentence...).

Basically the point behind this is to prevent match like I had. The entire team might have been balanced by the average, but having 3 good players in a group with 2 bad random players is always better than 2 bad and 1 good player in a group with 2 good random players.

Could just be me , but eventho I dislike the QM matchmaking in terms of hero selections (doubl sup vs no sup or triple tank vs no tank teams) , most my matches seem more skill then comp related.

Ive won with the weirdest comps. On Towers of Doom when they had specialist and we didnt. On others wherewehad no support and they did and still wreck.

Sure, I get some bad ones but majority isnt really that bad. Even if people in enemy team are in party. They are usually clingy and less team supportive then 2randoms that dont have issues splitting up.

Most of the matches in QM are indeed won by a skill of players, unless you get a heavy counter team composition against yours.

I don't know, for example Johanna, Diablo, Tyrande, Butcher and Azmodan has no chance of winning game against Raynor, Valla, Falstad, Leoric and Kharazim. The enemy team has just so many Giant Killers and Drain Hope to melt your tanks (And Azmodan).

However games like those are very rare.

[ttak82]

I am no engineer, so I have no idea how to do it. I just listed factors I find important to give you a good match.

Overall experience
It is self-explanatory, the more games you play the better your instinct is.

Experience with a chosen hero
This one is interesting, having a lot of games played on a certain role and playing a new hero of this role certainly gives you an advantage. However, let's say I have MMR of 2400 and I decide to play a Hero I never played before. Of course I can't be matched with other players of the same rating. Sure I have some experience with that role, but I have no insight into mechanics of this hero. Most likely I will have a build in my mind when playing him, but you know, what sound good on paper might be entirely different thing in practice.

However that does not mean I should start at rating of 1500 (or what is the starting number) when playing him. Just give me a slightly lower ranked opponents so I don't feel like hindrance to my team. It is mainly because I reached higher rating by a continuous playing, it was a natural development of my skill with a certain hero.

For example I usually play Warriors, but I suck so hard at Valla, I have no idea how to be effective at her. It is out of my comfort zone, I reached high rating playing heroes like Johanna or Leoric so obviously I can't be playing the same opponents as I normally do.

Average experience of a group
I think I already explained it. However when queuing as a group, I think experience with a hero should be a lower priority because as a group you have control over your composition to cover weaknesses of your heroes despite having lower experience playing them (What a long sentence...).

Basically the point behind this is to prevent match like I had. The entire team might have been balanced by the average, but having 3 good players in a group with 2 bad random players is always better than 2 bad and 1 good player in a group with 2 good random players.



Most of the matches in QM are indeed won by a skill of players, unless you get a heavy counter team composition against yours.

I don't know, for example Johanna, Diablo, Tyrande, Butcher and Azmodan has no chance of winning game against Raynor, Valla, Falstad, Leoric and Kharazim. The enemy team has just so many Giant Killers and Drain Hope to melt your tanks (And Azmodan).

However games like those are very rare.

Rare but if said assassins suck at laning/objectives or just at grouping up, then they will have a harder time. Plus the likelihood of everyone taking giant killer is rare.

[Delekii]

This is likely an outlier case. How many games have you played in total?

It's definitely not an outlier, teamp comp in qm matches has been horrible recently. I've noticed it myself.

We had a team of 5 assassins vs 3 tanks and 2 healers. I mean really, how is that even possible? You can make 2 good teams out of those 10 people.. how does it end up like that?

[ro9ue]

Yeah it's kinda shitty, I've had quite a few myself.

Also, I don't mind getting a weird comp, as long as the opposing team also gets an equally weird comp.

[Slant]

Don't worry. Hero League is fucked, too. Got my rank tanked by 10 ranks in two weeks because of matchmaking.

[Nerraw]

Don't worry. Hero League is fucked, too. Got my rank tanked by 10 ranks in two weeks because of matchmaking.

It's worse than QM. Where QM "merely" screws up on comps mostly, HL just throws random people into the mix as long as their HL rank is somewhat alike. Doesn't matter if you have 150 games or 1500 games. If you have around the same rank, you're playing together.

[Slant]

It's worse than QM. Where QM "merely" screws up on comps mostly, HL just throws random people into the mix as long as their HL rank is somewhat alike. Doesn't matter if you have 150 games or 1500 games. If you have around the same rank, you're playing together.

I had exactly that typed in as my main gripe, but deleted it, because of the inevitable flood of people telling me it's my fault all along. You have no idea how dissatisfying it is to lose a game and later find out that they're on my team with ~300 games played and I'm sitting there at 2k getting explained how I'm supposed to focus Morales... who's sitting behind not one, but two warriors and two assassins in the way.

And to make it even more comical, I'm playing Raynor with giant killer and destroy pretty much all tanks but Johanna within seconds, or at least force them to retreat, which to me is almost as good as killing them. I may not be able to outdps Morales, but god... if someone else helped, we could blow up Muradin in 2 seconds and then the gates would be open to the juicier targets. But no, please... Illidan, go ahead and dive right into the midst of them, get blown up in a split second and then complain how we're not focusing Morales...

[RH92]

Rare but if said assassins suck at laning/objectives or just at grouping up, then they will have a harder time. Plus the likelihood of everyone taking giant killer is rare.

Well, the game happened to me and they all took Giant Killers

[Nerraw]

Isn't that....you know....kinda the point of a ranking system?

A ranking system that completely disregards experience is fun for absolutely no one. Not the guys getting stomped, nor the guys getting dragged down by the people who keep going back into the fight with 5% hp left.