The Problems With Districts and Matchmaking

[Spudinskes 41]

The way that districts are designed results in an overall mediocre matchmaking experience. The consequence affects all players in some way. Here are some of the reasons that I believe the district structure is a detriment to this game. Feel free to disagree, and give an explanation as to why.

 

I will be speaking with the assumption that the underlying matchmaking ranking system has levels 1-10 for each tier. Also I will be assuming that top 5% of players have ELO that surpasses gold 10 but are stuck in gold because there is no bracket for them.

 

 

1) Friends can't play together despite them having similar skill. A bronze 10 player is unable to play with his silver 1 friend due to silvers not being allowed in bronze districts. This results in the players having to choose one of out of three options. The bronze could possibly "get good", unfortunately he is unable to get better than he already is due to any number of reasons. The silver could dethreat, unfortunately every time he reaches silver again he must do it again. The last option is the two players branch off on their separate gaming lives never to play with each other again due to the district restrictions.

 

EDIT: I may have misunderstood how bronze and silver restrictions are set since i have never had to experience it myself. Point number 1 may be incorrect, but even though bronzes and silvers can still play together in bronze districts, this still has the issues stated in points 2 and 3.

 

2) A pool of 40 players isn't enough to pick from. This often leads to longer than desirable wait times for opposition, and can even result in unbalanced matches as the system gets desperate to match people together as wait times get longer. Not only that, but teams often get matched against each other because the only balanced opposing team is the one that they just fought. So teams often fight against each other until one of them leaves. This can be seen as both good and bad depending on how much you like "rivalries" but for the most part this can cause the matches to get repetitive. Since the pool of players for the system to choose from is limited to one district, players are missing out on playing against opponents located in other districts. This is adding a hard artificial barrier even between players that are of the same skill level.

 

3) District tiers result in too wide of a skill gap amongst it's players. Due to how gold districts are virtually non existent, players from silver one to gold 10 and above are forced into the same district. This issue can not be fixed by a restructuring of the matchmaking tiers. Even if you add another tier like diamond, you'll still end up with the same issue of gold 1 players being stuck in a district with diamond 10 players.

 

In many matchmaking games out there low ranked players very rarely get matched against top players. Unfortunately in APB due to how few players are available for the system to choose from it gets desperate and results in very unbalanced  matches. In CSGO as a double AK you rarely ever run into a global elite. In Overwatch as a diamond you rarely see a top 500. In League as a gold you rarely see challengers. This is smart design because players do not get better by getting demolished by top players. Players can get better incrementally by overcoming players similar to their own skill level. A youngster that only took physics 1 in highschool doesn't become a PHD scientist by being taught post graduate topics that involve knowledge of many other topics. The guy needs to learn in steps, like physics 2, then AP physics 1 and 2, college physics, concentrations of undergraduate topics, etc.

 

I'm not sure what LO is capable to do to fix the integral problem of tiered districts. Maybe cross realm/district matchmaking that utilizes phasing technology like in games in WoW or Destiny? Do you have a solution? What are your some ideas?

 

And as always, be civil and be constructive.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Spudinskes

[magik 184]

2 hours ago, Spudinskes said:

The way that districts are designed results in an overall mediocre matchmaking experience. The consequence affects all players in some way. Here are some of the reasons that I believe the district structure is a detriment to this game. Feel free to disagree, and give an explanation as to why.

 

I will be speaking with the assumption that the underlying matchmaking ranking system has levels 1-10 for each tier. Also I will be assuming that top 5% of players have ELO that surpasses gold 10 but are stuck in gold because there is no bracket for them.

 

 

1) Friends can't play together despite them having similar skill. A bronze 10 player is unable to play with his silver 1 friend due to silvers not being allowed in bronze districts. This results in the players having to choose one of out of three options. The bronze could possibly "get good", unfortunately he is unable to get better than he already is due to any number of reasons. The silver could dethreat, unfortunately every time he reaches silver again he must do it again. The last option is the two players branch off on their separate gaming lives never to play with each other again due to the district restrictions.

False, you can always play together. You are able to play in districts above your threat level. And silver players are allowed in Bronze. You can enter districts one level below your threat. So.. bronze can go to all districts, Silver is limited to Bronze and up, Gold is limited to Silver and up. The idea that people can't play together is flawed, because anyone can play in gold, anyone can play in silver.

 

2) A pool of 40 players isn't enough to pick from. This often leads to longer than desirable wait times for opposition, and can even result in unbalanced matches as the system gets desperate to match people together as wait times get longer. Not only that, but teams often get matched against each other because the only balanced opposing team is the one that they just fought. So teams often fight against each other until one of them leaves. This can be seen as both good and bad depending on how much you like "rivalries" but for the most part this can cause the matches to get repetitive. Since the pool of players for the system to choose from is limited to one district, players are missing out on playing against opponents located in other districts. This is adding a hard artificial barrier even between players that are of the same skill level.

Forty players isn't enough, I agree. I'd rather have 64 v 64 districts, or even more if possible. But the servers can barely handle 40 v 40... they had issues with 50 v 50. If anything, new servers, and revisions to the hosting of the game should be in place for an upgrade in district populations.

 

3) District tiers result in too wide of a skill gaps amongst it's players. Ignoring districts for now, due to how gold districts are virtually non existent, players from silver one to gold 10 and above are forced into the same district. This issue can not be fixed by a new matchmaking ranking system. Even if you add another tier like diamond, you'll still end up with the same issue of gold 1 players being stuck in a district with diamond 10 players.

False, Silvers can escape the gold wrath (excluding dethreating), and not that I encourage silver players to move to bronze. I'd rather gold players play in respective districts.

I agree, adding more threat levels will not solve the problem. That's not how a 'fix' should be implemented. Too many people think that's how matchmaking can be fixed...

 

In many matchmaking games out there low ranked players very rarely get matched against top players. In CSGO as a double AK you rarely ever run into a global elite. In Overwatch as a diamond you rarely see a top 500. In League as a gold you rarely see challengers. This is smart design because players do not get better by getting demolished by top players. Players can get better incrementally by overcoming players similar to their own skill level. A youngster that only took physics 1 in highschool doesn't become a PHD scientist by being taught post graduate topics that involve knowledge of many other topics. The guy needs to learn in steps, like physics 2, then AP physics 1 and 2, college physics, concentrations of undergraduate topics, etc.

Those games are different. There is no 'district' system. They don't have an open world. Matches are closed and small. APB is not at all like that. The matchmaking in those games requires players to queue for a match, and of thousands players, a team of five is formed, against another team of five. APB has 40 players to choose from, for matches that range is 1 v 1, (which is a broken part of the system... this is a team game, not a solo e-peen booster) up to I've had 7 v 6 before, iirc. Which was fun, chaotic, but fun.

 

I'm not sure what LO is capable to do to fix the integral problem of tiered districts. Maybe cross realm/district matchmaking that utilizes phasing technology like in games in WoW or Destiny? Do you have a solution? What are your some ideas?

Remove the threat restrictions. Remove tiered districts. This leaves the currently abandoned Open Conflict districts. Which, implement matchmaking there, remove visible threat, put that behind the lines. (I'd still love to see the Rank, so maybe make the symbol for everyone's rank silver, and public, but threat is calculated behind the scenes, and kept behind in the code, not on the screen.)

 

And as always, be civil and be constructive.

 

I try, only sometimes people really provoke me, I have to rebut with some sort of non-civil insult.

 

Yeah, hope people will keep from flaming on this thread.

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by Sergsininia
Changed my response color text from red to blue.

[Unreal 20]

17 minutes ago, Spudinskes said:

The way that districts are designed results in an overall mediocre matchmaking experience. The consequence affects all players in some way. Here are some of the reasons that I believe the district structure is a detriment to this game. Feel free to disagree, and give an explanation as to why.

 

I will be speaking with the assumption that the underlying matchmaking ranking system has levels 1-10 for each tier. Also I will be assuming that top 5% of players have ELO that surpasses gold 10 but are stuck in gold because there is no bracket for them.

 

 

1) Friends can't play together despite them having similar skill. A bronze 10 player is unable to play with his silver 1 friend due to silvers not being allowed in bronze districts. This results in the players having to choose one of out of three options. The bronze could possibly "get good", unfortunately he is unable to get better than he already is due to any number of reasons. The silver could dethreat, unfortunately every time he reaches silver again he must do it again. The last option is the two players branch off on their separate gaming lives never to play with each other again due to the district restrictions.

 

2) A pool of 40 players isn't enough to pick from. This often leads to longer than desirable wait times for opposition, and can even result in unbalanced matches as the system gets desperate to match people together as wait times get longer. Not only that, but teams often get matched against each other because the only balanced opposing team is the one that they just fought. So teams often fight against each other until one of them leaves. This can be seen as both good and bad depending on how much you like "rivalries" but for the most part this can cause the matches to get repetitive. Since the pool of players for the system to choose from is limited to one district, players are missing out on playing against opponents located in other districts. This is adding a hard artificial barrier even between players that are of the same skill level.

 

3) District tiers result in too wide of a skill gap amongst it's players. Due to how gold districts are virtually non existent, players from silver one to gold 10 and above are forced into the same district. This issue can not be fixed by a restructuring of the matchmaking tiers. Even if you add another tier like diamond, you'll still end up with the same issue of gold 1 players being stuck in a district with diamond 10 players.

 

In many matchmaking games out there low ranked players very rarely get matched against top players. Unfortunately in APB due to how few players are available for the system to choose from it gets desperate and results in very unbalanced  matches. In CSGO as a double AK you rarely ever run into a global elite. In Overwatch as a diamond you rarely see a top 500. In League as a gold you rarely see challengers. This is smart design because players do not get better by getting demolished by top players. Players can get better incrementally by overcoming players similar to their own skill level. A youngster that only took physics 1 in highschool doesn't become a PHD scientist by being taught post graduate topics that involve knowledge of many other topics. The guy needs to learn in steps, like physics 2, then AP physics 1 and 2, college physics, concentrations of undergraduate topics, etc.

 

I'm not sure what LO is capable to do to fix the integral problem of tiered districts. Maybe cross realm/district matchmaking that utilizes phasing technology like in games in WoW or Destiny? Do you have a solution? What are your some ideas?

 

And as always, be civil and be constructive.

I totally agree with what you have say, but I like particularly the point 2, because it is true that I like fighting and finding myself against the same players second time so that we have (or they) have a revenge if the previous match was close. But it'ss boring to make same match against the same  people 4 times in a row..

I think honestly that the question of the matchmaking is complicated enough to solve for the moment and that he needs a complete revision from A to Z.

It would be necessary to set up a rather simple system (so effective as possible) and fast  to find a solution to a new more  complex and precise system.

[Spudinskes 41]

14 minutes ago, Sergsininia said:

 

I wish you didn't choose red, it's hard to read. Anyways, as for your response to point 1, you should look at point 2. I've also updated point 1 so have a glance at the edit. As for point two, 64 vs 64 would still present the same issue of having a hard segregation between similarly skilled players. As for your response to point 3, it repeats the problem stated in point 3. Except replace silver with bronze, and gold with silver. As for your second to last response, you still have the issue of point 2. It's all tied to the concept of segregating the matchmaking pool.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Spudinskes

[demonoid 16]

This is definitely one of the big issues in APB that has been detrimental to enjoying the game. I've been stuck as a gold rank since CBT and onward, and my experiences with the game have fluctuated over time. But overall the game really went downhill for me shortly after the implementation of tiered districts. Lack of opposition and empty gold and silver districts over time really put the nail in the coffin for my gameplay. All I really had left for awhile was fight club and that dried up too.

 

I haven't seriously played this game since about 2015. I've been on here and there to test the waters and whenever I did it was nothing but a barren desert. I really hope LO can sort this issue out, is I believe it's one of the biggest issues plaguing this game. I can agree with everything Spudinskes posted above.

 

Matchmaking, server stability, and optimization of the game are definitely the top three issues with the game at the moment. I still haven't gotten a chance to log in for awhile do to circumstances in my life, but I hope LO can resolve these issues in due time. Until then all I can do for awhile is sit back and wait. Once I get me a mobile PC solution, I'll start getting back on and testing things out.

[magik 184]

2 hours ago, Spudinskes said:

I wish you didn't choose red, it's hard to read. Anyways, as for your response to point 1, you should look at point 2. As for point two, 64 vs 64 would still present the same issue of having a hard segregation between similarly skilled players. As for your response to point 3, it repeats the problem stated in point 3. Except replace silver with bronze, and gold with silver. As for your second to last response, you still have the issue of point 2. It's all tied to the concept of segregating the matchmaking pool.

I'll edit it to blue, if that's better? My reply to your reply will be in green as demonstrated above.

 

And Response here:

2 hours ago, Sergsininia said:

The way that districts are designed results in an overall mediocre matchmaking experience. The consequence affects all players in some way. Here are some of the reasons that I believe the district structure is a detriment to this game. Feel free to disagree, and give an explanation as to why.

 

I will be speaking with the assumption that the underlying matchmaking ranking system has levels 1-10 for each tier. Also I will be assuming that top 5% of players have ELO that surpasses gold 10 but are stuck in gold because there is no bracket for them.

 

 

1) Friends can't play together despite them having similar skill. Wrong, friends can play together, whether or not they have similar skill. What you are saying in the first sentence is false. As I have said previously. A bronze 10 player is unable to play with his silver 1 friend due to silvers not being allowed in bronze districts. This is false too. Bronze players are most definitely allowed in silver districts, and silver players are allowed in bronze districts. What is false about friends not playing with each other, is that they can go to districts where the threat is higher than theirs. I'll address that in a minute. This results in the players having to choose one of out of three options. The bronze could possibly "get good", unfortunately he is unable to get better than he already is due to any number of reasons. I doubt someone won't eventually threat up. But he can still play at his/her current threat in a higher threat district. The silver could dethreat, unfortunately every time he reaches silver again he must do it again. Only if he leaves the district. And that is not including the fact that dethreating is against ToS. If you see someone dethreating, inform support with the evidence, and they can be punished for it. The last option is the two players branch off on their separate gaming lives never to play with each other again due to the district restrictions.

I will readdress what I said earlier here. Players are not separated permanently. The separation is there to keep golds (who don't dethreat) to go into bronze and stomp them in matches. Bronze players are welcomed, and allowed in a silver or gold district.

 

Sorry, had to change color to address another point. You told me to read Point 2 for this... and I did, again... That point doesn't address friends of different skill levels playing together. It merely states that unbalanced matches are made. And that is true. Matchmaking in APB isn't great. The issue is partially due to district pools being a small playerbase. And yes, I agree, cross district matchmaking would be great. However, you have to understand that there-in lies the issue, of the implementation. Districts are different instances.

 

False, you can always play together. You are able to play in districts above your threat level. And silver players are allowed in Bronze. You can enter districts one level below your threat. So.. bronze can go to all districts, Silver is limited to Bronze and up, Gold is limited to Silver and up. The idea that people can't play together is flawed, because anyone can play in gold, anyone can play in silver.

 

2) A pool of 40 players isn't enough to pick from. This often leads to longer than desirable wait times for opposition, and can even result in unbalanced matches as the system gets desperate to match people together as wait times get longer. Not only that, but teams often get matched against each other because the only balanced opposing team is the one that they just fought. So teams often fight against each other until one of them leaves. This can be seen as both good and bad depending on how much you like "rivalries" but for the most part this can cause the matches to get repetitive. Since the pool of players for the system to choose from is limited to one district, players are missing out on playing against opponents located in other districts. This is adding a hard artificial barrier even between players that are of the same skill level.

It isn't artificial. There's a reason behind the districts being a small population. The separate instances can't handle more than the players in the district. I've stated that. What are you meaning with 'hard segregation'? There is an issue with the threat system, and the matchmaking, I've said that publicly, and proposed some ideas for a solution. The biggest and most popular solution I've agreed with, if I can find it I'll link it at the end of my post, is @Noob_Guardian's post on the matter, in the old forums.

 

Forty players isn't enough, I agree. I'd rather have 64 v 64 districts, or even more if possible. But the servers can barely handle 40 v 40... they had issues with 50 v 50. If anything, new servers, and revisions to the hosting of the game should be in place for an upgrade in district populations.

 

3) District tiers result in too wide of a skill gaps amongst it's players. Ignoring districts for now, due to how gold districts are virtually non existent, players from silver one to gold 10 and above are forced into the same district. This issue can not be fixed by a new matchmaking ranking system.I don't see how it can't be fixed? If you change the rule-sets for matchmaking, the threat system to be overhauled, you improve the servers to host more players and do this (My final point of the first reply): 

Remove the threat restrictions. Remove tiered districts. This leaves the currently abandoned Open Conflict districts. Which, implement matchmaking there, remove visible threat, put that behind the lines. (I'd still love to see the Rank, so maybe make the symbol for everyone's rank silver, and public, but threat is calculated behind the scenes, and kept behind in the code, not on the screen.)

Even if you add another tier like diamond, you'll still end up with the same issue of gold 1 players being stuck in a district with diamond 10 players.

I did not give a solution here, I merely stated that what you said was false, (not true), I didn't say anything was a solution. In fact, I stated an error with the threat and segregation system, and then I agreed with what you said about adding another threat level isn't going to help the game.

False, Silvers can escape the gold wrath (excluding dethreating), and not that I encourage silver players to move to bronze. I'd rather gold players play in respective districts.

I agree, adding more threat levels will not solve the problem. That's not how a 'fix' should be implemented. Too many people think that's how matchmaking can be fixed...

 

In many matchmaking games out there low ranked players very rarely get matched against top players. In CSGO as a double AK you rarely ever run into a global elite. In Overwatch as a diamond you rarely see a top 500. In League as a gold you rarely see challengers. This is smart design because players do not get better by getting demolished by top players. Players can get better incrementally by overcoming players similar to their own skill level. A youngster that only took physics 1 in highschool doesn't become a PHD scientist by being taught post graduate topics that involve knowledge of many other topics. The guy needs to learn in steps, like physics 2, then AP physics 1 and 2, college physics, concentrations of undergraduate topics, etc.

Those games are different. There is no 'district' system. They don't have an open world. Matches are closed and small. APB is not at all like that. The matchmaking in those games requires players to queue for a match, and of thousands players, a team of five is formed, against another team of five. APB has 40 players to choose from, for matches that range is 1 v 1, (which is a broken part of the system... this is a team game, not a solo e-peen booster) up to I've had 7 v 6 before, iirc. Which was fun, chaotic, but fun.

 

I'm not sure what LO is capable to do to fix the integral problem of tiered districts. Maybe cross realm/district matchmaking that utilizes phasing technology like in games in WoW or Destiny? Do you have a solution? What are your some ideas?

Remove the threat restrictions. Remove tiered districts. This leaves the currently abandoned Open Conflict districts. Which, implement matchmaking there, remove visible threat, put that behind the lines. (I'd still love to see the Rank, so maybe make the symbol for everyone's rank silver, and public, but threat is calculated behind the scenes, and kept behind in the code, not on the screen.)

Yes, you are correct, you can't have the precision matchmaking of CS:GO or Overwatch because of our district system. That's correct. That is what I meant by saying that APB isn't like that. I'm not saying APB can't change. The ideal world, would have the removal of threat districts, or open conflict districts, and only have two: Waterfront, and Financial.

The entire population of that world would reside on those two servers. Some matches and roaming players (non-matched /d chat players) would would be in once instance, that could then have players seamlessly move around instances for matches the system finds.

I would entirely welcome a system that allows for that.

And as always, be civil and be constructive.

 

I try, only sometimes people really provoke me, I have to rebut with some sort of non-civil insult.

 

Yeah, hope people will keep from flaming on this thread.

Sorry about the wordy response, but I don't quite believe you understood what I was trying to say the first time, didn't read my post in it's entirety, or I didn't get my word across effectively.

 

Edit: here is the post that I mentioned.

https://forums-old.gamersfirst.com/topic/326688-remove-the-barriers/

 

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by Sergsininia
added link

[Spudinskes 41]

13 minutes ago, Sergsininia said:

I'll edit it to blue, if that's better? My reply to your reply will be in green as demonstrated above.

 

And Response here:

Sorry about the wordy response, but I don't quite believe you understood what I was trying to say the first time, didn't read my post in it's entirety, or I didn't get my word across effectively.

 

1) I don't think you read the edit that i made

2) Yes there is a reason why the district population is small. It is due to the servers currently not being able to handle more. But even if you get better servers and raise the player cap to 64v64 you still have the issue of 2 and 3. Hard segregation is having different districts that separate the matchmaking pool.

3) Even if you restructure the matchmaking and raise player caps you still have the issue of segregating the matchmaking pool, even for players that are the same skill level.

 

I did read your post in its entirety and understood the solutions that you present. However, the last part of your last reply seems to understand what a possible solution is that would fix the issues that I've outlined. But you also believe that increasing the player cap and changing the matchmaking rank structure would solve the issues.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Spudinskes

[magik 184]

1 hour ago, Spudinskes said:

1) I don't think you read the edit that i made

I started writing my post before you created the edit, sorry.

2) Yes there is a reason why the district population is small. It is due to the servers currently not being able to handle more. But even if you get better servers and raise the player cap to 64v64 you still have the issue of 2 and 3. Hard segregation is having different districts that separate the matchmaking pool.

Thank you for explaining what you meant.

3) Even if you restructure the matchmaking and raise player caps you still have the issue of segregating the matchmaking pool, even for players that are the same skill level.

True, and that is because of

• District system with no cross district matchmaking
• If you have players of different skill levels in a district, you want to match them as closely as possible, that's not exactly the matchmaking system as of now, but what is wanted.
• Yes, you are segregating the pool. But, at some point, there is a limit. Whether that be cross district matchmaking, you'll still have problems of players not having exactly their skill versing them.

You're last reply seems to understand what a possible solution is to fix the issues that I've outlined. But you also believe that increasing the player cap and changing the matchmaking rank structure would solve the issues.

I was merely stating the ideal. Not what could be attainable with current hardware, or current code, but with future hardware, and eventual engine changes.

 

[Spudinskes 41]

Just now, Sergsininia said:

 

Cross district matchmaking would be leaps and bounds have an easier time finding closer matches with a large pool. It may not be perfect, but it would certainly be better than restricting the pool to 40 or 64 or 128 or even 256. Yea definitely would require a total overhaul of the district system, to which I have stated that I wasn't sure if LO has the capability to fix the integral problem of districts and matchmaking.

[Lord Cashpoint 269]

I don't think raising the player cap per district is necessarily a solution which you can keep applying until the problem solves itself.

 

Even now in 40 v 40 districts there are still issues with areas becoming clogged up with multiple missions happening simultaneously. You get certain stress points around the map such as central gas stations where people tend to congregate and can lead to heavy congestion in the area. There's also the issue of people sitting in car spawner spots, as well as bounties from other missions attacking you. If you increase the player count too high, I can only see these problems becoming worse. 

 

I think honestly matchmaking could be solved via cross-district solutions, but I'm not sure it's such a good idea, given that for every mission you could potentially have to load into a new district every time. This creates a whole host of other issues of where the two teams will be placed when they spawn, or what district they would be placed in. It would also destroy a sense of actually existing within APB's game world, replacing it with maps like any other game.

 

Perhaps the real solution lies in getting the right people to the right district beforehand. Maybe re-work districts so you're less able to choose where you can go, and let the game guide you to a district with players more of your skill level.

[CookiePuss 5379]

The problem with matchmaking is people think it can be perfected. 

 

 

 

... gottem

[Nymphi--DoubleDee 83]

3 hours ago, Spudinskes said:

~snip~

1) Non-issue. Silvers can join Bronze, for now.

2) I gotta agree there. But, with the limited coding from 2010, it's what we have to deal with for now. We can't look into cross District, or even Phasing Districts, with the current code base.

3) This is why they did a Threat Lock, and the pissy Golds took their ball and went home because they couldn't farm Bronzes and Silvers anymore for easy Role progression.

 

Basically, the only thing we can do, is wait for the Upgrade... Again.

 

But with a more talkative company, I have hope again.

 

DON'T MAKE ME REGRET THOSE WORDS, MATT SCOTT!

[hotbot 16]

I think the solution lies in a couple different things

 

1) The tiered threats need to be removed. Set all threats to 1-15. Make them invisible, and set all districts open to every threat.

 

2) Tutorial districts

with this new threat level, if a player is below the rank of 75 and under the threat of three, they can join tutorial districts. While it is abusable, it means that new players won't be facing fully stocked max rank dethreaters with gear they cannot touch. It also means the decent players who know what they are doing can get bumped up to regular districts.

 

3) Casual vs Competetive

This I believe is the best solution to handling the extremely skilled and try-hard players going against more casual players. There needs to be a separation of competitive and casual districts. The casual district would consist of what we see now, but without the tiers and your invisible 1-15 threat level. Crims and Enforcers fighting it out. 

 

The competetive districts would open up to people threat level 6 and higher, and you would need to be apart of a pre-made group to join. To tackle the potential lower player counts in this districts, I would suggest that in competetive districts Enforcers could get matched against Enforcers and criminals could get matched against criminals. That way the pool of matchmaking is opened up. To entice players into joining the comp districts, this would be the only place where threats are visible, and the only place where you could reach threat levels of 13, 14, 15. There should also be higher rewards in the way of earning joker tickets for participating in Comp matches.

 

4) Clan Rankings and Clan Rewards

 

These could also only be achieved in competetive districts. Clan rankings should be tiered by organization size, so big clans like WASP and Evocoti would compete against each other and smaller clans with only 10-15 more skilled members would compete against each other. There would be rewards on total missions won, total kills, Win Loss ratio, Kill Death ratio, and maybe some gimmicky thins like most cars blown up or most objectives completed. Clan rewards could include joker tickets, weapon skins, and maybe some custom clothing options or titles. These rewards give incentives for players entering the competetive district, and it also gives incentive to players to running or joining clans. Which was originally a key point in the original APB. Clans are good for matchmaking as well as APB itself. This game is best played with friends, and having clans server a purpose would mean that more people would enjoy the game. 

 

 

Having this system coupled with the competetive and casual districts would mean the highly skilled players would be more likely to join the comp districts and face people ready for them, rather than rolling around silver districts stomping random players with their pre-made groups.

[magik 184]

1 hour ago, hotbot said:

snip

I like this, except I'd extend threat to level what we have now, 40, and competitive would be nice, but it shouldn't have to be only for people who are in groups, solo players should be allowed.

[hotbot 16]

23 minutes ago, Sergsininia said:

I like this, except I'd extend threat to level what we have now, 40, and competitive would be nice, but it shouldn't have to be only for people who are in groups, solo players should be allowed.

40 would be way too much, especially for our current population and how our districts are setup. Games like CSGO have only 18 and they have millions of players. To many ranks would mean it would be a lot easier to change rank and thus it wouldn't really change much than what we have now. Most of the population should lie in the median and with 40 ranks it would just be overkill. If APB had tens of thousands of players and a better matchmaking system to base off of (not a district with only 40 possible opponents) then it could work but APB needs to cut back on all the ranks.

[magik 184]

13 minutes ago, hotbot said:

40 would be way too much, especially for our current population and how our districts are setup. Games like CSGO have only 18 and they have millions of players. To many ranks would mean it would be a lot easier to change rank and thus it wouldn't really change much than what we have now. Most of the population should lie in the median and with 40 ranks it would just be overkill. If APB had tens of thousands of players and a better matchmaking system to base off of (not a district with only 40 possible opponents) then it could work but APB needs to cut back on all the ranks.

Ah, understandable. That makes sense.

[Karyon 14]

I personally think 50 per side was the sweet spot in matchmaking for the size of the district maps, and if server performance wasn't an issue would be an easy solution and likely make matchmaking better in general for a full district over what we have now.

[Nymphi--DoubleDee 83]

2 hours ago, hotbot said:

~snip~.

So, basically we the the Clan stuff, one Clan would always be getting rewarded, just because they have 100 members. And you be forcing me to ditch my Clans and brands of 4+ years, so I'd be able to get exclusive skins and clothing?

 

I don't like that portion.

[Excalibur! 207]

Clans, i would avoid anything related to clans.

[hotbot 16]

45 minutes ago, Nymphi--DoubleDee said:

So, basically we the the Clan stuff, one Clan would always be getting rewarded, just because they have 100 members. And you be forcing me to ditch my Clans and brands of 4+ years, so I'd be able to get exclusive skins and clothing?

 

I don't like that portion.

Did you miss the part where I said the clans would be tiered based on member count? Clans with 20 members wouldn't be competeing with those of 100 members.

Edited June 18, 2018 by hotbot

[killerskull 111]

Ive always dreamt that mm would not be limited to /d but all the /d. So if you are in financial, the mm will find matches for you from all fin and then a msg would pop up for players to join the desired fin for a match. But then people and/or teams would be constantly moving /d to /d

[Nymphi--DoubleDee 83]

7 hours ago, hotbot said:

Did you miss the part where I said the clans would be tiered based on member count? Clans with 20 members wouldn't be competeing with those of 100 members.

While clans with 1 member will still be trying to go into a Leaderboard situation against a clan with 100 members.

 

Or hell, even 10 active members....

 

No, Clan shit is stupid.

[Seadee 107]

11 hours ago, hotbot said:

arning joker tickets for participating in Comp matches.

 

4) Clan Rankings and Clan Rewards

 

These could also only be achieved in competetive districts. Clan rankings should be tiered by organization size, so big clans like WASP and Evocoti would compete against each other and smaller clans with only 10-15 more skilled members would compete

what do you do when you find that the "smaller clans" with 10-15 skilled members are clans like WASP and Evocoti?

 

you could quite easily do a score based on total earned divided by total members... then Zerg clans and small clans would be just as likely to achieve (i got the feeling that the RTW scoreboards did something like this)  

Edited June 18, 2018 by Seadee

[hotbot 16]

59 minutes ago, Nymphi--DoubleDee said:

While clans with 1 member will still be trying to go into a Leaderboard situation against a clan with 100 members.

 

Or hell, even 10 active members....

 

No, Clan shit is stupid.

 

Clans with 1-15 members would compete for their own rewards with no affect from any other tier. 15-40 member clans would compete for their own rewards in their tier. They would not be able to take rewards from the 1-15 member bracket, it is separate. 40-70 members would compete in their own bracket as well, and could not take rewards from other players in the lower brackets or higher brackets. 70-120 member clans would have to compete in their own bracket as well. See where I am going with this?

 

 

 

If you choose not to participate in Fight Club you also are severely hindered in receiving items that need joker tickets. If you refuse to use LTL you do not get custom clothing. Overwatch restricts golden weapon skins to Competitive, and in a lot of MMOs, guild housing is restricted to guilds. If you choose not to participate in certain aspects of the game (like Fight club, or LTL, or Valentines day events or literally any other holiday events) you choose to give up the rewards that come with it. Clans shouldn't be super competitive  with one  Clans were a central part of APB's marketing when it was successful and now they serve zero purpose. If you just are willing to write off a whole aspect of the game that was already introduced through RTW, by saying "Clan shit is stupid" then I don't really see the point in continuing to try to argue this with you in a thread about matchmaking.

33 minutes ago, Seadee said:

what do you do when you find that the "smaller clans" with 10-15 skilled members are clans like WASP and Evocoti?

 

you could quite easily do a score based on total earned divided by total members... then Zerg clans and small clans would be just as likely to achieve (i got the feeling that the RTW scoreboards did something like this)  

That's actually a good idea. The only reason I say to tier the member count is because during RTW there were none, and zerg clans would be gain most of the rewards, save for the rewards coming from mission win/loss ratio and kill/death ratio. Also, by including clan leaderboards more people will be looking to be apart of clans and joining up with bigger clans or smaller clans to reap the rewards. You'll have less people running around with one off clan names that serve as a alternative to their title and more actual clans running around. I remember in RTW certain clans were having trouble with the clan member limit and 90% were active just because every week they'd make sure they had the members to keep their clan rewards coming in. 

[ScarecrowXIII 27]

14 hours ago, hotbot said:

The competetive districts would open up to people threat level 6 and higher, and you would need to be apart of a pre-made group to join.

What if I feel like grouping with randoms in competitive mode? It happens, I do it often in Siege and it works surprisingly well.