How does the current matchmaking and threat system actually works?

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

11 minutes ago, Darkzero3802 said:

As far as APB goes your never going to see more then 50 so when a server is full matchmaking should work in the realm of APB, but it doesnt. This game will nevr have an open world like other games so comparing it to that is pointless.

I just told you why it does not work even at 50 people. 50 people is already such a minuscule amount of pop for the system to work with. Now remove all the people in missions already which is like 75% of the district and you're left with like 10 people for the game to match with. That is like two groups at best. 

[CookiePuss 5373]

19 minutes ago, Darkzero3802 said:

This game will never have an open world like other games

Agreed.

It will however eventually implement phasing, allowing matchmaking to select from the ENTIRE pool of online players, as opposed to the max 40 opp now.

[Darkzero3802 606]

1 minute ago, CookiePuss said:

Agreed.

It will however eventually implement phasing, allowing matchmaking to select from the ENTIRE pool of online players, as opposed to the max 40 opp now.

Which will still not fix anything so long as threat is inaccurate as fuck and ppl dethreat

[Fortune Runner 796]

45 minutes ago, Darkzero3802 said:

As far as APB goes your never going to see more then 50 so when a server is full matchmaking should work in the realm of APB, but it doesnt. This game will nevr have an open world like other games so comparing it to that is pointless.

wrong

 

phasing is addressing this issue when it happens

[Darkzero3802 606]

5 minutes ago, Fortune Runner said:

wrong

 

phasing is addressing this issue when it happens

Well see just how well it works given APBs history with updates and new things.

[CookiePuss 5373]

2 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:

Which will still not fix anything so long as threat is inaccurate as fuck and ppl dethreat

Phasing WILL bring better matchmaking, which in itself will reduce the incentive to dethreat.

 

[Darkzero3802 606]

2 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Phasing WILL bring better matchmaking, which in itself will reduce the incentive to dethreat.

 

Right. Like making dethreating something that is suspend-able did?

[LilyV3 323]

last explanation I remember is that the game compares all Mission participants threat and based on that threat there is an expected outcome how close or how hard one should own the other. And if you positively or negatively exceed these expectations you get up or downthreated. And this is based on missions core, so it includes objectives done.

 

A good example was a mission I (gold) had  with a silver buddy vs 2 bronzes. We entered their mission, they made a spot of 2 and got the missions scores for the spot. Then we arrived and I killed them and my buddy got 2 assists . After that the mission ended pretty quickly,  And one of them got silver even if they didn't make a kill. But their score for getting a spot and a spot assist was compared to our expectation in scores, winscore + 2 kills and 2 assists just not meeting the "how hard we should have owned them" So the system surely lowered my threat while upping that poor bronze dudes threat.

 

the Mm however tries to find people of rather equal threat but if that fails for some time opens up more "uneven" options thats why you pretty often get extremely bad setups. What i do not get is why it often does not allow to call backup while it should be possible.

Edited September 25, 2019 by LilyV3

[CookiePuss 5373]

4 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:

Right. Like making dethreating something that is suspend-able did?

Don't get me wrong, players like you will always complain, it's what you do. 

However by removing threat based districts as seperate player pools for matchmaking, you remove the ability for a player to easily put themselves into a pool of players where they do not belong. They will always be matched against the overall pool of players meaning that getting "easier" opp through dethreating will be much more time consuming. It won't be as simple as losing a few matches on purpose, players would have to spend significantly more time lowering their threat for it to make any noticeable difference as far as the opp they receive. 

 

tl;dr  remove one reason for dethreating (unfair matches) and people will be less inclined to WANT to dethreat, and by expanding the player pool to all available players, you make it much more time consuming for players who try to dethreat to actually get easier opp, reducing the INCENTIVE to dethreat

[Darkzero3802 606]

11 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Don't get me wrong, players like you will always complain, it's what you do. 

However by removing threat based districts as seperate player pools for matchmaking, you remove the ability for a player to easily put themselves into a pool of players where they do not belong. They will always be matched against the overall pool of players meaning that getting "easier" opp through dethreating will be much more time consuming. It won't be as simple as losing a few matches on purpose, players would have to spend significantly more time lowering their threat for it to make any noticeable difference as far as the opp they receive. 

 

tl;dr  remove one reason for dethreating (unfair matches) and people will be less inclined to WANT to dethreat, and by expanding the player pool to all available players, you make it much more time consuming for players who try to dethreat to actually get easier opp, reducing the INCENTIVE to dethreat

Dont get me wrong, you make LO look bad by trolling as a SPCT, its what you do. So long as a lower rank means easier opp ppl will continue to dethreat regardless of the avail pool. It means if you dethreat to bronzie you wont have to face golds as one and its more of an incentive to dethreat.

[Revoluzzer 274]

On 9/22/2019 at 8:22 AM, NotZombieBiscuit said:

If you are in the upper 50% score at the end of a match you gain rating based on a bunch of behind the scenes variables. 

 

Of course it is a bit more complicated than that but that is really the simple version of it.

The more complicated bit is that you could also lose threat when you are in the top 50%, but perform worse than the system expected.

[Uke 101]

14 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:

Dont get me wrong, you make LO look bad by trolling as a SPCT, its what you do. So long as a lower rank means easier opp ppl will continue to dethreat regardless of the avail pool. It means if you dethreat to bronzie you wont have to face golds as one and its more of an incentive to dethreat.

You're making yourself look bad by being an idiot. Phasing will help but it obviously won't completely fix anything. People will always find a way to be dicks.

Venting on LO won't fix anything, just report people like that and carry on.

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

7 hours ago, Revoluzzer said:

The more complicated bit is that you could also lose threat when you are in the top 50%, but perform worse than the system expected.

That is extreme outliers and has to do with some wacky variables like confidence values, etc like you previously talked about. 

[Fortune Runner 796]

On 9/25/2019 at 12:34 AM, CookiePuss said:

Don't get me wrong, players like you will always complain, it's what you do. 

However by removing threat based districts as seperate player pools for matchmaking, you remove the ability for a player to easily put themselves into a pool of players where they do not belong. They will always be matched against the overall pool of players meaning that getting "easier" opp through dethreating will be much more time consuming. It won't be as simple as losing a few matches on purpose, players would have to spend significantly more time lowering their threat for it to make any noticeable difference as far as the opp they receive. 

 

tl;dr  remove one reason for dethreating (unfair matches) and people will be less inclined to WANT to dethreat, and by expanding the player pool to all available players, you make it much more time consuming for players who try to dethreat to actually get easier opp, reducing the INCENTIVE to dethreat

 

21 hours ago, Darkzero3802 said:

Dont get me wrong, you make LO look bad by trolling as a SPCT, its what you do. So long as a lower rank means easier opp ppl will continue to dethreat regardless of the avail pool. It means if you dethreat to bronzie you wont have to face golds as one and its more of an incentive to dethreat.

CookiePuss is right on this.

Wondering how you got that  CookiePuss is trolling but I suspect it is just you deceiving yourself into thinking he is to justify yourself.

 

It has been said enough times that matchmaking , threat , and phasing are all being worked on to fix the detheating issues.

Along with rewards for actually being gold has also been introduced to test things out.

I'm assuming that you didn't realize it is all relevant to the detheating issues.

[GhosT 1301]

As far as I know it just matches you with whoever is also readied up in the district, with a little attention to threat levels.

Can't get any better than this at the moment because there isn't really any player pool available to deliver fair matchmaking.

[yood 345]

reality :  gold support LO plays in the bronze district .

[Noob_Guardian 417]

On 9/21/2019 at 7:12 AM, Solamente said:

simplified version: threat system takes the average of all players’ scores for a mission - if you score higher than average you threat up, if you score lower than average you threat down 

 

complicated version: i’m sure @CookiePuss will post the actual math equation used 

 

how much you threat up or down is affected by a bunch of different variables afaik (you and your opp’s current threats, how well you did against the systems projections, etc) but that’s the basic function

 

matchmaking simply tries to find the most equal match possible, threat-wise - of course a truly equal match is basically impossible to find with only 40v40 people to choose from, so after a certain amount of time it will default to whoever is available (e.g. if the matchmaking is trying to find opp for 2 gold8s it will search for 10 minutes and then try to find 2 gold7s, or 1 gold3 and 1 gold10, all the way down until it has no choice but to put 2 gold8s against 3 silver9s and 1 bronze3)

it uses score from the last 20-50 missions to determine threat, pretty sure its 50. However, that may have been the last win/lose system, i don't know if it changed or not.

Edited September 28, 2019 by Noob_Guardian

[vsb 6170]

1 hour ago, Noob_Guardian said:

it uses score from the last 20-50 missions to determine threat, pretty sure its 50. However, that may have been the last win/lose system, i don't know if it changed or not.

that hasn’t been a mechanic since the rtw threat system afaik, and rightly so since that’s far too easily exploited 

[Revoluzzer 274]

On 9/26/2019 at 6:10 PM, NotZombieBiscuit said:

That is extreme outliers and has to do with some wacky variables like confidence values, etc like you previously talked about. 

Those "outliers" aren't that rare in an environment where bad matchups and dethreating are commonplace. Alas, those will hopefully go away with phasing.

Also confidence values aren't "wacky", they help alleviating the difference between good days and bad days a lot of players have. By having a confidence value the system prevents your threat from moving too much based on minor spikes in your performance.

Since this confidence value has to be built up you will see new avatars threat levels bounce all over the place for a while, including odd situations like increasing their threat after losing against high threat opposition (another "extreme outlier").

Another nice feature of this confidence value mechanic is that dethreating is somewhat more difficult to do. In order to rapidly dethreat you have to drastically lower the confidence first. At this point you can, however, also rapidly increase your threat level again. And since the whole purpose of dethreating is to stomp weak opponents you keep your confidence low and your threat very mobile. If we didn't have this "wacky variable" it would be a lot easier to routinely keep your threat on a lower level than it's supposed to.

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

19 hours ago, Revoluzzer said:

 

I meant wacky as in it is not part of the 'core' function. It is a secondary/tertiary function.