Skill-based Matchmaking is mandatory for better player experience.

---

@2deski wrote:

---

@RichAC wrote:

@2deski   I agree with most of what you said except i'm trying to explain how Skill Rating is diff then a ranking.  Especially on a team game.  Yes kills partly determine your skill but they don't necessarily determine wins.  Especially in a team game.  You can't have ELO in a team game unless its dedicated premade teams, imo.  A skill rating can be per individual to match players to a team and then used to match teams to a matched game.

---

Ranking is sorting by rating. Ranking by anything but skill rating has no meaning for matchmaking. If a stat does not represent the player's skill it's useless. The question is what constitutes a player's skill. And as I said, there's no consensus on that, nor is the game clear on that. Additionally, if you match people by skill rating and then make a leaderboard by another then that ranking won't make much sense as you'll get low-level players at the top.

Theoretically, I don't see why you can't have ELO here. If you strictly rate players by relative positioning, you should be able to match players by their ability to score high placements. The reason it won't work is not because it's a team-based game but because way too few people actually play for placement.

---

@RichAC wrote:

Further more a  rank is based on a  single stat to rank on and I would pick wins. That is what any game is about. A skill rating should be based on all stats combined.

---

As I said before, combining everything just doesn't work because stats about kills do not correlate with stats about wins. The way I see it, there are two options:

1. rate by relative placement
2. rate by who players kill and get killed by

The latter seems to be what OP wants. And it seems to be the most fitting to how the game is now. May actually be a really good thing, but the devs would probably need to say goodbye to their top streamers like Shroud and Dizzy. Because it would take minutes if not tens of minutes for them to find a close enough match to then die in a hot drop in 30 seconds (because they are not matched against weak fighters anymore). This will likely almost kill the game on Twitch.

---

@RichAC wrote:

I stand by what I said about Poker and luck plays a part in any sport. There is a reason its on ESPN and e-sports is not.   And in no way do I think Michael Jordan should have been entitled to a win every game just because he had the best stats and considered the best player.  Understand?

---

The reason e-sports are not on ESPN is because gamers don't watch ESPN. So e-sports are on Twitch and Youtube. I get what you mean with Michael Jordan but I don't think that's a great example in here because there is no analogy in Battle Royale games. I think most people would say that it's Shroud but it's extremely shortsighted. Macro play is what separates BR from other shooters and AFAIK he never showed any prowess in that. It's like calling Ovechkin the best hockey player because of his goal scoring titles even when his +/- stat was horrible. People that follow competitive PUBG would probably name someone from there but even in the competitive scene there is so little understanding on what actually makes a player valuable that people still mostly fallback to the same basic stats of kills and damage (from the start PUBG awarded points for kills which I find very questionable). That's why focusing on having everyone go for the win and thus master the macro play seems the most attractive option to me since that would allow to actually develop an understanding on what sets the best players apart from the rest. Whereas now it is a total mess of two playstyles with contradicting goals.

---

But thats my whole point,  even the pro players don't believe it should be about going for the win.  So there is nothing separating them from the amateur or streamer playstyle besides good aim and tactics.  Strategy is meaningless.    And society won't respect a game thats not about winning.  I don't blame that on the BR game mode.   I blame that on players not wanting to change and play it like its a BR.  It feels like overwatch players wanting to play this like its a FFA.       My reply to them is don't play a BR game then because that feels fake to me. 

And I beg to differ,  lots of gamers watch espn and are into sports.    At least the American ones do, especially fps gamers.    But thats part of the problem..  Online gaming died 15 years ago and its mostly only foreigners keeping it alive.  Part of that is due to trolls spammer and hackers.  Its very hard to even moderate a forum or chatroom nowadays,  Its a full time job.

But another part of the problem is that Gamers don't respect the games,  like those who don't respect teamplay in a BR or it being about winning,   like the sports they respect.  It seems only Koreans and Japanese respect e-sports in the same way Americans and Europeans respect football.   I mean I constanlty use to hear  in quake how its just a pub,  so who cares about competitive teams or fair play.  As if they are noobs who deserve to get pwned because elitist players feel entitled.  That is now how you grow a sport.

ANd part of that is the 3rd reason,  that when people are anonymous online they show little respect towards others.