Unranked automatic matchmaking system

I’m quite convinced that the game developers must implement an “Unranked automatic matchmaking system”, in the place of the anachronistic Lobby Browser. Lobby Browser should probably remain only for custom scenarios and such.

I have to admit that, host players are not worthy of deciding who to keep and who to… kick, simply because they judge based on their personal interest. The same guest player can be kicked multiple times in a row, just because he is not high enough in the official ranked/unofficial unranked ladder the one time, or low enough the very next time, on each occasion he joins a lobby! This, makes the process to find a quick unranked game to play, a struggle that takes too much time!

Game developers must invest more on a fair and effective, both ranked & unraked, automatic matchmaking system, that uses hidden performance information for each player, like other games do. Self-evident service for every modern game.


Matchmaking requires ranking, otherwise it cant attempt to make fair games…


I’m talking about replacing of the Lobby Browser by an automatic system. That’s the topic.

It’s an interesting idea, but how would it work? Map pools and bans, same as ranked, but without ELO? Seems redundant, as you get the same limitations as matchmaking (which many people dislike) without many of the benefits.

FWIW, Dota 2 has this, there exists unranked matchmaking that functions exactly the same as ranked, but with separate MMR/ELO that is not shown to the player, I don’t think it would be bad to have this, but your ELO is already hidden from your opponent in-game when you play and no one else gets to see it but you unless they look you up, which is unlikely.

Maybe the community would benefit from something like this, but I don’t think the lobby system should go away entirely.

1 Like

Would be nice. It could incorporate/use an ‘unranked ELO’ score, as discussed in this old thread:

Personally, I just want an unranked ELO score to be shown to me from my single-player and unranked multiplayer AoE games, and for the game to give me a fun ranking title like I mentioned here, like Pirates! video game did. But if it had the added benefit of what you describe for matchmaking, it seems like that’d be pretty cool/helpful for players

An unranked ELO score actually exists already, as seen at aoe2.net, which FadedFriend2906 mentioned in the above thread I linked to:

…But I’m pretty sure it doesn’t count games you play via single-player (non-server) games. For my idea above, I would want single-player random map games to be counted.


EDIT: Sorry, I didn’t realize this thread was so old until after I posted and it said, “9 months later” on my post. This thread had shown up in the “Suggested Topics” area at the bottom of my forum screen, so I clicked it. If necro’ing is dissuaded here, the forum code should probably be fine-tuned to not show old threads like that. I’ve almost done it in the past, and now I fell for it. I can’t be the only one.

Here’s a sample screenshot of the area I’m talking about…


This wont work at all.

  1. Match making based on the unranked elo of the lobby will just result in a ranked queue with a different ladder. This ladder will always be less accurate than ranked. So in my eyes it has no benefit over the current ranked system.

  2. If we add a match making system based on no elo at all, then we end up with quick play. There is a good reason why quick play isnt popular. You only end up with unbalanced games. I know this thread was made before quick play was a thing, so @ProkmanI didnt knew this feature. Quick play in the current form is a disaster. I made my own thread about that subject already:

Completely deleting the lobby in favor of somethings else also seems a bad idea. There are some games that will always be played in the lobby. Some examples:

  • Tournaments games
  • Games with friend only (Example: LAN party)
  • Some niches that dont really fit into match making

That is called the ranked ladder. It already is in the game, it does not work great (unbalanced teamgames, because of high tg elo inflation…). So better fix the current ranked system than introducing a new system that has no advantages over the current one

Isn’t this what they tried with quick play?
It isn’t working so far…

Yes, it is.

Note: this thread was made before quick play was a thing. So this feature was unknown to @ProkmanI when he started this thread.

I’ve been playing Rocket League recently, both Competitive and Casual, and both modes have a rating, but the rating in Casual is hidden. It might seem like this has no benefit, but in practice they are quite different. There are some differences in mechanics, so in Casual it tends to keep players together game after game unless they actively leave and re-search, and you can vote for a re-match that keeps the teams the same for the next game. If a player leaves, they are replaced by an AI in Casual but not Competitive. And a new player can enter mid-game in Casual. But just the fact that the rating is hidden makes the games feel totally different. Competitive is tense and tryhard, Casual is much more relaxed. It really does make a difference. The game also has Private lobbies on top of those two modes where you can just play with friends, so that would be the mode that a streamer would use to play with viewers, for example, rather than Casual.

1 Like

Quick play does have the advantage of letting you go for relic or wonder victories, as well as preventing players from choosing their position in a team game, which could be to the liking of some, so I think getting rid of the imbalance in quick play is worth trying.