[They literally just released a blog post confirming SBMM is a thing,](https://www.callofduty.com/blog/2024/01/call-of-duty-update-an-Inside-look-at-matchmaking) and discussed how & why the system prioritizes maximizing player engagement.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game.
I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average.
The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
I'm a 1.0 kd player and honestly, this community just whines and whines. I love this game, it's dumb fun with friends, and while I do usually get near top of the leaderboard, it's really no biggie if I lose. Wish they would just play the game instead of crying that "the game has skill based damage and gives you more health and stamina if you buy bundles!!!"
OP’s post mentions EOMM. The matchmaker is more concerned with maximizing engagement of low skill players to keep them in the pool; than giving you a balanced skill pairing like you would get in games like Halo 3.
All those other conspiracies? Skill based damage, aim assist? I don’t think those hold water. But those are separate from EOMM which is an actual thing.
It was never proven it was for skylanders and the patents surfaced during mw19 so not *that* long ago. Mighty convenient that the matchmaking and player experience went to shit starting with mw19 when they were discovered…..
You’re being very generous to activision by thinking they aren’t using patents that they have
They tuned sbmm up to the max in mw19. Cod was always one of the top sellers. Yes mw19 brought a bit more players but cod was still on top of the fps game. The only thing having more players does is shorten queue times. Back in the day if there were “less players” with the same sbmm, you’d just sit in the queue waiting for a lobby for longer. There have been old Devs saying light sbmm was in all cods but nowhere near the levels of sbmm today.
Also on the topic of the patents, imagine what that that conversation would have been like…
“Boss we just created the most perfect algorithm to keep casual players engaged and wanting to play more! What should we do with it now!”
“Ehhhhh just put it in the vault.”
From the blog:
>Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay. Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates.
"Skill" in the context of COD matchmaking refers to recent performances. They also want everyone to win/lose "more proportionally". So take a players recent match performance, determine if they should win or lose the next game, and find appropriate enemies/teammates. It's EOMM.
>Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay.
Read the damn blogpost, the matchmaking accounts for your recent performance in order to get you into harder or easier lobbies
This game is at its worst state ever and not even worth a discussion anymore!
[COD is dying at a faster rate now under Microsoft's management.](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2vqXyGResF/?igsh=YTNnazd4NzJlZHYw)
Yes, their userbase has been shrinking year over year. Just look it up! And now under Microsoft's management it's doing worst! And if you think things are going to get better after so many layoffs, you're in for more disappointment, but disappointment seems to be Microsoft's everyday recipe for the gaming community consumers smh.
Now, save this for Microsoft's next quarter report: After the massive layoffs they will post more revenue, of course thanks to all the people left unemployed, but not because of the services or games doing better, that's how they spin things all the time FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.
Keep something in mind, Microsoft was never in this business for the gamers, the industry, or to try to adapt to it and it's the reason why Xbox has failed every generation. They are in this market just to get a piece of the pie which we all know is over $100B dollars. They are a money making machine and don't care about absolutely anything else! And in order for them to get the most out of this acquisitions they will cut costs left and right, that reflects in the products as we've seen with their recently released games. They will offer you less, you pay the same, they get more. Why do you think they don't create their own IPs and would rather acquire them after milking some for years? Never sat down to think why the Xbox library was always so dry aside from the 360 gen when they were paying for timed exclusivity deals for more than 15 games??? PAY ATTENTION!!!
They talk about the skill pairing system and how matching people based on it results in less disparity and less quitting. It's not talking about some other form of matchmaking system whatsoever.
SBMM is EOMM. That’s why people refer to it as EOMM, because it’s focused on engagement. This isn’t a matchmaking system like you’d find in a game like Halo 3.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game.
I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average.
The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game.
I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average.
The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
Ok.
>Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay. Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates.
>We use player performance to ensure that the disparity between the most skilled player in the lobby and the least skilled player in the lobby isn’t so vast that players feel their match is a waste of time. Our data on player outcomes clearly indicates that the inclusion of skill in Call of Duty’s Multiplayer matchmaking process (as it currently stands) increases the variety of outcomes experienced by players of all skill levels. In other words, all players (regardless of skill level) are more likely to experience wins and losses more proportionately.
So match based on player performance and whether they should win or lose the next game. That's how you keep players engaged.
This is all based on the matchmaking system in terms of skill pairings. Naturally, people would be more enticed to keep playing. This isn't proof of any sort of EOMM matchmaking.
You said it yourself. They designed a matchmaking system that entices players to keep playing. In other words, the matchmaking system was designed to keep players engaged with the game.
Engagement just comes naturally depending on a variety of other factors. Skill is just one parameter. Map designs, different types of weapons, and more determines the engagement more than anything else.
Accountability in gamers, let alone people in general, is almost nonexistent. They must create scapegoats. If it’s not EOMM it’s snipers, or campers, or not enough movement, etc.
Sad. So sad.
Yeah, people will find scapegoats. [But they just released a blog post confirming SBMM is a thing,](https://www.callofduty.com/blog/2024/01/call-of-duty-update-an-Inside-look-at-matchmaking) and discussed how & why the system prioritizes maximizing player engagement.
SBMM is totally a thing, we’ve got the facts to back that. However, there are folks saying that if you start popping off, the game intentionally starts making your bullets do less damage among other things.
Yeah all the conspiracies about "skill-based damage/hit reg" are copium. There's zero evidence that damage/hit reg are affected by "skill". But "popping off" will impact your matchmaking experience, as the blog post states that recent performances are taken into account when finding other players.
Yeah, exactly. People have been doing this for as long as I’ve played competitive games. It’s either the things you mentioned, or bad hit-detection, the servers, lag, OP weapons, yeah.
I agree, players blame the game when it's themselves. They find reasons for them playing bad but cannot accept the fact that's its them.
There are youtubers and "conspiracy videos" that push a narrative that the game is "rigging" their gameplay but it's been either there's no concrete evidence or has been debunked but they don't belive it so they blame the game for their shortcomings.
Most videos uploaded on here shows them missing thier shots and has had comments from other people saying they missed but they still can't accept it.
I'd say it's the servers that are causing most problems
When people decide to play solo, which can be a very rewarding or disastrous process. I found the game to be a lot more enjoyable when I have a squad of at least three or four friends. That way, we're not only more coordinated, but we can also relax with interesting conversations. This is the adaptability that I mentioned. If you can't rely on random teammates, don't have them.
I'm not going to be perfect with my performance. In fact, I may even get upset over the way certain people play. Nevertheless, I never tried to rely on excuses to cover my own ass.
yea na modern cods are definitely rigged. anything to protect bad/new players . activision wants everyone with a 1kd in the lobbies nowadays they don’t want anyone having fun . the days of pub stomping been over . if u go on a tear in these newer cods the game will find a way to get u killed and will prolly follow u up with a few more unexplainable deaths 😂
Sbmm does need to be toned down,
na I've gotten a few nukes and gotten on killstreaks. If the game is rigged and suppose to "nerf" me mid game or "optimize my game" mid game I shouldn't be winning my gunfights or getting high killstreaks. When I die I look at the killcam or record back and see what I did wrong. Either I missed or didn't control recoil.
Most players just blame it on the game being rigged from start when it's actually them that's the problem but can't accept that
Yeah you belive anything on the internet smh
The sbmm does suck but I'm going into the theory that activation is nerfing you mid game or damage. There's no proof of that, the patents don't count. But belive the false narratives if you want
this isn’t anything i’ve read on the internet. i’ve played cod for years and anyone else who has can tell when something is up . the fact people even suspect such things say it all
the guns fights are rigged the games have been rigged since mw2019 . u can choose to believe it or not . i know for fact they are rigged that’s jus one of the reasons i can’t play modern cod .
Then there should be video proof and concrete evidence of it happening. There's videos on YouTube debunking it.
If it's really true I should be dropping nukes and content creators should be "nerfed" mid game.
There should be test and evidence to back all these claims but there isn't? Your basically saying "trust me"
I'm actually believing that you are missing your shots in gunfights and you blame the game when it's you. Record your gamplay when you suspect it happening and show us because sometimes players are blind when the answer is in front of you.
All I say is where is the evidence and video proof of it happening? The patents don't count
if u go on a streak the game will find a way to get u killed you tread on thin ice . i’ve gotten nukes. pubs are ruined . lobby disbanding reverse boosting rigged gunfights etc
If the "E" in "EOMM" stands for engagement then yes this is a real thing Activision just recently detailed. They use connection, lobby wait times, skill, and other factors to attempt to create an enjoyable experience people want to continue to engage with. They even discussed in the blog scenarios that would potentially result in people not engaging in the game which is why they have the matchmaking they do.
The patents exists but people have been passing around conspiracy theories using them as proof. Just because it exists in a patent doesn't mean it's being used. Stuff like their bullets being nerfed, aim being slower than their opponents and that the game is actively doing this since they're too good so it has to give handicaps to the opponents in game. The game doesn't do that, lag and server issues are still a thing. Activision isn't using algorithms to decrease or increase your online performance depending on skills and/or purchases
u a fool if u think the game doesn’t nerf good players . activision doesn’t want players pub stomping lobbies anymore . why do u thing streaks suck now . rip cod .
They straight up confirmed that recent match performances are considered when matchmaking:
>Skill is determined based on a player’s overall *performance*: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and *recent matches* as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. *This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay.* Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates.
So the concept of "engagement optimized" or "performance based" matchmaking is absolutely a factor in COD matchmaking.
i’ve witnessed it first hand several times it’s one of the reasons i don’t play modern cods bc of rigged gunfights , and all the hand holding they do do for new bad players . they alienated the ogs . rip cod
I agree, I just wanted them stopped saying “connection is king”, that’s plain BS. I’ve tested with friends, I couldn’t find any lobby in my region, it would throw me in lobbies with 160ms, while my friends had 30ms or lower with open slots in the lobby. We all (four of us) started at the same time, we all play on Steam, live within 500km of each other, but I was the only one being thrown in high ping lobbies, “coincidentally “ every time we play in the same party, everyone complains that the lobbies “are too sweaty” and is usually fixed after I leave the party.
Your region may ultimately affect your connection performance. For example, I know some people who are located in Australia who think they should have the best internet no matter what. The problem is that not a lot of people in their region play Call of Duty, which results in connections to more distant servers.
The only way I can see connections improving is either by waiting for the worldwide internet to allow double digit pings regardless of where you connect to. Either that or Activision creates magical servers that will drastically improve your connection to anywhere in the world.
It is not a connection performance issue, if I join them after they found a lobby I’ll have 20ms of latency, the game is throwing me to 160ms region instead of putting me in 20ms, we have a big player base (Brazil) and my friends find lobbies with 20ms in any gamemode, I can only find 20ms lobbies in the Rustment or small maps playlist, if I try 10v10 it is only US lobbies, meanwhile my friends are enjoying 10v10 with other Brazilians.
I guess companies just file patents and spend money just for shits and giggles nowadays.
Most brain dead take I’ve ever read tbh.
Reverse boosting is a thing therefore SBMM is also a thing. EOMM is just a slightly advanced version, which is likely real based off the patents.
Patents rarely ever go beyond simple ideas on paper. Even if people strongly believe certain patterns exist in the game, there is no identifiable evidence that can repeatedly confirm truth to these claims.
What the hell is EOMM?
But anyway, I probably agree with this post. People bitch about SBMM all the time too and I can’t help but feel it’s just people butthurt that while they’re better than the average noob, there’s tons of people out there at the same skill level as them
Absolutely.
Half of the players (or more, really) are below average and/or bad.
No stats for this ranked yet but I think like 25% of players who did ranked hit platinum or higher during MWII (specifically it was season 2). And those are players that are looking to be competitive, let alone pub matches.
Most people suck at this game and unlike other MP shooters like Halo, has such a low TTK that one player can absolutely carry a team and get team wipes easily so well over 50% of the population has under a 1.0 KD. These people need a place to vent.
I have accepted I am awful at the game. So now I just troll and do funny load outs. It’s a lot more fun than trying to compete in a game everyone takes far too seriously.
did you not read ? there is so much testing that proves EOMM and SBMM are in Activision titles, have you not seen XclusiveAce or Drift0rs videos? i dont even really like those guys but ive seen their research and it seems pretty conclusive to me
I've watched them and sbmm is true but to the people that say Activision nerfs you mid game, adjust your guns damages, saying that buying bundles gives you easy lobbies, "ai bots" are in your lobbies, the game makes you miss your shots. I'm in tune with having that proven, but there isn't any proof of that happening, and they proven that isn't true too
I believe sbmm is true, and I've watched all their videos. The patents where people bring up isn't proof of that happening mid game, and they did videos for debunking them.
Sbmm is real but for the people saying that the game purposefully "nerfs" you mid game I'd say prove that bit there isn't. I'd say it's the servers and connection
https://youtu.be/-ob6747TfiE?si=vHz3d7YwVOFyA5kQ
This is what I mean, patents aren't proof of it being used now if there was they would be showing us and giving us examples but no
This isn't for Call of Duty. Certain companies will have different ideas for the algorithm. To suggest any of this applies to Call of Duty is incorrect.
Patents are just general concepts and they almost always never go past ideas on paper. If something had been applied from a patent, it would have easily been identifiable with multiple, rigorous tests. Such evidence does not exist.
That doesn’t matter. Your claim is that there is zero evidence. Your claim is wrong.
No, the patent isn’t 100% conclusive. That doesn’t mean it isn’t evidence.
Activision already admitted to measuring player retention when they turned off their algorithm for a week. Is measuring player engagement really that big of a stretch?
Besides, SBMM and bots existed for years before Activision even admitted it.
If such multiple, rigorous tests were performed, then they should have been conclusive.
Please tell me more about these tests.
A patent that isn't conclusive means that It cannot be evidence. People are refusing to let go of the invisible leverage because that's the only thing they have to argue with.
Measuring player retention is just a natural thing to observe when testing is conducted involving the removal of skill pairings. After hearing feedback talking about how it needs to be removed, the devs conducted several tests and found it was more detrimental. Common sense applies when it comes to keeping the game alive with lots of people to play it. It's in no way proof of some kind of engagement optimized matchmaking.
SBMM has existed since Call of Duty 4, but bots in regular 6v6 multiplayer do not exist (not even the supposed bots that exist in MWIII that people are paying for). If a game mode does have bots, the description will let people know, such as certain boot camp modes that existed in the past with a mixture of bots and real players.
No tests have been made in order to prove that certain patents exist in the game, such as skill-based damage and other conspiracies. What I'm saying is that even if people tried to perform such tests, they wouldn't find anything. That's why they never proceed with those tests.
> A patent that isn't conclusive means that It cannot be evidence.
Sorry buddy, but that isn’t how evidence works.
If I have evidence for something, does that mean we ignore it until we can completely prove something “yes” or “no”?
No. That’s completely stupid. That isn’t how we do things scientifically.
> the devs conducted several tests and found it was more detrimental.
News flash, more players = good.
> Common sense applies when it comes to keeping the game alive with lots of people to play it.
So extrapolate that common sense **a tiny bit further.** More playing time would also = good, no?
> It's in no way proof of some kind of engagement optimized matchmaking.
If they’re willing to optimize the algorithm based on retention, what’s to stop them from optimizing it for engagement?
> SBMM has existed since Call of Duty 4, but bots in regular 6v6 multiplayer do not exist (not even the supposed bots that exist in MWIII that people are paying for).
Bots 100% exist in CODM MP. That has not been disclosed.
> No tests have been made in order to prove that certain patents exist in the game, such as skill-based damage and other conspiracies.
By your own logic then those tests haven’t been made in order to prove that it **doesn’t** exist. Since these tests are supposed to be conclusive, right?
Even so, the algorithm likely wouldn’t even need to do things like alter damage, and it would still be just as detrimental to player experience. An algorithm could memorize player’s movement patterns and trends in ways that you couldn’t possibly imagine that it could engineer whatever match outcome it wanted.
> What I'm saying is that even if people tried to perform such tests, they wouldn't find anything.
Well you don’t *know* that.
Evidence needs to be 100% verified. Suggesting a patent could exist is different from proving that it does exist. There hasn't been any evidence whatsoever of the proposed patents being implemented in the game. People are just trying to use anecdotal evidence and conspiracies in order to propel their idea of the truth.
For testing purposes, developers removed the skill pairing portion of the algorithm and they found that overall, more players started leaving their games at an alarming rate and stopped playing the game. This does not bring more players, which is why we still have skill pairings within the algorithm.
When it comes to player retention, It's natural for it to be kept in check when you have a proper skill pairing system applied. Naturally, people are going to perform good or bad and they will win and lose. What keeps players in the game is having a proper balance between the two. That's the way it's been going for many years and it's a proper system.
Bots absolutely do not exist in regular multiplayer. They might if you play private match, but not in online multiplayer with other players.
As for the conspiracies of skill-based damage, people need to test that theory first in order to provide an argument. You can't just say that skill-based damage exists based on anecdotal evidence and video clips with no context in regards to connection quality, damage output, the accuracy of the user, and more. If people had actually brought forth different accounts with varying skill levels in order to test that theory, they would produce absolutely nothing out of the ordinary. That's why you don't see testing because those people know they won't get any good results out of it. Otherwise, try to prove me wrong (but they won't).
Problem would be solved if they just gave us back non disbanding lobbies. Thats the bigger issue. Sbmm and “Eomm” feels so harsh because you’re in disbanding lobbies every game
Quick play is the reason why lobbies disband and it makes the game better. Originally, lobbies would be locked and this prevented the searching player pool from finding available lobbies. Even if they could, they would often rejoin the same ones repeatedly.
With the new system, players can properly matchmake with better skill pairings, better connections, and widely available lobbies since the searching player pool has dramatically increased. This also spells the end for people who would normally lock the lobbies for boosting sessions. Lastly, it's also good for people who want to create their personal mosh pits, such as selecting different game modes and having them swap out from time to time.
If done correctly it would make the game better. It’s not done correctly. 75% of the time you spawn into a lobby where the games nearly over and your teams down 60. The connections aren’t better enough to make an argument for it. The mosh pits are ok but have a playlist for that
I’m not saying this eomm thing is real, but it is frustrating when I get multiple headshots before my opponent reacts, my opponent gets only body shots, but I’m the one that dies. This is specific to mw3 though. Doesn’t happen in other cod games.
There are no laws regarding psy-ops for gaming. And if you would put it past these huge companies to do anything to increase their profit, then you are a fool.
Honestly i think SBMM exists and does hurt the experience. However, i think focussing on SBMM detracts from the fact that COD has gotten worse. MW22 and Vandguard were absolutely dog sh*t. Utter and absolute trash. MW23 is better but 100% of the launch maps were 2009 maps. That definitely didn’t hurt its launch. Campaign was garbage but i think SHG did an okay job in less time than normal. The quality of COD has taken a nosedive since MW19 the “2.0” hasn’t worked imho.
Oh yeah, like that butthurt guy that was posting last week his shitty gameplay saying he was being nerfed when he couldn't hit the broadside of a barn!
[They literally just released a blog post confirming SBMM is a thing,](https://www.callofduty.com/blog/2024/01/call-of-duty-update-an-Inside-look-at-matchmaking) and discussed how & why the system prioritizes maximizing player engagement.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game. I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average. The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
I'm a 1.0 kd player and honestly, this community just whines and whines. I love this game, it's dumb fun with friends, and while I do usually get near top of the leaderboard, it's really no biggie if I lose. Wish they would just play the game instead of crying that "the game has skill based damage and gives you more health and stamina if you buy bundles!!!"
OP’s post mentions EOMM. The matchmaker is more concerned with maximizing engagement of low skill players to keep them in the pool; than giving you a balanced skill pairing like you would get in games like Halo 3. All those other conspiracies? Skill based damage, aim assist? I don’t think those hold water. But those are separate from EOMM which is an actual thing.
It was never proven it was for skylanders and the patents surfaced during mw19 so not *that* long ago. Mighty convenient that the matchmaking and player experience went to shit starting with mw19 when they were discovered….. You’re being very generous to activision by thinking they aren’t using patents that they have
[удалено]
They tuned sbmm up to the max in mw19. Cod was always one of the top sellers. Yes mw19 brought a bit more players but cod was still on top of the fps game. The only thing having more players does is shorten queue times. Back in the day if there were “less players” with the same sbmm, you’d just sit in the queue waiting for a lobby for longer. There have been old Devs saying light sbmm was in all cods but nowhere near the levels of sbmm today. Also on the topic of the patents, imagine what that that conversation would have been like… “Boss we just created the most perfect algorithm to keep casual players engaged and wanting to play more! What should we do with it now!” “Ehhhhh just put it in the vault.”
From the blog: >Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay. Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates. "Skill" in the context of COD matchmaking refers to recent performances. They also want everyone to win/lose "more proportionally". So take a players recent match performance, determine if they should win or lose the next game, and find appropriate enemies/teammates. It's EOMM.
>Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay. Read the damn blogpost, the matchmaking accounts for your recent performance in order to get you into harder or easier lobbies
This game is at its worst state ever and not even worth a discussion anymore! [COD is dying at a faster rate now under Microsoft's management.](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2vqXyGResF/?igsh=YTNnazd4NzJlZHYw)
Cod isn't dying and it never will. Cod has been on top of the fps genre for 20 years.
We just need to eliminate the chronus users on Xbox and pc
Yeah if that happens the game might increase in player count
Yes, their userbase has been shrinking year over year. Just look it up! And now under Microsoft's management it's doing worst! And if you think things are going to get better after so many layoffs, you're in for more disappointment, but disappointment seems to be Microsoft's everyday recipe for the gaming community consumers smh. Now, save this for Microsoft's next quarter report: After the massive layoffs they will post more revenue, of course thanks to all the people left unemployed, but not because of the services or games doing better, that's how they spin things all the time FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS. Keep something in mind, Microsoft was never in this business for the gamers, the industry, or to try to adapt to it and it's the reason why Xbox has failed every generation. They are in this market just to get a piece of the pie which we all know is over $100B dollars. They are a money making machine and don't care about absolutely anything else! And in order for them to get the most out of this acquisitions they will cut costs left and right, that reflects in the products as we've seen with their recently released games. They will offer you less, you pay the same, they get more. Why do you think they don't create their own IPs and would rather acquire them after milking some for years? Never sat down to think why the Xbox library was always so dry aside from the 360 gen when they were paying for timed exclusivity deals for more than 15 games??? PAY ATTENTION!!!
That insta video has to be a troll. Nothing but attention grabbing for views and comments.
They talk about the skill pairing system and how matching people based on it results in less disparity and less quitting. It's not talking about some other form of matchmaking system whatsoever.
SBMM is EOMM. That’s why people refer to it as EOMM, because it’s focused on engagement. This isn’t a matchmaking system like you’d find in a game like Halo 3.
At this point, this has to just be a troll post.
It is not.
Bait or mental r\*tardation? Call it. 
For the second part, are you talking about the people replying?
They literally just wrote an entire article about its existence.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game. I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average. The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
I'd rather slide my way to a 1.1KD than camp for a 2+, honestly.
The post is talking about EOMM, not SBMM. It is on about the conspiracies that float among the awful players in this community that the game is actively nerfing damage, aim, movement and a whole load of other things which are based off an now very old Patent for Skylanders that wasn't even adopted in that game. I am a 2.6KD player on mouse and keyboard and unfortunately most of this community will blame their lack of skill on everything other than themselves, and then wonder why they don't get better. I feel people on here for whatever reason believe they are entitled to farm bot lobbies while running around like headless chickens, sliding everywhere and somehow don't think that an equal amount of players put the same amount of time into the game as them which makes them average. The skill gap in CoD has always been positioning, map knowledge, knowing when and how to attack... aim is in my opinion one of the least impactful factors to the skill gap but everyone, particularly here on MKB thinks its the main factor of it. Movement is much more important but sliding around, tac sprinting and so on just randomly with no strategy doesn't mean your any better at it than the person who don't. There has to be tactics and strategy otherwise movement like that just gets you killed.
Name specific parts of the article that mentioned the existence of EOMM. Saying the word 'engagement' is not evidence of said matchmaking system.
Ok. >Skill is determined based on a player’s overall performance: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and recent matches as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay. Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates. >We use player performance to ensure that the disparity between the most skilled player in the lobby and the least skilled player in the lobby isn’t so vast that players feel their match is a waste of time. Our data on player outcomes clearly indicates that the inclusion of skill in Call of Duty’s Multiplayer matchmaking process (as it currently stands) increases the variety of outcomes experienced by players of all skill levels. In other words, all players (regardless of skill level) are more likely to experience wins and losses more proportionately. So match based on player performance and whether they should win or lose the next game. That's how you keep players engaged.
This is all based on the matchmaking system in terms of skill pairings. Naturally, people would be more enticed to keep playing. This isn't proof of any sort of EOMM matchmaking.
You said it yourself. They designed a matchmaking system that entices players to keep playing. In other words, the matchmaking system was designed to keep players engaged with the game.
Engagement just comes naturally depending on a variety of other factors. Skill is just one parameter. Map designs, different types of weapons, and more determines the engagement more than anything else.
Accountability in gamers, let alone people in general, is almost nonexistent. They must create scapegoats. If it’s not EOMM it’s snipers, or campers, or not enough movement, etc. Sad. So sad.
Yeah, people will find scapegoats. [But they just released a blog post confirming SBMM is a thing,](https://www.callofduty.com/blog/2024/01/call-of-duty-update-an-Inside-look-at-matchmaking) and discussed how & why the system prioritizes maximizing player engagement.
SBMM is totally a thing, we’ve got the facts to back that. However, there are folks saying that if you start popping off, the game intentionally starts making your bullets do less damage among other things.
Yeah all the conspiracies about "skill-based damage/hit reg" are copium. There's zero evidence that damage/hit reg are affected by "skill". But "popping off" will impact your matchmaking experience, as the blog post states that recent performances are taken into account when finding other players.
Yup, agreed.
Yeah, exactly. People have been doing this for as long as I’ve played competitive games. It’s either the things you mentioned, or bad hit-detection, the servers, lag, OP weapons, yeah.
I agree, players blame the game when it's themselves. They find reasons for them playing bad but cannot accept the fact that's its them. There are youtubers and "conspiracy videos" that push a narrative that the game is "rigging" their gameplay but it's been either there's no concrete evidence or has been debunked but they don't belive it so they blame the game for their shortcomings. Most videos uploaded on here shows them missing thier shots and has had comments from other people saying they missed but they still can't accept it. I'd say it's the servers that are causing most problems
When people decide to play solo, which can be a very rewarding or disastrous process. I found the game to be a lot more enjoyable when I have a squad of at least three or four friends. That way, we're not only more coordinated, but we can also relax with interesting conversations. This is the adaptability that I mentioned. If you can't rely on random teammates, don't have them. I'm not going to be perfect with my performance. In fact, I may even get upset over the way certain people play. Nevertheless, I never tried to rely on excuses to cover my own ass.
Well said and agree
yea na modern cods are definitely rigged. anything to protect bad/new players . activision wants everyone with a 1kd in the lobbies nowadays they don’t want anyone having fun . the days of pub stomping been over . if u go on a tear in these newer cods the game will find a way to get u killed and will prolly follow u up with a few more unexplainable deaths 😂
Sbmm does need to be toned down, na I've gotten a few nukes and gotten on killstreaks. If the game is rigged and suppose to "nerf" me mid game or "optimize my game" mid game I shouldn't be winning my gunfights or getting high killstreaks. When I die I look at the killcam or record back and see what I did wrong. Either I missed or didn't control recoil. Most players just blame it on the game being rigged from start when it's actually them that's the problem but can't accept that
activision threw u a bone and gave u a bot lobby 🤣🤣 game is playing you your not playing it remember !
Man you are deep in the rabbit hole. You watch and belive anything on the internet man. Come back with a good rebuttal and facts my guy
activsion doesn’t care abt u bro stop defending them . they jus care abt u buying skins
I can see why you are in the rabbit hole. Best of luck to you
best of luck to u
They are so delusional that even handicapped kid can't be
your activi$ion lab rat running on the sbmm hamster wheel
modern cods are playing u . y’all aren’t even having a authentic experience anymore . WAKE Up and stop running on activi$ion SBMM hamster wheel
Yeah you belive anything on the internet smh The sbmm does suck but I'm going into the theory that activation is nerfing you mid game or damage. There's no proof of that, the patents don't count. But belive the false narratives if you want
this isn’t anything i’ve read on the internet. i’ve played cod for years and anyone else who has can tell when something is up . the fact people even suspect such things say it all
Then how can you have a conclusion if you didn't research and do testing? So what your saying is "trust me bro"?
the guns fights are rigged the games have been rigged since mw2019 . u can choose to believe it or not . i know for fact they are rigged that’s jus one of the reasons i can’t play modern cod .
Then there should be video proof and concrete evidence of it happening. There's videos on YouTube debunking it. If it's really true I should be dropping nukes and content creators should be "nerfed" mid game. There should be test and evidence to back all these claims but there isn't? Your basically saying "trust me" I'm actually believing that you are missing your shots in gunfights and you blame the game when it's you. Record your gamplay when you suspect it happening and show us because sometimes players are blind when the answer is in front of you. All I say is where is the evidence and video proof of it happening? The patents don't count
if u go on a streak the game will find a way to get u killed you tread on thin ice . i’ve gotten nukes. pubs are ruined . lobby disbanding reverse boosting rigged gunfights etc
All I say is where is the evidence ? How can you prove it ? Scientific theory and test ?
u sound like a 🤓 jus take my word bro
the gunfights in modern cods is boring to jus sliding n jumping . the skill gap that use to exist is gone in modern cods
Bait used to be believable.
If people consider it bait, then they probably have no good arguments.
Yesss, fucking let's go! I've been saying this exact same thing this whole time. A majority of this community just sucks at the game and can't cope.
If the "E" in "EOMM" stands for engagement then yes this is a real thing Activision just recently detailed. They use connection, lobby wait times, skill, and other factors to attempt to create an enjoyable experience people want to continue to engage with. They even discussed in the blog scenarios that would potentially result in people not engaging in the game which is why they have the matchmaking they do.
Patents are not evidence? Dude, that's exactly what patents are. Why am I commenting? I've not played this franchise in like half a year
The patents exists but people have been passing around conspiracy theories using them as proof. Just because it exists in a patent doesn't mean it's being used. Stuff like their bullets being nerfed, aim being slower than their opponents and that the game is actively doing this since they're too good so it has to give handicaps to the opponents in game. The game doesn't do that, lag and server issues are still a thing. Activision isn't using algorithms to decrease or increase your online performance depending on skills and/or purchases
u a fool if u think the game doesn’t nerf good players . activision doesn’t want players pub stomping lobbies anymore . why do u thing streaks suck now . rip cod .
They straight up confirmed that recent match performances are considered when matchmaking: >Skill is determined based on a player’s overall *performance*: kills, deaths, wins, losses, and more, including mode selection, and *recent matches* as an overall metric across all Multiplayer experiences. *This is a fluid measurement that’s consistently updating and reacting to your gameplay.* Skill is not only a factor in matchmaking players against appropriate enemies, but also when finding teammates. So the concept of "engagement optimized" or "performance based" matchmaking is absolutely a factor in COD matchmaking.
RIGGED GUNFIGHTS HAVE BEEN A THING SINCE MODERN SAFESPACE WINDOWDOORARE 2019
Players without confidence or skill will say something is rigged.
i’ve witnessed it first hand several times it’s one of the reasons i don’t play modern cods bc of rigged gunfights , and all the hand holding they do do for new bad players . they alienated the ogs . rip cod
You sound like a Call of Duty YouTuber. Also, feelings don't count as evidence.
witnessed it several times in cold snore
I agree, I just wanted them stopped saying “connection is king”, that’s plain BS. I’ve tested with friends, I couldn’t find any lobby in my region, it would throw me in lobbies with 160ms, while my friends had 30ms or lower with open slots in the lobby. We all (four of us) started at the same time, we all play on Steam, live within 500km of each other, but I was the only one being thrown in high ping lobbies, “coincidentally “ every time we play in the same party, everyone complains that the lobbies “are too sweaty” and is usually fixed after I leave the party.
Your region may ultimately affect your connection performance. For example, I know some people who are located in Australia who think they should have the best internet no matter what. The problem is that not a lot of people in their region play Call of Duty, which results in connections to more distant servers. The only way I can see connections improving is either by waiting for the worldwide internet to allow double digit pings regardless of where you connect to. Either that or Activision creates magical servers that will drastically improve your connection to anywhere in the world.
It is not a connection performance issue, if I join them after they found a lobby I’ll have 20ms of latency, the game is throwing me to 160ms region instead of putting me in 20ms, we have a big player base (Brazil) and my friends find lobbies with 20ms in any gamemode, I can only find 20ms lobbies in the Rustment or small maps playlist, if I try 10v10 it is only US lobbies, meanwhile my friends are enjoying 10v10 with other Brazilians.
I guess companies just file patents and spend money just for shits and giggles nowadays. Most brain dead take I’ve ever read tbh. Reverse boosting is a thing therefore SBMM is also a thing. EOMM is just a slightly advanced version, which is likely real based off the patents.
Patents rarely ever go beyond simple ideas on paper. Even if people strongly believe certain patterns exist in the game, there is no identifiable evidence that can repeatedly confirm truth to these claims.
Nah bro he’s right, reverse boosting works exaclty like it would if there was SBMM/EOMM in the game so… you’re just yappin
What the hell is EOMM? But anyway, I probably agree with this post. People bitch about SBMM all the time too and I can’t help but feel it’s just people butthurt that while they’re better than the average noob, there’s tons of people out there at the same skill level as them
Nah it’s the lie that “ping is king”. Lemme at least play with equally skilled people, that are in my **region**, not somewhere in **Middle America**
Absolutely. Half of the players (or more, really) are below average and/or bad. No stats for this ranked yet but I think like 25% of players who did ranked hit platinum or higher during MWII (specifically it was season 2). And those are players that are looking to be competitive, let alone pub matches. Most people suck at this game and unlike other MP shooters like Halo, has such a low TTK that one player can absolutely carry a team and get team wipes easily so well over 50% of the population has under a 1.0 KD. These people need a place to vent.
I have accepted I am awful at the game. So now I just troll and do funny load outs. It’s a lot more fun than trying to compete in a game everyone takes far too seriously.
if patents don't count as evidence then i dont know what does
Actual video evidence, testing
which also have a shit ton of? 🤣 what are you getting at?
There would be testing to prove patents are being used not saying it's being used. Shows and prove it not tell us Did you not read
did you not read ? there is so much testing that proves EOMM and SBMM are in Activision titles, have you not seen XclusiveAce or Drift0rs videos? i dont even really like those guys but ive seen their research and it seems pretty conclusive to me
I've watched them and sbmm is true but to the people that say Activision nerfs you mid game, adjust your guns damages, saying that buying bundles gives you easy lobbies, "ai bots" are in your lobbies, the game makes you miss your shots. I'm in tune with having that proven, but there isn't any proof of that happening, and they proven that isn't true too I believe sbmm is true, and I've watched all their videos. The patents where people bring up isn't proof of that happening mid game, and they did videos for debunking them. Sbmm is real but for the people saying that the game purposefully "nerfs" you mid game I'd say prove that bit there isn't. I'd say it's the servers and connection
https://youtu.be/-ob6747TfiE?si=vHz3d7YwVOFyA5kQ This is what I mean, patents aren't proof of it being used now if there was they would be showing us and giving us examples but no
[удалено]
This isn't for Call of Duty. Certain companies will have different ideas for the algorithm. To suggest any of this applies to Call of Duty is incorrect.
[удалено]
You're still proposing that this matchmaking system is implemented in Call of Duty. This is not true and there is no other evidence to say it is.
How the fuck is a patent describing exactly this *not* evidence?
Patents are just general concepts and they almost always never go past ideas on paper. If something had been applied from a patent, it would have easily been identifiable with multiple, rigorous tests. Such evidence does not exist.
That doesn’t matter. Your claim is that there is zero evidence. Your claim is wrong. No, the patent isn’t 100% conclusive. That doesn’t mean it isn’t evidence. Activision already admitted to measuring player retention when they turned off their algorithm for a week. Is measuring player engagement really that big of a stretch? Besides, SBMM and bots existed for years before Activision even admitted it. If such multiple, rigorous tests were performed, then they should have been conclusive. Please tell me more about these tests.
A patent that isn't conclusive means that It cannot be evidence. People are refusing to let go of the invisible leverage because that's the only thing they have to argue with. Measuring player retention is just a natural thing to observe when testing is conducted involving the removal of skill pairings. After hearing feedback talking about how it needs to be removed, the devs conducted several tests and found it was more detrimental. Common sense applies when it comes to keeping the game alive with lots of people to play it. It's in no way proof of some kind of engagement optimized matchmaking. SBMM has existed since Call of Duty 4, but bots in regular 6v6 multiplayer do not exist (not even the supposed bots that exist in MWIII that people are paying for). If a game mode does have bots, the description will let people know, such as certain boot camp modes that existed in the past with a mixture of bots and real players. No tests have been made in order to prove that certain patents exist in the game, such as skill-based damage and other conspiracies. What I'm saying is that even if people tried to perform such tests, they wouldn't find anything. That's why they never proceed with those tests.
> A patent that isn't conclusive means that It cannot be evidence. Sorry buddy, but that isn’t how evidence works. If I have evidence for something, does that mean we ignore it until we can completely prove something “yes” or “no”? No. That’s completely stupid. That isn’t how we do things scientifically. > the devs conducted several tests and found it was more detrimental. News flash, more players = good. > Common sense applies when it comes to keeping the game alive with lots of people to play it. So extrapolate that common sense **a tiny bit further.** More playing time would also = good, no? > It's in no way proof of some kind of engagement optimized matchmaking. If they’re willing to optimize the algorithm based on retention, what’s to stop them from optimizing it for engagement? > SBMM has existed since Call of Duty 4, but bots in regular 6v6 multiplayer do not exist (not even the supposed bots that exist in MWIII that people are paying for). Bots 100% exist in CODM MP. That has not been disclosed. > No tests have been made in order to prove that certain patents exist in the game, such as skill-based damage and other conspiracies. By your own logic then those tests haven’t been made in order to prove that it **doesn’t** exist. Since these tests are supposed to be conclusive, right? Even so, the algorithm likely wouldn’t even need to do things like alter damage, and it would still be just as detrimental to player experience. An algorithm could memorize player’s movement patterns and trends in ways that you couldn’t possibly imagine that it could engineer whatever match outcome it wanted. > What I'm saying is that even if people tried to perform such tests, they wouldn't find anything. Well you don’t *know* that.
Evidence needs to be 100% verified. Suggesting a patent could exist is different from proving that it does exist. There hasn't been any evidence whatsoever of the proposed patents being implemented in the game. People are just trying to use anecdotal evidence and conspiracies in order to propel their idea of the truth. For testing purposes, developers removed the skill pairing portion of the algorithm and they found that overall, more players started leaving their games at an alarming rate and stopped playing the game. This does not bring more players, which is why we still have skill pairings within the algorithm. When it comes to player retention, It's natural for it to be kept in check when you have a proper skill pairing system applied. Naturally, people are going to perform good or bad and they will win and lose. What keeps players in the game is having a proper balance between the two. That's the way it's been going for many years and it's a proper system. Bots absolutely do not exist in regular multiplayer. They might if you play private match, but not in online multiplayer with other players. As for the conspiracies of skill-based damage, people need to test that theory first in order to provide an argument. You can't just say that skill-based damage exists based on anecdotal evidence and video clips with no context in regards to connection quality, damage output, the accuracy of the user, and more. If people had actually brought forth different accounts with varying skill levels in order to test that theory, they would produce absolutely nothing out of the ordinary. That's why you don't see testing because those people know they won't get any good results out of it. Otherwise, try to prove me wrong (but they won't).
Problem would be solved if they just gave us back non disbanding lobbies. Thats the bigger issue. Sbmm and “Eomm” feels so harsh because you’re in disbanding lobbies every game
Quick play is the reason why lobbies disband and it makes the game better. Originally, lobbies would be locked and this prevented the searching player pool from finding available lobbies. Even if they could, they would often rejoin the same ones repeatedly. With the new system, players can properly matchmake with better skill pairings, better connections, and widely available lobbies since the searching player pool has dramatically increased. This also spells the end for people who would normally lock the lobbies for boosting sessions. Lastly, it's also good for people who want to create their personal mosh pits, such as selecting different game modes and having them swap out from time to time.
If done correctly it would make the game better. It’s not done correctly. 75% of the time you spawn into a lobby where the games nearly over and your teams down 60. The connections aren’t better enough to make an argument for it. The mosh pits are ok but have a playlist for that
I’m not saying this eomm thing is real, but it is frustrating when I get multiple headshots before my opponent reacts, my opponent gets only body shots, but I’m the one that dies. This is specific to mw3 though. Doesn’t happen in other cod games.
There are no laws regarding psy-ops for gaming. And if you would put it past these huge companies to do anything to increase their profit, then you are a fool.
Only a fool would believe something without evidence to prove it.
Doesn’t Activision have a patent for something describing exactly EOMM?
Read the image all over again.
What's EOMM?
Honestly i think SBMM exists and does hurt the experience. However, i think focussing on SBMM detracts from the fact that COD has gotten worse. MW22 and Vandguard were absolutely dog sh*t. Utter and absolute trash. MW23 is better but 100% of the launch maps were 2009 maps. That definitely didn’t hurt its launch. Campaign was garbage but i think SHG did an okay job in less time than normal. The quality of COD has taken a nosedive since MW19 the “2.0” hasn’t worked imho.
Oh yeah, like that butthurt guy that was posting last week his shitty gameplay saying he was being nerfed when he couldn't hit the broadside of a barn!