New Matchmaking System

Everything dealing with the video game developed by Cyanide!
morbidorbits
Posts: 17
Joined: 08 October 2009, 16:30

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby morbidorbits » 23 March 2016, 22:34

Did you miss the context of discussing teams with fewer than 5 games played?
I know, and that doesn't change a word of what I said.
Teams with that few games have not had the time to establish their actual performance level to a satisfactory level.
Which is a reason to INCREASE the 50, not decrease it. Because your team with 3 wins more might actually find playing the sameTVplusWizard team a walkover.
I don't even care if that's fair or not, it's dumb is the point.
No, you just don't like it. There's a pretty big difference. If they are evenly matched and coach B wins then the system is doing its job! And you're still talking as if a wizard is an iWin button...

@ morbidorbits - I'd like to know what relevance you think that has. Regardless of how much BB2 I play (and I do) I have many hundreds of hours in BB1, LE and CE, as well as having run the largest player-run open league on Cyanide (which was bigger than any league but Nagg and Auld) for about 3 years.
I don't understand why you would be so cagey about checking steam and sharing how many hours you have played BB2 for. That is what we are discussing here, although the others are all relevant too. It's really no big deal to get all cagey about. :roll:

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7041
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby dode74 » 23 March 2016, 22:40

And I don't see the relevance of the question. What we are discussing here is not solely BB2, it's matchmaking in BB2, and there is a whole pile of information which comes from other MM environments which is entirely relevant. If it's no big deal then why are you asking at all?
Image

morbidorbits
Posts: 17
Joined: 08 October 2009, 16:30

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby morbidorbits » 23 March 2016, 22:42

And I don't see the relevance of the question. What we are discussing here is not solely BB2, it's matchmaking in BB2, and there is a whole pile of information which comes from other MM environments which is entirely relevant. If it's no big deal then why are you asking at all?
Hahaha

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7041
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby dode74 » 23 March 2016, 22:43

Oh, ok. You're trolling.
Image

licker34
Posts: 163
Joined: 09 March 2016, 17:40

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby licker34 » 23 March 2016, 23:04

I don't think accurate zsums will happen within 5 or 10 games anyway
Because.. you don't think?
Oh, you got me. Ok, I know that accurate zsums will not happen within the first 5 or 10 games for most coaches.

It's actually definitional in the construction of the method.
You're applying an additional inducement value on teams which have not established their actual performance rate.
On the contrary, they have established their precise performance rate so far. You seem to be operating under the illusion that a team has a particular zSum at which it will sit, whereas we know that performance of teams changes as the team itself changes. Rolled a +ST? Awesome. Lost the AG6 Wardancer? Less so.
As we've discussed your zSum will fluctuate in a range correspondent with various factors. But you know where those factors don't really apply? Hmm. I wonder where that would be?
But TV doesn't change appreciably for low games teams while TV++ is an instant swing of 100 (that's 5 skills or an extra positional!) for a 1 game team. These teams are nominally mechanically identical since they have had no chance to add anything yet.
And we're measuring performance. If the 100TV is too much then it will swing the other way. That's how the system works.
Ugg... we know how the system works, but it only really works in aggregate, it doesn't work particularly well on individual games, BECAUSE IT CANNOT. Again, rather definitional, but especially with large zsum multipliers you will almost never actually be at the 'real' value which would produce that 50% goal. And exactly to the point, we're still discussing the space within the method where it simply does not have enough results to produce an accurate measure of your performance. Why? Because it doesn't really measure your performance in individual games (again, this is completely definitional as the system is described), it seeks to measure your performance over several games. If you disagree then you need to simply make zsum a static value of +1, 0 or -1 which only applies after your last match. That would be really pointless, but you know where it actually applies? Yep, in that low games played region.

I'm not sure what 'missing half off all teams' means. And you can game the system however it's implemented, that really isn't a consideration in my opinion.
Typo - half of all teams. The median games played is 5, so any factor not implemented before 5 games misses half the teams. And gaming the system absolutely should be a consideration. It's the ability to game it which got us here.
I don't think gaming the system is what got us here. I think the nature of CRP in open ladders got us here (and CRP generally within different TV bands). Making a killer cpomb team isn't gaming anything, and allowing for huge TV differential pairings also isn't gaming anything. But likely we are working from different definitions of 'gaming the system'.
I equate it to 12 wizards. If that's too much we'll just let the system self correct.
That would be great if you had any sort of self-correction happening. As it is you don't, which means you're talking nonsense. And you know it.
I'm not really talking nonsense though and I think you know it. 12 wizards surely is nonsense, but then so is a multiplier of 50 for TV++. It's all nonsense really because the goal of making every match a 50% outcome is nonsense.

If you are actually serious about it you would take my question seriously and develop a system which handicaps rookie teams since TV++ hasn't kicked in yet. Seems that's about 10% of all games if we take your median number of 5 matches per team before retirement. And certainly making sure that first game any coach plays is 'fair' should be the highest priority.

Well if we're worried about individual games and not the aggregate at least.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 7041
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby dode74 » 23 March 2016, 23:40

Yeah, we're going round in circles again. You're now pretending that a system with information is worse than a system without simply because the with-information system doesn't start out perfect. Not playing that game with you again, licker.
If you are actually serious about it you would take my question seriously and develop a system which handicaps rookie teams since TV++ hasn't kicked in yet.
You develop it. The current system, despite your pretence and protestation otherwise, is no worse than TV alone.
Image

licker34
Posts: 163
Joined: 09 March 2016, 17:40

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby licker34 » 25 March 2016, 14:30

A system with imperfect information due to the variance at low games played is worse in some cases.

That's what I've said.

And no, I won't create a system to 'fix' imaginary issues, that's the job TV++ is after. But, the question remains. If your goal is to provide 'fair' matches then you're not taking advantage of the data you do have to address the purely mechanical issues at (primarily) zero games played.

Why is that?

EastCoast
Posts: 135
Joined: 09 September 2009, 22:47

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby EastCoast » 25 March 2016, 16:07

:roll:
Image

TheBagdad
Posts: 37
Joined: 13 August 2015, 00:43

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby TheBagdad » 22 July 2016, 18:00

I still don't get how the new matchmaking system is working.

Why does my 2k+ human team always get matched vs 1k or 1.1k team when I have 2 or 3 teams around 1k at the same time in the matchmaking?

:roll:

User avatar
dragonwolf
Posts: 442
Joined: 09 September 2015, 10:59

Re: New Matchmaking System

Postby dragonwolf » 22 July 2016, 18:04

I still don't get how the new matchmaking system is working.

Why does my 2k+ human team always get matched vs 1k or 1.1k team when I have 2 or 3 teams around 1k at the same time in the matchmaking?

:roll:
At the present time the MM can match you 1000 over or under your tv from next week and the release of the undead it will be reduce to 500tv +- and the spinning time should be extended from 3 min to 5min to find a better match . I m sure someone will correct me if i am wrong


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron