Fix Match Making Please

[argblarg]

Not much to say here, just going to outline a game for you to back up my request that Epic seriously reevaluates how it decides which teams face one another.

My team:

Ranks: 84, 56, 52, 46, 41
K/D: 1.1, 1.1, 1.0, .9, .7
W/L: 1.5, 1.0, .9, .8, .3

Their team:

Ranks: 100, 93, 87, 75, 73
K/D: 3.5, 2.7, 2.4, 2.0, 1.1
W/L: 16.0, 12.9, 11.1 , 11.0, 7.1

Just a side note, everything is organized in descending order. The first rank does not necessary match the first listed K/D etc.

This is not the first time I have played a game with overwhelming odds, but I feel that this game in particular reflects just how poor a job the current match making system is doing to ensure fairness and competitiveness.

Now, it is extremely obvious to me, and likely obvious to those of you who have chosen to read this, that one side had a clear advantage in this game. Furthermore, the enemy team had the benefit of being a 5-man team as opposed to a collection of 5 random players like my team. I have no problem playing people better than me, I have no problem fighting players slightly below my skill level. However, I DO have a problem playing in games where the skill differential is so vast that the matches are almost certainly decided before a map has even been chosen. That is to say, I don't like getting **** stomped and I don't like thrashing newbs. I like challenges. Games should not consist of the first 10 players to queue up for a ranked match. Games should consist of two opposing teams of reasonably equivalent skill levels. Matchmaking times would almost certainly go up, but I am absolutely ready to make that sacrifice if it will guarantee that each individual match is more fun.

If I had my way, full parties would also only fight against other full parties, but that is a matter for another time.

You're welcome to chime in with similar stories, to call me a whiny baby or simply to ignore me. My primary goal is to get Epic to refine what is currently an atrocious match making system.

[Oddly Uneven]

I agree. Even when a room is full and teams are re-randomized, the matchmaking sucks. Not to mention they will often times throw all of the bot players on one team or the other, even when there are no parties. Thank got matches don't last long, though.

[mags1412]

Was it Ranked or a Quick Match? Also, if they were to match up teams based on how many people were in a party it would take hours to find games in gametypes like Capture the Leader, Warzone, and Execution.

[Sticky T Fox]

Matchmaking is not done by rank, nor is it, I believe, by W/L, or K/D.. All of those can be boosted. Someone correct me if you know otherwise and can back it up with a source.

The best thing to do when you get in a match like that is ride it out. There are a lot of level 100's that suck worse than I do. You can bail any time; you don't have to make a prediction before the match starts.

If you're overly concerned about your ratios you should probably find five players to play regularly with and play ranked mode.

[argblarg]

For those of you wondering, it was a ranked match.

Matchmaking is not done by rank, nor is it, I believe, by W/L, or K/D.. All of those can be boosted. Someone correct me if you know otherwise and can back it up with a source.

The best thing to do when you get in a match like that is ride it out. There are a lot of level 100's that suck worse than I do. You can bail any time; you don't have to make a prediction before the match starts.

If you're overly concerned about your ratios you should probably find five players to play regularly with and play ranked mode.

I am not overly concerned my ratios. That being said, they are the most objective metric available to players by which to measure skill. I am painfully aware matchmaking is not done with respect to rank, K/D or W/L because I have suffered through too many one-sided games at this point. Also, how is "you can bail any time" a viable response? No one likes 4v5s, encouraging this will make games even less enjoyable. Do you not agree that ranked matches are often decided before they have even begun?

[argblarg]

For those of you wondering, it was a ranked match.

Matchmaking is not done by rank, nor is it, I believe, by W/L, or K/D.. All of those can be boosted. Someone correct me if you know otherwise and can back it up with a source.

The best thing to do when you get in a match like that is ride it out. There are a lot of level 100's that suck worse than I do. You can bail any time; you don't have to make a prediction before the match starts.

If you're overly concerned about your ratios you should probably find five players to play regularly with and play ranked mode.

I am not overly concerned my ratios. That being said, they are the most objective metric available to players by which to measure skill. I am painfully aware matchmaking is not done with respect to rank, K/D or W/L because I have suffered through too many one-sided games at this point. Also, how is "you can bail any time" a viable response? No one likes 4v5s, encouraging this will make games even less enjoyable. Do you not agree that ranked matches are often decided before they have even begun?