Matchup Trackers and the Matchmaking Algorithm

Mort’s announcement that riot is now allowing matchup trackers has sparked a lot of discussion about their value and the overall way match making works in a game of TFT. Mort’s comments as well as discussion in the AMA seem to indicate he is unhappy with the degree to which the matchmaking algorithm has been “solved”. He has also indicated that he would consider adding more randomness to it, as a way to force you to account for all 7 players instead of just the 3 you would to now.

I have a lot of thoughts on this but let’s start with the use of trackers. I am not going to deny that using a tracker gives you an advantage, yes it gives you no information that couldn’t be accomplished with a pen and paper or a notepad app. Hell it only confirms info you could theoretically remember. But it does make the process way simpler and does free up time that could be used for other things. Is it necessary to get better, absolutely not but it is a nice QOL addition? Should they be allowed? I think so, deck trackers have been used in Hearthstone forever and no one seems to care, which is providing a pretty similar service, but it would be nice if Riot was completely clear as to what is allowed and what isn’t. The best solution is to build tracking into the UI itself. Give everyone the info and just let people play. Riot did this with dragon timers, which might have been a small skill expression in very low Elo, but is it an interesting one? No. It feels like pointless busy work.

The fundamental problem here is that the match making algorithm was unnecessarily obfuscated from the start. There was no reason to ever pretend that it didn’t work exactly the way it does from the start. The idea that this is a “hidden mechanic” that people shouldn’t really have full understanding of makes no sense. Mort has talked about how the algorithm is “solved” but it just isn’t that complicated. You can’t face someone twice within 4 rounds (until people start dying). That’s it, its not complicated. If this was just told to players in say the tutorial or in a fact sheet provided by riot, then this would never have been an issue. We would all just know how it works. The problem comes from lower ELO players, simply not knowing that there is a, at least somewhat, deterministic way to see who you can fight each round. Therefore, there is this big “skill gap”, but rather than an interesting one you have to learn and get better at managing, it is a binary did you find out that there is an algorithm at all? but really is that the kind of thing that is interesting for people to learn? No it’s a check, did a friend tell you this when you learned the game or did you watch a YouTube video explaining it, this isn’t something you get better at, or can learn slowly. Take this barrier out of the game and just let people know that yes matchmaking works this way.

As for the matchmaking algorithm itself. The way that Mort has talked about adding to the randomness really scares me. First to make something absolutely clear, randomness is 100% necessary for TFT to function. Rather than taking way skill, much of the skill expression in TFT comes from managing randomness and accounting for the uncertainty it provides. I say to because this isn’t some rant about how RNG is bad and shouldn’t exist in a skill-based game, but rather to say that RNG should be used to facilitate skill expression. Mort’s comments scare me because, adding more RNG to matchmaking could easily take away skill rather than add to it, and that is the point where the randomness is bad.

The current system, ignoring the first 4 rounds and the extreme end game, has a fair amount of skill. You are accounting for 3 other players and need to maximize your change to win (or lose if streaking) against those 3 players. There is not time where you are guaranteed to fight someone, in fact there is never a time where you are more than 33% likely to face someone (again ignoring the super late game). Therefore, this idea that Mort has, where it is just an APM battle between 2 players is not something that is all that common. Yes, there are odd scenarios where 2 players are win streaking, and are laser focused on 1 possible fight, but that is rare, and requires both players to recognize that is the situation. (Again I am totally ignoring the late game, doing something about the actual 1v1 scenarios might be reasonable). With this, account for at most 3 system. You are forced, if you want to maximize the value of your positioning, to always think through the multiple people you can play. But you can make very real choices about what is the best way to play a particular situation. Is there 1 player in your pool who positioning can change the outcome of the fight? Great position around them and get a nice advantage. Odds aren’t bad that with 3 possible opponents, there is something you can do to really maximize you change of winning (or losing) all 3. Those small things add up and a skilled player will eek out advantages and see their win rate go up and their LP go up.

Let’s compare that with a hypothetical world where matchmaking was 100% random, you could, in theory play the same player every single match throughout the game. On paper this would require a ton of skill, every round you would need to account for all 7 boards rather than just 3, and a skillful player would pick the position that maximizes their chance to win against the most people. In practice, you would pick one general position and never move. Why, there is no way you as a player has time to scout all 7 people, process each of their boards and then make real positional adjustments. If each round lasted 5 minutes, sure? But 25 seconds not a chance.

On top of that, if positioning against 7 possible outcomes, the depth will almost certainly be removed. At least the way the game is designed now, there are too many positionally dependent units to account for. Diana, Vel’koz, Nocturn, Nunu, I could go on. All of these units require a decent amount of thought to play around. If you are looking at 3 players boards, ok fine. See what the biggest threat is and deal with that. Even if all 3 have very positional dependent boards, which is unlikely, you can reasonable look and say, player a is strongest, I should position around them, but hedge a little in order to not auto lose to player b. That is something you can process in a relatively short time. But with 7 there is just going to be too many. The change of playing any one player is now so low, 33% vs 14% that you just aren’t getting enough value to use specific position, as in positioning where you are stronger against 1 player but weaker against another. Sure there might be some very general things you can do, same side the 1 vel’koz player for instance, but 1 they could move, and 2 that implies there is only 1 vel’ and not 5 other boards with some big positioning threat. Better to just play the general all purpose position as on average, that will just be better.

Plus this isn’t a single player game. Everyone is moving their boards, with 3 potential opponents sure you can watch and make an educated guess as to where they will end up. But 7, again no just ignore it and hope for the best. Paradoxically By making you account for more players you are going end up accounting for less. Positioning is most fun when its subtle. Putting Lucian in this spot so it can get an angle to snipe the carry rather than getting stuck on a tank. That takes real experience to know how to do. But good luck finding moments like that if you need to look at all 7 players boards, with different types of carries, items etc.

Now this is obviously extreme, but it does to illustrate that a total lack of determinism in matchmaking takes away from the overall skill of the game. Most of the changes I’ve seen floated don’t really make sense. Keeping the system, we have but adding a small chance to get a totally random opponent, really does nothing. If the chance is low, then there really is no reason to ever think about it. Just play the same as now and hope you don’t get screwed by it. Since as proved above there is no way to properly position around 7 players, the objective right move is to simply ignore it you get no added value out of sweating it. Any basic expected value equation will say this, as at let’s say a 10% to give you a random opponent, you are only looking at a 1.4% change to play anyone not in your current pool. It would take a truly absurd scenario where you are actually getting value out of messing with your positioning for that 1.4% to face any 1 particular player. All you’ve done as add a small amount of variance to the game, which no one pays attention to. As I said before, RNG is there to facilitate skill, This would just be variance for the sake of variance, which why? If instead the chance was high, well then we have just moved into the scenario above, where seating positioning is meaningless and you should just pick the 1 position that is going to be generally good vs everything.

Is the current matchmaking system perfect, no but I hope if Riot decides to change it they do it in a way that add skill expression to the game and is upfront about what the new system is, rather than obfuscating it. People will figure it out, Competitive gamers are pretty good at tearing down an algorithm if it can give them an edge. Be upfront and we can discuss whether changes are good.