Eugen you have a working Matchmaker sitting in SDN44. Please just bring it over!

[stray quarry]

I feel like this is a pretty good level to start on, in my dream with a map veto system on top.

[muted trout]

Give matchmake I am sick and tired of waiting for 15 to 30 min to play a simple 2v2/3v3.

[stray quarry]

I to this date dont get why the just shredded this function in SD2 and didnt bring it back with WARNO

[muted trout]

I agree it is a mistery.

[vapid geode]

I think you didn't use that matchmaker system at all, since nobody has good memories from it on sd44. Waiting 30 min for a game wasn't too fun

[stray quarry]

It was the time were I actually played 2v2 in SDN44.
Died quickly sure, but lobby sim was pretty dead too for Team games.
Eugen making close frontline the main mod in the matchmaker didnt help.

2v2-4v4 playerbase in Any eugen game is damn low, even though the mod is decently fun, but 2v2 lobby sim is just the biggest pain.
Playing in a 2v2 tournament lately again and havign to go through it for practice it reminded me again why I only play 1v1 and a bit of 10v10 ever since the matchmaker died in SDN44 usually.

[vapid geode]

lobby sim lasted 3 years, good old MM in SD44... 3 months? or was it 2 and then the close combat change?

Which being fair, the matchmaking did everything it could, but without numbers you can have the perfect matchmaker and it will still be awful for players

[muted trout]

We need matchmaker in this game.

[stray quarry]

Reading feedback from people who migrated to ba or Who compare the games. It's one of their Main reasons.
Ever since BA came out, lobby sim got even worse. Cause the few remaining 2v2-4v4 players migrated in big numbers.

[vapid geode]

that is the main advantage of having more players and less game modes, you get a matchmaking that can work

[stray quarry]

Well without a MM you never will have Numbers.

[vapid geode]

and without numbers you will never have a working matchmaking (as seen on SD44 and its +30 min search times). Almost like a paradox

[limber plume]

anecdotally all of my friends I've got to play warno stopped playing because of the current waiting around in a lobby for 30+ minutes; The non 1v1/10v10 experience is really bad atm

[stray quarry]

It's like as if the game could have a better player retention rate and with that outperform the sd games even harder in player numbers if it had a matchmaker.
I also yet have to find a player who enjoys the lobby sim.

[severe knot]

We have “matchmaking” in ranked already and although it’s bad, I only would play ranked because I could avoid lobby sim

[vapid geode]

you will have the same success finding someone that enjoyed the 30min of waiting time in SD44 matchmaking. Nobody likes high waiting times, no matter the format

[hexed vapor]

We need a match maker

[patent echo]

with a matchmaker everybody can do something different while waiting, but in a lobby at least the host has to regularly check if enough players are there and if everybody has selected his deck and is ready so are matchmaker is way more comfortable

[vapid geode]

There is plenty of improvements that can be made to the lobby system that achieve the same while working in a more efficient way. Having a visual + sounds alert when lobby fills, quick search of lobbies with standard parameters... In a nutshell, it is not about changing to a diff system, but about making the waiting be the shortest possible and with the most QoL for the player

[teal osprey]

Beyond All Reason is an open-source game with similar player numbers to Warno that has a matchmaker and the wait times are not long; lobby sim is fundamentally a coordination problem.

[patent echo]

but matchmaker and a lobbysystem dont exclude each other so there really isnt a changing to a different system in discussion but supplementing the current system

[teal osprey]

Reasons why I don't play team games without a matchmaker:

• most lobbies are only half full - the stacked half; and the stacks don't sit in separate lobbies instead of playing each other
• I have no idea if the settings are rigged or not; nobody wants to play against a stack that plays the same settings over and over and have tuned their decks and strategies for it
• there is no auto-balancing

[patent echo]

i also would be very careful with alerts for filling lobbies as there are already quite a lot of players that like to join and instantly leave games

[muted trout]

I have around 10 people around me that can say the same. We just don't have the nerve to WAIT constantly. People defending the abscence of a matchmaker are straight up delusional in my opinion. It's not like people want to replace the lobby system.

[teal osprey]

It’s simply something people expect in 2025 and the new buyers from the big sales will definitely click on

[limber plume]

This is purely speculative on my part, but I feel that under the current lobby system players are pushed away much harder by bad experiences i.e - Joining a teamstacked lobby with cheese settings, getting kicked nonstop etc.

There's nothing worse than joining a game and 15 minutes in you realize the timer is on 60m and score limit is triple or something
Quick play would at least give players a standard curated experience that avoids these very frustrating situations

[muted trout]

Last 4 days experience for me and my group was waiting for people to joing the lobby for 15+ min until we just give up and play something else.

[earnest orchid]

The few times I’ve joined a team game lobby it’s inevitably been unlimited timer 3x score high income and I noticed about 30s after I start. Never again 🙏 give me sane setting matchmaker so I can have fun team games

[vapid geode]

There you are right, it should be something you can turn off

[muted trout]

We need a matchmaking system, simple as.

[severe knot]

This is just trying to make lobby sim closer to matchmaker. And considering the issue we always talk about is balanced games, do we actually get balanced games in lobby sim? No!

[vapid geode]

Ofc, the main thing isn't that MM is bad, but that MM can't be achieved with good searching times in warno. So you can either improve lobby so it isn't a sim or get the 30 min MM of sd44

[stray quarry]

Yeah anyone who played a bit of 2v2-4v4 in the last 2 years I think can agree with that. Pain is real.

[stray quarry]

And I played other games with matchmaker and similar /smaller playerbases were you sure had to wait a bit but the progress of getting a game was much less frustrating and less work.
Like Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2

[vapid geode]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/573100/discussions/0/1741106440025571716/

and that having... only 2small size gamemodes?

[muted trout]

There are many small RTS games with a community with the size of Warno and the have matchmake. There is no excuse in 2025 anymore. Just no excuse.

[stray quarry]

Another day in WARNO lobby sim, waiting 16 minutes, with 13 different people by now having been in and out of the lobby. At least a couple of similar skilll evel that a matchmaker could have fairly matched us again.

19 minutes 15 people later, we finally have game, withj okayish balance.

[muted trout]

Yeah leaving only the lobby system and showing people's level so absolutely everyone can get scared of high levels was a very bright idea.

When early access ™ matchmake?

[stray quarry]

It's both shit. Not having levels and having zero clue how good the enemy might be sucks too.

Both showing levels and hiding levels lead to issues, as the core issue is the system itself and individual people's just being less efficient than a MM system that can sort them

[muted trout]

I agree but in as it stands currently showing levels of players leads to people constantly leaving lobbies.

[royal fjord]

Even if the levels are hidden in public lobbies or something, I bet someone will make a mod or a workaround to reveal the levels again sooner or later.

[muted trout]

To call this speculation would be mild. Where is the mod that hides levels? I bet someone won't do that as no one ever did so far. My point stands.

[stray quarry]

no need for a mod 😛 you can just reset your level ^^

[muted trout]

I love people trying to excuse everything with some beyond funny speculations. As one of my friends says when we play games - If we didn't lose this one we would've won. That's how all this sounds.

[earnest orchid]

Ok but hiding them would almost certainly result in more games that aren’t worth playing. A big part of why I stopped even trying with warno team games was that the vast majority of the time if it wasn’t a game where I knew the other guys it was over in ten minutes either because my stack rolled them or their stack rolled me and the randoms I was with. Levels are one of the few ways to skill gate a lobby. It’s not a great way but it beats literally nothing.

In BA or COH or DOW with a matchmaker this isn’t generally an issue after placement matches. I get solid games that could go either way.

[muted trout]

While I understand where you are coming from all we are talking about here is team games. Ok your experience is great in 1v1 and we are all happy for you. Some other people though like team games and in the current circumstance I would rather be playing than sitting in lobby, that is how bad it is at this point in time.

[earnest orchid]

I’m not talking about ranked?

[muted trout]

I said 1v1 in which Warno currently has matchmaking, regardless of ranked or not. Same goes for DoW DE btw which I also play these days - it has both ranked matchmaking and normal matchmaking for up to 4v4. And yes sometimes it rolls you with very good opponents, and sometimes not. You are still playing the game though. Keyword in this conversation - playing. Right now we are waiting most of the time.

tl;dr I would rather games not worth playing (whatever that is btw) than sitting in a lobby for 15 to 30 minutes.

[earnest orchid]

I see my phone accidentally an S. I’m also talking about team games

[royal fjord]

5v5 matchmaking to poach BA playerbase. Or whatever will be left of it, if it fails more.
How many bought and played BA? 70k?

[teal osprey]

this sounds like making the perfect the enemy of the good. Perfect matches are never guaranteed. More good enough games is what everyone wants; apparently BA also doesn't have perfect matches every time, yet people play a lot more team games on it, simply because of the convenience of MM

[vapid geode]

it is just a way to show that you can have skill based MM, short queue times or more than 1 game mode, but not the 3 at the same time with this playerbase numbers

[teal osprey]

I would order the importance of them as such:

1. Short Queue Times - lobby simulator just turns people away
2. Game modes - a lot of people are not going to play 1v1 or team games and that is okay
3. Quality of skill-based matchmaking - this is the only one that really is a function of the number of players and the current ranked mode is proof you can have a very alive community even without perfect matches. I can consistently find matches on 2 minutes on average, no matter the season or time of day. Sure some times I stomp or get stomped, but I keep playing because I enjoy it

[vapid geode]

agree with you there, just that a good MM here is not possible without deleting those game modes (good luck deciding which one remains and explaining it to those players) and that people will expect to face same skill players, so they will be angry when it doesn't happen

[teal osprey]

I don't think anyone is suggesting 100 queues, just an additional team game one, in a popular format. I'm sure not all of them are equally popular

[vapid geode]

that is still part of the problem you will face, you have a limited amount of player numbers. If you separate them in either game modes or lobby/MM, you lose players. Less players= longer search times and more unbalance in skill. Which comes back to the same problem, either you focus all your player into a bad MM with okayish search times or you won't get anything faster than the lobby system. As an example, BA did a MM, but it got more players and really limited the amount of game modes to allow it. Basically the suggestions here are great, don't get me wrong, if they had any chance of being accomplished with the current values

[teal osprey]

You can’t really divide team players - the mode is barely played publicly because of lack of MM. 1v1 and 10v10 are the most played because games are easy to find

[vapid geode]

but then how do you manage people that want to play other game mode than 10v10? Either you don't give them MM, which is an option, or make them join 10v10 even if they don't want. Even there 10v10 is a huge size for a matchmaking with warno numbers, so searching times wouldn't be short

[muted trout]

So it gets even better. I join a 2v2 lobby. We wait for 10 min for a 4th player. I get the question where I am from. I counter the question with the same question. Host says Im first, I tell him they will get no answer then. Proceeds to kick me for being unfriendly 10/10 experience would wait for 10 minutes again, Eugen.

• of course host had anime pfp

[stray quarry]

https://www.reddit.com/r/warno/s/qiIZDpIRPe
Another example of somebody fcked by lobby sim.
Even in 10v10 it has big disadvantages, though it's not as bad as in private lobbies

[teal osprey]

With a matchmaker these three stacks would have probably matched with one another once in a while

[muted trout]

Come on, Eugen, early access matchmaker we know you can do it.

[earnest orchid]

What do we want??? Matchmaker!!! When do we want it??? In a reasonable timeframe!!!

[muted trout]

In what form? Early Access! 😏

[muted trout]

🛌🏿

[stray quarry]

Another Day another 15 minutes in the lobby sim.
Ending up with a level 3 on the otehrside who is new to the game that we would have to likely kick if we would want to get a game, making him feel unwelcome.
Whilst another 15 people rotated through with half of them close to our level (30+)
We had to stop searching after 25 minutes.
Even though 20+ people checked out our lobby. But surely matchmaker couldnt do it better.

[vapid geode]

You would learn a lot more if you tried to use that time you waste trying to find a game in learning about MM, its advabtages and its cons
https://joostdevblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/designing-matchmaking-for-smaller.html
There you have 1 against MM with small numbers and one with solutions, so instead of just asking for it you can see what changes eugen would need to make to have it

https://joostdevblog.blogspot.com/2014/11/why-good-matchmaking-requires-enormous.html

[teal osprey]

Where does this blog recommend lobby sim? Because it looks like it just treats having an MM as fundamental for multiplayer, it’s not even a question; the question is how to make the best experience with one.

[vapid geode]

who said it recommended it? you can read it and see the advantages and problems. it will be smarter than just look at the img. As an example, according at the one that designs MM for nitche communities, it encorages you to remove ALL game modes but 1

[stray quarry]

My post shows that there are enough players.
The system just doesnt match them atm.
There were multiple decent opponents it could have matched us with:
But Because everyone is scared about lobby hosts and getting pubstomped.
Having an unbiased tool that hosts the lobby and puts you into a match is way smoother than having to jump into some ones lobby.
Thats why 10v10 lobbies work to some degree.
Though the jumping inbetween lobbies there is also slowing down the speed at which games starts too.
Even enabling individual players to hold a full lobby of 19 other players hostage.

[vapid geode]

really, make the effort to read them, you will see the difference between 20 players joining you and having 20 active players. If you want to ask for something like this, you should at least try to learn about it

[stray quarry]

Those are the same 2 links you posted 2 years ago no?
We already had this debate and everyone but you agreed that its not an arguement against MM in WARNO. 😆
I mean just look at the upvote ratio here.
People want match maker, it needs to be a robust matchmaker with decent flexibility and QOL (showing which size of games are searched and allowing to switch between teh game sizes without having to cancel search for example).
But it absolutly can work with the current players.
How are 20 people jumping in and out who ACTIVELY click on a lobby, less active than people sitting in a matchmaker waiting to be matched whilst watching a YT video?
WARNO is a good bit bigger than SD2 and likely would be able to be even bigger with a decent MM, as currently yeah the 2v2-4v4 population is small and yet you still see a good few people filter through.

[vapid geode]

and yet you failed to read them and see what things work and which ones don't. Like there is literally a link giving suggestions of what warno cand o to have a matchmaking, but we all know that was too hard. For the warno pop, you have BA with x5 the players and even them followed the advice in the first link

but well, I am sure your data of lobbies and upvotes will make eugen ignore the limitations, as it did 3 years ago

[broken sand]

Ranked 1v1 MM works fine, you get a game, that's the point. same concept applies to other modes. It's a small game, you want a match. Your options are go sit in lobby for 15 minutes (it can be way longer for 2v2 if you're good) or press a button. If the button makes you wait 15 minutes then you would also wait 15 minutes waiting for a lobby, that's a player count issue. However instead of my experience being joining every 2v2 lobby to see if I want that (I take anything so I don't do that) I now just press a button and the game does the work for me, and this also prevents the stupidity you had in RD that still exists where you will have 4 2v2 lobbies open but nobody consolidated because someone wants a rigged lobby (bad for noobs) etc

Custom lobbies should be for custom setups, in houses, people with flexible team sizes, people who want a specific map to train on, but most people just want a match to play. Eugen doesn't need to attract the people in "catgirl war 3v3 max lvl 30 no rush mirror pact" they already are diehards. They need to attract the "give me the most balanced and fastest game you can right now"

[stray quarry]

This post just tells us that matchmaking wont be perfect and why:
https://joostdevblog.blogspot.com/2014/11/why-good-matchmaking-requires-enormous.html

And this one tells us how to tackle MM to make it even possible for games of down to a low number of 10 simultanious players at 1 time, whilst we have a couple hundrets in warno we chance for a few dozen-hundrets more if the Multiplayer experience improves.
https://joostdevblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/designing-matchmaking-for-smaller.html

Really reading nothing about "dont do MM for your small game" in there. And WARNO all ready is on the bigger end for this category even based on that post.
Yes you would have to think about how to set it up (only conquest, no destruction, searching for multiple games sizes, letting people know what is searched for and enable them to quickly join that game size etc.)
Down time can be filled with armory or maybe allow them to test units (we have the dev mode in game now afterall so just let them in onto a "test map" and shoot at stuff.
Nice read 2 years ago, once more a nice read now. Perfect show case on how eugen should implement MM to stop us from the lobby sim hell we have atm.

[vapid geode]

finally you managed to read . Now you mixed the part about modes. warno has 2 game modes, true, but each game size counts as a mode here. So warno has the same playerbase as the working one in the first article, but with roughly 5 times less players + lobbies. So, without removing anything, you divide the... lets say 1500 players? between the MP and the solo ones, then between destruction and conquest and then between all the sizes. I think even you can see the numbers there aren't enough to then expect a balanced matchmaker (+ 10v10 is a really big game mode for this nitche, reducing available players more)

So in a nutshell, it is possible to get a bad matchmaker in warno, but even that would need to remove gamemodes to have waiting times of less than 7 minutes, specially if 10v10 is one of the matchmaking modes (or use some of the advices of the 2nd one, which usually led to lower quality but decrease waiting time)

[teal osprey]

Even the game mode problem can be designed around; you can simply queue for multiple, maybe even order them for preference

[teal osprey]

really nice article, everywhere on that blog Matchmaking is assumed. Even in 2015 it was the standard, no matter the playercounts

[stray quarry]

haha love how condescending you always have to be, never allowing to let an opponent in a debate be your equal, because you have to fear you could loose and the narcissistic you couldn't take that.
So you have to make me "the guy who can barely read" 😄
I did read it 2 years ago. I did read it again now. Its a decent addition of information, its not rocket science and it isnt a comparision of MM and Lobby sim.

I also went through a lot of different match makers through the years and collected good and bad examples and disccused them with a lot of RTS players.
You arent a bigger expert here than I am. No matter how many times you try to belitle me. I mean look at the freakin poll, its the most upvoted one here.
Nobody says MM is easy. Nobody says its the silver bullet that will make it as big as BA over night.

But its NEEDED and it IS doable. WARNO is bigger than you make it out to be already. NOBODY expects a fully balanced matchmaker.

The die hard eugen fans wont stop being die hard eugen fans and stop searching after 3 minutes in MM, if they go through 20 minutes of the current lobby sim.
casuals will have a slightly higher % of staying, as they will have an easier time getting into games. Over time maybe even leading to slightly more balanced games.

SDN44 was dead in lobbies and quickplay. Quickplay had the worse game mode, so the few people remaining collected around lobbies.

Matchmaker already works in WARNO with ranked.

[vapid geode]

it would be fantastic if you read it 2 years ago, but you didn't even read the one that was available. Main thigns you are lacking is that you believe a poll has a bigger impact in matchamking possibility than number of players, while expecting it to have no downsides

as said above, matchmaker is possible, a quality matchmaker with all game modes and sizes, no stacked teams, shorter searching times, option to avoid same players, skill based, etc... isn't. Also the 1v1 vs 10v10 matchmaker is quite different on teh requirements, but I am sure your experience and talks told you that

[stray quarry]

I did read it 2 years ago and you know it. But lovely that you have to be condecending ones more.
Once more nobody is talking about a perfect matchmaker. We talk about getting the fcking basics.

.If it turns out nobody is searching 3v3, so be it, as long as people get indicated what is searched for and they can switch to it, its the same as having 1 team game size or even a bit better, as it can grow and shrink over time with population.

Just got to be careful with different game modes (you shouldnt do that). As those are hard splits of the community.
People already cant really choose game size now between 2v2 and 4v4, you mostly just join what ever lobby is up, but more conveluded.
But you know all that, just like all the people who upvoted this know it.

You are just a bit dense and need to find a way to be against it, because you started this debate against it.

[vapid geode]

I guess myself and eugen are too dense to see it. But at least you have a poll

[limber plume]

There is no reason to assume that a system has to separate all permutations of game types and sizes into different queues, or that it even has to be done in some other single/specific way. MM implementation could be as simple as the game itself making a lobby with locked standard settings + random/voted map and putting the players from queue into it. The whole point of the conversation is to have a single funnel to provide a standard curated game experience. The problems we're solving for are:

• Having various half filled lobbies scattered around
• Lobbies with cheesy settings (this one feels terrible to be on the receiving end of)
• Having to be actively present to participate (lobby leader has to constantly monitor his lobby, players have to monitor settings to avoid sneaky changes before start)

There surely are solutions both involving MM or by further refining the current system, or even something third. The impression I get is that you're more anti-MM than you are advocating pro-something else . I'd like to know what you think would be good proactive steps to mitigate these issues

[vapid geode]

I am not againdt MM, I am against the naive conceotion that MM can improve everything without cons (mainly lack of ways to remove stacked teams, autosurrenders and team killers). My advice would be to do it by steps, first give an option to automatically join on going systems (something eugen already has). Then add quality of life to make lobby waiting less annoying (visual or sound clues when a lobby is full) and finally full MM when player numbers are enough. Personally I do agree the automatización part is the greatest advabtage, but expect a rise on players, better match balance or short queues without removing game modes and with the amount of players is just optimistic, unless you add solutions like bots

[muted trout]

Imagine recommending players to read some blogs instead of trying to play the game.

"Wasting time to find a game". Well news flash - we want to play the game.

I am dying laughing here, thank you!

[vapid geode]

Also, you need different queues for MM unless you make people play a game size they didn't want at first, since people doesn't want a game, but a specific type. If not you may queue for 10v10 and play a 1v1

[teal osprey]

Which is a straw-man, people play other games and know what to expect
from a matchmaker.

[vapid geode]

I suggest you read your own msges then, yourself said MM strongpoints were auto balance and avoid stacks. And as logic says, having a matchmaker with low player, autobalance, avoididng stacks and working in diff modes can only be possible adding artificial players (bots) or having a single queue (and removing game sizw choice from.players)

[teal osprey]

again same strawman, I’ve never claimed matches will be perfect.

On your other point - you can queue for several modes at the same time.

You can’t sit in several lobbies at the same time.

I still think fewer queues is generally better, though

[vapid geode]

Nobody said you can't queue in multiple modes, but you still divide the amount of players. Some may be fine with a 1v1 or a 10v10, but lost won't want a 1v1 if they queued for the 10v10. Even that choice removes playwrs from the queue UNLESS you make them have to play, and then you need to take intk account players May leave a game they didn't want to play

Like there are several ways to make a MM in this game, but to get all the rhings you expect, you would want to take messures you will most likely dislike. For example, would you be fine with a MM that makes you play vs bots if not enough players available? Or in a diff game size if not enough players on the one you want?

[teal osprey]

Again with the dividing, I believe a majority of team players don’t have a strong preference over the exact size of the game, 3v3 or 4v4, etc

Even if they do if you look at the screenshots from SD44 you can see you can select which modes you are queueing for so you can wait more if you like.

Also, your dividing logic also impacts LOBBIES just the same - the community is split between lobbies with different settings, don’t you think?

[vapid geode]

I can only encourage you to read a bit about MM. You can select multiple modes, but as long as you don't make player play what they didn't choose, you divide the amount of players, since not everyone will want to play any game. Sd44 queue in multiple sizes still did that, since some.player may want a 4v4 and others a 1v1, if they don't want both, they are not in the same queue

[teal osprey]

OK if say the SD44 matchmaker is brought into Warno, and I deselect 2v2, while queuing for the other 3 options, how am I forced to play 2v2?

I’m just going to wait more if I really care. If I’m up for whatever I will select all of them.

[vapid geode]

Also advantage of lobbies is not that they divide players better, but that they give tools to avoid players to get into games they dislike, which MM can't in small playerbases

[full lotus]

Matchmaker sounds fine as long as you can select multiple options/modes at the same time in searching query. You'll usually get something at least, regardless of if its your favorite.

[vapid geode]

Think now, if you deselect the 2v2 queue, aren't you removing yourself from that queue for the other players? Aren't there X-1 players for 2v2 now? If the amount of players isn't big enough and you want serching times that are normal, you would remove the option to select or add artificial players

[teal osprey]

I can only encourage you to consider people’s preferences and ask around what they are 🙂

Most people value a convenient game over lobby sim all things being equal

[vapid geode]

Well, at least you saw the dividing still affecting it now. As said, if people wants a bad MM with no balance and long queues that is possible, the non possible is the one without stacks and skill balance

[muted trout]

I am going to further the discussion by stating we need a matchmaker.

[stray quarry]

Thanks for finally coming to this realization.
People want that imperfect mm. Because lobby sim doesn't allow you to avoid stacks and get real skill balance either. If the player pool can't give it, neither system can.
So yeah we want the more convenient way to get into games. Regarding team killers. Well Eugen is sanctioning those if you report them and you can't really avoid them in 10v10 either as they can follow you into lobbies and there is usually only 1 lobby filling up.
Still somehow more people play 10v10 than lobby sim 2v2-4v4.

[devout geyser]

No you don‘t get it he is Albert Einstein hinself and you all „can‘t read“ (even though, as you correctly said, he isn‘t even capable of providing a source that backs up his point, because HIS OWN source takes MM as a given lol)

[lofty spear]

we want a matchmaker bozo

[earnest orchid]

Fuel the matchmakers with the juice of the matchmaker deniers!

[broken sand]

MM:
1v1 ranked conquest
2v2 conquest
10v10 conquest, destruction

3v3 and 4v4 custom lobbies only. That's 4 queue pools, you will face stacks if you select 2v2. That's just how the game is, in fact a proper algorithm will pair premades or players of high skill and send lower levels to randoms in the ideal scenario like on a weekend. If 10v10 becomes too stacked, then force balancing, if you have 10 friends you can handle having yourselves split up because 10v10 is not a competitive mode

[vapid geode]

without skill based, assuming that most players have similar ping and that all players online right now are playing MP (and that lobbies for those other game modes don't get any player of those in MP) and an avg of 35 minutes per game, you would need around 6,5 minutes to fill a 10v10. If that is the time people wants and skill (low levels and high level being treated as the same) is not an issue, it is more or less what you will get (and no way to dodge a premade team, a teamkiller, someone that autosurrenders, etc)

[broken sand]

Premade teams? Balance sides or force side balance. It's an issue even with lobbies. Tea killers or people who disconnect or surrender early? That's an issue with the game not with match making in any way. They can change their name, avatar, etc. or but a new key. These problems are irrelevant to matchmaking and are solved independently

Matchmaker provides quality control not dictated by groups of people rummaging though official lobbies hijacking them with stacks. Matchmaking is a possible solution to this problem that has kept noobs away from the game since wargame

[ivory steppe]

Upvoted specifically because of Gonzo.

He should learn to comprehend his own source material.

Also, matchmaker might make me more inclined to play PvP, since I won't have to sort through rigged elitist Discord stacks to have a snowballs chance in hell of playing just to get stomped in a match which teaches me nothing.

[broken sand]

Yeah this RD business of joining some third party Al Assad server to have some form of janky side balance isn't AAA game experience. If you want to stack a 10v10, make a custom lobby, there should be a limit to stack size if queuing for 10v10 or they should have an algorithm that makes a call on whether or not to split stack based on its perceived side balance (hidden elo and levels, winrate)

[vapid geode]

You didn't follow me there, lobbies let you kick that guy once you know it, matchmaker doesn't + force side blance and not allowing friends to play together isnnot a solution (but even if done, it just needs more time to balance it)

[lofty spear]

Even if EUG didn't ban him, he has unfortunately stated about wanting nothing to do with warno

[stray quarry]

I forgot that WG RD already confirmed that the community even takes a jank mm like the Al assad system over the basic lobby sim. Imagine Eugen cutting out the jank and making it a clean MM...

[royal fjord]

I don't think Bashar's system was a matchmaker per se. I think it was more of an auto balancer.
It recorded everyone's ELO on Bashar's server(s?) and adjusted the teams accordingly.
It had a few rudimentary user inputs, which allowed the player to set a side preference (max 5) and/or a team preference to stick together with friends.
One could also check their own ELO and the team's average, so that wasn't hidden.

Personally I loved the system and played on those servers a lot. It was a heck of a lot better than nothing.
Cheaters and griefers got banned within a day or two, that's the benefit of an active admin.

[stray quarry]

Well yeah its a makeshift MM that still forces you to join the lobby etc.
But it shows that people want to get away from eugens lobby sim.
Even with rudementary, clunky things like the al assad servers
Cheaters and Griefers get banned in WARNO by eugen too after reporting.
So that part is fine too. Though it takes a week or so sometimes.

[teal osprey]

WRD had a 3rd party binary patch to the dedicated server that allowed chat commands; this is unfortunately not possible in Warno unless Eugen add the feature or someone else mods it. https://github.com/wargame-mods/wargame-server

And yeah such servers need to track elo separately; which is strickly worse than having access to the global elo that Eugen records (the MM API has been closed off)

[jaunty river]

What was this assad system 😂?

[royal fjord]

Bashar Al Assad is a user/player, who runs dedicated servers on that game. Afaik they are the only servers to feature the mod above.

I basically mained his servers back when was my main game.

And since he is the only or the most popular one, who runs that kind of system in EUG games, I guess that's why they call it the Assad system.

[lofty spear]

There are other lobbies but they're usually rigged or stacked
Assad has a 5 per matchmaker "team" limit so it's harder to do

[ionic robin]

Yes, please. I would like to play casual team games of Warno without having to make it a whole production.

[stray quarry]

Tried to get into a 3v3 or 4v4 last night.
Got kicked from the ones I tried joining and nobody joined the one I host.
10/10 experience.

[torpid orchid]

Post southag, it likely that a new roadmap with upcoming DLCs will be hinted at. A QoL roadmap for new features, esp THIS ONE would be very welcome as well. Even if it still ways away I think the playerbase would be happy to see that a matchmaker revamp was on the todo list , vs hoping / wishing if its happening or not.

[earnest orchid]

EUGEN GIVE ME BACK MY MATCHMAKER

[noble path]

https://tenor.com/view/dancingdog-gif-9655448

[earnest orchid]

hahaha bot you have no power here, putin gaysex f35 MATCHMAKER

[noble path]

https://tenor.com/view/quagsire-pokemon-wooper-huh-huhh-gif-10333941026352545707

-# what

[stray quarry]

another 2v2 practice day another 30 min + lobby sim

[muted trout]

I literally just shelved the game again for now lel. I do a 4 hour session - 1 hour is gameplay 3 is waiting. Or I have to do 10v10 which is 🤢

[lofty spear]

10v10 can be fun with friends

[muted trout]

A lot of things can be fun if I am not pushed to them forcefully. I will and I can play 10v10 when I want to. The problem here is I don't have a choice.

inb4 go play 1v1 - the same.

[lofty spear]

Oh I agree with you on all counts, 1v1 is just sweats

[muted trout]

I actually caved in, 3 weeks ago was like - ok fuck it 1v1 it is. Go in, matchmake, match is found, deploy - guy cheeses me with literally 20 helis.

[lofty spear]

Lemme guess 35th

[muted trout]

can't remember actually, was weeks ago.

[stray quarry]

efficient sweating is what separates us from other animals, so we gotta use it 😉

[simple socket]

@stray quarry pls tell eugen how important a matchmaker is, i have 3 friends that prefer to play BA cause warno is a lobby simulator

[stray quarry]

I mean I literrally did in here and many other times but thanks for the ping xD

[lilac quarry]

This change could bring life to the game once again

[muted trout]

Another day another reminder for a matchmaking system. Thanks.

[inland hamlet]

We really want 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 ranked, it would be fun

[stray quarry]

yeah, I enjoy 2v2 a big more than even 1v1, but the lobby sim is killing it for me. 🙁

[teal osprey]

Warno will crush BA if it had a team MM

[jovial junco]

I feel like the soft lane system + the fact that most maps are made for 3-5 players really does make 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 perfect. (in the interest of time and a solid playerbase I would be perfectly fine with just 3v3 or 4v4 ranked and scrapping the other two)

I'm just a 1v1 frog but I definitely do not envy team players as it is now. Team games with bans, map picks etc in some kind of moba style could genuinely be huge for this game. The RTS market has never really managed to innovate on the "search for a 1v1 game and match up with random faction/div/whatever" formula. WARNO does have the opportunity to do that

[granite shore]

Age of Empires II provides the perfect model/example for that

[inland hamlet]

Any chance to get this topic addressed by devs? I think this is the number 1 request by the community at the moment, but I don’t think I’ve heard Eugen address this topic yet.

[jaunty river]

U cant expect rational thinking by a clinical regarded company

[simple socket]

I fucking love lobby Sim!

[earnest orchid]

Give me matchmaker or give me death 😤

[hollow hinge]

That's the problem, trying to satisfy everyone and ending up satisfying no-one. Eugen should ditch 10v10 and have just two game modes: 1v1 and 5v5, both joined using a queue. Lobbies should just be for custom games and shouldn't be the main way people play. If there are no 10v10 servers most of the people playing that game mode would play 5v5 instead, and end up having more fun.

[quasi vessel]

Or stop playing because they don't want the responsibility of a smaller team.

[hollow hinge]

Possibly, but I think far more have stopped playing because they can’t find a game.

Honestly they could probably just get rid of 1v1 as well and just make it a custom game mode for tournaments, and force all the sweats to play in teams.

[quasi vessel]

I wasn't playing back then but I do wonder if 10v10 has always been a thing. I seen conversations about how wonderful and special 10v10 is. 10v10 is unique to Eugen and it's popularity has always been astonishing.

[lucid scaffold]

Eugen should consider to take deeper inspiration from SD2's UI design, it looks good and gives off those ww2 vibes good enough, current warno UI is diabolical 🙏

[quasi vessel]

Yeah, i have been asking for a port of the SD2 UI since warno came out.

[vapid geode]

That is true, with low numbers they need to take some hard decisions to make it work

[jovial junco]

It's not a very fashionable approach these days to put high expectations on people. Nid is right that some people would be scared off with the responsibility of a smaller team. But frankly, how is that different from a moba or any ultra conventional MP game today?
If twelve year old school kids can handle having complete responsibility over a fortnite run, then WARNO players who are often grown ass adults can absolutely handle a 5v5. The question is really just, would it yield you more players than you lost? I for one absolutely think the long term yield in players would be positive. 10v10 just feels like a dead end.

Sometimes, the kindest thing you can do for either a person or several people is not what they say they want but what they actually need. 10v10 players need 5v5 with div and map- pick and bans and a ranked ladder.

[devout geyser]

That‘s completely insane. 10v10 is one of biggest USPs for Eugen, hell will freeze over before they remove it, and rightfully so.

This isn‘t a zero-sum game. You don‘t need to remove one mode to be allowed to add another one.

[jovial junco]

I don't disagree, removing it is risky. They would probably prefer to settle with how it is even though there's massive room for improvement.
No one would argue with it being a unique selling point. We're saying they should throw it out and get a better one.

With that said the amount of players at any given time is always limited, that's kind of the definition of zero sum.
But I'm confident enough that 5v5 would be such a superior game mode that I would be fine with just introducing it and seeing what happens.
If we enable people to queue with some overlay that shows how many people have been found for the game, it could offer a stark
contrast to 10v10, you only need to find half the amount of players. And if you get to have a SDLeague style pick and ban system, it
would be a no brainer

[hollow hinge]

Except that you do. 10v10 needs to die if multiplayer is to thrive. It really is a zero sum game because the community is so small.

What Eugen could do is have "team game weeks" or "team game weekends" where the only way to play is 5v5, or 3v3, or whatever, and everyone is funnelled into that specific game mode. Then the rest of the time it can be like normal.

So maybe 10v10 doesn't need to die, but maybe it needs to go into hibernation from time to time, like 1v1.

[vapid geode]

I think you don't get how matchmaking and game numbeers work if you think you don't need to remove or downgrade stuff in low population games

[hollow hinge]

I am astonished people don't get this since it is totally obvious

[quasi vessel]

Matchmaker would hardly dent the 10v10 player population. Might get a lot of the ranked players and all the people currently trying to have team games.

How many people that are playing SP and would would like a matchmaker is just unknown.

Improving the skimish AI and the polishing the AG campaigns would be a much better use of their time. That is 85% of their player base and the obvious place to grow their market share.

[lofty spear]

If anything, getting 10v10 going should be the job of player modders and coders, not Eugen
Bashar turned out wonderfully, it's half the reason that Wargame is even still alive

[quasi vessel]

Yup, requires commitment and private servers though, unless Eugen decides to do it themselves.

[earnest orchid]

Running a team game event tomorrow with 30+ people signed up. This is after yesterday’s 2v2 tournament and is an entirely different group of people who just want casual games. Sure wish we could all jump in the matchmaker and get some warno 😂

[fierce silo]

like you can have a 1v1 and a 3v3/4v4 queue with the 10v10 eugen servers all in the same environment. the bar for non 10v10 team games is incredibly low like a 10min queue would be seen as a godsend by the people who play them. Would stacks and balancing be a bit janky, sure but its better than playing lobby sim for hours on end or bugging people in a discord for an in house etc. Sure 10v10 lobbies will fill up slowly and ranked 1v1 queues might go from like 3min to 4-5min but thats small numbers compared to the 10-20mins of waiting you have to do for a 2v2/3v3/4v4 etc.

Like I’ll agree that eugen will have to pick one size for their mid size team game queue as warno can’t really hold a 2v2/3v3/4v4 queue all at once with its current player count, but acting like it can’t support one of those game sizes as a queue is kinda disconnected from whats the scene is right now.

[rugged finch]

Me and my buddies have started to play 10v10 more and more because getting 3v3 and 4v4 lobbies to fill up takes so long whereas 10v10 fills up and starts quickly. The lobby sim kills the fun. And 10v10 plays completely different, but it's a choice between that or no game or trying to wait and hope for your lobby to fill up eventually.

We want and need the matchmaker.

[silent ruin]

I think the problem with 2v2,3v3,4v4 matchmaking is that most players in that mode want to know the skill level of the opposing team so they don’t waste their time. The WARNO community already struggles with players avoiding each other, and if the choice is between going in blind or hosting a custom lobby to find an even match, most people will choose the more balanced option.

Total War has a 2v2 matchmaker with a much larger player base, yet almost no one uses it—players still prefer custom lobbies. You really need a massive player population for matchmaking to work properly, and WARNO just isn’t anywhere near Total War’s size.

What I would like to see is a better, more robust 1v1 matchmaker. Like other RTS games have.

[quasi vessel]

Proper match makers do that though. Back when I played CoH the matchmaker did match you against similar level people

Bashar does that in Red Dragon with Eugen code.

[fierce silo]

Like I wanna say without looking at the numbers for exacts details that Warhammer 3 had a bigger player base than like aoe4 or aoe2 who have matchmakers that are fairly popular and used a lot. Population isn’t the be all end all for matchmakers as stuff like Coh surely has a lower playerbase than TWW3 etc. And its hard to argue that people would be more willing to sit 20-30+ min for a team game so they can “balance” it over queue in a 10-15min queue and getting a game. That and most people balanced on level which can be wildly inaccurate of player skill etc.

[silent ruin]

You’re right that population isn’t the only factor in whether a matchmaker gets used, and there are definitely examples like AoE2/4 and CoH that have functioning systems with smaller overall numbers than WH3. But I think the key difference is that those games have long-established competitive cultures built around ranked play. Players expect to queue for serious matches, and the devs structured their systems around that from day one.

WARNO’s player culture is almost the opposite:
People overwhelmingly prefer curating their own matches—even at the cost of slower setup—because they want greater control over balance, map, and skill level. That’s why even with WH3’s much larger population, its 2v2 matchmaker sees almost no use; people still choose lobbies instead. The same dynamic already shows up here.

It could be a thing for the next game, but not for WARNO, which has been out for so many years now.

[devout geyser]

If the community would be overwhelmingly in favor of lobbies, this thread wouldn't be the most upvoted one.

[silent ruin]

I think most people would like it, so would I, but if they added it now, I don't think the 2v2 matchmaker would be used at all after a week.

[quasi vessel]

Well Eugen, if they responded to this sort of thing, would say that their weekly player numbers are between 20,000 and 40,000 so 83 is in fact still a minority. 10v10 is their sacred cow and they will not do anything to threaten it.

[quasi vessel]

Yeah that is a distinct possibility. Bashar style lobbies would be popular and could be introduced to 10v10, once they became established then smaller lobbies down to 3v3 could be added.

The idea is to not force anyone anywhere. Give them options while leaving their base options unchanged.

[jaunty river]

Imo opinion eugen has one last opportunity to get out of the hellhole that was this season by introducing MM and launching a free week with streamers that help set up 4v4 and 3v3 tables. This would encourage new players to join the game and learn the basics.

[hollow hinge]

I would agree with you that most people want balanced matches.

However, the existing lobby system doesn't usually provide this. Heck, usually it doesn't even provide matches at all.

And the custom lobbies are too carefully curated: one side picks a map, settings, and divisions. And it decides when the game starts. That side may have spent ages optimising their decks. And if you join the match against them, you may or may not be given a chance to actually choose the deck you want to play.

The best solution, very obviously, is to have only ONE ranked game mode at a time, and to dedicate all of Eugen's servers to that mode. The game mode could be anything from 1v1 to 10v10 and it could change from day to day or from week to week. But while the game mode is 4v4, your only option would be to queue for 4v4. You could play any other game mode as a custom game but not in ranked. And apart from when 10v10 is the game mode, no-one could join a 10v10 match.

Whatever the ranked mode, it also should include features like seeing the map you are going to play before choosing your division, and possibly (at least in 1v1) also including a ban system. But this is all icing on the top.

[rugged finch]

The issue with this is that if you can't queue as a team, or you don't have a team to play with, it's going to be a coin toss who you get as teammates and individual skill matters less. A whole season must be 3v3 for example to get comparable results - win rates may change wildly between 1v1 and 4v4 - and even then if you're not playing with a team, the individual skill level isn't really measured well. For ranked, it must be a level playing field IMO, either queue only as a team or only as an individual.

[hollow hinge]

As for the possibility of queuing as a team, that is a basic feature of any team matchmaker. But if you seek to impose any rules and restrictions on how you are allowed to find a match (like "only queue as a team" or "only queue as an individual") all you are going to do is reduce the number of people who use the matchmaker. That is a very bad idea unless your goal is to ensure that the matchmaker fails.

There is no doubt that my proposed solution would result in many unbalanced team games. However, that is not an argument against it, since the current lobby system also results in many unbalanced games.

The main reason for a matchmaker is to make finding a game easier. A secondary goal is to have more balanced games, but that is only going to happen gradually over time as people's ELO changes, and it is never going to be perfect because ELO is not a perfect measure of one's ability, especially in a team game. It is certainly going to be a much better measure than player level (which can be changed anyway).

The best way to ensure a suboptimal multiplayer experience in Warno is to keep doing exactly what the developers have been doing. But another way to ensure a ***bad ***multiplayer experience would be to just add a team game matchmaker, while leaving all the other game modes the same. That would be a guaranteed fail.

The best solution would be to have a matchmaker with a single game mode and to try to funnel everyone into that game mode. The game mode itself can change from time to time but it must always be just one game mode. Otherwise you will just split the small Warno user base and noone will find a game in a reasonable time.

[sweet otter]

This is only the very active discord part of the Community of.. What... 1000 people? And warno is sold >300.000 times according to some sources... So it's the 1% talking here... Not th broad player base

[devout geyser]

And what exactly does this mean then? That Eugen shouldn‘t listen to the people that actually play the game, and rather to the people that don‘t care or have already left to play other games?

I don‘t see the point of discussing the opinions of an undefined group that we have no information about.

[sweet otter]

Maybe it would be reasonable to make a questionnaire ingame for 1 week to a month to actually get the real players ideas and wishes

[devout geyser]

Okay, and you expect the players in the game to prefer the lobby system? Is there any actual reason for this assumption?

We are not talking about some crazy new feature, we are talking about the industry standard for 20 years for Christ‘s sake.

[vapid geode]

You fail to see that it being an old festure and it being easy to implement without big changes (like.limit the amount of game modes) is not the same

[earnest orchid]

m a t c h m a k e r

[lilac quarry]

up

[earnest orchid]

Match me like one of your French girls

[faint needle]

Lmao protoss this is based this issue plagued sd2 at the end and why i stopped playing eugen games online sadly (that and the lack of map veto system)... Its the one thing with deck system that BA has over warno imo never too late to add it. More unbalanced games are better than no games because of long waiting time. If i can play 2 3 unbalanced games in the time I wait for 1 to fill up I would play online again.

[faint needle]

I kind of aggree (10vs10s are not fun except tactical and still) but that kind of hard decisions is only possible for their next game I think.

[quasi vessel]

10v10 is Eugen's signature mode, they will never get rid of it.

[royal fjord]

I wonder if EUG's next game will include 10v10 matchmaking...

[quasi vessel]

The previous 5 haven't

[lofty spear]

If you don't like them you can just not play them. There is no need to make the game worse for anyone who does

[faint needle]

Regardless more communication from eugen on that matter would help

[quasi vessel]

Regarding what?

[quasi vessel]

This entire conversation is player generated. Their one attempt at a matchmaker was 2 games back. Their player numbers are currently down because of the black screen issue so they will not even mention anything because nothing positive can come from it.

People with friends play team games, randos play skirmish or 10v10 and tryhards play ranked. It is the holy trinity of Eugen games.

[vapid geode]

"we don't get enough player to make a MM that works, and if we did, we would have to sacrifice some game modes that may include your favourite one, hope you like it!"

[quasi vessel]

BA losing 90% of their player count is a good example of how not to run an RTS. The boys at Eugen want to eat and so the frustrations of the yappy minority who live on their discord is largely discounted for their own sanity and the good of the game.

[lilac quarry]

okay, so fair trade 2x2 in exchange for 10x10

https://tenor.com/view/brad-pitt-deal-yeah-right-agreed-i-would-make-that-deal-gif-15679299

[quasi vessel]

10v10 is the majority of the PvP player base, and it is extremely popular and the reason most people even play PvP in Eugen games. Any idiot can join a 10v10 and by all accounts any idiot does. But they bought the game and they are entitled to a mode that is accessible as 10v10.

[lilac quarry]

10x10 is so popular, because there is no 2x2/3x3 matchmaker. 1x1 is not an option for a majority

[quasi vessel]

That is actually a good point, the obvious thing to get rid of is ranked, they will all play 2v2s whereas most 10v10 players would just stop playing if 10v10 disappeared.

[faint needle]

I did not say remove 10vs10s( they dont do it for me and other players) sadly I think mm can only be made for their next game

[vapid geode]

I think you mistake what a matchmaking does with how a higher number of players reduce waiting times. Both a lobby or a mm system will get similar waiting times with a small playerbase. While convenient, a matchmaking won't have a magical effect on player numbers

[lilac quarry]

so we have to think about it for millennia without doing anything?

[vapid geode]

doubt you can do anything about it, unless you can get 5k players on the game. Same as how I doubt eugen can really do anything that really improve the system without that player number

[lilac quarry]

its been told already, that for lots of people, find both 1vs1 MM and 10vs10 game modes as not convenient. Yes, 2x2 MM is not a magic pill that fixes anything, but still it easier to get lobby filled by match maker, than making people to join your own lobby

[vapid geode]

the point is not that matchmaking is bad, it isn't, but that if you have problems getting players in lobbies, you will still have problems getting players in matchmaking. The game searching method isn't as relevant as the amount of players available. Ofc you can try and remove all options but one to get all players into a single queue, but that will always make people leave if the option isn't one they like

[broken sand]

Gonzo you've taught me life is a marathon not a sprint

[earnest orchid]

Kill 10v10…

… to add 20v20!!!

[quasi vessel]

kill ranked to add 2v2 matchmaking.

[earnest orchid]

Kill ranked 🙏

[ruby anchor]

kill the only fun mode 🙏

[earnest orchid]

team games will still be there?

[ruby anchor]

boring

[earnest orchid]

Begone ranked thot!

[ruby anchor]

no

[severe knot]

Gonzo is a Eugene plant to give them an excuse to not make match maker

[vapid geode]

I am glad you randomly thought about me one wednesday, but I am not interested

[earnest orchid]

I beg of you matchmaker

[deft prism]

I start a thread talking about manual matchmaking
https://discord.com/channels/471232139661410305/1466033963473567816

[stray quarry]

interesting idea, but likeyl just as hard to make as just a normal matchmaker 😄 Here is hoping eugen hears us at least in their next title ^^

[lilac quarry]

spoiler alert

[stray quarry]

spoiler, a company that has been making games for 20 years will do another game at some point ^^

[lilac quarry]

but if the new game is not predicted to be soon, no one talks about it

like imagine you saying the same thing in 2022

and if to be more clear, it was a joke 🙂

[stray quarry]

I did in 2022 😉 was hoping for a sd3 with warno graphics ever since 😄

[lilac quarry]

https://tenor.com/view/water-spray-stop-sprinkle-water-gif-12639877674493562634

until we get alternative version of OIF in Eugenverse, i am not ready to see sd3