Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.


Matchmaking needed asap

GerryGamer7GerryGamer7 Munich, Bavaria | GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 430
Hi guys,

I am a below average player. Nevertheless iI usually have a lot of fun. :):D

I do not play very often, so I could check: I have played 18 of my last 20 matches vs. players with 40.000 points or more.
This is beyond frustrating. I am down to 20K now, I dont care about the points, but it is a pain to ALWAYS play much better players.

I play chess also and matchmaking there is absolutely the rule there. I dont understand why this is impossible to implement into quick battles. what do you think? thx
No matter how negative i may sound, i love three kingdoms.


  • OrkLadsOrkLads Registered Users Posts: 1,875
    Been requested many times before but apparently the player base isn't currently big enough to support it through QB. It seems that player base is growing significantly due to Youtubers & CA supporting tournaments, so that may come in the future.

    In the meantime, I think the best way to consistently get good games is add people as friends after you have a good game with them. Then you can create a lobby with people at your level and play some best of 5's or best of 3 etc.
  • DracoknightDracoknight Registered Users Posts: 281
    edited November 2018
    Its a standard catch22 with a bit of a negative feedback loop and may i even say corperate mindset.

    So CAs explaination to the terrible multiplayer infrastructure is due to the lack of players right?
    However the lack of new incomming and returning players often is the fault of a few points:
    - Buggy infrastructure that often disrupt the flow of the game as you often have to restart or fix the game to even be able to be matched (The "found game" bug in particular) and the crashes that happens in post game.

    - Unfair match system that basically clash newbies and veterans alike into a mess where i met Ninjahund in my 12th game and similar scenarios where a player can possibly in his first game meet top rankers.

    - A very limited campagin where only 2 people can be allowed, if time between turns is the issue remember people have been playing games like Civilization and even End of Legends in massive games that goes on for days, and honestly some of the same mindsets can be found in TW too, hell its a option.

    - And then you also have CA themselves proclaiming they are mainly a single player experience giving it the impression that they have abandoned MP, similar to the saying of "Lack of players". Who would want to join a playmode that is apparently abandoned by the devs themselves?

    Hey, i would have played this game more and in longer spurts if the game actually allowed me to play more than 2-3 games before having to use 5-10mins or more making sure i am not getting bugged out of matchmaking.

    MP is scary for newcommers as you never have a "clean" easing into the multiplayer as you more or less get dumped in with the rest of the population, hell even a games-played matchmaking that expands every 2 or 3 mins of searching would be better than whatever the current system is. (There is better systems out there ofcourse, but it is merely an example of one).

    So with CAs streams, Online personality clashes, dev games and a overall revamp of the multiplayer infrastructure... as in "effort". The multiplayer scene actually would have a foundation to grow on if that was the case, but you cant just do one without the other as the infrastructure is just too bad to even support proper growth of such a community.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 10,261
    Well at least 13.1% players had won 10 multiplayer battles now, up from 7% earlier in the year, so MP is on the raise.
  • SarmatiannsSarmatianns Registered Users Posts: 4,581
    That might also be campaign multiplayer... , but, yeah, still counts.

    On the whole, yeah, there's simply not enough active players to have meaningful matchmaking at the moment. Being paired with a good opponent is better than no opponent.

    And CA has slowly started supporting multiplayer more. Kudos for that. Yes, those are baby steps but we all started that way, and I think it is the right way to do it - continuous incremental small improvements are better than one big one.
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Registered Users Posts: 5,836
    Some match making would be possible for sure with any number of players, just give it 30 seconds or one minute before the release valves are opened and any match accepted.
  • MarkroxMarkrox Registered Users Posts: 207
    The multiplayer side of the game is still absolutely barebones, despite it growing in popularity greatly since WH1 launched.

    Match found bug is apparently unfixable.
    No match making.
    Ladder is the most basic implementation I've ever seen in a game. No ranks, seasons, decays, resets or automated tournaments. Nothing.
    Queuing with a high rank feels pointless because of you losing far, far more points than you win.

    That's not even mentioning patches being tied to DLC creating stale metas because patches can be half a year apart, the whole game suffers from that.

    Throw the MP scene a bone.
  • SarmatiannsSarmatianns Registered Users Posts: 4,581
    I think there's a difference between balance and developing team wants to do, and what they're allowed to do by those who look at the numbers...

    Not literally 'what they are allowed' more like what they're given the budget for. When you have p2p connections, there are zillions of things that can go wrong. I'm sure if they had dedicated servers, it would be much less of a hassle, but that requires budget for infrastructure and maintenance, and they probably don't have that.

    MP is on the rise, but it is still a minority of players. Slowly improving it is probably the safest way to go.
  • MarkroxMarkrox Registered Users Posts: 207
    I'm very aware, but don't completely agree. The Warhammer games have sold extremely well and made CA a lot of money, yet this area of the game has seen no tangible addition despite that. Players shrugging off Warhammer multiplayer being undeveloped and making excuses for them is only going to allow CA to continue as they are. The only chance of WH3 launching with anything more than WH2 in the MP department is by making posts highlighting these issues.

    The majority of points in my post can be implemented without dedicated servers, that's not what I was saying the game needed (although now you mention it.... :) )
  • AIMA_DracklorAIMA_Dracklor Registered Users Posts: 4,467
    Yeah and its quite anoying, I am a top 100 player with 95% winrate, but i get a lot of games against people that donc have any formations or that are staying in blocks, charging cav in my halberds etc...

    Like its ok, I won, but I feel bad for the guy, plus there is no challenge in it. And I cant afford to lose the gsme or ill loose like 3 000 points

  • GerryGamer7GerryGamer7 Munich, Bavaria | GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 430
    I have registered for a FREE chess site recently. I am getting opponents only within my reach. I can work myself up easily. So is it technically so difficult to check:

    if opponent has same range of plus/minus 9999 points > create lobby
    {else search further
    {try five times, time limit 60 seconds_
    [end of cde]

    is that line of code so difficult, time consuming and therefore expensive for a company that succeded to establish a CI like Total War? I would take the 60 seconds more wait any time. cheers

    No matter how negative i may sound, i love three kingdoms.
  • GerryGamer7GerryGamer7 Munich, Bavaria | GermanyRegistered Users Posts: 430
    I have begun to play chess again. On lichess. The match making system is so good, I only play against players within of 10% of my ELO. Result: 4 wins-2 ties-1 loss today. And I am not very good. So much fun.
    On ladder I play almost exlusively vs. top 1000. With more than 40K points. Result: 2 wins-18 losses ...
    I do not care for the points, but I want to have a bit of a fun. So sad. Warhammer is my favourite game of all times.

    No matter how negative i may sound, i love three kingdoms.
  • UniverseBearUniverseBear Registered Users Posts: 123
    To make MP viable they need to:

    -fix match found bug
    -blind race picks
    -a system to force fights in the long game. Maybe a capture point that opens up at some point (to combat drawkiters)
    -match making
    -auto loss for people who disconnect or leave lobby and auto win for the remaining player
    -some kind of progression, even if it's just unlocking cosmetics for units like they did back in the dow2 days.
  • WitchbladeWitchblade Registered Users Posts: 908
    Even the most basic of matchmaking system would be a dramatic improvements indeed. Right now, multiplayer is quite unforgiveable on new players. I remember I lost probably the first 100 battles. Then you get drawkited a few times and I can't blame players for giving up on multiplayer. It can be as simple as: for the first 20 seconds, anyone with fewer than 10 wins first tries to be matched up to anyone else with fewer than 10 wins. If no match can be found, do a universal search like now.

    There could also simply be an option to tick to first try to find someone within 10k points of yourself. This would aid both beginners and competitive play. Beating camping Dwarf noobs gets old quickly.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file