Feature Request: ELO Rating Filter


  • administrators

    @MonkeyZ Thank you very much for your additional questions. Due to how Elo Works all-new players also start with an Elo of 1000.

    We would have to take all those players in an extra match-making pool to achieve what you are looking for. It's not impossible but we would have to check if we won´t hurt their game experience as you mentioned correctly.

    I will take this conversation here to one of our next dev- meetings and we will see if we can do something about it in the current system or if we would need to change things up in a different way to achieve a more evenly distributed field of contestants for each game.



  • @administrators You said something that was pretty interesting in that you don't want to hurt the experience of those people. What about the people who are active in the community and actually consistently play?

    I say that because I think you are hurting their experience without knowing it. You are putting them in games with people much more experienced with the online portal and they are slowing the game down. Other players are getting frustrated because they don't know how to trade, roll, or anything from the site prospective. It's not a good experience for everyone.

    However, in response to the actual request for the feature. For example, I played a game with two 900's just now. The game took less than 30 seconds to start. So either, it just built one as quick as possible or only 900's were online. I had the Karma filter on and one of them was 3 stars. So in 30 seconds, I got two below starting level players and below Karma. I won the game and got 2.72 points ELO. The second place person (who by the way lost...by 4 points) got 2.94 points towards ELO. The risk/reward is just not worth it for people over 1200 and the game is not fun because better players make that game much closer. I lose that game, I lose 14 point easy. Now I should win, I get it but still for the loser to get more points while losing by 4 points to a game to 10.

    Just saying, there is a gap in the matchmaking. If the matchmaking is flawed, we are just looking for ways to have more competitive games. I know there are many things you guys are working on and we appreciate it. At the end of the day, it's a suggestion.



  • Let's be honest here. Matchmaker only works for games where there is only one game mode. League of Legends has 1000 times more players but only 1 main map. Catan has base game, 2 expansions and other different customizations... And the new Incas game. And so on.

    You can not match people up based on Elo or Karma. I'm quite sure these checkboxes only maybe make the matchmaker wait for 5-10 more seconds before switching back to the main queue. If the players can not choose for themselves in a game like Catan, it will start ruining their gaming experience. And it definitely is.

    Bring back the frigging lobby. It is not hard to come up with a good UI/UX version for mobile. Learn how filtering works and put some effort into it. Finding suitable players and kicking out the ones who you do not want to play with will make the games much more fun in the end.



  • Das ist doch mal eine Ansage.
    Ich kann es nur unterstützen.



  • @Stroom said:

    Catan has base game, 2 expansions and other different customizations... And the new Incas game. And so on.

    You can not match people up based on Elo or Karma.

    What does ELO mean across different variants!? There was a discussion here recently about playing for 2nd but the main guys pushing for it only play 3 player base, and I play 4 player Catan and consider them slightly different games. I'd probably struggle to compete in any of the other expansions (for a while) until I learned the unique strategies.



  • @Administrator said:

    @MonkeyZ Thank you very much for your additional questions. Due to how Elo Works all-new players also start with an Elo of 1000.

    We would have to take all those players in an extra match-making pool to achieve what you are looking for. It's not impossible but we would have to check if we won´t hurt their game experience as you mentioned correctly.

    I will take this conversation here to one of our next dev- meetings and we will see if we can do something about it in the current system or if we would need to change things up in a different way to achieve a more evenly distributed field of contestants for each game.

    Are there enough players online at any given time to allow for tiered play? Going back to my ranking system idea of players increase "skill/experience" rank after a number of wins against comparable level, they move up a rank (never down).

    Then allow people to pick whether they are playing in a ranked game, which might take longer to match but guarantees a certain level of play (and a chance to move up the ranks), or an open/unranked game which allows everyone to play a fun game where ELO doesn't matter and hopefully it's more fun for all because there's no need to be overly aggressive towards less skilled players.


Log in to reply