My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

by CountSero
Reply

Original Post

My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

[ Edited ]
★★★★★ Pro

So related to the calls for permanent servers and own server for AoW I will put out my thoughts about this “new” approach of DICE with servers in BF2042

 

So, what I now write is only my assumption and observation (I don’t have facts and I think DICE has not given an information about it yet)

 

As I have written before I think DICE is using a completely new approach to the server structure for BF2042, which is in that it seems that there are no singly permanent gaming servers anymore

 

I think they have developed a kind multi server cluster which is hosting every session for its own and when the session ends it will be closed. Seems similar to Portal.

 

In the end is more efficient because there are only as much servers as needed.

 

But unfortunately, then you have the problem that you can put in a running game to full up the server or you get multiply times in the row the same map

 

So, I think in this way the matchmaking is working at the moment:

 

  1. The Client is looking for an existing session
  2. If a session is found you will put in and then it doesn’t matter how the state of the round is. It could be at the beginning, in the middle or the end (which is kind of bad design at the moment)
  3. If there is no session it will be created one which sometimes will lead into a little waiting time (which in the most of the time was less than 60 to 90 seconds for me)
  4. Round ends sever session closed
  5. Rinse and Repeat

 

 

So, now to the problems I see and some suggestion which can improve it:

 

  • One Positive thing is when it is working, that the servers are 95% of the time are filled with real players

 

  • Putting players in rounds which are running with less than 2 minutes left is frustrating (Causing also more loading and wait time if this happens 3 ore more times in the row, which had happened to me several times). The matchmaking needs to check if the session is already running for longaer than 2-3 minutes

 

  • This system lacks of the feature to check which maps the players had already played. The matchmaking needs to check the played maps and will start the rotation over after all maps have been played by the player.

 

  • It also seems that somtimes the session close on it own, wiche causes the loss of your exp without any message that there were a problem. This issues needs to be fixed and at least put in a message to the player that an error accoured, don't load only into the main menu.
  • It also needs a feature so that player can create their own rotation list so everyone can play the maps they want.

 

  • As additional feature maybe this above-mentioned rotation list contains also the mode the map is played in for example, I like orbital in conquest and then discarded in Breakthru and so on

Yes, a server browser is a nice tool but if my assumption and observation is true you can only see the active session so it is not as usefull when there are no permanent servers

 

 

What do you think about my thoughts? What is you observation ?

 

 

See you on the Battlefield.

 

[UpDate]

To make it more clear if have no problem with the new aproach but it needs some more QoL things to make it worke much better for all!

Message 1 of 12 (354 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★★ Apprentice

Indeed the less than 2-3 min till the end or under a certain score option for matchmaking should be implemented. It seems an easy and logical implementation.

I also think the map rotation setup by each player would be a nice addition, but tracking how people are complaining and the active users number is dropping,there might be situations where you won`t find a server. Cause either they play on different maps or different modes, so less and less options, but if you find one...at lest its what you wanted. +1

 

The permanent server in my opinion is the most important one. I still don`t get why its not designed like that. They took away the private servers, but they took away also the way it was working. No anymore meeting the same people. I think they should just make a "matchmaking list" where they list all the games running at the time and of course to make them continuous. Who wants to constantly get into the main menu and wait 40 sec to get out of a game and then another 20 to find a game + 1 min to start the new one. FFS

 

They made too many changes to the game and of course people are not happy. If they were slowly implementing/taking out features...the transition was waaaaaaay smother. You wouldn`t be taken by surprise by everything that is new...which is a lot. (specialist, season passes , no server browser, no stats, no HARDCORE, only 10-ish (playable) weapons)

 

Most of us comment here out of love and to try to make the devs understand what we want most. 

 

#BringBackBattlefied

Message 2 of 12 (332 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★ Guide

I think you are correct about a new way of handling this which makes it hard to give us what we had before. My issues with the new matchmaking flow :

 

my random squad is lost on new round.

I often find myself playing the same few maps again and again. I would like a full map rotation.

Message 3 of 12 (298 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

[ Edited ]
★★★★★ Pro

@mesterKGmmh this sounds good they should ask at the end of the round if you want to stay with actual squad

Message 4 of 12 (294 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★★★ Novice

Matchmaking on Ps5 (crossplay off, SEA region)  rarely finds a game because of this "new method". And just to check, me and 3 of friends tried starting a game simultaneously without making a party. One of us got in a game with 30+bots and 3 of us ended up on separate lobbies with no games found. The system should have sent us to that one server that had 30+ bots and start playing but chose to leave us hanging in the matchmaking lobby. 

 

 

Message 5 of 12 (272 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★★★ Pro
@Hehe_lol_haha your right but what I read here in the forum it seems that the matchmaking on console has some more issues on top than PC.

Its seems that the cross-play function is more bugged there if you turn it off
Message 6 of 12 (268 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★★★ Novice

Yup. When we turn on crossplay, matchmaking is fast.  Unfortunately, we are at a disadvantage against PC players since we dont have an option to choose our input device. 

Message 7 of 12 (261 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★ Guide
@Hehe_lol_haha Console players turn off cross play because of controller vs keyboard is unfair. Pc players turn off cross play because of console’s aim assist make it unfair… weird!
Message 8 of 12 (245 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking

★★★★★ Pro

mmh the match making needs to be changed quick

 

I have not counted it 100% accurate so these are only rough numbers but these are the top maps that where in my matchmaking rotation the last 3 days:

 

- Kaleidoscope 50%

- Breakaway 25%

- Discarded 20%

- Renewal 2%

- Hourglass 2%

- Orbital 1%

- Manifest 0%

 

It’s a pity beside Discarded, Manifest one of my favourite maps

Message 9 of 12 (214 Views)

Re: My obersvation and thoughts about Server Structure and Matchmaking


@CountSero 

In the end is more efficient because there are only as much servers as needed.

 


Whilst true that doesn’t really effect what you put on them and how they run. It’s more to do with managing demand and the highs and lows of those demands.

 

any decent scaling configuration, whether your running continuous server instances or as you suggest instances just for each game/round, isn’t really going to make thing much more or less efficient to the point that you would select a * match making experience over a known and well tested solution such as continuous servers.

 

Often, and very likely for a game likely BF, dice will have dedicated servers they have to pay for. That’s to meet the minimum demand. 

Beyond that the server farms they have maybe available for other games they also provided. I don’t know, something like FIFA or something. 

When peak demand is in play they then reserved those servers, likely at a reduced none streaming price. I.e they’re ready but not being used right this second. Then as servers get full they enable that instance and start paying the full streaming running costs. 

mon top of that they may then have further scaling options, I.e they may a reserve on a 100 servers but need more. Beyond what they’ve provisioned for. And then more money is invested.

 

at the end of the day scaling server solutions are really clever and I can’t think of any reason why that implementation would impact whether you wanted to have a server run one round, or many rounds before kicking everyone out to the curb.

 

 

 

 

Message 10 of 12 (175 Views)

ea-play-promo-splash

What's EA Play?

New name, new look, same great benefits: EA Access and Origin Access are now EA Play.

Get more info on the change here.

ea-help-promo-3

Forget your EA Account ID or password?

Reset, update, or link your account information.

View more on EA Help