Match queueing and FTA

[Syvan]

I might be imagining this, but I think I have stumbled on a way to bias getting FTA. I think it's only a problem at the extremes of the ladder, which is unfortunately where it is most a problem due to the competitive nature of the players there.

I'll tell you my story first. This morning I spawned P2 4 times in a row to the same person. I wouldn't have thought too much more about it, but he has been quite ruthless about pushing FTA on a couple small maps. Then a couple hours later in a bit of frustration (BTW, can we make Glitch about 4 hexes longer?) I started two more games. Again spawning both of them P2 against another player. This got my thinking about the Waiting for Player dialog in a game that hasn't found an opponent.

I'm not entirely sure how matches are found or leagues are distributed, since Adam and Alex have been cryptic about it, but I'm going to draw on some lessons I've learned in other games that seem applicable here. First, I suspect my MMR, or skill value, is somewhat high, which means I probably have a relatively small pool of competitors. It may have also been shrunk by the recent tweaks to the ladder placement system, which I think is a good thing overall. However, currently when a match cannot be found, the searching player goes first. If the server cannot find any matches, it just says Waiting for Player. Another game can be started, placing it in the queue all the way out to 20.

Including yesterday, I started P2 8 games in a row, which I figured was a little bit outside the realm of chance. With a little finesse of the queue, I started at least 7 games in a row as P1 before I ran out of space.

In this way, a person at the extremes of the skill distribution can fill the rest of their 20 games fairly confidently as P1. By periodically probing the system, it should be possible to discover when the queue is empty and start first most of the time.

This may be a system that keeps the point rich getting richer, as the phrase goes. Since the people at the furthest extremes will have the best opportunity to bias the system and abuse FTA.

I think there are a couple ways to fix the problem, but these are merely suggestions. (1) Prevent the server from searching more than 1 game per player. I think this can also be gamed. As soon as I see the match grab a player, I can just start a new game. (2) Force the match to wait for both players before randomly assigning who goes first. I like this option the best.

For those of you at the edges of the MMR, my current suggestion would be if you start a game as P2, wait a while before starting another, as you may be playing this same person.

Sorry if I have been completely wrong and you had to read this far for nothing.

As I wrote this post, I think I spawned some unfortunately player into my games as P2 4 times in a row. I suspect he will be a little frustrated. Zalteo, if you're out there, sorry about that

[Mowmail]

First off +1
Secondly, I am having the same problem but I not see the disadvantages of going second (except shark island). I am not facing the same player over and over again as you are. That would be annoying. As for your two suggestions, the first one I threw out the door right away. Your second suggestion is golden. If you play someone over and over again and they beat you over and over again. You would be mad. That is a problem that should be high on OML's priority list.

[Glorishears]

Letting the searching player go first does get matches started faster; I'd suggest some sort of cool down where your first searching match you get to go first but if you start another one within some time you have to wait. Depending on how fast games appear, the cooldown probably only needs to be 5-10 minutes to work.

And there's no question going first is an advantage, the only question is how much. If you're indifferent, then do nothing on turn one, and then you'll get to be P2, but with 5 extra wits, which is obviously better than being regular P2

[calmon]

They just need to balance first player and all is fine.

Let him start with 2 wits and is good. If its to "complicate" for normal player to understand do it on master/titan league only.

[Harti]

(07-15-2012 07:22 AM)calmon Wrote:  Let him start with 2 wits and is good.

LOL

You hopefully understand what limiting it to 2 would mean for the first player. Nothing else to do than to grab the bonus spaces, effectively giving P2 the chance to set everything up like P1 originally would have been able to do. Second turn advantage then, pretty much.


If OML has an open mind about doing something about FTA, the beta testersalready presented a fair amount of (better) solutions than limiting P1's wits to 2.

[calmon]

(07-15-2012 07:42 AM)Harti Wrote:  

(07-15-2012 07:22 AM)calmon Wrote:  Let him start with 2 wits and is good.

LOL

You hopefully understand what limiting it to 2 would mean for the first player. Nothing else to do than to grab the bonus spaces, effectively giving P2 the chance to set everything up like P1 originally would have been able to do. Second turn advantage then, pretty much.


If OML has an open mind about doing something about FTA, the beta testersalready presented a fair amount of (better) solutions than limiting P1's wits to 2.

6 income in first players second turn. 2 wits is a good amount to balance it.

2.5 would be the half but 3 is worse because like you said first player get bonus first AND he exactly knows second players positions in first turn.

So better 2 wits instead of 3.

And not sure what you mean with you 'LOL'. Every number between 1-4 is better than full 5.

And sure there are dozens of solutions.

[Dawizerd]

This has been discussed in this
http://www.onemanleft.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=222
Thread. Also containing a reply from Adam

(07-13-2012 01:14 AM)oneadamleft Wrote:  We're watching the numbers for first turn wins, and for special unit advantages. We've yet to see a first turn rush that's uncounterable (do please send us replays if you encounter one).

We've seen guaranteed base hits, but that's not the same as a win. Especially when you lose units and bonus space defenders doing it.

But yeah, we're watching for and discussing FTA a lot.

Also, having a snarky attitude does little to encourage others to respect your thoughts and opinions.

[Zalteo]

May it be a nice four games :-)
Personally I don't really mind going second.

[calmon]

For me the whole thing starts getting annoying:

In titan league the players want the FTA Bonus and it leads to queues filled with 1 player.

I by myself do it now because otherwise I'm second in 90% of the games.

There are 2 possibilities and both are bad:

a) you play the same player in a lot of games (good chance when fill the queue with a lot of games on same time)
b) you get second in most of games (good chance when just start 1-2 games)

Just an example: Zero_killer played me in 8-10 games because he put himself with a lot of games in the queue. After 1 day he give up 80% of his games, not all were really dicided! Just because he wants going first and thought its better to give up early to prevent long games as second player. He did that whenever he got a small disadvantage.

Now I'm seocond in a lot of his games. I will not give up but again I don't like the fact to mainly play one player.

Dear developers, please provide some solution here. Either equalize the FTA Bonus at least in titan league or prevent a matchmaking which leads to 10+ games against 1 player (3 max against same player, something like this). I would prefer the first solution because it would stop this wait-for-several-games-ended-and-mass-start-them which is annoying by itself.

[Harti]

(07-29-2012 06:57 PM)calmon Wrote:  Dear developers, please provide some solution here. Either equalize the FTA Bonus at least in titan league or prevent a matchmaking which leads to 10+ games against 1 player (3 max against same player, something like this). I would prefer the first solution because it would stop this wait-for-several-games-ended-and-mass-start-them which is annoying by itself.

SE-

CON-

DED!



It is probably not going to work (because you can't do your turn as P2 before P1, who's not in the game yet, moved) but there needs to be some randomness for determining the player to be P1 or P2.

I think it would be possible with a "Game was created! / You are Player 2, so you'll have to wait for another person to be assigned to the game" popup when starting a League game.

This would require an application client update, however. OML is busy tracking bugs and fixing them for an update sometime in August. They're not likely to implement this before the bugs and crashes are gone.