Taking A Look At Matchmaking and Tier Progression

124

Comments

  • AettThorn
    AettThorn Posts: 125
    Ohboy wrote:
    Gideon wrote:
    I played Mersicide 5-10 times this event. The way I believe matchmaking should work is if there are let's say 7000 players in platinum I shouldn't play the same player twice in the same event. If the matchmaking gives me player A for my first battle player A should now be eliminated from my pool of players to play against for the event. Next match I get player T and after that then player T is eliminated from my pool of players for the event. None of us should ever see the same opponent twice in any single event.

    I agree with the concept, but I feel it should be by unique decks, not player.

    So I can play you 10 times in a row, no problem. But I want to face 10 walkers.

    I'd be fine with that as well. Played the same Kiora deck this morning three times. It's a fetch deck, so the game crashed all three times. Three losses to the same deck because of game crashes. That ain't okay.
  • UweTellkampf
    UweTellkampf Posts: 376 Mover and Shaker
    Any development with the broken (?) matchmaking? In the current event I'm facing my third "Ultradaved" out of 6 games played. I don't really mind the difficulty - his decks are pretty strong - but this just is tedious in terms of having such variety of decks out there and being forced to play always the same ones.
  • babar3355
    babar3355 Posts: 1,128 Chairperson of the Boards
    AettThorn wrote:
    Ohboy wrote:
    Gideon wrote:
    I played Mersicide 5-10 times this event. The way I believe matchmaking should work is if there are let's say 7000 players in platinum I shouldn't play the same player twice in the same event. If the matchmaking gives me player A for my first battle player A should now be eliminated from my pool of players to play against for the event. Next match I get player T and after that then player T is eliminated from my pool of players for the event. None of us should ever see the same opponent twice in any single event.

    I agree with the concept, but I feel it should be by unique decks, not player.

    So I can play you 10 times in a row, no problem. But I want to face 10 walkers.

    I'd be fine with that as well. Played the same Kiora deck this morning three times. It's a fetch deck, so the game crashed all three times. Three losses to the same deck because of game crashes. That ain't okay.


    Fine, but shouldn't the probability of playing Gideon 10 times be roughly (1/7000)^10? Not only do frequent opponents start running grief decks for non-event decks that lag or crash the system or stall endlessly, but people like me don't get to hear how my decks play against other people. Everyone loves when someone messages them that they are playing against your deck.
  • octal9
    octal9 Posts: 593 Critical Contributor
    babar3355 wrote:
    but people like me don't get to hear how my decks play against other people. Everyone loves when someone messages them that they are playing against your deck.
    Yep. A week and a half ago I started crafting a few decks on PWs I don't use and then realized it was a completely useless exercise.
  • buscemi
    buscemi Posts: 673 Critical Contributor
    octal9 wrote:
    babar3355 wrote:
    but people like me don't get to hear how my decks play against other people. Everyone loves when someone messages them that they are playing against your deck.
    Yep. A week and a half ago I started crafting a few decks on PWs I don't use and then realized it was a completely useless exercise.

    Meanwhile coalitions which contain players that everyone plays against gain an unfair advantage, through nefarious means which are well known to the community by now.
  • Yvendros
    Yvendros Posts: 202 Tile Toppler
    that'd be cool if you could view stats for your decks. how many AI wins/losses it's received. of course that stat would reset once you make any changes...
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Yeah I want to craft decks for the ai too.

    Will admit it was fun the time someone told me they met my deck during Halloween event when I dropped down to gold.
  • UweTellkampf
    UweTellkampf Posts: 376 Mover and Shaker
    Ohboy wrote:
    ...when I dropped down to gold.

    How did you manage to do this?
  • THEMAGICkMAN
    THEMAGICkMAN Posts: 697 Critical Contributor
    UweTellkampf wrote:
    Ohboy wrote:
    ...when I dropped down to gold.

    How did you manage to do this?

    I'm assuming he had only a couple of colours in platinum and then when the event with 2 colours came along, he had those colours in gold still.
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    THEMAGICkMAN wrote:
    UweTellkampf wrote:
    Ohboy wrote:
    ...when I dropped down to gold.

    How did you manage to do this?

    I'm assuming he had only a couple of colours in platinum and then when the event with 2 colours came along, he had those colours in gold still.


    Yeah I had everything but black in platinum, so Halloween event was the only time I was in gold.
  • Lagartha
    Lagartha Posts: 186 Tile Toppler
    Meanwhile coalitions which contain players that everyone plays against gain an unfair advantage, through nefarious means which are well known to the community by now.
    You do realise that we did that for the old EC event back when each battle took 45 minutes and it's not something that happens anymore, right?
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Lagartha wrote:
    Meanwhile coalitions which contain players that everyone plays against gain an unfair advantage, through nefarious means which are well known to the community by now.
    You do realise that we did that for the old EC event back when each battle took 45 minutes and it's not something that happens anymore, right?


    Sure, and that wasn't unethical at all.

    And when the loophole of allowing players to come and go in the coalition during an event was open, I'm sure everyone was honest about whether they abused the hole.

    Come on, we're adults here. If it works, someone will milk it. Why pretend it doesn't /won't happen?
  • Lagartha
    Lagartha Posts: 186 Tile Toppler
    Ohboy wrote:
    Lagartha wrote:
    Meanwhile coalitions which contain players that everyone plays against gain an unfair advantage, through nefarious means which are well known to the community by now.
    You do realise that we did that for the old EC event back when each battle took 45 minutes and it's not something that happens anymore, right?


    Sure, and that wasn't unethical at all.

    And when the loophole of allowing players to come and go in the coalition during an event was open, I'm sure everyone was honest about whether they abused the hole.

    Come on, we're adults here. If it works, someone will milk it. Why pretend it doesn't /won't happen?
    I'm not saying it wasn't unethical. I just openly admitted that we had done it in the past. What would be the point of lying about it now?
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    The way you phrased it just made it sound like you were indignant that anyone would suggest you would stoop so low as to abuse the advantage. That it was only something done during EC where there was a "valid reason" .

    I'm just saying let's not kid ourselves. If you could come up with an excuse to justify doing it back then, you can come up with one now or in future. It's an advantage, whether you choose to use it or not.
  • Lagartha
    Lagartha Posts: 186 Tile Toppler
    Ohboy wrote:
    The way you phrased it just made it sound like you were indignant that anyone would suggest you would stoop so low as to abuse the advantage. That it was only something done during EC where there was a "valid reason" .

    I'm just saying let's not kid ourselves. If you could come up with an excuse to justify doing it back then, you can come up with one now or in future. It's an advantage, whether you choose to use it or not.
    K. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • buscemi
    buscemi Posts: 673 Critical Contributor
    Hibernum_JC wrote:
    This is an actual issue (matchmaking/Standard format) we're looking to resolve at some point in time (I can't give specifics because I really don't have any).


    So no progress has been made on matchmaking at all? After all this time? How come you have so much time to constantly overhaul the user interface? The endless flip-flopping about how hexproof works.. what is it now, 4 major changes to functionality over the course of the last year? How come you keep changing old code which works and which you could leave alone into code which doesn't, such as with Fetch cards, and clicking on supports in 1.9? You spent all that time around SOI changing the entire functionality of Discard and adding keywords to all of the Discard cards, and you told us it was important for some reason, but it clearly wasn't because you forgot all about keywording Discard in Kaladesh?

    Perhaps you could tell us just what kind of matchmaking system you DID put in place, and what it's intentions were? You did this with the design of the 3 Energize planeswalkers, and the results were reasonably well received.
  • buscemi
    buscemi Posts: 673 Critical Contributor
    Still looking forward to those matchmaking changes!

    Just to reiterate: everyone would like more of their opponents to be matched appropriately to their skill levels and the cards in their decks.

    Also, we don't want to play [redacticide] any more.
  • Mainloop25
    Mainloop25 Posts: 1,959 Chairperson of the Boards
    The smaller brackets are helping with that. However, I'm still facing the same names within my bracket now.
  • Dogslaya
    Dogslaya Posts: 7
    The smaller brackets actually make the matchmaking issue worse (if you're in a bracket with mersicide and ultradaved - sorry schmara ☹️)
  • Sarahschmara
    Sarahschmara Posts: 554 Critical Contributor
    Dogslaya wrote:
    The smaller brackets actually make the matchmaking issue worse (if you're in a bracket with mersicide and ultradaved - sorry schmara ☹️)

    Well, at least I haven't faced killwind (although I see him hanging out at the top of the leaderboard!) icon_e_wink.gif

Categories