+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 153
Like Tree55Likes

  Click here to go to the first Rift Team post in this thread.   Thread: How ELO Works in RIFT

  1. #16
    Shadowlander
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ianto Jones View Post
    This is what I was trying to tell you in the other thread: I think the system is theoretically supposed to work this way, but it can't because there aren't enough players with high-ish rating to fill teams. The vast majority are so bad and people who aren't bad are so few that it's impossible for it to make matches like this.

    it doesnt seem like that , during prime time queues are basically instant and i rarely see more than 1 or 2 of the same players. The fact there is even instant queues means the system isn't waiting or has super broad matching rules. just add a minimum wait 60 seconds or something. But ive been insta queued into 5v5 matches with 3 players on my team in blues, no earrings, etc. there's no way that should happen in prime time if the system worked that way

    on a side note i wonder how much my ELO went up for beating the premade only stack heals and can't kill thiefs raid geared greybriar scrub squad

    http://i.imgur.com/5piXG7o.jpg
    Last edited by Definitleynottechfall; 04-06-2015 at 09:25 PM.

  2. #17
    Champion of Telara
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,270

    Default

    This is not an ELO system. This is a bare bones W/L matchmaking disguised as an ELO system. Calling this ELO is basically a disservice to real ELO games.

    Until you make a seperate PM and solo queue, it's a joke that devs cannot grasp this. Because that's how arena games work.... take a random team of 5 vs another full team and see how that works based on a useless W/L ratio.

    Let me ask, how well do you think this will work for a raid? A team of 20 pugs (who happens to have the achieve/kill) vs a guild (PM) run? This ELO is a joke, calling it ELO is a joke which is only proving the point, PVP in Rift is a joke.

    This match making CAN work, but it needs differentiate between queue types. Solo queue and PM Queue at the very least. And the ability to enforce those sets. 5 man PM should not be put against solo. Will it make them wait longer for another 5 man PM, yes but that's the price you pay. The same reason why CQ PM should not be limited (but not for the reason given). If a 20 man PM wants to queue up, be it but they won't be allowed to enter til another 20 man PM queues (or 2 more since there is 3 sides) and all enters at the same time. If there are no other PM, then they need to realize that they will not be allowed to enter.

    I believe this is more then fair. PVP players always say want a good even match and there really is no more balanced pvp then if all 3 sides have a full PM. And more players enjoy these matches much more then having it stacked on one side. They get to play with their friends, which is what Trion wanted, right? And the only thing to take this idea farther is, if 3 PM joins kill counters should increase before tripping. Whenever there are even sides, kills come fast (as it should) and if players are enjoying why not let the match last a little longer.

  3. #18
    Soulwalker
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    22

    Default

    I wonder if it would be better to add objectives to the ELO to incentivize team work.

    Things like:
    Flag cappers get a modifier increasing / reducing the significance of the adjustment
    Healers get a swing chart based on average heal volumes (not hps)
    DPS get a 'time engaged' modifier
    Carriers / Glass Snipers get a modifier

    Although seeing some of the quiet periods has me suspect that this will just be abused.

    Pretty sure there would be some way to apply these changes during 'primetime' and make the normal win / loss apply during 'off-peak' to make more rational games

  4. #19
    Prophet of Telara Meowy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,134

    Default

    How about something like this:

    Make 2-3 'ELO Threshold' like for example one for those 2000 and below, one for 2001-4000 and one for 4001 and up. When people que, they can only join WFs under their threshold so they will relatively be fighting against people of 'same skill' until their ELO goes up or down and change threshold.

    Of course, to those that que as group, their group's average ELO becomes their ELO threshold.

    P.S. I don't know if threshold is the correct term and I am just randomly suggesting numbers but I think you get the idea.
    Serale@Faeblight

  5. #20
    Ascendant spaceboots's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,760

    Default

    Higher elo should award more for dailies too.

    NTEs only get easier, as pvp gets harder.... and/or more frustrating

  6. #21
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Thank you for some information at long last.

    Given that the current system clearly does not yield very nice results for most individual players (even if on the whole it may statisticly end up close to 50/50 win loss ratio), I would hope we can try some changes.

    Personally I'm in favor of simplification rather than trying to find a super complex formula to make it better.
    Remove the stuff below and my belief is that we will get a more enjoyable system.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ocho View Post
    The amount it goes up and down depends on the challenge your team faced. If a team's total ELO score was less than their opponents and they won then those winning underdogs would have their ELO score go up more than usual, and the losers would go down more than usual. However if the compared total ELO ratings expected one team to dominate, and they did dominate, then the final scores would be adjusted only slightly (the winners getting very little, and the losers losing very little).
    Quote Originally Posted by Ocho View Post
    • attempts to get the same number of healers
    • attempts to get the same number of DPS
    • if possible, have the same number of Pre-mades

  7. #22
    coy
    coy is offline
    Telaran
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Hmm, as far as I understand, this "ELO" system does not prevent the lvl100 to play together with fresh 65 in green cloth. The new players and the rank100 will be in the same group because of the same win/loss ratio -> frustration guaranteed for the high rank player, like we have it now

    The perfect solution for me would be a system, with a matchmaking in place that pick rank100 only + ELO (and for all others rank +/-20 +ELO together), additionally to any new system for BOT/leech prevention

    I'd wait double/triple the queue time for a solution like this, just to play with people who know the objectives

  8. #23
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spaceboots View Post
    Higher elo should award more for dailies too.

    NTEs only get easier, as pvp gets harder.... and/or more frustrating
    So basically people who only pre made get more rewards while those who solo queue get less? No thanks.

    I'd agree with your suggestion is ELO was based on anything substantial, rather than just win/loss ratio in the cluster**** that is the current match-making system. Until ELO actually tracks some decent metrics that reflect player skill, effort, and contribution, your suggestion is a no-go.

  9. #24
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coy View Post
    Hmm, as far as I understand, this "ELO" system does not prevent the lvl100 to play together with fresh 65 in green cloth. The new players and the rank100 will be in the same group because of the same win/loss ratio -> frustration guaranteed for the high rank player, like we have it now

    The perfect solution for me would be a system, with a matchmaking in place that pick rank100 only + ELO (and for all others rank +/-20 +ELO together), additionally to any new system for BOT/leech prevention

    I'd wait double/triple the queue time for a solution like this, just to play with people who know the objectives
    Back when we had prestige ranks that meant something, and no bolstering, this was possible. Not so easy today.

  10. #25
    Fia
    Fia is offline
    Champion of Telara Fia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nefelia View Post
    It does certainly explain why those who spend a great deal of time in premeds have such a miserable time when they solo-queue: their ELO is artificially inflated by their easy PM wins so they get extremely bad teams when they solo-queue. Trion has basically trapped these people into their PMs, unless they wish to go on a losing spree long enough to correct their ELO.
    Certainly seems that way, though I have to admit that, at least for me, I have been experiencing a lot of pretty even matches lately, which is good. I do agree however, that ELO should be calculated independent of your teams performance, i.e. ELO has to be calculated for every player individually, based on his/her perfomance, something like dps output, number of kills, hps output, ... . Also it should take into account gear"score" differences.
    Fiia@Typhiria | Asthea@Hailol
    Cleric-Heal/Tank/DD | Lvl70

    Now with new Prime Content! -> http://youtube.com/astheatv


  11. #26
    Shadowlander
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ocho View Post
    When the matchmaker is creating two teams for matches, it takes several factors to balance the two teams:
    •team sizes
    • relative total ELO rating
    • attempts to get the same number of healers
    • attempts to get the same number of DPS
    • if possible, have the same number of Pre-mades

    After studying the logs of hundreds of thousands of warfront outcomes, the biggest indicator in who was likely to win a match isn’t which side has the most healers, or DPS, or pre-mades... The most accurate predictor of which side will win was which side had the highest total participating ELO rating.

    One interesting thing that we noted was that participation is the most important factor in which side wins. Although the match maker can try to put together two teams with a relatively equal chance of winning, if someone doesn't show up to a match, or bails out, then that side is going to be handicapped until the matchmaker can try to find someone to take the place of the person who didn't participate.
    This is way too contradicting. The biggest indicator to win the match is total participating elo rating. Yet the matchmaker doesnt take into account that factor to adjust the elo. There shouldnt be a match if the initial players dont acceppt to form the match in the first place. Also what if:
    - The players on the dominated side leave the match, then the matchmaker tries to put in stronger people, then does the elo self adjust if these new additional and stronger people manage to win back the match against dominating side ?
    - Vice versa, if people on the dominating side leave the match, new people join in and lose, how will the matchmaker adjust the elo ?
    - Is there elo punishment for someone that leaves the match on purpose ?

    Being very familiar with how elo works in other games (here is one good read:http://de.dota2.com/2013/12/matchmaking-2/), If none of these things (and maybe more complicated factors) are taken into account, its only a matter of time before the forum is filled with the posts of broken elo and how people try to game the elo system. I myself already have full of ideas how it can be abused:

    Example 1: easiest for solo players: they just have to leave the match that is about to end with a foreseeable loss result and keep on doing the same until they are in the dominating side of the match.

    Example 2: a bit more complex and require coordination from players
    10 people in 1 guild (or even pug) try to queue at the same time. 5 on main and 5 on alts. They only tick in 1 certain type of map (codex for example). They will leave if 10 of them are not in the same match and not in opposite side. Eventually, the system will match them up altogether because of not enough player size problem, then 5 people on alt will saboteur the match and boost the elo of 5 people on main. 5 out of max 15 players per PvP match has way enough influence to make this happen.

  12. #27
    Sword of Telara
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fia View Post
    Certainly seems that way, though I have to admit that, at least for me, I have been experiencing a lot of pretty even matches lately, which is good. I do agree however, that ELO should be calculated independent of your teams performance, i.e. ELO has to be calculated for every player individually, based on his/her perfomance, something like dps output, number of kills, hps output, ... . Also it should take into account gear"score" differences.
    when you calculate ELO based on players performance a good player will raise ELO even when loosing and since he will be put in wfs with bad players to compensate, he will be put in worse teams every time. it means the better he plays the more likely he will loose a wf.

    an ELO based on player performance only works when all in your wf would have similar ELO ratings. as soon as you mix good and bad players, the better a good player gets, the worse his team will be. it would be bad to be a good player. ;)

    i am not sure if its possible but the only solution could be to have wfs with ppl of similar ELO ratings, so bad ones play against bad ones and good ones against good ones. mixing bad and good players obviously not seem to work.

    problem is that you wouldnt have enough high ELO rated players to fill big wfs, probably just at primetime and these would fight against the same players most of the time.

    as bad as the current ELO rating is, there is no easy fix to it.
    despite all the ELO ratings a big factor in wfs is the mix of roles. a team with no or next to no healers is quite handicaped. should it be forbidden to change roles in wfs, the number of healers in each team at least could be even.

  13. #28
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xirxe View Post
    as bad as the current ELO rating is, there is no easy fix to it.
    What everyone should think about is: Would completely random be worse or better? I think it would be better.
    Would in any case be real easy to implement and try for a week or two...

  14. #29
    Ascendant Kronos v's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    7,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ocho View Post
    When the matchmaker is creating two teams for matches, it takes several factors to balance the two teams:
    • team sizes
    [u]• relative total ELO rating[u/]
    • attempts to get the same number of healers
    • attempts to get the same number of DPS
    • if possible, have the same number of Pre-mades

    After studying the logs of hundreds of thousands of warfront outcomes, the biggest indicator in who was likely to win a match isn’t which side has the most healers, or DPS, or pre-mades... The most accurate predictor of which side will win was which side had the highest total participating ELO rating.
    I think I've spotted where the matchmaking system is broken.

    how about instead we try matching by individual ELO rating - meaning players in the same match have near the same ELO.

    the current system only punishes players when you can have Cupcakey
    Quote Originally Posted by Riane View Post
    I'm at 4612.
    teamed with a bunch of Micknicos
    Quote Originally Posted by MickNico View Post
    on PST my elo is 318.
    for a ten player team rating of 7474.
    it wont matter how good Cupcakey is, when the rest of the team is a field of potatoes, they will get farmed.

  15. #30
    General of Telara Sheo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    975

    Default

    Well, there should be a reset when new expansion came out. This way old players don't have advantage/disadvantage against new players. I think this is how its work in other elo games?


    I still don't believe mine is not bugged tough So this is why I solo heal lot of time (except when I queue with a healer) coz I count 2? And this is why we got "potatoes" on our team, to balance out my elo? I feel sorry for my team members! Vote kick me if you see me next time. (maybe they forgot to apply fernand solution on EU?)


    If 5ers would put strictly against other 5er, that will reduce 5er amount drastically. We already had it and this is my experience from old/previous system when Vanen did a lot 5er. Other 5ers disbanded after the first loose, and we had 30-40 min waiting time. Now 5er just hope to put against pugs, and what is very interesting always the 5er has the advantage: 5-7 ppl on pre against 3-4 on pug side. Even if later more ppl will join 1-2 min can decide the winner (especially in khartan), and the future ppl just join to an inevitable ending wasting their time. Could you fix this soon?


    Matchmaking needs a fix, or a complete revamp. Enough of the roflstomp matches, spawn camping not fun doesn't matter which side we are.
    Last edited by Sheo; 04-07-2015 at 05:23 AM.
    Sheona/Faynee <VANEN> , <Apotheosys>

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts