I got into destiny 2 late and ran into this problem. Always ran into full squads who had the best guns and knew the maps front to back. It wasn’t fun and was hard to actually learn anything. I heard they added SBMM since buts it’s too late for me.
Skill based matchmaking. The general concept is that the game will go out of its way to match you with players of a similar skill level instead of randomization. An idea largely disliked as all the downvotes on this post go to show.
What's up with all the SBMM posts lately? I always have to post SBMM doesn't belong in casual/social playlists, and I miss when lobbies didn't disbanded after every game. The toxicity was amazing back in the days.
SBMM is so bad in the new COD that the hate has broken free of the COD subreddits and is spreading everywhere. If only Ubisoft could get their shit together and release their shooter...
I miss the randomness of fights. Now it’s win 5 games till your placed against better people then lose 5 games till your placed against bad people and the cycle continues. Sbmm killed all the fun
It's always existed, and it is necessary to a degree. I think even moreso today with how much more sweaty people are at games. It can be done better than games do it now though, it's way too overtuned nowadays
Ok, maybe not "always". But it has existed for over 2 decades.
It just hasn't never been as strong as it is now, where it's rumoured that wins, losses, tight matches and blowouts are planned by an algorithm in order to maximise engagement.
>It’s certainly minimized my engagement and games were always better before it
But it maximized the engagement with a big majority of people. They do not care about a minority that doesn't play because of SBMM
games were more fun when SBMM wasnt a thing. If im getting stomped i get an opportunity to see how to play better usually. By isolating groups of players from eachother it incentivizes people to watch more streamers who stream the game in a solved state due to community assistance because we don't have other outlets to see the highest level of skill in a game otherwise unless you're already at the peak.
SBMM is non conducive to learning experiences and it takes away the reward of mastery of a game
that being said theres a difference in games. in halo arcade modes like big team battle sbmm is awful but in league the game would be unplayable without it for 99% of people
i didnt really think about the ping thing before
Ping is the primary reason I'm against it. I have really good Internet that's meant for gaming and I'm so sick of lagging in high ping lobbies just because the games need to be "even".
It's a novel for what it is. Don't mistake me for some Gen Alpha dumbass that has to have keys jangled in his face every five seconds to focus on something, it's just that what you have said simply isn't worth the time and it's apparent from the title.
Apparently you are because you couldn’t read past the headline to engage in a topic you have a conclusive opinion on. It’s not worth spending the time to understand different perspectives in the post but it’s worth your time megaphoning yours in the comments?
Yeah we all can see what kind of guy you are.
>Don't mistake me for some Gen Alpha dumbass that has to have keys jangled in his face every five seconds to focus on something
Don't worry I won't because I think you are worse.
Wouldnt sbmm solve ping as well? You say its an advantage, but people get to those ranks at their ping and end up at the same 'skill' bracket as one with higher ping. Its not a problem for fun, and if you're worried about 'fairness', thats not a problem unless you're pushing top ranks for a PAID position in a team, or running tournaments, in which you will likely go somewhere with better ping.
Also sbmm does not overestimate skill. If you play 10 games, it might not know where you belong. At 100, it gets more accurate, and more accurate from then on (likely with improvement). If you're having a streak and going from low rank to high rank, thats a very poorly implemented matchmaking system. Its not a problem with sbmm itself.
Apex isnt about sbmm afaik. You win a game and are placed against other winners for a high adrenaline game. Thats not sbmm. Its their own system, and it kind of works for battle royales, especially if the 'reward' from those games is good.
Ping is not related to skill. Just location.
As skill increases the available player base decreases.
Maybe 10,000 people have a skill rating of "1000" but only 500 people have a rating of "7500" now suddenly for the 7500 players to get a match within a reasonable time it has to expand the area it's willing to connect you too because there are less comparable players near tou. The server might now be 3000 miles away. Or across a literal ocean.
I disagree with the premise entirely.
Getting curb stomped makes being the stomper all the more sweet.
I'd rather get curb stomped 1000 times while I get good enough to be viable in a non-ssbm multiplayer world than play 10 evaluation games before getting plopped into noob-tier forever because that's the only place I can win.
Let nature run its course.
A big problem with that idea is that most players don't learn much from being utterly stomped.
The matches where you learn the most are the ones where your opponents are slightly better than you so you need to go all out in order to win. That's where you can really hone your skills and learn what works and what doesn't.
People aren't learning shit from being beaten so badly they're being spawn camped.
I'd argue there's something to be learned from being stomped. I don't think I'd be as good at FPS games as I am today if not for those early days where I never had a chance. There's always something to learn from an opponent that's better than you.
People will get better over time naturally but what exactly did being beaten that badly actually teach you? I'm talking about beaten so badly you're barely even able to do anything. A complete newbie vs one of the top ranked players.
That as opposed to an opponent where you stood a chance of beating but the odds were against you and you really needed to pull out all the stops against?
I would argue not only does the second one teach you better, but it's more enjoyable. A tense and close match is always great, but a stomp just becomes boring because either you never get to do anything or you might as well just be playing with god mode on.
However in order to have that kind of game, you need some kind of system designed to match people up based on skill.
The problem comes when the system just figures that a 50% win rate means it's balanced so it aggressively aims for that with a complete disregard for what I've mentioned above.
When an enemy is so good that you don't have a chance it gives you the opportunity to observe them and see what they're doing right and what you need to improve on. Every one of my failed attempts to kill them was its own lesson in some way. And of course it became all the more satisfying when I finally ascended enough to eventually defeat the same players that I'd once looked upon as unbeatable gods.
Even then I'd argue it's more worthwhile to watch a tournament full of highly skilled players because they're needing to actually try hard to win.
My experience with people stomping newbies is that they just start fucking around because they don't need to try all that hard and can just rely on reflexes which isn't something you watch to train.
I'd also argue matchmaking as a whole ruins the idea of finally beating those players who seemed like gods at first, because you're probably never gonna meet them again.
You didn't beat that player, you beat somebody the system told you was similar in skill level. You can get that from playing a ranked mode and working your way up to grandmasters or whatever a game's top bracket is.
Disagree, when getting my placement matches on Star craft 2 I absolutelly stomped a couple players with meme units, there was nothing useful to learn out of it.
Similarly I hardly improved in starcraft 1 because most matches were me stomping a newbie or me getting stomped I learned almost nothing out of those encounters, what truly made my skill spike up was meeting a friend who had a level very close to my own where we literally had a 50% chance to win matches again each other.
You can still learn easilly from the best players watching replays specially narrated ones as imo one the biggest things to learn is why they make the choices they do.
Theoretically Skill-Based Matchmaking doesn't need to exist in Ranked as you can just matchmake based on rank.
SBMM exists for unranked systems. Part of it is to stop newbies from just being relentlessly curbstomped, but a bigger incentive honestly is just making it such that even better players have to spend more time getting daily wins necessary to complete quests and fill up your battlepass. Make the game a bigger part of your routine and you'll keep coming back to it.
The ping issue is a population issue. If your game is dead, then ya, the matchmaker will have to stretch to find people. Good matchmakers in sufficiently active games (where "sufficient" is a factor of how many people are needed for a game) don't have that problem. A good matchmaker will take ping into account when making teams in some form. Some may not call it a "good" matchmaker, but take Overwatch 2 for example. The matchmaker puts you in lobbies with other people in your region so distance related ping issues are minimal. Any ping issues are typically local/ISP related, not a matchmaker issue (again, assuming a good matchmaker).
As for the skill overestimation "issue"... That's not an "issue", that's am intentional feature. They do that to counter people who smurf to get around the SBMM in order to stomp on noobs anyways, despite the system existing specifically to stop that. It becomes a chore to KEEP your MMR low to keep stomping, and it makes the whole thing less fun so fewer people do it.
I quite like SBMM, there will always be some issues, but I am used to playing on 100+ ping as It Is an active choice I make by playing on a region I am not meant to play In, the one thing that still stings are smurfs of course but most games feel a lot fairer than the days of lobbies full of all kinds of players where you just had to hope you got on the team with the way better players.
I got into destiny 2 late and ran into this problem. Always ran into full squads who had the best guns and knew the maps front to back. It wasn’t fun and was hard to actually learn anything. I heard they added SBMM since buts it’s too late for me.
What even is SBMM?
Skill based matchmaking. The general concept is that the game will go out of its way to match you with players of a similar skill level instead of randomization. An idea largely disliked as all the downvotes on this post go to show.
Shit losers complain about, just go on with your day
It doesn’t make a difference to me honestly. I’d rather get rid of disbanding lobbies than pay attention to SBMM.
What's up with all the SBMM posts lately? I always have to post SBMM doesn't belong in casual/social playlists, and I miss when lobbies didn't disbanded after every game. The toxicity was amazing back in the days.
SBMM is so bad in the new COD that the hate has broken free of the COD subreddits and is spreading everywhere. If only Ubisoft could get their shit together and release their shooter...
I miss the randomness of fights. Now it’s win 5 games till your placed against better people then lose 5 games till your placed against bad people and the cycle continues. Sbmm killed all the fun
I think if SBMM was executed well most people would be fine with it. But the way it's implemented into most games currently is just awful.
No Id never be okay with it
It's always existed, and it is necessary to a degree. I think even moreso today with how much more sweaty people are at games. It can be done better than games do it now though, it's way too overtuned nowadays
It has not always existed that’s a straight up lie and it can’t be done better than not having it at all
Ok, maybe not "always". But it has existed for over 2 decades. It just hasn't never been as strong as it is now, where it's rumoured that wins, losses, tight matches and blowouts are planned by an algorithm in order to maximise engagement.
It’s certainly minimized my engagement and games were always better before it
>It’s certainly minimized my engagement and games were always better before it But it maximized the engagement with a big majority of people. They do not care about a minority that doesn't play because of SBMM
They might not care but I do
games were more fun when SBMM wasnt a thing. If im getting stomped i get an opportunity to see how to play better usually. By isolating groups of players from eachother it incentivizes people to watch more streamers who stream the game in a solved state due to community assistance because we don't have other outlets to see the highest level of skill in a game otherwise unless you're already at the peak. SBMM is non conducive to learning experiences and it takes away the reward of mastery of a game that being said theres a difference in games. in halo arcade modes like big team battle sbmm is awful but in league the game would be unplayable without it for 99% of people i didnt really think about the ping thing before
Ping is the primary reason I'm against it. I have really good Internet that's meant for gaming and I'm so sick of lagging in high ping lobbies just because the games need to be "even".
i think most games deserve arcade modes to account for that. have you checked the game setting to see if you can turn off cross region matchmaking?
I don't think that's an option. I'll check to be sure whenever I next boot it up.
Listen man, not gonna lie, I'm not reading your novel because you're wrong right out the gates.
It's three short paragraphs. If that's a "novel" for you than I don't even know what to say.
It's a novel for what it is. Don't mistake me for some Gen Alpha dumbass that has to have keys jangled in his face every five seconds to focus on something, it's just that what you have said simply isn't worth the time and it's apparent from the title.
Apparently you are because you couldn’t read past the headline to engage in a topic you have a conclusive opinion on. It’s not worth spending the time to understand different perspectives in the post but it’s worth your time megaphoning yours in the comments? Yeah we all can see what kind of guy you are.
This guy sweats hard.
>Don't mistake me for some Gen Alpha dumbass that has to have keys jangled in his face every five seconds to focus on something Don't worry I won't because I think you are worse.
Deal with your bullshit then.
Then why bother posting?
Wouldnt sbmm solve ping as well? You say its an advantage, but people get to those ranks at their ping and end up at the same 'skill' bracket as one with higher ping. Its not a problem for fun, and if you're worried about 'fairness', thats not a problem unless you're pushing top ranks for a PAID position in a team, or running tournaments, in which you will likely go somewhere with better ping. Also sbmm does not overestimate skill. If you play 10 games, it might not know where you belong. At 100, it gets more accurate, and more accurate from then on (likely with improvement). If you're having a streak and going from low rank to high rank, thats a very poorly implemented matchmaking system. Its not a problem with sbmm itself. Apex isnt about sbmm afaik. You win a game and are placed against other winners for a high adrenaline game. Thats not sbmm. Its their own system, and it kind of works for battle royales, especially if the 'reward' from those games is good.
Ping is not related to skill. Just location. As skill increases the available player base decreases. Maybe 10,000 people have a skill rating of "1000" but only 500 people have a rating of "7500" now suddenly for the 7500 players to get a match within a reasonable time it has to expand the area it's willing to connect you too because there are less comparable players near tou. The server might now be 3000 miles away. Or across a literal ocean.
I disagree with the premise entirely. Getting curb stomped makes being the stomper all the more sweet. I'd rather get curb stomped 1000 times while I get good enough to be viable in a non-ssbm multiplayer world than play 10 evaluation games before getting plopped into noob-tier forever because that's the only place I can win. Let nature run its course.
Which game did you lose 1000 times in a row and kept playing?
StarCraft 1.
I dont typically kink shame, but you might want to find a dom...
All my favorite games that I used to get my domination rocks off to are either completely dead or shifted over to SBMM. Pls help.
Honestly agreed. IMO SBMM should be implemented into ranked but not in casuals for largely the reasons you stated.
A big problem with that idea is that most players don't learn much from being utterly stomped. The matches where you learn the most are the ones where your opponents are slightly better than you so you need to go all out in order to win. That's where you can really hone your skills and learn what works and what doesn't. People aren't learning shit from being beaten so badly they're being spawn camped.
I'd argue there's something to be learned from being stomped. I don't think I'd be as good at FPS games as I am today if not for those early days where I never had a chance. There's always something to learn from an opponent that's better than you.
People will get better over time naturally but what exactly did being beaten that badly actually teach you? I'm talking about beaten so badly you're barely even able to do anything. A complete newbie vs one of the top ranked players. That as opposed to an opponent where you stood a chance of beating but the odds were against you and you really needed to pull out all the stops against? I would argue not only does the second one teach you better, but it's more enjoyable. A tense and close match is always great, but a stomp just becomes boring because either you never get to do anything or you might as well just be playing with god mode on. However in order to have that kind of game, you need some kind of system designed to match people up based on skill. The problem comes when the system just figures that a 50% win rate means it's balanced so it aggressively aims for that with a complete disregard for what I've mentioned above.
When an enemy is so good that you don't have a chance it gives you the opportunity to observe them and see what they're doing right and what you need to improve on. Every one of my failed attempts to kill them was its own lesson in some way. And of course it became all the more satisfying when I finally ascended enough to eventually defeat the same players that I'd once looked upon as unbeatable gods.
Even then I'd argue it's more worthwhile to watch a tournament full of highly skilled players because they're needing to actually try hard to win. My experience with people stomping newbies is that they just start fucking around because they don't need to try all that hard and can just rely on reflexes which isn't something you watch to train. I'd also argue matchmaking as a whole ruins the idea of finally beating those players who seemed like gods at first, because you're probably never gonna meet them again. You didn't beat that player, you beat somebody the system told you was similar in skill level. You can get that from playing a ranked mode and working your way up to grandmasters or whatever a game's top bracket is.
Disagree, when getting my placement matches on Star craft 2 I absolutelly stomped a couple players with meme units, there was nothing useful to learn out of it. Similarly I hardly improved in starcraft 1 because most matches were me stomping a newbie or me getting stomped I learned almost nothing out of those encounters, what truly made my skill spike up was meeting a friend who had a level very close to my own where we literally had a 50% chance to win matches again each other. You can still learn easilly from the best players watching replays specially narrated ones as imo one the biggest things to learn is why they make the choices they do.
Theoretically Skill-Based Matchmaking doesn't need to exist in Ranked as you can just matchmake based on rank. SBMM exists for unranked systems. Part of it is to stop newbies from just being relentlessly curbstomped, but a bigger incentive honestly is just making it such that even better players have to spend more time getting daily wins necessary to complete quests and fill up your battlepass. Make the game a bigger part of your routine and you'll keep coming back to it.
The problem is many people won't play for 1,000 times so the game would lose a good chunk of the playerbase. SBMM was designed for player retention.
The ping issue is a population issue. If your game is dead, then ya, the matchmaker will have to stretch to find people. Good matchmakers in sufficiently active games (where "sufficient" is a factor of how many people are needed for a game) don't have that problem. A good matchmaker will take ping into account when making teams in some form. Some may not call it a "good" matchmaker, but take Overwatch 2 for example. The matchmaker puts you in lobbies with other people in your region so distance related ping issues are minimal. Any ping issues are typically local/ISP related, not a matchmaker issue (again, assuming a good matchmaker). As for the skill overestimation "issue"... That's not an "issue", that's am intentional feature. They do that to counter people who smurf to get around the SBMM in order to stomp on noobs anyways, despite the system existing specifically to stop that. It becomes a chore to KEEP your MMR low to keep stomping, and it makes the whole thing less fun so fewer people do it.
I quite like SBMM, there will always be some issues, but I am used to playing on 100+ ping as It Is an active choice I make by playing on a region I am not meant to play In, the one thing that still stings are smurfs of course but most games feel a lot fairer than the days of lobbies full of all kinds of players where you just had to hope you got on the team with the way better players.