Team matchmaking in quickmatch result in inbalanced teams

In random team quickmatches, the matchmaking seems to generate very strange teams constellations sometimes…

Here is the experience from today evening, which all resulted in very frustrating games:

I am not sure what the algorithm uses, but such inbalance in skills result in very one sided matches. Maybe it’s the lack of players… there are sometimes good matches though, and those are fun. I started to get these strange ones recently.

Thank you for this @WiseConcil! This is something we are keeping an eye on. Matches that are competitive and fun are extremely important to us and definitely the player base as a whole. I’ll make sure the team sees these numbers you’ve given.

Do you recall how long you sat in the queue before each of these matches?

1 Like

Thank you for your response. I remember that on that day waiting times were longer than usual:

  • typical waiting time for me is around1:30-2:30
  • on that “streak” somehow it took longer, around 4:00 - 6:00 minutes - but no warranties, just my blurry recollection

In one of yesterday’s matchups, this seemed to be a very balanced matchup on Boulder bay:

And this one was a clear, almost uncontested victory on our end on Nagari:

My guess is somehow on closed maps (where team mates can easily wall / protect) less skilled players can be compensated for more easily. Or something like that… what I want to say, that I understand this is a complicated matter. For once, probably the numbers also not fully represent what a specific player can do in a specific setup (civ, map, opponent strat), since we are not talking about pros :slight_smile: so consistency not our strength…

On the other hand, a 500 ELO difference between individual players is very significant. Almost like that 1 vs 3 would be a fair match :smiley: And of course good players also need matches…

So, without knowing the formula that is used… the simple addition of individual ELOs is probably not a very robust indicator of how good the balance would be. So selecting a “peer” for each player would be probably more promising… That each team has its gold, silver and bronze champions… not like 3 silvers has to compete against one platinum and 2 bronzes.