Some thoughts on 2v2 matchmaking

[onealexleft]

Hi All!

So I've got like 3-4 concurrent things going on at the moment at various stages (including our newly announced game) and don't have the resources to re-think a fare matchmaking system for lower-population player pools. Strangely, lower-population isn't exactly the right term since were at about 18,000 actives a month. But due to the nature of the game, getting the 'right match' is more in the realm of a 'real-time' problem since the time constraint is more immediate on finding a match than on actually playing one.

But I'll give what info I can on the current situation and some suggested solutions to roll out in the interim.

Currently when trying to match a player, the server has 3 strikes before it 'gives up' and you end up spawning a new match and map:

1. Find all matches that are *very* close to your skill level
2. if we found none, find all matches with twice the skill range search
3. if we *still* haven't found anything, give me all the matches that are older than 2 days

Out of that above set of matches I sort them by skill and find the closest matching one and put the player in that one. So even the worse case scenario (#3) I still try to find a 'best match' and not simply a random game as some have stated previously. This problem isn't so prevalent in 1v1 since games tend to be over quicker and players are looking for games more often.

2v2 is a different beast given how long games can take and the complicated nature of matching 4 different people. The top tier (ST,Master) are far fewer in this mode of play so they tend to get the short end of the stick more often than not due to not having another ST ready to go and join you at any given moment.

Here is some shorter term solutions I could consider pushing live on the server and why:

1. Widen the try #2 skill range. Either triple or quadruple the range instead of just double. You can still get a somewhat more lob-sided team skill but in those events when a partner is *just* out of your search range but would still make for a fun game, it'd be more likely to capture them.

2. Lengthen the waiting period for games that are lumped into try #3 to 3 days. This doesn't change the
skill range, but will grow the 'pool' of potentially joinable games. So instead of seeing a pool of only 2 day old games, you'd see a larger 3 day pool that could potentially hold a game that is more suitable to you.

I can do either or both relatively quickly, but I'd like to hear what others might have in mind for possible solutions that could be just as relatively simple first. Or maybe this isn't a problem on the whole except for the top 5% (still a problem as they tend to be the most active)?

Let me know what you think!

[[PETA] Doodat]

I see the first option being something that can help a lot. Maybe something like, up to 24 hours, within skill range, 24-72 hours, the multiplier on the skill range which, if it grows, I think is really good for finding matches that are at least playable. I think extending to all matches is something that should be a last resort.

[terenceshiu2005]

Thanks Alex for sharing! This is exact issue the ST, master random player facing. Being a 2v2 random player, it is so discouraging when paired with a not ranked player. So, prefer it can cancel the game after doing its best afford. If not, the option #1 will help!

(06-18-2014 01:09 PM)onealexleft Wrote:  2v2 is a different beast given how long games can take and the complicated nature of matching 4 different people. The top tier (ST,Master) are far fewer in this mode of play so they tend to get the short end of the stick more often than not due to not having another ST ready to go and join you at any given moment.

[Flarp55]

Maybe there should be a "matchability quotient" such as (time spent waiting) - k * (skill difference) where k is a constant that is best determined by you guys. Whichever match has the highest matchability quotient over a predetermined number wins. Maybe change (time spent waiting) into a logistic function of time spent.

[Juslas]

Thx Alex,
first fix sounds great, can it be implemented in steps (over set time limit): double, triple, quadraduble?
I do not understand second fix, but what I get from it makes me strongly feel it would help ST players!
Separating random and arranged is probably out of question, to me that would make leagues fare.

And I assume we get new season when these changes take a place.

There are some smart players here, I am eager to hear more ideas. Bbobb555 algorithm was a good start. For me time waiting a match to start is meaningless, quitter newbies are the problem (and I have learnt to avoid them quite efficiently by now).

[Torbreck]

Thanks Alex - I'm with terrence - option 1 sounds the best to me also.

Not sure if 1v1 is also up for discussion but I would put in a request to widen the search for that also

[terenceshiu2005]

(06-18-2014 05:36 PM)Torbreck Wrote:  Thanks Alex - I'm with terrence - option 1 sounds the best to me also.

Not sure if 1v1 is also up for discussion but I would put in a request to widen the search for that also

I met the same issue when I were being top 5 players in 1v1. even top 10 occasionally had the same issue. So, we may consider 1v1 as well. I think both fine tuning can help 1v1 league. #1 can let more players meet the highest level players like poweewee & LER4T. #2 can have more time to do a matching.

[Hifimatlock]

Can you be matched in 2v2 random, with your arrange partner as a teammate?

[Juslas]

(06-20-2014 07:17 AM)Hifimatlock Wrote:  Can you be matched in 2v2 random, with your arrange partner as a teammate?

No.

Also if you start a match with your ongoing random partner as arranged (invite) match, both of matches were counted as 'new teams' placement matches. This was used to climb to the top of 2v2 random ranking. If this has not been fixed, it should be!

It is common to play with same random partners all the time, having multiple ongoing matches with same 4 players is understandable result of matchmaking system. Some of the more active 2v2r players know each other's tactics as team member of foe quite well.

[Alvendor]

Interesting to see how the matchmaking works!
I would consider changing it so that the matches have a skill range they accept to something like:
Day 1: accept players close to skill level
Day 2: accept players with twice the skill range
Day 3: accept quadruple skill range
Day 4: accept all players

This skill range also needs to be reset every time a new player joins the game. Otherwise if player 3 joins after 3 days, it is a huge drawback for player 2.

So when a new player joins the steps would be:
1. Find all matches that accepts my skill level.
Priority:
Games waiting longer have priority (day 4 gets matched before day 3 games etc)
If same wait period, game skill rating have priority (game with skill rating 200 matched before skill rating 150)

2. If no found, create a new game.


For 1v1: the only problem I experienced is what Terence and Torbreck mentions: the high super titans are not getting matched with enough people. Maybe take the rating for the currently 10th ranked player and make a special case that players with a higher rating than that gets a wider search?