A fair way to patch the issue of dodging map

How AOE2 handle people who dodge map or leave the game at the beginning is unfair and not fun.
If a player play only one type of map his Elo doesn’t represent his level because in others map he sucks. It’s not fair if one player choose his civ and not the other one.
What should do AOE2:

  • Unlimited ban map
  • Dynamic ELO, when you ban a map it add some point to your tempory ELO
  • Choose civ increase also your temporay ELO

How it works:
My elo is 1000
I ban 3 maps : tempElo=1000+3x50
The rank game select some one with the closest tempElo we will say the same one (1150)
Then, I choose my civ : tempElo=1150+50
and not the other one : OpponentTempElo=1150
Then at the end of the match, it calcultates how many elo we win and lose with tempElo value. And add this number to the ELO.

Like this people who want to play only one map they can.
People who play all type of map can win and gain elo against people who focus only one type of map.
No ELO point is created or deleted

1 Like

There is no reaction to my idea, you don’t understand my point?, you like the way Microsoft handle the issue? You don’t see issue in the first place?

I’m curious about the dynamic elo portion, and I think it’s a decent idea.

Not a fan of unlimited map bans -

I would rather:

1.) get rid of non-standard game-modes from ranked to get rid of the insta-ban maps that waste map bans and increase the star amount for maps from 1 to 3.
(Nomad, mega random(currently needs a consistent 1 tc, 3 vills+civ bonus, 1 scout/eagle scout standardized start to be considered for the ranked queue))

2.) Capping elo at 2k + a second counter that starts after yet doesn’t effect who you’re queued against so inflation is removed on both team and 1 vs 1 elo.

3.) Pick civs at the start of the queue and once done so the civ pick and map stars/bans are locked in regardless of what map pops up.

4.) Introduce an unranked elo so that lobby users have more information on non-ranked users to reduce lobby smurfing.

5.) Have new accounts made under family share start out with(may still lose) the highest elo account under the user’s family share umbrella, while at the same time improving the anti-drop measures to further reduce reverse elo farmers from smurfing (usually 1-1.3k elo attempting 700-900 elo) (do not remove nor overly restrict family share.)

6.) If incorporating dynamic elo - I’d imagine 15 temp elo gained for each map ban, and 30 elo for picking civ.
However no temp elo gained for starring maps. (So for 1 vs 1 a max 75 temp elo may be gained(any higher would be too much)

7.) Introduce a 500 elo disparity limit on who you may be teamed up with in ranked queue(not ranked lobby)
(Secondary counter elo would not be counted towards this limit) this will more or less remove team-game elo disparity smurfing by high elo users teaming up with 1k+ elo below them to gain easier opponents.

8.) Reset team-game elo to help remove the insane inflation there, but do not reset 1 vs 1 elo since inflation isn’t so high as to justify a reset there. Elo above 2k in 1 vs 1 will automatically be counted towards the second counter

1 Like

except elos aren’t inflating in 1v1.
you can see that by the fact that the pros are still right around 2500 elo after literally months or years.

1 Like

Added a few more to the above comment, I may add more if I think of anything else - any suggestions?

I agree with you! 20 caracters

1 Like

In the current system the matchmaker can match up anyone, based only on ELO, and there will always be at least 1 unbanned map. If players have more bans,then this system of matchmaking is no longer possible, and queue times will increase.


I find the idea with a temporary Elo intersting. But I would like to modify it a bit. Assume I want to learn a new civ and start to play it by picking it every time. Then your porposal would give me a higher Elo from the beginning although in reality my true Elo with this civ would be lower. So my proposal:

  • Check how often a player has played the assigned civ (doesnt matter if it was picked or assigned randomly) in the last X matches (or Y days?) and adjust the Elo accordingly. Open question: mapping from X (or Y) to an appropriate Elo increase.
  • The same could be done for the played map.

However, I see a problem with the temorary Elo due to the chosen map (in your but also my proposal). Currently, first the players are matched and then the map is chosen. That means the temporary Elo due to the assigned map has no influene on the match-making, only on the calculation of the new Elo after the match has finished.
So, they would have to switch the order, first map-assign, then calculating temp Elo and then finding an opponent.

And additionally for team games: Count how often in the last X team games (or Y days?) you have already played with your matched team mates. For example, count it for each team mate individually, sum it up for all team mates and divide it by the number of team mates (so that 2vs2, 3vs3, 4vs4 are more equally treated). The more often you play with the same players the higher gets your temp Elo.

1 Like