So, here we go. An ELO system turns out to be a very good predictor for CW games.

I have parsed all CW games and calculated the ELO of every single player. Then I used the standard ELO prediction equation to try to predict the outcome of all games from timeslots 5522-5569 (current season). I did not take free wins into account, only games that were actually played. The prediction system works pretty well, and here are the results:

[clan name]: [actual wins / actual losses], [predicted wins / predicted losses]
MASTER Clan: 4/3, 5/2
Python: 5/1, 4/2
Myth Busters: 184/89, 183/90
ONE!: 0/8, 3/5
Optimum: 189/91, 183/97
Vikinger: 1/0, 1/0
Please name your clan. Note: Your clan name cannot: 1/0, 1/0
Twelve: 1/1, 1/1
HAWKS: 10/5, 8/7
Nestlings: 1/0, 1/0
[Blitz]: 4/6, 3/7
Super Cute Marshmallow Gum Drop Warriors: 2/1, 2/1
The Fancy Dot ●: 7/5, 8/4
Lu Fredd: 2/6, 4/4
CORP: 4/1, 2/3
ズKING: 0/0, 0/0
ΑΘΕ: 1/2, 1/2
{101st}: 91/127, 91/127
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: 0/1, 1/0
♥ Fizzer Appreciation Group ♥: 0/0, 0/0
Elephants: 1/0, 1/0
Clan Italia: 9/19, 11/17
The Last Alliance: 74/103, 76/101
German Warlords: 4/3, 4/3
Orcas: 3/1, 2/2
M'Hunters: 46/53, 43/56
French Community: 1/3, 1/3
Prime: 132/136, 129/139
Undisputed: 13/9, 11/11
knyte club: 72/99, 74/97
Polish Eagles: 36/51, 40/47
Aviators: 2/1, 2/1
Hydra: 0/1, 0/1
CELLAR DWELLARS: 0/1, 0/1
Battle Wolves: 5/6, 4/7
Harmony: 113/117, 110/120
[V.I.W] Very Important Weirdos: 1/9, 3/7
Partisans: 2/5, 3/4
WORLD LEAGUE: 1/0, 1/0
Join if you're new!: 0/1, 0/1
The Saber-Rattlers: 1/0, 1/0
Le Furie Azzurre: 5/5, 4/6
After_Dark: 0/1, 0/1
Metal Gear: 11/20, 14/17
Varangian Guard: 6/4, 5/5
Devil's Soldiers: 3/1, 2/2
Celtica: 8/8, 6/10
Soldiers of Fortune: 0/2, 1/1
Ving: 14/21, 17/18
Red Rum: 2/4, 2/4
Flunky Fizzers: 6/9, 7/8
|WOW|: 2/4, 3/3
<--The Avengers-->: 0/1, 0/1
KILL ‘EM ALL: 10/17, 10/17
Cats: 10/10, 8/12
Brothers in Arms: 2/4, 2/4
Appalachian Warlight Federation: 0/1, 0/1
Special Forces: 1/3, 1/3
Camp Chaos: 0/1, 0/1
Full Gas: 0/0, 0/0
Raging Penguins: 0/1, 0/1
Polandball: 0/5, 1/4
🐉 Warzone Dragons 🐉: 0/1, 0/1
That 1 Clan: 0/3, 0/3
SPARTA: 1/7, 1/7
DARKLORDS: 0/1, 1/0
Clanzilla: 0/2, 0/2
The Poon Squad: 0/2, 0/2
ILLUMINATI â–²: 0/1, 0/1
Wigglin Jimmy: 1/1, 0/2

As you can see, by calculating the ELO of the players we are able to predict the outcomes before the games start with quite high accuracy, therefore the win ratios are the result of the current matchmaker itself. This was an important step because now I know that we can actually measure the strength of players and that we can actually match them better. I am now starting to write the actual code for the matchmaker, and will use the same real data from the same timeslot to try to generate better matches with less free wins and no games found. Will keep everyone who cares updated.

Would be nice to get any comment by Fizzer at this point because we do have real data.

@OrgangeSpider: You calculated an individual Elo for all individual players? I'm a bit scared to ask, but who is the lowest Elo player around there?

As you can see, by calculating the ELO of the players we are able to predict the outcomes before the games start with quite high accuracy

That's how Elo works :)

Would be nice to get any comment by Fizzer at this point because we do have real data.

Yeah, Fizzer will not change anything. But I still am curious and scared at the same time to see who is last.

Also, how do people even query the CW games?

https://www.warzone.com/wiki/Game_ID_feed_API

The WarLight API is not that well documented.

Edited 9/24/2023 12:04:05

I didn't query them, I just asked for the data from FiveSmith, he gave it to me as csv. The bottom 10 players all stopped playing by now, and I wouldn't really shame anyone anyway. If you're curious about yourself, you would be #2 with 1376.499 ELO after Gatsu12 in your own clan this CW, but apparently you didn't participate.

I wasn't sure if ELO would work well in Warzone because of how much random chance can affect the outcomes somehow. Apparently it does work very well, much better than I expected.

If you're curious about yourself, you would be #2 with 1376.499 ELO after Gatsu12 in your own clan this CW, but apparently you didn't participate.

I'm starting to really hate that guy.

I wasn't sure if ELO would work well in Warzone because of how much random chance can affect the outcomes somehow. Apparently it does work very well, much better than I expected.

For me CW has always been the best way to measure skill across clans. It was always a hassle for me when people argued with me that a clans CW rating meant nothing. I'm also not arguing with a math teacher that 1+1 = 3.

However I believe you are arguing a bit not just merely the obvious but even the mathematical necessary when you say that "I wasn't sure if ELO would work well in Warzone because of how much random chance can affect the outcomes somehow". If there was a huge randomness in the outcome involved, then the ratings would accurately reflect that by them being more close together. You might think of a highly skilled player having a preference of SEAD which introduces more randomness. However as long as he is not all of a sudden switching to SEAD, then his SEAD preference is already a part of his rating which is lowered by him playing SEAD games.

Edited 9/24/2023 14:11:27

@OrangeSpider
I think what Norman is trying to say is that everyone knows that elo accurately predicts game results - it is designed to do that. Everyone knows that elo is a great way to get fair individual matchups.

What is not as obvious, and what is the main point here that you're trying to argue, is why we should use individual matchmaking in a competition Fizzer has very deliberately designed to be a whole-clan competition, with the focus rather on the average ability of CW players from those clans than on fair individual matchups.

While I agree there are parts of the system I don't like, try focussing on finding data that shows how the current system doesn't accurately assess average clan ability, or something like that, rather than trying to prove that elo is a good individual matchmaker when everyone already knows this.

Fizzer would have already considered individual elo ratings for matchups - he deliberately chose otherwise because he wanted the competition to be about the whole clan. To have any chance of change, you have to convince him why the current setup doesn't actually work for that whole-clan idea.

Edited 9/24/2023 14:02:42

What is not as obvious, and what is the main point here that you're trying to argue, is why we should use individual matchmaking in a competition Fizzer has very deliberately designed to be a whole-clan competition, with the focus rather on the average ability of CW players from those clans than on fair individual matchups.

I thought that was obvious. Clan wide matching overpunishes weak players in the clan. It creates people with ultra high and ultra low win rates. It is a fact that only a few players will stick around to play something once their win rate drops below 30%. We don't have a high player base as is, therefore player retention should be the highest priority. Top it of with the no games found and free games issues, and you have a matchmaker that isn't good at all. Here are some of the more concerning metrics:

23.9% of all players who participated in CW at least for 10 games have below 33.33% win rate
60.0% of all players who participated in CW at least for 10 games have below 50% win rate

Those numbers are bad for player retention and this is why an individual ELO would be better for matching than clan ELO.

That's more like it

One more thing: The reason why I started with proving that ELO is good in predicting outcomes of Warzone CW games is because I am planning to use it as a metric for efficiency of different matchmakers that I will be testing, so it is very important that we all agree that it is a good enough method before I even start testing anything.

my biggest issue with matched being determined by any rating is we already tend to play the same slot and template. i don’t want to play the same person 5-10 games per season. i’m happy losing to the greats and beating noobs with everything in between but constantly facing the same opponent is tedious. clan wars is to determine which clan can win the mist qm games so let me face everyone regardless of skill level. for those that argue “losing 15-20 games in a season is disheartening “ i say look at my early seasons when i was at a 30% win rate including boot and fw. i stuck with it and learned and not i’m closer to 50%.

Might be worth investigating template specific ratings per player and then averaging out the rating between all clan members who joined that template during a specific slot (not all current clan members that have ever joined said template but only average across players waiting to play). Should give better matchups than a plain overall clan rating.

Edited 9/25/2023 00:35:30

If you make it by player elo, just start every season on a new alt. Once the tactic is common and wide spread it would be a case of who can create the worst alt before season starts.

And yes, you calculated player elo quite accurately. But people will change behaviour once match making changes. You'll have a player base of 3 parts, legacy greats who have elo in the thousands who can't be bothered to start an alt and win anyway. Normal players who enjoy 50%WR and the worst alt tribe who start at the bottom and try for perfect seasons. If there are enough numbers in the alt tribe it would turn into just random matchmaking.
Would there be numbers in the alt tribe?
Well, it's a massive advantage to get wins. MB, OP, Harmony, Prime, 101st , TLA and KC all want wins, all with 40 players each season. so up to 280 new alts each season? How many would keep their legacy great account?
There's only another 100 active players below.
A low ball estimate would have a third of the CW players on worst account, totally destroying any meaningful player elo matchmaking.
Fizzer could add boot reQ to CW to force worst alts to surrender rather than boot but you need to find a solution to stop worst alt accounts ruining your idea.

Also, your lack of knowledge of FW in your first post is jarring.

Your second point on clan groupings.
Your clan has the lowest elo at the time of my posting, yours is the clan that should be hoovering up.

3. Yes. If a lower skilled player joins a higher skilled clan, they'll suffer. Which is why they'd be advised to play SEAD. If you can't get a 30% WR on SEAD you're not a player you're a bystander.
And consider this if matchmaking was changed to player elo.

4. That's part of their tactic. With your clan's lower elo you could go free win hunting and gazzump them. With 50% more games per day Harmony have more chance to get FW. Ving attain so many by being the lowest rated can actively bystanding.

5. Current clan match making requires clan cohesion and discussion to swarm a template. They are rewarded by possible easier matches. MB are the best at this as they can swarm multiple template options and aim to swarm slot 6. Again, this can be played back to you. Have your clan swarm better, or read where an enemy swarm is to avoid them. Match making by player elo with worst alts will just get to a point of randomness.

Your proposal of player elo, I can't see it working
Fully random seem a bit pointless. Fizzer's whole ethos is to have meaningful games of similarly skilled players.
Limiting players, again, Fizzer's whole ethos is not to limit and the amount of template jumping at the moment would make it totally unworkable. 9 minutes in and MB have swarmed secb with 20 players, OP have swarmed in with their own 20. 3 seconds out and one clan jumps to S1. What to do with the ~15 extra players? There currently isn't even a second template choice to cover missed games

You have stats but stats aren't worth much on their own.
23.9% of all players who participated in CW at least for 10 games have below 33.33% win rate
Idle players can't play warzone? Free win hunters get annihilated when they don't get the FW?
60.0% of all players who participated in CW at least for 10 games have below 50% win rate
I on behalf of OP apologise for being good at our templates? Perhaps Flexus should apologise for his two 70%WR seasons?
Even with the match making pointedly pairing MB vs OP in most templates, those clans still have 20 players each posting 70%+ WR. The fact that both clans are about 70% really does shift the balance. Those 40 players make the season average of 50/50 closer to 45%. What percentage of players who played 10+ games have a WR below 45%?

Perhaps compare player CW WR to overall WR as well.

I completely agree to Mylo-vadász.

You cannot just change a matchmaking algorithm and assume player behavior will stay the same. This is naive. People will adapt to squeeze the best possible outcome for them.


But what bothers me more is the attempt to individualize clan wars.

At the moment, matchmaking is based on a clan-based rating - so the clan is in focus, not the single player.
At the moment, swarming is a good strategy - so clan coordination is in focus, not a player's behavior in isolation.
At the moment, rewards are equal for all participants of the clan (given at least 1 real win). Do I only have a 5% win rate? Irrelevant, as I get the full rewards from my clan.

This competition is called clan wars and not ladder. I really like that a full clan is rallying together and doing something together. Plz keep it that way.


(And if I am not rated individually, I can ride in the shadow of our elite players like Fivesmith.)

So what if the problem isn't in the elo system, but rather in the rewarding system? What if we changed rewarding system from simply counting wins to something more accurate like amount of points? ( defeating an elite player would be worth more points than defeating a noob) Then reward each clan based on the total amount of points earned from all its players. (ofc idle should have its own rewarding system)


I definitely should have write more but I am just lazy :/

This is what ChatGPT wants to say
Changing the rewarding system from simply counting wins to considering the amount of points earned could potentially address some of the issues in the current system. By assigning different point values to victories against different level players, it would encourage players to challenge themselves and aim for higher-ranked opponents.

Rewarding each clan based on the total amount of points earned from all its players would promote collaboration and teamwork within clans. This system could motivate players to support each other in improving their skills and competing against stronger opponents, ultimately benefiting the overall performance of the clan.

However, it's important to consider the potential drawbacks of this proposed system. Assigning point values based on player skill level could lead to imbalances if the ranking system is inaccurate or biased. It could also result in players actively targeting weaker opponents just to gain more points, potentially creating unfair matchmaking scenarios.

Additionally, this system only addresses rewards in terms of coins. Other forms of rewards, such as experience points, customization options, or unlockable features, would still need to be considered and integrated into the new rewarding system.

While the idea of implementing a more nuanced rewarding system has potential, further development and consideration of potential drawbacks and unintended consequences would be necessary to ensure fair and balanced gameplay for all players.

Would it be 'fairer' if there was no rating system at all, but random matchups every time (apart from players in same clan cant face each other)? Doesn't address the issue of certain clans having loads of players in same template though. Would need a max limit for number of players per template as well as max games per day (max per day should be capped at 40 - the max size of clans ever since there was a clan cap).

Rating per player is already implemented well in other ladders, and not necessary for an event like Clan War I think. It would be interesting info, but Clan Wars is about a Clan's production, and not based on any single player.

Edit: to be more clear, a clan rating is cool since you are playing as a clan, like mylo said there is strategies like stacking templates, and like otto said it is nice to have strong teammates. There is also stuff like avoiding slots and head hunting, etc etc. So like, a person's personal rating may get skewed very quickly, where as a clan rating is much more true to the team effort

Edited 9/26/2023 15:46:20

[deleted]

Edited 9/26/2023 15:45:54

@DanWL
I was addressing the issues that would happen due to using the Elo ranking system, which involves players using autopilot and alts to farm wins in CW. If we used a better rewarding system, these problems would fade away.
I apologize if my previous statement wasn't clear.

Though knowing everyone's ELO would be nice :) Care to publish such a thing?