So, apparently Matchmaking thinks

Matchmaking thinks that pairing 3-4 newcomers (level 10 and less) with a 100 level player (me) against a team full of mid-level (40-70) guys will make for balanced and fun match. Well, guess what? It doesn’t. At first I thought I was just unlucky, but now I recognize it more as a pattern which it follows.

I don’t understand why wouldn’t it try to throw people around at the very least? So that there would be equal amount of newcomers and seasoned players in each team.

A couple more matches like this and even Battleborn fanboy like me gonna call quits. This is simply getting less fun and more frustrating each time.

2 Likes

I wonder if there’s a way for Gearbox to group people together in 10’s. So level 1-10 is grouped together, 11-20 and so forth. That way you’re always playing with people in your level.

That does nothing, as level has nothing to do with your skill level.

3 Likes

It’s been stated that account level has no bearing on the matchmaking at all, as it is not indicative of skill, or even time played. Someone level 100 could have all of those levels come from Story/Coop.

4 Likes

I’m just throwing it out there. It was just a suggestion. Do you have a better idea? I disagree in some instances. I’m pretty sure at level 92, I’m better than most level 10’s.

It’s not whether or not I have a better idea. I’m telling you why matching based on account level is flawed. Matching based on level punishes Coop players trying out PvP, for example. There are, in fact, level 100s that aren’t better than some of them level 10s.

If the matchmaking in Battleborn is anything like similar games, it uses an ELO system that attempts to rate your overall skill versus other players by tracking your wins and losses, but probably expands the range it will group you with the longer you wait in the queue. A lot of these matchmaking problems are probably not entirely due to the system itself, but the fact Battleborn doesn’t have the gigantic playerbase of, say, League of Legends.

1 Like

Thanks for the explanation. I understand what you’re saying. I think my biggest frustration, along with others, is the amount of dropouts and skill differences. I love the game and hope that it lasts.

I really wish I had an idea to fix the matchmaking, but aside from ranked, I don’t think there’s much you could do about it.

It does when you’re as low as 10 or less. Don’t make me explain that.

1 Like

I don’t know how ELO ratings work exactly but if it’s just w-l ratio then someone with only one battle under their belt would be matched with someone with a 90-100% win ratio?

I think the whole matchmaking and ELO ranking system is messed up however it works. I understand if they put different ELO ratings in a queue because no one else is available, that’s fine. But there needs to be a better or more equal basis. Of course with more people it’d be easier but as of right now they might as well just put random people together.

Generally yeah but there’s a ton of exceptions I’ve come across. I had a team of mid 50s+ in capture against a team of Lv2,3,7,9, and 17. I had to get off about 2 minutes in, I checked in the morning and my team lost 1000-173 lol, I wish I could tell you how, but I know for a fact one teammate missing doesn’t cost you that much, considering we were winning before I left.

Usually such systems take into account the ELO ratings of the people you win/lose to. So, for example, if you lose to someone whose ELO is higher than your own, you don’t change much, while losing to someone lower than yourself causes your ELO to drop more than if they were the same.

It usually also takes a few games for new players to get into their proper position.

But does it count your loss of the game or your score? Because I feel like the scoring has issues as well. Depending on the character and versus mode, sometimes I win games with a low score. Other times I have a high score. And vice versa for losses.

It seems like however it’s done there’s really no immediate way to tell the skill of your teammates and the skill of your foes.

Also, where are the boundaries for the ELO ratings? If I’m paired with those lower and/or higher than me then there’s really no equal grounds because there’s some wiggle room?

It makes sense because there may not always be people of equal ELO playing at the same time.

That’s the point. Generally. I generally get paired up with newbies, and they generally get slaughtered by the enemy mid-level guys. Those games are not fun. Like, at all. Not for me, not for them.

I get that all the time. Half my team is under level 10 and the other team has 2 level 100s with Master of so and so titles.

No worries, ELO doesn’t work that way. Everyone starts with a preset value. Let’s say 150. The game will try to match you with similar scores. (However, with widening of the matchmaking pool in the last couple of updates, it makes matchmaking issues.*) However, for demonstrations sake, let’s say everyone on in the match had 150. Winning team gets more ELO rating. The other team loses points. The number of points gained per win is reduced if you have a higher ELO rating. They get an increase if you have a lower score. The opposite if you had lost in the respective scenarios.

I don’t know if surrenders are counted in the win/loss scoring. All I know is that I feel that they should not. If a team surrenders, it is probably due to a poorly made match. Not only that, but then we’d have reverse ELO boosting. The score should also not be recorded if a player DCs. Without drop-in, which should never be considered by Gearbox (unless we are talking about PvE), it causes a far greater skill gap.

*Faster connections while sacrificing fairly matching players with equally skilled players.

Hmm. That’s another thing I never considered. I’ve had teammates that tried to surrender while we were winning and teammates successfully surrender while we were down 50 points Meltdown and some asinine surrenders in incursion. I never vote for surrender as I have had many close games (which are the best).

I don’t really care about scores and K-D or w-l but I do enjoy playing the objective. I’ve never thought about the “consequences” of losing before.

Interesting, interesting, hmm :yum:

I’m level 25 right now but since level 15 I’ve been averaging about 10 kills a game with 1 death if I get unlucky.
Player level has nothing to do with skill.

This mite sound Jerk-ish, but if you are getting paired with these low level players, in which you say they are not that good, maybe your elo is that low?

Level has nothing to do with skill.