A PvP matchmaking idea...

Options
Unknown
Unknown
edited April 2015 in MPQ General Discussion
I had this saved up for the next time D3 decided to go for their PvP MMR "test" which was so unpopular last time (only a matter of time til they did) and happily (for me) they saved it til after I stopped playing... HOORAY!!! Still, I thought I would share in case ppl think it's a good idea etc etc.

So the aims are to stop vets beating up 2* rosters (dev's aim) to make PvP less unfun for vets than the new system (devs bang on about the fun factor all the time..) and to stop ppl from feeling like they are being punished for progressing (should be an aim IMO even if never been explicitly stated by the devs).

The idea...

At the start of each PvP, at the point where you select a time slice you are assigned an MMR. That MMR is based upon the level of your featured hero and the average level of your top 3 heroes (not including the featured if he/she is in there). The level is determined by level divided by 13 multiplied by number of covers the hero has. This is to take into account an intentionally underlevelled, lvl 94, fully covered 3* is a lot better than a soft capped lvl 100 3*. I don't want to punish ppl for levelling heroes as they get covers rather than waiting til they are cover maxed during the 2* to 3* transition. This means that a 2*-3* player with a few lvl 100 ish soft capped 3*s will actually be scaled based on their fully covered 2*s.

DISPLAY the MMR on your PvP nodes screen.

The equation for levels might need a tweak, but I think covers needs to be in there too....

The MMR you are assigned is equal to the pre-change equilibrium score a roster of that strength would sit on. By equilibrium score I mean the points total you could sit on and play few to no matches to stay there for a prolonged period. So, for example, a maxed out roster would sit on 600 ish comfortably and barely take losses. So the highest MMR (for a maxed roster) would be 600. A 2* roster would be 300 (or something similar. A 2* player would know better where their equilibrium used to sit).

MMR is assigned in bands.... so average hero levels of a-b puts you at 300 MMR, c-d puts you at 350 etc.

You are matched against ppl in your MMR band and possibly one above and below. If the pool of possible targets is too small widen to another band above and below (to avoid only ever seeing the same few ppl in your queues which is a risk given the way everyone is already split up by time slices.) This means that you are only seeing similar strength rosters until you reach a high enough score for MMR to break down (as it has for a long time and still does). There is no MMR adjustment during an event it is all roster strength based.

The big bit.... you get bonus points for wins UNTIL your score reaches your MMR rating. This only changes the points you gain... not the points your target loses. Start at double points and have it tail off as you get closer to your MMR in score. Once you are up to your MMR rating it reverts to the normal score calculations and stays like that unless you go back below your MMR in points. THIS is the payoff for being a vet and having tougher matches. You are still facing other maxed rosters but you get more points to compensate and get through the dead-space levels of points without an unfun and irritating grind then get to the meat of the PvP (higher scores) and have to compete normally.

Bonus points might need to be removed in the last few hours of an event to stop ppl abusing the system to dominate fresh brackets. Maybe the last 3 hours?

That's it really... you face similar rosters but get rewarded for facing tougher rosters earlier on in an event with more points but it doesn't unbalance rankings because you're only getting the advantage through scores you will always pass through every event anyway.

The possible cons (that I can think of):

It's a bit more complicated and ppl might wonder why the scores on offer keep going down BUT ppl will get used to it and you can have a UI element to help explain. Ppl complain about hitting nothing but 25 or worse matches in stretches already.... so no change if they keep doing so icon_e_smile.gif

You can try and game the system by having only 2 high level heroes then the levels fall off a cliff. That would be fixed by changing it to average of featured + top 2 only but I feel that undervalues having a few hero options ( esp in cases of clashing colours) so I went for 3 and could even see an argument for 4 or 5 heroes for the average. Not that many ppl would build abnormal rosters AND while they may have easier opponents by manipulating their MMR they also stop gaining bonus points earlier. The idea of the system is to make trying to tank your MMR by manipulating your roster kind of irrelevant

You can also try and game the system by joining then levelling your featured. Again the benefit of hitting lower level teams is balanced by earlier loss of bonus points AND you can only do it once per hero icon_e_smile.gif

Reduced engagement.... so basically you need to play less matyches, so are playing a bit less, so might become less engaged. Dunno if that would be a thing but can't deny it as a possible con.

So there is my idea. Good? Bad? Improvable? Beyond redemption? icon_e_smile.gif

Comments

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    I'm not sure how this would improve the situation. This system also punishes people who play occasionally, but don't have enough iso to level up their characters.

    I think the problem with Demiurge's latest fix is not the MMR number, it's the actual match making itself. The MMR number still seems pretty consistent and decently thought out (after many months of trial and error). The match making has just gotten horrendous.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Options
    daibar wrote:
    I'm not sure how this would improve the situation. This system also punishes people who play occasionally, but don't have enough iso to level up their characters.

    I think the problem with Demiurge's latest fix is not the MMR number, it's the actual match making itself. The MMR number still seems pretty consistent and decently thought out (after many months of trial and error). The match making has just gotten horrendous.

    The basic idea is to accelerate point gain at the lower points levels which are where it changed. If you're getting bonus points for wins until you hit the level you used to reach by beating lower level teams then the overall amount of time and effort you need to invest would be about the same. So it attempts to balance out facing beastly rosters from the start.

    As for ppl who don't level heroes... well they are only playing against similar rosters, which is what D3 is aiming for.

    Maybe my explanation is terrible...

    Basically vet rosters will be matched against other vet rosters BUT your first match for 27 points becomes a match for 54 points with the multiplier tailing off until you reach 600 points (assuming a max lvl roster giving a max MMR rating). Then from that point onwards it plays like it always has (facing highly scored rosters). The person being hit loses the normal number of points.

    This also helps with the insane incoming attacks because ppl are getting more points per match... so less attacks in total... so less attacks on everyone meaning less points loss and not needing to make as many extra attacks etc etc.

    Noob rosters face other noob rosters but aren't getting a points multiplier to do so. So for them it's as if nothing changed BUT you don't get slapped by vet rosters at any point cause they are all fighting each other (but needing less matches to advance than said vets used to to compensate increased difficulty (and longer matches, more damage taken etc)).
  • Thorzhamer
    Thorzhamer Posts: 35 Just Dropped In
    Options
    bonfire01 wrote:
    daibar wrote:
    I'm not sure how this would improve the situation. This system also punishes people who play occasionally, but don't have enough iso to level up their characters.

    I think the problem with Demiurge's latest fix is not the MMR number, it's the actual match making itself. The MMR number still seems pretty consistent and decently thought out (after many months of trial and error). The match making has just gotten horrendous.

    The basic idea is to accelerate point gain at the lower points levels which are where it changed. If you're getting bonus points for wins until you hit the level you used to reach by beating lower level teams then the overall amount of time and effort you need to invest would be about the same. So it attempts to balance out facing beastly rosters from the start.

    As for ppl who don't level heroes... well they are only playing against similar rosters, which is what D3 is aiming for.

    Maybe my explanation is terrible...

    Basically vet rosters will be matched against other vet rosters BUT your first match for 27 points becomes a match for 54 points with the multiplier tailing off until you reach 600 points (assuming a max lvl roster giving a max MMR rating). Then from that point onwards it plays like it always has (facing highly scored rosters). The person being hit loses the normal number of points.

    This also helps with the insane incoming attacks because ppl are getting more points per match... so less attacks in total... so less attacks on everyone meaning less points loss and not needing to make as many extra attacks etc etc.

    Noob rosters face other noob rosters but aren't getting a points multiplier to do so. So for them it's as if nothing changed BUT you don't get slapped by vet rosters at any point cause they are all fighting each other (but needing less matches to advance than said vets used to to compensate increased difficulty (and longer matches, more damage taken etc)).


    I LOVE this idea.

Categories