Lets Talk About 'Skill-Based Matchmaking'?
INTRODUCTION He...
Forum Discussion
@JiboTVThis is a very good post, that I must disagree with.
You are not being punished for being good. On the contrary, you are being fairly pitted against players of similar skill. You are simply being challenged. Removing SBMM removes that challenge.
The experience you describe is the same for everyone, not just high skilled players. Everyone is playing against opponents of like skill. They are not being punished either, but fairly challenged.
The vast majority of players will never be as good as those of your skill level. Tailoring a game to a small minority’s preference would not, in fact, be good for a game sustainability. The opposite is true.
What you describe is an acute experience that can only be had by the very few, Predator level players, who represent a tiny fraction of the population. Domination of lesser skilled players in a non SBMM environment.
I apologize, but you are simply wrong.
All players are more fairly challenged now, on average. That’s a great model for a game.
SBMM has not only improved the gaming experience for the overwhelming majority of players, but it had also constructed the foundation for long term sustainability.
Masters against novices is a terrible format for any competition.
@DarthVaapar wrote:@JiboTVThis is a very good post, that I must disagree with.
You are not being punished for being good. On the contrary, you are being fairly pitted against players of similar skill. You are simply being challenged. Removing SBMM removes that challenge.
The experience you describe is the same for everyone, not just high skilled players. Everyone is playing against opponents of like skill. They are not being punished either, but fairly challenged.
The vast majority of players will never be as good as those of your skill level. Tailoring a game to a small minority’s preference would not, in fact, be good for a game sustainability. The opposite is true.
What you describe is an acute experience that can only be had by the very few, Predator level players, who represent a tiny fraction of the population. Domination of lesser skilled players in a non SBMM environment.
I apologize, but you are simply wrong.
All players are more fairly challenged now, on average. That’s a great model for a game.
SBMM has not only improved the gaming experience for the overwhelming majority of players, but it had also constructed the foundation for long term sustainability.
Masters against novices is a terrible format for any competition.
So everyone must be content with winning 1 in 20 games?
'cos that's the natural consequence of perfectly balanced matches.
No matter how good you are; if you play at the skill level appropriate to your MMR, statistically you'll have a 5% chance of winning a match, and you'll tend towards a K/D of 1:1.
That isn't my idea of a satisfying progression system, nor a rewarding experience.
@TheJumpingJawa wrote:
@DarthVaapar wrote:@JiboTVThis is a very good post, that I must disagree with.
You are not being punished for being good. On the contrary, you are being fairly pitted against players of similar skill. You are simply being challenged. Removing SBMM removes that challenge.
The experience you describe is the same for everyone, not just high skilled players. Everyone is playing against opponents of like skill. They are not being punished either, but fairly challenged.
The vast majority of players will never be as good as those of your skill level. Tailoring a game to a small minority’s preference would not, in fact, be good for a game sustainability. The opposite is true.
What you describe is an acute experience that can only be had by the very few, Predator level players, who represent a tiny fraction of the population. Domination of lesser skilled players in a non SBMM environment.
I apologize, but you are simply wrong.
All players are more fairly challenged now, on average. That’s a great model for a game.
SBMM has not only improved the gaming experience for the overwhelming majority of players, but it had also constructed the foundation for long term sustainability.
Masters against novices is a terrible format for any competition.So everyone must be content with winning 1 in 20 games?
'cos that's the natural consequence of perfectly balanced matches.
No matter how good you are; if you play at the skill level appropriate to your MMR, statistically you'll have a 5% chance of winning a match, and you'll tend towards a K/D of 1:1.
That isn't my idea of a satisfying progression system, nor a rewarding experience.
Actually, most everyone was already content with your statistics, and even worse, since before SBMM, the game was basically allowing professional level players to run amok against college and high school level players. Most players, the overwhelming vast majority of them, are in the high school and college arena.
If you find it unrewarding to play against similarly skilled opponents, and prefer rather to play against lower levels, then yes, maybe you should seek such “rewarding” entertainment elsewhere. There are other games that promote such disparate match making. Thankfully, this game is no longer one of them.
@DarthVaapar wrote:Actually, most everyone was already content with your statistics, and even worse, since before SBMM, the game was basically allowing professional level players to run amok against college and high school level players. Most players, the overwhelming vast majority of them, are in the high school and college arena.
If you find it unrewarding to play against similarly skilled opponents, and prefer rather to play against lower levels, then yes, maybe you should seek such “rewarding” entertainment elsewhere. There are other games that promote such disparate match making. Thankfully, this game is no longer one of them.
Simple question:
With the current casual SBMM system, by what metric can you gauge whether you're improving?
Prior to SBMM, I knew I was getting better, because my average damage increased, so too did my K/D and win rate.
Now?
Stats mean nothing; regardless of skill level, we're all tending towards the same averages.
We're nothing but mice running in a wheel.
Ranked is (as the name implies) where match making should be taking place.
Casual is (as the name implies) where players should be able to kick back and mess around, not be subjected to the exact same hyper-competitive gameplay present in ranked.
If newbies (or anyone else for that matter) want to be matched against similarly skilled opponents, then they should be playing Ranked. It's that simple.
The two game modes offered different gameplay experiences for a good reason. Now they don't, and the game is significantly worse for it.
@TheJumpingJawa wrote:
@DarthVaapar wrote:Actually, most everyone was already content with your statistics, and even worse, since before SBMM, the game was basically allowing professional level players to run amok against college and high school level players. Most players, the overwhelming vast majority of them, are in the high school and college arena.
If you find it unrewarding to play against similarly skilled opponents, and prefer rather to play against lower levels, then yes, maybe you should seek such “rewarding” entertainment elsewhere. There are other games that promote such disparate match making. Thankfully, this game is no longer one of them.
Simple question:
With the current casual SBMM system, by what metric can you gauge whether you're improving?
Prior to SBMM, I knew I was getting better, because my average damage increased, so too did my K/D and win rate.
Now?
Stats mean nothing; regardless of skill level, we're all tending towards the same averages.
We're nothing but mice running in a wheel.
Ranked is (as the name implies) where match making should be taking place.
Casual is (as the name implies) where players should be able to kick back and mess around, not be subjected to the exact same hyper-competitive gameplay present in ranked.
If newbies (or anyone else for that matter) want to be matched against similarly skilled opponents, then they should be playing Ranked. It's that simple.
The two game modes offered different gameplay experiences for a good reason. Now they don't, and the game is significantly worse for it.
Come on... A quality, long term player of FPS knows when they are getting better, whether or not there are displayed metrics.
I started getting better in Season 2. I started getting significantly better about two weeks ago. My Season 3 stats are 50% better than my overall game stats. I’m doing more damage and getting more kills on average now. I almost always try to get better, but I do slack sometime and just play around. I work shift work and often enough I’m fatigued and my gameplay is lesser. Nevertheless I am getting better. I have more wins in Season 3 than all other wins since launch.
What’s being described and presented as casual isn’t really casual at all for most players. Without SBMM, top tier players dominate. That is not healthy for this type of game, nor would it be healthy for solos for that matter. It would be different if this were a game like Battlefield where skill levels would be distributed between two large teams. This is a BR. A 3-man last squad standing environment. It’s F2P with monetization built around cosmetics. Without SBMM, a game like this will have no longevity when the main population has little to no chance of ever winning.
Also, most players don’t even play ranked at all, regardless of skill level. There are longer wait times, and if you’re chasing challenges you are very often a liability for your squad. You can’t just tell players what mode they should be playing. What you can do is make all the modes as fair and enjoyable as possible for everyone. That’s what they’ve done.If that means that top tier players don’t have a safe space to retreat to in order to dominate, then so be it, and so what. No one else does either.
I agree that the top tier players should be listened to when it comes to balancing and tweaking concerns. There’s no question about that. But when they start calling for the removal of SBMM so that they can have an easier time of it, then no, absolutely not. That’s not about fairness or sportsmanship. There are many words I could use to describe such sentiment, but I’ll just go with ridiculous.
- @DarthVaapar Your original assumption is flawed.
"On the contrary, you are being fairly pitted against players of similar skill"
This is patently false. Respawn's sbmm algo is broken.
Answer me why are players with 1k kills no 2k badge being placed in lobbies with 4k 20kills badge players with 20k kills?
A player with 1.5 kdr are placed against 7kdr it's not even close.
If respawn is determined to keep sbmm at least relax the tiers it uses.p and fix their algo. Keeping pub matches random and fresh was why apex legends become so popular in Feb and March.
@highOctane91prem wrote:
@DarthVaaparYour original assumption is flawed.
"On the contrary, you are being fairly pitted against players of similar skill"
This is patently false. Respawn's sbmm algo is broken.
Answer me why are players with 1k kills no 2k badge being placed in lobbies with 4k 20kills badge players with 20k kills?
A player with 1.5 kdr are placed against 7kdr it's not even close.
If respawn is determined to keep sbmm at least relax the tiers it uses.p and fix their algo. Keeping pub matches random and fresh was why apex legends become so popular in Feb and March.Flawed assumption? Patently false?
Please.... Try again.
Sure, it may not n the best SBMM ever created, but it’s much better than it was. All metrics overwhelmingly support that SBMM is very healthy for the sustainability of competitive games. Frankly, it’s very logical and easy to understand. No assumption necessary.
Your next part is priceless.
You describe, in a question to me, an example of mixed tiered matches, then complain that Respawn should relax SBMM in order to achieve mix tiered matches.
You’re a gem.
The only time that I experience a relaxing of tiers in standard play is during off-peak hours. This is to be expected and a function of all decent SBMM systems.
What is patently false; however, is your notion that matches being “random” and “fresh” is what made Apex popular in February and March. Nothing could be further from the truth. What made this game great was that it had great gunplay and movement mechanics in a squad based BR with hero characters having different in-game abilities.
Community Highlights
- EA_Mako2 months ago
Community Manager
