Matchmaking... not really a match

[Basileos Leandros I]

I'm pretty sure this has been adressed before, so I'm here asking if anything can be done player wise about it.

After playing only in lobbies with people who joined, 2v2 and 3v3, the battles were equal and quite fun. I went up the avatar rank and everything seemed fine. I tried Matchmaking today for the first time.

Horrible.

I'm a bronze five star, and in the first two battles I had battles against one stars. Pretty much destroyed them without any chance. Next three battles, I got a bronze 9 star, silver 8 star and silver 7 star. Pretty much got destroyed.

It's incredibly unequal, it's not even a match. The silver 8 star was the only decisive defeat, the other two were really close. I perfectly understand the Avatar system is supposed to be unequal, but match me against bronze 5 stars not silver 8 stars who come out with full experience bodyguards that destroy two units of Yari Samurai.

Is there any way that this can be adressed? Or like made in some way equal?

[krisslanza]

The problem is there isn't enough people to matchmake I think, so eventually it just throws you to people who are around your stars even if they're of off colors. Other times it just throws you into a game. Too many people use Battle Lists, I think, and so the Matchmaking pool is pretty small.

[CptAustus]

TBH the colors dont mean a whole lot, it bugs me people instantly kick me because I'm silver. Theres a lot less people on sengoku avatar conquest since FOTS was released, but even before matchmaking was a bit annoying. My advice is to beat higher levels with numbers and tactics, personally, I'm careless when fighting a low-mid bronze avatar, usually they dont employ good tactics.

[Basileos Leandros I]

Equal battles always equal better matches - I was matched up against a Level 5 bronze, exactly like me, and won. Decisive victory but it was at least a bit more equal and I wasn't pushed around.

Battle lists should give clan tokens as well.

[krisslanza]

Equal battles always equal better matches - I was matched up against a Level 5 bronze, exactly like me, and won. Decisive victory but it was at least a bit more equal and I wasn't pushed around.

Battle lists should give clan tokens as well.

They probably don't do this as battle lists are easy to set up and just lose on purpose. Then again, nothing stops you in matchmaking. Then again, not like if you actually played matchmaking you wouldn't probably end up with several hundred tokens and nothing to use them on, considering how long it takes to max rank a veteran.

[DeliCiousTZM]

i wish Head to Head had matchmaking. And i wish there was more people interested in playing Shogun 2 total war. Instead of grinding small out of context,one facet out of the game battles.

[Basileos Leandros I]

The thing is that there are still a lot of players, but most of them play battle lists, like krisslanza said above.

[androcathr]

I think, and so the Matchmaking pool is pretty small.

[Basileos Leandros I]

I think the system could have been implemented with a +2 or -2 system, whereas if you're rank 5, you can battle with someone who's equal, rank 7 (max) or rank 3 (minimum).

That way match-made is really a match.

[Ne Obliviscaris]

Veterency is slightly overpowered in avatar mode, I think. There's nothing so demoralising as having your attack broken by two FU bow warrior monks. It means that battles are won by experienced units, of the Skill of a player as in RTW multiplayer for example.

[krisslanza]

Veterency is slightly overpowered in avatar mode, I think. There's nothing so demoralising as having your attack broken by two FU bow warrior monks. It means that battles are won by experienced units, of the Skill of a player as in RTW multiplayer for example.

Actually in my experience battles are won by whoever has more units. Skill is still a large factor in winning, I think they fixed most of the really broken units (Like Naginata Warrior Monks spamming Warcry to rout everything).

[TheCrazyCat]

Veterency is slightly overpowered in avatar mode, I think. There's nothing so demoralising as having your attack broken by two FU bow warrior monks. It means that battles are won by experienced units, of the Skill of a player as in RTW multiplayer for example.

huge misconception

>rtw is a huge mess, its a huge faction war game.

>S2 has some slight faults but mostly its the melee/bow/leader general imbalances
plus bow monks arent even OP-ed, you are better off using vanilla 3 matchlock ash over 2 vetted bow monks.

450x3 compared to 1100~ x2


@Basileos, why bother with matchmade when its the most abusive part of multiplayer? if you wanna find the more active players of shogun 2, http://steamcommunity.com/groups/THGWs use this steam group.

[Man o' War]

The Match Making pool and MP playerbase is small because MM battles are completely unmatched. It's not small and subsequently players of all veterancy are matched so that it's easier to find a game, far from it.

It just wasn't and hasn't been thought out properly.

Players drop out of MM and MP in general because they get demoralised and dejected getting beaten game after game by people of far higher skill level, thus keeping the playerbase low.

Properly matching people of similar skill level would encourage people to stick with it and in turn would increase the playerbase.

[krisslanza]

The Match Making pool and MP playerbase is small because MM battles are completely unmatched. It's not small and subsequently players of all veterancy are matched so that it's easier to find a game, far from it.

It just wasn't and hasn't been thought out properly.

Players drop out of MM and MP in general because they get demoralised and dejected getting beaten game after game by people of far higher skill level, thus keeping the playerbase low.

Properly matching people of similar skill level would encourage people to stick with it and in turn would increase the playerbase.

The thing is, the pool used to be just fine. Then people either didn't like MP, or some reason stops them from playing it and they stop going. Then the pool gets smaller. People don't like being mis-matched. Gets smaller still. Now all you get is mismatched games generally. Just how it is.

[Basileos Leandros I]

I'm curious - were there many more players before than they are now in MP? Or did the playerbase remain constant?

Referring here mainly to 2011, when the game was released.

[krisslanza]

I'm curious - were there many more players before than they are now in MP? Or did the playerbase remain constant?

Referring here mainly to 2011, when the game was released.

I think it's dropped off. I seem to remember when the game was new getting games very, very quickly. Now I have to kind of wait, sometimes a long time if it's odd hours.

[Basileos Leandros I]

Yeah, matchmaking is pretty much useless now. I tried again but only silver and gold stars still play now, it's a huge mismatch for a relatively new player.

[krisslanza]

Matchlocks abusive? Maybe in a defensive siege. But bow monks make the defender, unless they also have bow monks, at a massive disadvantage as their own walls trap their units within a killzone.

[TheCrazyCat]

Matchlocks abusive? Maybe in a defensive siege. But bow monks make the defender, unless they also have bow monks, at a massive disadvantage as their own walls trap their units within a killzone.

matchmade not matchlocks.

[Basileos Leandros I]

Thanks for the group link I'll play now only in battle lists, 2v2 and such, at least it's fun and properly match-made. Had some good battles.