Ludia Forums

[News] Jurassic World Alive | Update 1.5 Matchmaking


#41

hmm… I wonder Why I never face bots??
I also still don’t see the option to battle the AI in the arena.


#42

Only time I face bots is when timer runs out, and you get the option to battle a bot instead (huge waste of time to wait that long). Rankish 50-70 is when I see it the most


#43

Thanks for explaining everything so well. I have to agree with you, this sounds like a good solution to add fairness to the current mm.

This would be nice. I know it can be done - before update 1.3 you were always matched with a bot after losing two in a row. Since bots were more predictable and easier to beat this helped prevent the endless losing streaks many of us are experiencing now. Losing 500 trophies in one day is very discouraging (and no, I didn’t suddenly become a newb).

Again, thanks for taking the time to discuss this important issue and offer solutions. I hope the devs are paying attention :slightly_smiling_face:


#44

Lol, Wow. So you have put a couple of minutes of thought into this I see. Whew… I think I understand. I believe that a level cap tourney would be fine or should I say a 3 level cap a 15, a 20/22 and a 23 up to max


#45

My pleasure my friend :slight_smile: I was worried it was going to get buried. I appreciate the kind words :slight_smile: I agree - its very important. I want them to get this right - because I love this game.

Lol I admit Im ashamed to say not only that I have, but it comes from decades (literally) of playing competitive games, and half a decade of that has been spent on competitive mobile games.

I didnt just wake up one day and decide this - Ive been on leaderboards for many games for years. This comes from a lot of very diverse, very invested experience.

Doesnt mean I have all the answers. But Im usually good at at least getting the smart folks discussing the right things :slight_smile:

@Jorge would you please pass along this discussion to the devs?


#46

still trying to wrap my mind around it and grasp it lol. im slow and have to stop once i smell the wood burning.

i did have a not so thought out plan/system.

what if they still base it on the dinos but give each dino a rating. rating = (level, immune, moves, damage etc) each dino would be added together, so your 8. then those teams would be matched accordingly. this will get rid of those overleveled dinos and would be costly to someone who puts that rugrat on their team. it wont pair you against the same dinos either which would be nice. just a thought.


#47

Haha no worries pat! Its a good suggestion.

But I still prefer what I suggested, simply because, for me, Im trying to protect folks who don’t know better or arent skilled enough.

Example - my wife loves indoraptor because its in the movie. She has no clue how to use it correctly. She shouldnt be paired with only other folks who have it, or similar weights, because the driver makes a bigger difference than the dino. Ive seen her evasive against nulls.

A w/l system keeps you with people you are more likely to have an even match with. Both the smurf who just made an alt account and is focusing in high power but currently lower level dinos, and the higher level but less skilled folks.

Also, this helps see a little more variety. I mean, Im pretty sure the folks in top 300 are pleasantly surprised to see my 22 toura. If this changes in the way you are suggesting, itd reduce the already small variety even further - and would still punish you for getting good dinos but not knowing how to use them.

Poor players fighting with good dinos at higher levels is simply a built in handicap that should be preserved. Level is a big deal, but its not everything. Skill dictates a lot.


#48

its got a participation trophy feel. i see your point though… but wouldnt you still hit the same wall or even worse?

id be even more mad if i lost to rng.


#49

with my idea. if someone wants to add a level 26 deus with underleveled dinos its going to match them with higher teams. if you keep your team even you can steadily climb.


#50

Id agree with participation trophy if folks actually got rewards worth caring about. A blue inc for 2500? Give em to everyone, I dont care.

The real rewards are still way out of reach.

Regarding hitting a wall- short of having some enforceable “im mediocre to bad at pvp” flag in the game you could match on, its simply unavoidable. (And thats obviously not possible.)

Hence, our goal should not be to hit one extreme or the other (get rid of the wall or ignore it) but rather to mitigate it. We have to decide what we are willing to live with, since we cant solve all of it.

Regarding a 26 deus and an underlevelled team, I mean, thats gross. That goes back to something I said earlier and can expound on now - Im not suggesting we dont consider levels at all. But perhaps weight them exponentially. I accept that I will fight crap like this:

And this

Even though my highest level is 26.

That said, if we are talking something more than, say, 7 levels higher that your average team yeah - it should have a hefty weight. Just to catch folks like this.

But frankly I worry thatd be spending time solving for something that would be a rare occurance.

Still, it could be taken into account.


#51

how do you categorize who in the win loss column you face? will it be within a certain amount of trophies or any random that is on a losing streak?


#52

Great question! I suggest that these systems (w/l, team strength, whatever) are subsets of the main matchmaking. They dont replace or overwrite it, so much as supplement it.

So if you are at 5k, and lose streak, you are flagged. You are now at, say, 4500. You hit “battle”.

You are now put into queue. The first, say, 60 seconds it tries to match you with someone that is both within your current range (+/- what, 450?) and also flagged with that loss streak bit flipped to on.

If a match is found, great! Someones loss streak is over.

If not, and time is >60 seconds, remove that requirement and just match normally.

Does this make sense?


#53

it makes sense. i ask you this though. what are the common gripes of matchmaking? and the actual reasons for these losses


#54

to me its.

  1. higher levels terrorizing lower leveled players.

  2. rng from overleved dinos.

  3. higher levels having to wait so they tank.

  4. 450 range is to broad for some and they dont agree with it.

  5. crappy bots lol


#55

Two questions. Gah you posted while I was typing. Ill try to modify.

First: common gripes. We have to be careful here. In a 1 v 1 game, someone always loses (barring a tie.) We dont want to eradicate losing. It feels bad, but its part of the game. Unless we have folks stuck at 0 trophies, we have to be careful not to too fully take these comlpaints at face value and as 100% valid.

Point 1 - we dont have this data. How often is this actually happening? And at what point is a dino overlevelled vs maybe the other team being underlevelled? Gross miscalculations, sure. But +/- up to even 7 levels shouldnt really flag anyone. We need to tread very carefully here.

I can tell you from my families perspective, ranging literally from 500 trophies, to 2k, to a few at 2500, to a few at 3500 that this is not a common problem.

Just because some had a screenshot and shouts about it doesn’t mean its reality 100% of the time, or even close.

  1. Rng from overlevelled dinos

Not following you friend. Level has nothing to do with rng, at all. RNG is frustrating. I hate the 50 and 75% chance stuff with a passion. Should it he adressed? Sure, I think so. But what dies it have to do with mm?

  1. This gets worse with your suggestion though. The wait times will increase. If we want to reduce wait times, frankly we need a larger player base. We already have a huge mm spread.

This is not a problem a mm algorithm can solve.

  1. Well, we cant have it all ways can we? Are wait times too long? Or is the spread too large? We have conflicting desires. “I want to be able to eat tons of candy all day AND I dont want to get fat ir have a stomach ache!” As my mom used to say want in one hand…

That said, they can tighten it again. And times will increase. So folks will tank.

  1. Yeah lol.

So in short, we cant let pursuit of perfection stop us from making the game better. We cant get stuck in analysis paralysis.

My way Im suggesting at least makes things better, if not perfect.

I wonder if @mnbrian has thoughts.

Please also dont take my reply harshly friend.


#56

Reply hidden. Wait for it…


#57

figured lol


#58

it went away again but i read it. your solution would completely ignore those things and thats what i worry about. these things do happen alot and is evident on this forum. imagine to those who are not on the forum. the solution i suggested is just a supplement to the already set standard. which i think yours should also be a supplement but not the standard. the same thing can be said about how many people suffer from 5 or more losses at a time. is it common or not?

my 5 points were just brainstorming common complaints. from what i heard. no we cant cator to all but we can steer in the right direction to actually help. my suggestion is just that, a suggestion nothing more just adding to convo. but ideally its to help contour current issues.

honestly i like the system in place. the bots dont work half the time though and that doesnt help. hopefully they fix that.


#59

thats what makes the world spin. different ideas from many.


#60

Agreed my friend :slight_smile: