Matchmaker Suggestions

The latest tweaks in the matchmaker were interesting, however the waiting times for four squads has sometimes become really bad, because now even if I know another 4squad queues from another corp, we don’t seem to find the game. So before I rant again about the GUI missing information to make us find enemies better, who are willing to fight us, I want to suggest two things for the current state, which imho would be important, and maybe another.


  1. 4 squads meeting 2 2 squads

I am not against having a 4 squad meeting a 2squad, especially, if the 4 squad is not perfect, but the 2 squad is two veterans. But what about 2-4 vets and other players, or similar setups?

Facing two 2squads, or even 2+3 if the 4squad has been really strong, would give even more room to the matchmaker to make good matches. So I suggest, expanding the rulesets in these directions. The usual 3vs4, or similar should still apply, but it should not be like this, that squadding leads to waiting times of hours in the queue, because the future of this game clearly needs players to see squadding up as something, which is not just exercised by elder players.


  1. Drop or change the corporation rules in the MM

not meeting another squad you know it is queued up and of similar strength, only because they are from the same corporation, is bad for the game for so many reasons. I know, this can be abused by corporations in a way, to farm, but such things should be controlled separately, maybe through some kind of trust system, and specifically to target abusers. Mixed squadding shows, that fights where both sides feature the same corporation leads to sometimes intense games, especially because the pilots know each other, instead of leading to abuse.

If people abuse and farm, the problem is more the rewards for the time invested, if the game is ideal, such problems should not arise!


  1. Optional feedback

Just an idea, what about a nonintrusive feedback mechanism for players, so they can say “this match was good or this match was horrible”, in the debriefing? Especially the winners’ feedbacks would be interesting to be analyzed. I would sometimes love to like the MM for a good game, or a bad game, to make the analyst look at corner cases.


  1. Re think the GUI for MM.

Yeah, I added it again nevertheless. Inform players which Tech they are facing; add more optional information for the players; have more transparency in the queue system. Add things to do while you wait in queue, so the players can discuss their ships, view them, etc. instead of locking these features down (it’s okay if they cannot re-equip their ships)

This part of the game needs the most attention. It is a source of nonstop complaint, even by people who do not say it on the forums;


  1. unlock MM rules over waiting time. If you wait desperately for a match, there comes the time, where you would just take anything. Even an unfair game in any direction. See this as opportunity. People would care much less to be steamrolled, if it does not mean, waiting another eon for the next game.


  1. promise to keep an eye on this, again and again

pvp is the strongest trumpcard (not invasion), and soon, there comes a lot of competitors on the market. having the best arena game for spacegames, especially by delivering for casuals and hardcore players at the same time, is neat. Talk about it, also about obstacles, not just “we did this and this was good”. Make us believe, the MM is magic and make it so.


  1. Rewards for squadding

Squads clearly should have no benefits, like more damage or similar, their strength is already in communication. But please, do not treat squads as magical OP things, because, a squad still consists of a couple of players, who can be even weaker if you combine them. If squadding would give rewards, by increasing income in some way, which does not make it completely unfair, maybe squadding would become more common. It would be great to one day see regularly multiple 4squads fighting each other in bigger games, which is usually the highlight of a day.

I agree with pretty much all of the above, please Devs, make it happen!


The latest tweak to the corp squads has really annoyed me - our games with corp squads on both sides (with a guest as one of the leaders) were some of the most enjoyable (and often closest/best balanced) I have played

All great suggestions. +1

I am especially fond of the “rewards for squadding” angle.


Part of the problem, and the reason the game is now clearly NOT a team based game, is that someone in the Dev Team got it in their heads that “squads” = “four ESB pilots with no life outside of this game.” They then build the game on that assumption, and wonder why people are getting pissed that they and their two inexperienced friends with middling green ships are considered ‘equal’ to a four man purple deathball.


Being in a squad should always give more reward than not being in a squad. this would encourage people to squad up more, and thus naturally push people to want to find better squads to maximise rewards, which in turn pushes them to become better players, promotes value within Corps, and improves the game.

thanks for your input - forwarded to Devs

Yep. Pretty much a perfect list.  Excellent, g4borg!

I admit, i don’t know, how the MM exactly works, however, i want to make 1 additional suggestion:


The MM should also take in credit, which ship is the prefered one of the individual participants on the choosen map.


For example:

It should be counted, if the (solo-)player often uses frigate, or if he likes to fly supportships or if he uses interceptors only, so the MM would be able to spread these kinds of ships on the different teams. That would be much more fair, than one team full of LRFs and the other with only fast interceptors. Or Team1 with 2 Engineers and Team2 with nothing for support. Or a team with 4 Guards against a team with mainly tacklers. Something, we all know, happens everyday and can be very frustrating. I hope, you got my point.