Matchmaking still flawed?

+

Guest 4375874

Guest
At least in my case, bad matchups are not the result of any actions by CDPR. It’s my stupid cell phone. Ever since it got possessed by the spirit of Elvis Presley, nothing has gone my way!
lol see now I can't believe you...we all know Elvis is alive somewhere vacationing in the caribbean
 
Matchmaking in ranked is ok in my experience, sometimes good matchups, sometimes bad matchups, pretty randomly depends on who is queuing I suppose. But Casual seems a different story: today I wanted to try Arachas deck cause I've never played it in ranked, so I went to Casual to test it. The 1st match was against a MO deck with two forktails which countered the swarm strategy. I didn't expect them at all because forktails didn't seem to fit in opponents deck. The 2nd game was against a NR deck with boost units, some griffin witchers and other usual NR units...until he used Triss Lacerate also in the worst moment. That made me think that queuing is not random in Casual, maybe if they detect a meta-deck (arachas) you directly queue into people with direct counters.

If it is really like this, it's ok for me, since giving the worst scenario with direct counters it's the perfect training.
 

DRK3

Forum veteran
1. When i initially named this thread, i called it 'rigging', but it was a poor choice of words, not what i intended, so i replaced it with 'flawed'.
Because i never intended to imply the matchmaking algorhytm favours some players in detriment of others, or that the dev team created it with malicious intent.

2. I was looking through my posts but couldnt find what i was searching (maybe it was an idea for a post that i never actually executed :shrug:
So i'll do it now:

I think clearing up this matter of the matchmaking (for ranked and casual) would be very positive for the Gwent devs, in achieving the level of transparency and communication they should have to the playerbase, which despite numerous situations in which they express this was their goal, i didnt see much progress.

To be honest, currently im even distrustful of whatever they say, as im no stranger to PR tactics to generate excitement over a game, create trust or dispel doubts, but that's why i wanted them to come (maybe to a TWIG) and clearly say how the matchmaking works.

3. There's an expression in my language, i dont know the english equivalent but its something like 'throwing wood to the fire', which is what i will do now, maybe its wrong but its definitely true, im not making this up:

Played 40 or 50 matches (mostly on Ranked), without seeing a Yrden. Started playing dwarves, with many boosts (although on Casual), and in 5 games, 3 of them had Yrden, and even though i also had Yrden and played around Yrden, still lost every single one of those :giveup:
 
1. When i initially named this thread, i called it 'rigging', but it was a poor choice of words, not what i intended, so i replaced it with 'flawed'.
Because i never intended to imply the matchmaking algorhytm favours some players in detriment of others, or that the dev team created it with malicious intent.

2. I was looking through my posts but couldnt find what i was searching (maybe it was an idea for a post that i never actually executed :shrug:
So i'll do it now:

I think clearing up this matter of the matchmaking (for ranked and casual) would be very positive for the Gwent devs, in achieving the level of transparency and communication they should have to the playerbase, which despite numerous situations in which they express this was their goal, i didnt see much progress.

To be honest, currently im even distrustful of whatever they say, as im no stranger to PR tactics to generate excitement over a game, create trust or dispel doubts, but that's why i wanted them to come (maybe to a TWIG) and clearly say how the matchmaking works.

3. There's an expression in my language, i dont know the english equivalent but its something like 'throwing wood to the fire', which is what i will do now, maybe its wrong but its definitely true, im not making this up:

Played 40 or 50 matches (mostly on Ranked), without seeing a Yrden. Started playing dwarves, with many boosts (although on Casual), and in 5 games, 3 of them had Yrden, and even though i also had Yrden and played around Yrden, still lost every single one of those :giveup:
Hahahah

Jogando lenha na fogueira.

Did you see my Last post? I have The exactly same feeling. I repeat, for months i didnt faced a single simbiose deck and when i create One i faced 7 times in lass than One Day.

Again, i know 5 of 16 qualifiers players have used it, but that was One week ago and in this week until i made The deck i didnt faced no simbioses.

So in The past month i didnt faced simbioses deck and sudenly they appear in The same time i have created my
 
I do find it interesting that when I play my “special” deck (a stupid deck with 40 cards — almost all 4 provision and 27 special cards designed to quickly complete quests), I suddenly start queueing into decks it can beat. But I don’t recommend trying this on high level ranked play.
 
So Occam's razor:
1) Matchmaking isn't flawed, algorithm is random, everyone who thinks it is flawed is tinfoil hatted and/or confirmation biased.
2) Matchmaking is flawed, CDPR uses the algorithm to maximize profits.
 
CDPR uses the algorithm to maximize profits.
This has never made any sense to me. What, exactly, could they possibly gain from it?
There is zero financial profit to be made in doing extra work to set up a complicated system (whose only purpose is to annoy players, no less) in a free-to-play game.

One of the many reasons this whole theory isn't even remotely realistic but completely illogical.
 
There is zero financial profit to be made in doing extra work to set up a complicated system
2018 begs to differ: https://www.reddit.com/r/FIFA/comments/778e46
uae0e4zzomsz.jpg
 
Plus, by that logic any two games can are comparable to each other when talking about specific aspects, which obviously is not true. Which means the logic is faulty anyway.
So true. So now let's redefine the Occam's Razor:

1) Matchmaking isn't flawed, algorithm is random, everyone who thinks it is flawed is tinfoil hatted and/or confirmation biased and any reference to Activision's matchmaking patent is comparing apples to oranges.
2) Matchmaking is flawed, CDPR uses the algorithm to maximize profits.
 
You added a lot of unnecessary stuff there to reflect how people feel. The actual choice is:

1) CDPRs Matchmaking isn't flawed, the algorithm is random, or
2) Matchmaking is flawed, CDPR uses the algorithm to maximize profits.


It's also a false dichotomy. It could be true that matchmaking is "flawed" (which is somewhat subjective anyways) in some peoples opinion, but for reasons other than an intentional effort to maximize profits. Or it could be that CDPRs matchmaking isn't "flawed," but also isn't totally random. There are more than two options.
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
You added a lot of unnecessary stuff there to reflect how people feel. The actual choice is:

1) CDPRs Matchmaking isn't flawed, the algorithm is random, or
2) Matchmaking is flawed, CDPR uses the algorithm to maximize profits.


It's also a false dichotomy. It could be true that matchmaking is "flawed" (which is somewhat subjective anyways) in some peoples opinion, but for reasons other than an intentional effort to maximize profits. Or it could be that CDPRs matchmaking isn't "flawed," but also isn't totally random. There are more than two options.
I think it's been said numerous times here as well. It's impossible to determine whether it's intentional or deceptive in nature since no one outside of CDPR has access to that information or the motivation behind it. As you said it could simply be a case where the algorithm is working as intended but isn't random which may be why people notice specific matchups the moment they change their deck. That, however, is not randomization and is where I tend to agree with most because it suggests the algorithm is flawed as far as card games go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's impossible to determine whether it's intentional or deceptive in nature since no one outside of CDPR has access to that information or the motivation behind it.
Well, as the wise say:
Who can say where the road goes
Where the day flows, only time

 

DRK3

Forum veteran
Im freaking out with the matchmaking on current seasonal (powershift).

Im using 4 decks, 2 are devotion, 2 are non devotion.
The devotion decks obviously have no way to banish or deal with Madocs.

Last week i played a lot with my ST non-devotion, that just destroys anything with carryover... barely found any madoc players.
Today i played 5 or 6 with my MO deck, which also has a counter for Madocs and Cerys... found no Madocs.
The F***ing moment i switch to my devotion SK list, i start getting matched with Madocs, i will not accept this as 'coincidence', there's a limit to coincidence and ive gone way past it.
 
Im freaking out with the matchmaking on current seasonal (powershift).

Im using 4 decks, 2 are devotion, 2 are non devotion.
The devotion decks obviously have no way to banish or deal with Madocs.

Last week i played a lot with my ST non-devotion, that just destroys anything with carryover... barely found any madoc players.
Today i played 5 or 6 with my MO deck, which also has a counter for Madocs and Cerys... found no Madocs.
The F***ing moment i switch to my devotion SK list, i start getting matched with Madocs, i will not accept this as 'coincidence', there's a limit to coincidence and ive gone way past it.
That could explain why out of all my matches last season (playing strictly SY bounty) (didn't play this season), I never once had a mirror match.
 
Im freaking out with the matchmaking on current seasonal (powershift).

Im using 4 decks, 2 are devotion, 2 are non devotion.
The devotion decks obviously have no way to banish or deal with Madocs.

Last week i played a lot with my ST non-devotion, that just destroys anything with carryover... barely found any madoc players.
Today i played 5 or 6 with my MO deck, which also has a counter for Madocs and Cerys... found no Madocs.
The F***ing moment i switch to my devotion SK list, i start getting matched with Madocs, i will not accept this as 'coincidence', there's a limit to coincidence and ive gone way past it.
Yes, it's curious to say the least. I'm trying a Mobilization Idarran-Siege-Archers NR deck (which has solid results) and very often I get matched with decks with lots of bandits and armor. It's precisely the stuff that greatly minimizes damage pings, yet when I use the 8-or-lower-provisions ST deck, I don't get any armor. I don't believe the matchmaking is purely random, regardless of whoever tries to sell it to me. Perhaps the system starts matching you with reasonable counters for your deck once you're playing past your daily crown gains to relieve the queue and make life easier on the servers (just a thought).
 
Top Bottom