http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/33/level2opponement6ku.gif/

Back when at lvl50 rt, i could find a 4v4 rt game under 5minutes, even at 11pm... then the day after search ranges got changed, i could never find a game under an hour at 45-10, and i dared not play more.

Funny thing, before they "made the search range better to provide better challenge and allies", games were pretty damn even, by shortening the range at which you can match with people, it made it impossible for good players to find games in a reasonable amount of time.

Too bad Sc2 is nowhere near Wc3 in terms of team play and micro, i just cant get into sc2 like i did for wc3, feels like sc2 is all about everything being overpowered and however uses their overpoweredness the best wins.

Loved SC2 single player campaign but stopped playing multiplayer after only 3 months. It was nothing but a spamfest. Micro is more or less obsolete in that game.

Just can't wait until they release WC4. All the people that deserted WC3 for WoW will jump back into RTS and we'll have a healthy playerbase again.

did anyone ever make a thorough analysis of how the matchmaking system works?

http://classic.battle.net/war3/files/amm.shtml doesn't really say that much

---

Q u o t e:
did anyone ever make a thorough analysis of how the matchmaking system works?

http://classic.battle.net/war3/files/amm.shtml doesn't really say that much

---

The way it works, you get matched against other people depeding on an "hidden level" called estimated ladder level, which ranges from lvl10 to lvl50. This level is determined by who you win and lose against. You start of at lvl30 (The average skill level), if you win against lvl30 players, you go up, etc.

If you are lvl30 ELL, and your actual level is 30, youll gain equal xp for a win than youll lose, if your level is above, youll lose more exp per loss than per win unless you increase your ELL.

So, basically the way the system works, youre supposed to be at 50% win because you play even matches, if you win more than 50%, its because youre not at your ELL yet, or you belong to the top of the ELL ladder, aka lvl50.

For searchtimes purposes, the problem is that blizzard changed the matching ranges, thus, you might be lvl40 ELL, but the matching range is +-6 ELLs, so you can only match people that are 34 ELL or 46 ELL. Widen this range, and searchtimes will, get much better.

---

Q u o t e:


The way it works, you get matched against other people depeding on an "hidden level" called estimated ladder level, which ranges from lvl10 to lvl50. This level is determined by who you win and lose against. You start of at lvl30 (The average skill level), if you win against lvl30 players, you go up, etc.

If you are lvl30 ELL, and your actual level is 30, youll gain equal xp for a win than youll lose, if your level is above, youll lose more exp per loss than per win unless you increase your ELL.

So, basically the way the system works, youre supposed to be at 50% win because you play even matches, if you win more than 50%, its because youre not at your ELL yet, or you belong to the top of the ELL ladder, aka lvl50.

For searchtimes purposes, the problem is that blizzard changed the matching ranges, thus, you might be lvl40 ELL, but the matching range is +-6 ELLs, so you can only match people that are 34 ELL or 46 ELL. Widen this range, and searchtimes will, get much better.

---

that doesn't match their explanation. on that amm.shtml page they say there's 3 ratings:
1) "battle.net's internal player skill ratings" for match making. takes into account your win% and "opponent quality" (=oppwin%?). I wonder how they turn these 2 into a single rating...
2) ELL. they translate your "skill" to this with the help of some other stuff like the realm ladder level distribution and your amount of games. it's not the same as skill rating, and low level players have their ELL capped, even though they can match against the top with just 6-0 or something like that...
3) the visible ladder level, which follows your ELL, and to have them match you just play enough

---

Q u o t e:


that doesn't match their explanation. on that amm.shtml page they say there's 3 ratings:
1) "battle.net's internal player skill ratings" for match making. takes into account your win% and "opponent quality" (=oppwin%?). I wonder how they turn these 2 into a single rating...
2) ELL. they translate your "skill" to this with the help of some other stuff like the realm ladder level distribution and your amount of games. it's not the same as skill rating, and low level players have their ELL capped, even though they can match against the top with just 6-0 or something like that...
3) the visible ladder level, which follows your ELL, and to have them match you just play enough

---

It does, the internal player skill rating is ELL. yes you can match against the top even if youre low level if you win a lot, because it means youre really good. Your visible ladder level follows your ELL. If your ELL is 40, you probably wont reach 41 ever, unless you happen to be very lucky with a winstreak, which will most likely increase your ELL as well, but if you don't belong there, you'll go down..

The current AMM is a really great system, it doesn't have any flaws, the only problem is making sure the matching range is appropriate, which is not the case right now.

If Blizzard will do something against hackers, the good old times would come back :)
Nothing more would be needed. Its a work about 2 days for Blizzard, nothing more and
we could be happy hehe ;) there are still enough wc3 players :)

---

Q u o t e:


It does, the internal player skill rating is ELL. yes you can match against the top even if youre low level if you win a lot, because it means youre really good. Your visible ladder level follows your ELL. If your ELL is 40, you probably wont reach 41 ever, unless you happen to be very lucky with a winstreak, which will most likely increase your ELL as well, but if you don't belong there, you'll go down..

The current AMM is a really great system, it doesn't have any flaws, the only problem is making sure the matching range is appropriate, which is not the case right now.

---

"Battle.net now attempts to match players based purely on skill, without regard to each player's XP or ladder level. Under this new approach, Battle.net determines a player's skill based upon the player's wins and losses, as well as the quality of opponents faced"

ELL = estimated ladder level. that's all about ranking you in the ladder, it's the XP they want you to have.
matchmaking = something done without regard to level
skill rating = combination of your wins&losses and &opponent quality.

mixing match-making and ELL still does not make sense to me. how does it make sense to you? they directly say "without regard to each player's XP and ladder level". they say "the skill rating is not suitable as the lone means of determining the "best" players on a realm's ladder". ELL determines the best in a ladder. skill rating matches people up. they're 2 different things according to them.

---

Q u o t e:


"Battle.net now attempts to match players based purely on skill, without regard to each player's XP or ladder level. Under this new approach, Battle.net determines a player's skill based upon the player's wins and losses, as well as the quality of opponents faced"

ELL = estimated ladder level. that's all about ranking you in the ladder, it's the XP they want you to have.
matchmaking = something done without regard to level
skill rating = combination of your wins&losses and &opponent quality.

mixing match-making and ELL still does not make sense to me. how does it make sense to you? they directly say "without regard to each player's XP and ladder level". they say "the skill rating is not suitable as the lone means of determining the "best" players on a realm's ladder". ELL determines the best in a ladder. skill rating matches people up. they're 2 different things according to them.

---

I think youre mixing things up, these 3 things are all the same, your skill rating is your ELL, i dont know what youre saying about matchmaking though.. They determine your ELL with your win/loss ratio and the quality of opponents you face, and you get matched against people in your ELL range.

Basically, this system is the same as Sc2, just without divisions, leagues and with ratings instead of levels.

---

Q u o t e:


I think youre mixing things up, these 3 things are all the same, your skill rating is your ELL, i dont know what youre saying about matchmaking though.. They determine your ELL with your win/loss ratio and the quality of opponents you face, and you get matched against people in your ELL range.

Basically, this system is the same as Sc2, just without divisions, leagues and with ratings instead of levels.

---

okay, I'll quote some essential things from that page to illustrate why I don't see skill rating and ELL as the same thing. they seem to be different ratings despite the fact that skill rating is used for making ELL.

1) "Battle.net now attempts to match players based purely on skill, without regard to each player's XP or ladder level."
2) "While Battle.net's internal player skill ratings provide better matching of players, the skill rating is not suitable as the lone means of determining the "best" players on a realm's ladder."
3) "To try and better distribute the wide range of players and skills on the ladder, Battle.net also translates your current skill level to an expected ladder level (ELL)."
4) "As you play additional games, your maximum ELL will increase."

so
1) match-making doesn't use the ladder, and since ELLs are the real ladder levels, they're logically not a part of MM.
2) there's more to ELL than just the skill rating
3) ELL is created with the help of skill rating, so they might scale similarly, but it's not the same thing
4) an example of something ELL takes into account, but match-making doesn't.

the current AMM system was designed with three things in mind:

- make sure everyone wins 50% and loses 50% of their games, regardless of skill
- make sure everyone reaches a high level, at least halfway to 50, regardless of skill
- try at all costs to avoid good players being matched against bad


fact of the matter is, none of these changes were necessary to have a "good ladder". they were all made with butthurt noobs in mind, the same noobs who had been crying about not being able to role play as master of the universe when they were stuck at a measly level 10, the same noobs who thought it was a grave injustice that occasionally they would match superior players who had made a new username

if you look at WoW, the next game they made after wc3, you can see all these points addressed. noobs are coddled to the max in wow. level 10s cant be targetted by higher levels, they have baby pool pve realms where noone is targettable, everyone gets level 100 sooner or later, and if you do battlegrounds you can count on winning about half of them, give or take.

sc2's system again made ample provisions for the noob playerbase that accounts for the biggest portion of game sales. in your first 10 games, decents are rapidly sorted out from the lowbies and spirited away where they cant hurt their feelings. the dumbest 90% of players get bronze, silver and gold olympic medals for their horrible performance. on top of that, they split the ladder up into thousands of divisions so they can literally have tens of thousands of players think they are "rank 1", and every single player online gets to be in the "top 25"


looking forward you'll only see more of this. fact of the matter is we bad mannered legit pro gamers are a dying breed, hunted from pillar to post by an ever-more empowered mob of downie permanoobs