[Suggestion] We need Ranked Lobby

Yeah but to be fair, you can still play the maps you want to with friends.

You just can’t do it ranked; and changing the matchmaking and ranking system from the way it is will affect more people than just you. I expect there to be compromises on both sides if changes are implemented.

There actually are far more interesting maps these days than just the ones that’ve been around since 1999 too. A lot of the tournaments in HD and DE have showcased some interesting strategies and games. Some civs even shine on these maps that wouldn’t normally on Arabia and Arena. If anything caring about the maps is caring about a large variety of maps rather than just one or two no?

I think saying ranked/elo/rated are sometimes interchangeable though.

1 Like

Oh nice its only me that wants to play arabia… I guess I am a bit lost and I should not have bought this game.

But it’s actually not like that. I am not the only one that wants to play rated with whatever map they want. We all should have freedom to choose what maps we wanna play, come on.

I don’t care (not saying bad words) about compromises. I just want to play like real aoe 2 was

You want to keep playing the maps that are in the map pool? You would still be able to play them

I disagree that unlimited bans would lead to worse matchmaking. In my opinion, playing something you find boring is more detrimental to the player experience which lead people to leave the game or, at least, the ladder — which results in worse matchmaking and less players. This is actually your current suggestion to a poster above - leave the ladder if you do not want to play random maps.

My suggestion is to allow players to play what they want (knowing they will have a longer queue), from the pool that has been given (and BF should be fixed there as its the #2 map) so more people actually join the ladder.

When the ladder doesn’t match player expectations or provide good experiences you start to see alternative ranking systems poping up - like nC for TGs. I would not be surprised if someone opened up a website for 1v1 Ladder for DE Arabia at some point.


I personally don’t mind waiting long queues but when i find a match, I enjoy the match. We all have different preferences. There is peolpe that wants to play bf 1v1 rated and now they can’t and there is no reason for that.
Matchaking was a nice idea but only providing 4 bans is awful.

I never said so. You probably are referring to @Hardform’s post.

The issue is ‘I want to enjoy the game’ means somethings else for everyone. What i like, can be boring to you. What you like, can be boring to me.

I already told my experience with the ranking at Voobly and HD. I also started with playing just one map (BF) and i started to get better into that map, so my rating increase. After a while i got boring of playing the same map over and over again. So i wanna play other maps (like Arabia). This map is completely different to what i used to play. Players at my own rating would steam roll me, players of a lower rating wont play me. So you are kinda stuck with playing only one map.

So the ladder at Voobly / HD was only good for ‘one trick ponies’, players who just wanna play the same map over and over again. The ranking was pretty bad for players who wanna switch from one map to another map or for players who like map variaty and play at different maps everytime.

For me, as someone who likes playing different maps, the current matchmaking / elo rating is delightful. I like how i can easily play different maps against equally skilled opponents. I feel like the match ups at DE are much better than on HD or Voobly. Note: I mostly play 1v1s, there seems to be an issue with team game ranking, same as for the hidden unranked ranking. See:

I feel like if you have unlimited bans, it will be the same as voobly / HD again with drawbacks i described above. Some of you would love that, others dont really like it. At this moment i just dont see any good solution for everyone. It is ofcourse the dream to have just only AoE II DE and everyone enjoys the game, so we dont have any need for Voobly, HD or even Gameranger. If someone has the ultimate solution to this issue, i will immediately vote for that solution. It is ashame it is non existing at this moment.

I won’t mind if the number of bans will be increase by a bit. Unlimited isnt the right call, i think, but lets say 6 for 1v1 is pretty much possible. I really dont know about teamgames, since you need to match multiple players into one game and if you all have many bans, i dont really think it will work. Multiple bans in teamgames can also lead to some issues: You join the queue with 2 friends for a 3v3. If everyone has 3 bans, you can ban every map, so you end up with no valid maps. So you need to avoid such situation.

I also dont really know how easy it is to increase the number of bans. Maybe the match making algorithm needs to change. I guess it will pick 2-8 with around the same elo from the same part of the world. At the end it just randomly pick one of the non banned maps. If you increase the number of bans, there is a risk of having no valid maps. So matchmaking needs to consider also the banned maps of all players and check if there is a valid map. This means they have to change the algorithm and can result in much more waiting time.

You agreed with Hardwell it was MegaRandom. But yeah, doesnt really mattter :wink:

Yeah, i have some some really interested maps in the past tournaments. I would love it if they add those to map pool at some point.


That is the response I gave to @Hardform

I have no issue with existence of MM (beside the bad TG matchups), but why can’t we have a Ranked Lobby alongside it?

Will it change the game too much?

1 Like

Actually yes, for different games like RM, DM, Regicide, KotH, EW, each Team games 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, and even with different partners in team games should have each separate ratings for them.
This is what happens in Starcraft 2, which I find its MMR (our Elo rating) to be pretty accurate, at least that’s what I see for today’s AOE2 DE.

They have a party invite feature which I find it amazing that you can host and invite your friends to join your party to play together in team games, queuing for ranked team games, having each separate Elo rating for different team mates each time. In a party, you can also watch replays together. I do certainly hope the party feature is introduced soon, then this would help to ease the “different ban maps” issue as stated by @WoodsierCorn696 above, where the host will ban maps and start queuing. But that’s another topic to see another day.

I see where is this topic going after scrolling through 75 replies, that there’re players who don’t like different map variety hence go to lobby, but don’t like to be overmatched or having huge skill level difference among players for ruining the game hence wanting lobby elo, I do get that. But tbh, ranked is for competitive play and promote community to go tournaments by encouraging variation in different strategies and meta on different maps and it’s really interesting to go in this direction. Some players who love to stick to one map forever I’m not sure if this is healthy, but lobby is the correct place to practice and have fun with friends. Maybe banning player feature can be your answer to refrain high level players from joining your games?

I even hope to see ranked rating vs AI, where it allows everyone who wants to play against AI in team games can queue and team together and beat the AI, with AI difficulty adjusted with the total team AI Elo as matches go. But that’s another feature we hope to see in another day, can be a party mode too.

1 Like

Yeah. But will that be an issue?

I already explained that going one map for ranked is a bad idea.

Also, I mostly intend to have different game modes in ranked.

Sure, if they added all these game modes, I’ll not see a reason for Ranked Lobby mostly

For different game modes like RM and DM are still ok, as they’re more or less the same. Let’s discuss each mode as below:

Random Map: Current tournament standard.

Death Match: Increased resources of RM.

Regicide: more towards boom to imp for they have 12 villagers and a castle built at the start, much like closed maps such as BF, Arena

King of the Hill: much like Wonder maps but in the middle of the map, a fun mode. If only conquest is the standard mode, this shouldn’t be in ranked.

Empire Wars: much like DM.

Team games: party feature can be introduced to ease map selection and bans by host and faster queuing. Different rating should be used.

You are trying to say all mapmode are the same and there isnt much difference between the game modes?! Different game mode really played out different. It is not like you go for a scout rush in DM… I also like how you compare EW to DM. For me EW is more like RM, but with an head start. I also dont know how you compare KotH to Wonder maps. What is Wonder map?

I never got into SC II, so i dont really know that game and there MM system. So I have some questions for you about your suggestion / how this is done by SC II.

I feel like a MM system is only great if you have enough players. In your suggestion you already have 5 game modes and 4 different team. This is already 20 different ladders. I dont really know what you mean with ‘Different partners’. Does this mean i have another rating if i play with you instead of with ArshiaAghaei? Or do you mean other match ups, like FFA, 3v5, …? How does SC II deal with this amount of ladders? I really dont know if SC II has many game mode for example.

If i know have a look at DM 1v1, there are only around 1000 players on the ladder. The number if pretty low to have a good ladder. I dont know how popular maps like 4v4 Empire wars or 1v1 regicide are. Do we really need that specific ladders? Are there enough players so a ladder make sense?

I would love if they add more game modes to match making. Regicide, KotH and EW seems all fine. For EW i would just add a solo and team game ladder. Not 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4. I dont know how many palyers play Regicide. Is this still in teams or is this more FFA? For me KotH is really a FFA kind of format. All other players against the one who controls the middle. So maybe KotH only needs a FFA ladder.

So i would love to hear more about the ranking / matching system at SC II (you can also link to a good source, so i can read it from there).

You can invite friends and play ranked now though? Or is it more the other stuff, like watching a replay together that is missing? So does every pair of players get a separate rating or how does it work?

That does sound kind of cool, matchmaking for vs ai :slight_smile:

This makes no sense. Empire Wars is just like RM but skips the dark age. DM starts with thousands of resources, all upgrades and explored map…

Glad devs dont listen to one or two comments online or games would be a mess. So much incorrect information being thrown around.


Yes, in the end there’re so many variation of game modes, so I don’t think fitting all game modes into one ranked elo is doable, worse when lots of players prefer to play on certain maps only.

In order to make Elo work best, the player pool has to be sufficient, which is the reason why more players are encouraged to go into ranked than lobby, but first, we have to study the reason why many players refuse to go ranked. Maybe some of my information above were inaccurate such as RM is same as DM. Please take it with a grain of salt, my intention is to hope to provide insights, and discussions are always welcomed. :smiley:

Disclaimer: I’m not a pro player but a loyal one where I played AoK and TC during my school years, I didn’t know and played HD until recent years and continued playing DE with my father. So some of the HD features I might missed.

For SC2 they did revamped a couple of times their matchmaking system throughout the past 10 years, and I feel it’s pretty good today. As an overview, SC2 has 3 servers, which they separate world players based on different regions for better matchmaking and latency, namely US / SEA server(including Oceania AU), Asia server (KR/TW), and Europe server. Each of them further categorise their players into different leagues based on ranked from the lowest to the highest, the Leagues are: Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, Master and Grandmaster. I find this categorisation fit into modern RTS and MMO games today where many are familiar with it. It can be seen as an in-game achievement. There are numerous divisions within each League, with each division being composed of up to 100 players (for further easier categorisation making the list less crowded). The process of matchmaking is based solely on MMR and not on a player’s division or league.

Players are ranked within their division based on their Points. The function of points is to determine a player’s rank within their division. After having completed their placement matches, players start out with 0 points. The number of ladder points is only weakly correlated to skill. Especially if players have unspent bonus pool, ladder points tend to measure activity level much more strongly than performance. The Bonus Pool is the sum of all “bonus points” a player can get in a particular division, mainly to encourage players to play games so their points are always trending upward, to me this is optional.

You earn or lose points by winning or losing matches, respectively. To simplify how it works in practice.
y = (+/-)12 + x + z



  • “y” : the total number of points
  • “x” : the relative expected skill level between one player’s points and the other’s MMR (can be negative, calculated independently per player)
  • “z” : the points you get from your bonus pool

=> “x” is a value in the interval of [-12,12], positive numbers are when your opponent is favored

  • if the game says you are even, “x” is part of {-2,-1,0,1,2}
  • if it says your opponent is slightly favored, then “x” is part of {3,4,5,6,7}
  • if it says your opponent is favored, then “x” is part of {8,9,10,11,12}

(of course, if you are the slightly/favored player, then “x” is negative, which means you will lose more or win less than 12 points)

“z” will be greater than zero when your bonus pool is > 0. In which case z = 12 + x, permitted you have enough points in your bonus pool.

You may refer to this link https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Battle.net_Leagues for more detailed information on Starcraft 2 matchmaking system.

Again, I do not intend we take everything from there, just sharing it as I feel they’ve done a great job and we can learn something, and some parts AOE2 DE are different, for instance:

  • our total player pool, to make ranked system effective (I have no idea how many players are playing this game online as there’s no announcements like in SC2 announcing (claiming) their number of online players at a single time.
  • team games seem to be preferred than 1v1 by our players (again, I’m based on what I see from lobby that has lots of team games and VS AI games because I’m one of them, and long queue times on ranked team games, might be because of other factors as well)
  • different game modes (as discussed in posts above)
  • many more different civs compared to SC2 has 3 distinct races with totally different units and tech.
  • many different maps on top of randomly generated maps (yes, the starting resources are more or less the same between players but still, many randomness is there such as expansion base locations, ramps and chokes, high-low grounds, etc, which give advantages from one to another) I can’t deny this randomness makes AOE2 DE an awesome game but seeing tournament players and many lobby players only go for some meta shows two possibilities, either lots of meta not explored by players yet, or players prefer to not play on randomness.

Sorry for the long post. I hope I’m making the posts on track to the title. You guys may quote me for discussion to make the game great again! Again, please take a grain of salt on them, hope we have a great discussion ahead! :smiley:

First: I will have a look at your insight about SC II at a later moment. So dont worry, i will respond to that, since i like suh insight.

I dont think there needs to be one ranked elo. I can see we have the following:

RM 1v1
RM team
DM 1v1
DM team
EW 1v1
EW team
regicide FFA (?)

Something like this. This seems pretty much doable. Question in the end will be: Is the number of players of each mode sufficient? Probably only for RM, but DM already has a ladder and i dont really think EW or KOTH has less players. There are always some lobbies with this game mode.

Like i said i will respons to this part of your post. I try to understand how it works at SC II.
To me SC II has two different kind of systems:

  1. Something with ladders, leagues and divisions based of ladder points. If I read everything correctly, this seems not related to matchmaking at all. You are part of a league and division, but in the end it wont has any influence on the matches.
  2. MMR rating and their own leagues. I am pretty confused about two different kind of leagues? As far as i goes about MMR: To me this seems to be just something like we already have. Very briefly sad, there system is just an advanced Elo calculation. I dont think this part is much different to Age of Empires II at all. Where they tell much about ladder points, they wont go deep into MMR rating calculation. They say like ‘It is just like TrueSkill’ and that seems to be all.

I feel like SC2 had much more players. On Steam you can see the number of players. This will pick around 30.000. Then we have Xbox live, but i dont know if you can see the numbers of active users. Note that some of the users are playing the game in single player or as unranked. Those are not part of matchmaking.

For RM 1v1 there are currently 33,342 players on the ranking (at least 10 games).
For RM team games this number is 48,187. To me a surprise: More players at the team game ladder than on the 1v1 ladder. I dont know anything about the number of games for each players. I always thought getting a 1v1 is much easier than a team game. So a new surprise to me.

You can compare this numbers to SC II. I think SC II will win without doubt. If you have more players, you can also have more different kind of rankings to me. So i can understand

Us a surprise to me, your right. But dont have a look at the lobby. I have see the ongoing games at the lobby. I think half of the games is against AI. I dont think games against AI needs to be part of Ranked games. But again, also in Unranked games most games are team games, i feel.

There are even 193,564 players with at least 10 unranked games! Based on the ongoing games this is also a surprise to me. I thougth it would be a bit largers, but not with this factor. It would be great of we can make them move to Ranked games as well. More games in ranked is better ratings to me. This means we need to know why they play unranked games and maybe make changes for them.

I feel like most attention go to 1v1. Even most big tournaments focus on 1v1, but by the looks the team game community is much bigger than i was expecting!

Does SC II just have 1 game mode? Or do i see this wrong? I also dont know how maps where generated in SC II, so i dont know how the variaty is between the maps played at SC2. For civs (or races) they have only 3. For 3 civs it is much more easy to balance the civs, since all match ups are pretty common, even on high level. If you had a larger player base, it is much more easy to analyse winrate and such things.

1 Like

I think some of you guys take the elo too seriuosly. I feel it doesn’t really matter if you are 1600 player but you still lose to 1400 in water maps, it doesn’t matter. It’s your problem that you don’t want to learn new maps, It’s only your problem.

I think the most important part was that you still had freedom to never play those maps you don’t like.

It is clear you only care about playing Arabia only and you dont really care about anything else.

1 Like

I’m gonna ask a question.

If they don’t add the other game mods to MM, will it be bad to have a Ranked Lobby for at least those?

I mean, not that I care, but if someone just wants to play ranked Arabia, if they ever get to MM they will have a hard time in less standard maps. So, that will be their disadvantage