That’s why there can be be only 2 players avoided per person and why it’s only limited (7 days). It doesn’t want to act like a punishment.
It works like a punishment only if a considerably large amount of players chose to reserve one of the two spots in their “Avoided Teamates” section within a week to avoid you.
At that moment, 2 things can happen.
1.Tens of games are not happening because you are prioritised over the ones avoiding you.
2.Tens of games are happening.
I would chose the second option to be fair.
Rather than affecting tens/hundreds of players negatively, it will affect only one: the player that made himself an unwanted teammate.
In conclusion, it’s better this way. In my opinion, it’s fair and logical.
I’m not sure what gave the impression I was trying to say it was slow or couldn’t handle multiple calculations? What I’m saying is that we do not know how the priorities are set up. There is the potential for a complicated web of A avoiding B avoiding C etc, and then for any of those players in that chain to avoid another player, etc.
Only if there are enough players at that SR range to provide effectively unlimited candidates. We also don’t know if it would select P1, find that others in that SR range have avoided them, then discard them in favor of making a match without them.
This makes the assumption that the game would consider this to be a balanced enough match to commence. There is no such guarantee. And it also sounds like (from what the devs themselves have said) that avoidance is given an absolute priority over every other matchmaking concern.
This last thought is a bit tangential but: I wonder how this will affect the actual match quality for those that have their queue times raised. Will it create fair matches or will that priority start to unravel?
That is how almost all MM is setup.
Avoidance changes nothing in the long run in terms of balance because the player pool is extremely high. In top 500 you may see abuse but lower ELO’s it isn’t a problem.
It won’t Discard.
It will keep them on their own “Temporary Team” until the list becomes populated. It doesn’t need to find a “Perfect match”
Once the team is populated an “Average MMR” can be set. Then a new team can be formed with similar enough average for the game to be considered “Balanced”
In competitive things have to be more accurate - but at the same time it can “preset” specific ELO by taking average from player pool ahead of time.
If MM knows the current pool of available players average is 2000 MMR. It simply has to shuffle the team until that average is hit based on que priority.
If a player cannot be put on a team because a person of higher priority blocked him or her, than that person gets placed on the next time and filled as players who can match with them become available.
The priority is essentially “Equal” but it may feel like the “blocked” person is longer because others are getting into games ahead of them. This is only because all the other players have blocked that player hence they are kept on different teams that get filled faster.
Keep in mind there is a limit to the amount of time a player will be kept in a “temporary team” before disbanding and trying again. This is something you will notice often when it tries to fill in backfill players.
How can you be confused? The avoided player get down-prioritized while the one avoiding him is in searching for a game. This works both ways, so if they avoid eachother they will each be met with 50% of the “penalty”.
Do you mind if I ask if you have worked on MM systems in online games before? Or if you happen to have some special access to the way that the Overwatch matchmaking is set up?
While I can see a lot of what you’re saying as reasonable assumptions I’m just wondering if there is anything specific which causes you to have that opinion?
Doesn’t that assume everything else is equal? That they are both the same exact MMR and that there are two potential well-balanced teams that can be formed with both of those players on separate teams?
I could see that working out, just by circumstance, to still have a disproportionate effect on one or the other.
Yes of course it assumes everything else is equal. If more people avoid you, there’s longer queue times. I litterally don’t understand how it’s possible to be confused about this?
There is no flaws with the system. Not yet at least since it’s only possible to have 2 blocked.