Bad Matchmaking Thread

[az1]

I would post screenshots but what's the point? This thread is 400 pages ... 400 pages... four hundred pages... of screenshots that are showing entire teams going 1/10, 1/9, 0/12 etc and nothing has been done about it.

This is beyond a joke.

PS: every time this happens in a game, the duo queue or the trio queue are the ones freeding. Obviously it has something to do with that.

@Yoshi

 

[minifarkan]

 

[snake_roke]

WTF whit this matchmaking

 

[lucastret23]

44393411

emissary average vs oracle average

why even send this game man it's obvious from the get go it's gonna suck

 

[Pat]

Has anyone who frequents this forum ever seen a single acknowledgment of the matchmaking system from a Deadlock dev? I feel like posting match id's here is pointless until we get some sort of confirmation that they actually give a shit. I get the game is under development but with nearly 45k daily concurrent players someone from the team should make an attempt to let us know they are working on it.

comment on this in discord and out come the kneepads for valve with a lot of tHeY JuSt UpDaTed ThE GaME ThEy aRe FiXinG iT

no, not really aware anyone is doing anything with the feedback in this thread, and if they say they are, they're outright lying based on player experience consistently posted here. i asked the question and got laughed at in their discord and was told i'm the weak link of my team

 

[SadeVEVO]

This one felt incredibly unfair
44406076

 

[SerialSolace]

44408346 This was the worst game I've played. I would not care if my teammates were anywhere near good enough to deal with these players but they all sucked

 

[ninjabear2015]

Use this thread to share matchids for games that you think the matchmaker did a bad job at. If you can explain what you felt was a problem in it that would be helpful as well.

Do not post matchids for games that were within the past 24 hours from this post. Games older than that are fine and games going forward are fine.

Thanks for the help

Match ID:44410761

Overall the match felt one sided, due to champion pick pools rather than player skill. The overall game felt more balanced towards their side having more powerful, or better characters. Characters like Doorman, who has the HIGHEST base damage gun, that fires faster bullets than a swarm can beat out a soul, or Calico who just has a Once a Fight "Outta here" button. Vs, Infernus, guy who shoots you, with a pity bullet and can at MOST level 1 (W/ recommended ability) hitting only headshots can do ~340 damage. Meanwhile if we assume that Doorman can also only hit head, without ability, does 405 damage.

Made worse by his Bell that deals an additional 140 damage. My issue with match making comes from how character select is done, there is no way to counter pick, seeing a doorman and picking a longer range character, or is there any way to coordinate with your team. Especially if there are randoms. Because even if you select Prio teamates in lane, you can still end up with two cahracters that don't complement each other. Even if your 2X Prio'd them.

 

[Zen_Akechi]

44411250

 

[1432]

View attachment 62524

Have you noticed that your bad games only happen when you play in a party with your friends?
That’s not a matchmaking problem — it’s just weak coordination within your group.
Try playing solo, and you’ll see that your matchmaking issues disappear.

 

[multiplemike]

My previous high was Ascendant I, then I took a year break and now I cannot escape Arcanist. I have over 1,000 hours. I play on the NA server. My overall winrate is 54% which was primarily achieved by solo queuing.

My current experience with matchmaking is that unless I play a character that is designed specifically to kill enemy players, and also perform outrageously well - then I will simply not win. Over the past 16 matches I have 4 wins and 12 losses, 8 of those losses are in the screenshots below. In nearly every game I am either the best performing or one of the top three players on my team, and yet that is not enough to have even a 50% winrate over 16 games or more.

My opponents very frequently have players that go 15-3 or something. It is very difficult for me to believe that there are still SEVEN ranks above the peak of player skill that I witness in my games. It feels as if players of EVERY skill are present in my games, and for some reason the worse players are on my team.

Paradoxically, if I happen to luck into a higher skill match, like Emissary or Archon, then I do not seem to perform much worse and actually have a better time overall synergizing with my teammates. My teammates in Arcanist often struggle with simple actions such as maintaining lanes or buying counter items.

I could be completely delusional and bad at the game, but something feels completely off. I simply cannot, while performing well, have above average match results in a rank that seems to represent the bottom 50% of skill.

Can't know exactly what happened in these games but I think your stats are not indicative of you deserving to be out of that rank. (outside of the mina game). I see a lot of different heroes youre playing too, maybe watch a replay and see if you are indeed making some mistakes you are not noticing.

 

[SardineS]

Can't know exactly what happened in these games but I think your stats are not indicative of you deserving to be out of that rank. (outside of the mina game). I see a lot of different heroes youre playing too, maybe watch a replay and see if you are indeed making some mistakes you are not noticing.

The point of my post is that currently the ranks do not convey any perceptible skill level. It's why currently 14% of all playerbase is stuck in Initiate I, which is 5 times the size of any other rank division. In my games I have players who range from 'playing for the first time' to having perfect mechanics and decision making. There is nothing that defines an Arcanist, a Ritualist player; or a player of any particular rank.

I'm not sure if any action can qualify as 'deserving to be out of a rank' if at most a player can hope for is having an above 50% winrate. I could reach whatever rank I want after playing a 1,000 games at 52% winrate - but it would be reached not as much as a result of improvement but the sheer amount of games played.

If ranks actually conveyed a certain attitude or skill expression then it would be possible to counteract it and have a high win-rate for the rank (60%+). As it is currently you can meet any type of player at any rank (who knows if that is partially as a result of smurfing). The result is that you're not trying to outwit a particular skill group - you're trying to outwit the meta-game of the ENTIRE ladder, starting from Initiate I to Eternus. By doing so you can only hope at a slightly above 50% winrate at most.

That's not also to mention that maintaining the winrate can only be done with characters that are designed to snowball and effectively slaughter the enemy team. That is, characters like Mina and not something like Paige. Playing Paige well result in games like this, which will make your winrate even closer to 50% therefore taking even more games to rank up. I don't think I will have Mina results playing Paige. At least playing Paige thematically and not something like gun Paige.

It also does not help that I have supportive tendencies and I like sacrificing myself for objectives. It's good in theory but not when most games hinge on killing the enemy (so that they don't kill your teammates). I play characters like Mina begrudgingly.

---

Obviously there is a degree of speculation in what I am writing, but if I am at all right (and Valve does not treat this space just as a misdirection for venting), then it could be a useful testimony.

 

[Burger_Kyle]

44421329

wait 5 minutes in queue just to get placed into archon 1 vs oracle. emissary teammates start 0-6 in lane against phantom opponents, 1-11 drifter first time playing the character

 

[Trashmaking]

comment on this in discord and out come the kneepads for valve with a lot of tHeY JuSt UpDaTed ThE GaME ThEy aRe FiXinG iT

no, not really aware anyone is doing anything with the feedback in this thread, and if they say they are, they're outright lying based on player experience consistently posted here. i asked the question and got laughed at in their discord and was told i'm the weak link of my team

I avoid the discord like the plague. Its genuinely just a bunch of weebs in there yapping about anime and unrelated shit 24/7. You cant have any serious discussion about the game without 5 neckbeards chiming in.

 

[SardineS]

Can't know exactly what happened in these games but I think your stats are not indicative of you deserving to be out of that rank. (outside of the mina game). I see a lot of different heroes youre playing too, maybe watch a replay and see if you are indeed making some mistakes you are not noticing.

Besides all the potentially disingenuous stuff I wrote, you are right that I do like to play too many heroes and it does affect my ability to iterate on skill. Nevertheless it does feel like the skill range of players in any particular rank is too high, which results in too much weight being given to 'damage' heroes, as well as players one tricking those heroes, when it comes to match outcome.

The players on the lower end of the skill range end up as fodder for damage heroes. The tighter the skill range of players in a match/rank, the less the carries get fed.

 

[Pickle-O]

44431086

the lose steak continues. 27 in a row and counting. The games arent even close in any capacity. constant 40-70k difference. Unsure how the shit matchmakign is fair but alright. keept it up.

 

[weekendemo]

44324449
44405848

 

[Trashmaking]

The point of my post is that currently the ranks do not convey any perceptible skill level. It's why currently 14% of all playerbase is stuck in Initiate I, which is 5 times the size of any other rank division. In my games I have players who range from 'playing for the first time' to having perfect mechanics and decision making. There is nothing that defines an Arcanist, a Ritualist player; or a player of any particular rank.

I'm not sure if any action can qualify as 'deserving to be out of a rank' if at most a player can hope for is having an above 50% winrate. I could reach whatever rank I want after playing a 1,000 games at 52% winrate - but it would be reached not as much as a result of improvement but the sheer amount of games played.

If ranks actually conveyed a certain attitude or skill expression then it would be possible to counteract it and have a high win-rate for the rank (60%+). As it is currently you can meet any type of player at any rank (who knows if that is partially as a result of smurfing). The result is that you're not trying to outwit a particular skill group - you're trying to outwit the meta-game of the ENTIRE ladder, starting from Initiate I to Eternus. By doing so you can only hope at a slightly above 50% winrate at most.

That's not also to mention that maintaining the winrate can only be done with characters that are designed to snowball and effectively slaughter the enemy team. That is, characters like Mina and not something like Paige. Playing Paige well result in games like this, which will make your winrate even closer to 50% therefore taking even more games to rank up. I don't think I will have Mina results playing Paige. At least playing Paige thematically and not something like gun Paige.

It also does not help that I have supportive tendencies and I like sacrificing myself for objectives. It's good in theory but not when most games hinge on killing the enemy (so that they don't kill your teammates). I play characters like Mina begrudgingly.

---

Obviously there is a degree of speculation in what I am writing, but if I am at all right (and Valve does not treat this space just as a misdirection for venting), then it could be a useful testimony.

It will remain this way until they switch the rank system from only taking win % into account vs weighing in individual performance. You are correct when you say playing a supportive style wont lead to ranking up in comparison to playing a carry. You can play perfect every game and still lose most of the time on someone like Paige because she just doesnt have enough direct impact on winning matches. If you really want to win but still maintain that more supportive style I would reccomend playing someone like krill, kelvin, dynamo etc who can play supportive via their utility but still flip the switch and hard carry when needed. Overall im a firm believer that ranks currently do not matter at all as the system combined with the MM is inheritenly busted and not really able to truly guage a players skill.

44431086

the lose steak continues. 27 in a row and counting. The games arent even close in any capacity. constant 40-70k difference. Unsure how the shit matchmakign is fair but alright. keept it up.

View attachment 62564

Yo dude that is actually insane.. You wanna duo some games today? ill try to help you snap this loss streak haha.

 

[TheBearded]

Have you noticed that your bad games only happen when you play in a party with your friends?
That’s not a matchmaking problem — it’s just weak coordination within your group.
Try playing solo, and you’ll see that your matchmaking issues disappear.

My dude, I've only played solo and I can tell you with a honest heart:
It's non-existent.

Whatever you're smoking I need some of what you're having and I'm pretty sure Snoop Dogg would hunt you down if he knew what you stashed.

Matchmaking in Deadlock is about as advanced as a hamster is alive after a round in a blender on the smoothie setting.

Neil Armstrong saw his house in more detail from the moon than matchmaking has integrity.

A deaf person have a higher degree of appreciation of Vivaldis spring than the feedback is being listened to in this forum.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to tell you.

TLDR: Matchmaking doesn't work and every single player, except you apparently, knows it. Even major streamers admit it.

 

[pickle420]

44442563

Why do you put kelvin and paige on one team, and shiv and abrams on the other? Who is supposed to be our frontliner?