can some random person explain the new matchmaking system .

cuz i want to be able to play at all levels
(highest level is not a problem) but i keep meeting stronger people at lower level without winning a single battle, so basicly what others do is wear a strong torso with weak weapons and fight weakr people is that how its calculated?

im confused here

Once you hit level 15 now, you will be matched against anyone from level 15-30. You will be matched against players that are the same rank as you, or a rank above or below you. (so if you are ran 7 you will be ranked with ranks 6-7-8). As you play you will find yourself in a comfortable rank eventually where you win/loss ratio is 50%. Until you ind that though you will win a lot or loss a lot.

Is there no way to make the matches a little bit fairer?

I'm rank 3 and now i got 6 matches in a row vs rank 1-mechs with tons of mythical items!

The best I can is take half of their hp before I explode...

6 matches vs much better equipped opponents, 6 times no chance, 6 losses in a row and still forced to battle such mechs?

It does try to match you against people with the same rank as you, maybe one over if you're only a couple stars away from that level, but if it can't find any matches at that level, it will expand the search. IT is there so you wont' sit there for ever waiting for a match.

Seriously, something has to be changed in matchmaking!

I'm LVL 16 and I have to fight the same opponent 8 times in a row without any chance! This guy had 250hp more than me and tons of high-lvl-stuff.

Why must I "battle" the same player over and over again when there's no chance for me?

I really hope you're exagerating when you're saying 8 times, if not, there is a serious problem with the system (well, might be anyway).

I do think part of the problem is that some people focus more on the single player than others, which means their mech improves, but their rank does not. And so they start off with a level 10+ mech against level 4 mechs, which creates unfair battles. I've suggested a "fix" for this, we'll see if others find it to be a good one.