Ranked matchmaking regarding ELO


in the last few weeks it looks to me that the ELO balance in team games is a bit broken. I am aware of the general problems with match making and ELO and so one, but to me it seems to be a bit more unbalanced than before.
For example 4v4 (avg. 1317 vs. 1435) but the the single ratings were 1431/1519/644(!)/1635 vs 1545/1440/1340/1456. Unsurprisingly the game was lost real quick from a competitive point of view. But seeing your pocket player on arena trading in feudal was special and fun in a positive way :slight_smile:

Another example 4v4 (avg. 2451 vs. 1918) with following single ratings 2296/2550/1862/3096 vs. 1611/2143/1532/2386. This game took not to long and not everyone reached castle age on team islands on this day :sweat_smile:

What are your experiences regarding this?

Please don´t get me wrong it´s not about winning or losing, but more about missing the fun of having a fair competition.

Well TG elo is kinda screwed anyway since the old system caused an elo inflation that made it so that pretty much anyone could get to 2k+, then when they changed the calculation they didn’t try to correct the inflation so people with an excess of points kept it and you can even use alt accounts to raise your elo a ridiculous amount (that’s why there is a 3k elo dude in one of your examples). So this means that at the end of the day you can have perfectly balanced teams ELO wise but the game will not feel actually balanced and vice versa.

1 Like

Here would be my suggestion regarding team games:

I’m personally more of a fan of 1v1s due to them tending to be faster, but as a team-game fix, I definitely think that this a good way to go. The problem is, if people only play team games, that won’t really work.

How to improve early 1v1s:
Maybe if for the first 10 games of 1v1, you only play against other people with less than ten games, that should be the matchmaking priority for the first few minutes, if it takes more than 5 mins, then it just matches you against someone with similar elo. This should help stop new players falling afoul of people who are now getting good at the game and are on a 50 win streak coming back from 800 elo or something. For these first 10 games, team games could be locked.

Introducing early team games:
Once the ten are complete, it now unlocks team games, where it matches you with teammates and opponents within 50 elo of your 1v1 score. You then gain or lose elo points at the end, based on the average of the two teams, which theoretically should be very similar. They matchmaking the team games this way for the first ten games.

Progressing Team Games:
After those ten games, there should be enough data that they start matchmaking with people of a similar team game elo. If the matchmake process is taking too long, they can add players who have a 1v1 elo score similar to the average of all players currently found. In that manner, all players on the team should be of a fairly similar level, leading to a better chance of victory. Naturally this would require a complete reset of the team game rankings, maybe save the current elo’s in case a new system fails.

How other issues might be resolved:
As another couple of things that would be useful to implement to stop people just quitting and ruining the game for everyone, would be team surrender. For this, before anyone is allowed to surrender, the majority of players on their team must be willing to resign. If more than half of the team votes for team surrender, people can now resign. The team as a whole isn’t forced to resign though, and if the remaining players want to play on, they can do so. For the purposes of tie-breakers, the player on each team with the currently highest score counts for two votes, but only if there is a tie. If a player drops or is defeated, it counts as an automatic vote towards team surrender.

How to deal with players who have used Alt f4:
Either, any other player the team can now control the resigned player, this is not they take over totally. Instead, this control is shared between the rest of the team, so that they can all share control or resigned players, as well as controlling their own base. The other suggestion would be to have an AI sub in for the resigned player. The Ai could either be an extreme AI, or the game takes the highest AI level ever beaten by any player on this team, which shouldn’t be too hard, seeing as there is an achievement that could be checked. It then adds one level of difficulty to this and subs that in in place of the player, Ie. if the best AI anyone in the game had ever beaten was hard, a hardest Ai would be the substitute. Although giving the remaining players shared control of the resigned player would be more fair, it would be harder for them to manage, and even agree on a course of action. If an AI was subbed in however, it would be almost certainly worse than a player, but it would be able to receive commands from the players to give it instructions on how to play, and it would allow the players to run their own bases.

Other suggestions regarding elo for players using Alt f4, or teams dealing with it:
Players who use Alt f4 in the first 5 minutes of the game, or before the game starts should also automatically lose a set number of elo points, regardless of the actual result. It has been suggested that this could be 14 points. If they use Alt f4 at any point after those first 5/10 mins, they could instead lose 7 points. It could also be implemented that if the team with a resigned player loses, the amount of points they lose is decreased by a fixed amount, such as 7, so that they don’t suffer as much for the loss. Anyone who uses Alt f4 should also be effected by the outcome of the match if possible, in addition to losing the set points.

Prebuilt Teams:
After team games are unlocked for a player, they can now also play team games with a prebuilt team. When assembling a custom team, the likely-hood of having largely different elos is quite high. This could be resolved by taking the highest elo person on a custom team, and taking the average of them and all other team members within 200 elo. This is the average that it then tries to match with.

Those are my ideas currently. What do people think?

1 Like

afaik a lot of these issues are a result of the smaller online player base… iaw almost every “new player” will exceed their 5 min queue due to player base, the same applies to most of your other changes, which would have been more easily done with a largeer MP player base…

Yes. We really do need a larger player base. The problem is not AoE2. The problem is other games!

Okay, fine, that won’t work. I think my changes could be a step in the right direction though, and if the player base does grow, this could help matchmaking, which could further grow it.

Okay, thanks this inflation explains a lot of games I had before with balanced ELO, but unbalanced game play experiences.
In this specific case I knew the 3k ELO player from yt guides where people copied his build orders and in this game he showed why :smiley:
It was fun anyway.

But looks like the match making is not worse than before. Maybe I was lucky until last week.

Hope this explain you the Team Elo Fix


I read this as you assuming that all new accounts are new players and new players who will not be skilled at the game. My understanding is that the current system accounts for experienced players on a new account or experience in other RTS giving them an edge. So if you’re winning your first few games you very quickly get put against someone of much higher elo, and not hammer lower 1k rated players. The 1st 10 games jumps hundreds of elo depending on how u win/lose (at least that’s my understanding).

Your system just dooms the experienced player now playing 10 games against mostly lower skilled players AND dooms the lower skilled players who now get thrashed multiple times because that particular account isn’t allowed to move up the elo until 10 games are done.

I guess, maybe scrap that idea then.

1 Like