Open Playlists in Black Ops 7: Do Lower SBMM Pings Improve Latency?

When players noticed lower in-game ping in Black Ops 7’s new “Open” playlists — the ones with reduced Skill-Based Matchmaking (SBMM) — the reaction was immediate: did Treyarch quietly improve server tech, or did removing SBMM actually change the network picture players see? Early tests from the beta suggest the answer is: sometimes. The reduced-SBMM playlists can show measurably lower server latency for many players, but the effect is neither universal nor absolute. This feature explores what’s likely going on, why the change matters (and where it doesn’t), how to interpret in-game latency values, and what players should expect when the full game launches.

Background / Overview​

Black Ops 7’s open beta introduced two “Open” playlists that intentionally reduce SBMM influence: an Open Moshpit and an Open Search and Destroy. Players quickly reported an unexpected side effect — lower displayed server latency (ping) in the Open playlists compared with the standard, SBMM-driven playlists. The difference is small but consistent in many reports: single-digit to low-double-digit milliseconds improvement in the Open playlists versus the regular playlists.
At face value, lower latency in a reduced-SBMM environment makes sense if matchmaking constraints are relaxed. But online multiplayer latency is shaped by multiple systems working together: matchmaking logic, population size for each playlist, server selection rules, regional capacity, and the game’s networking architecture (tick rate, authoritative servers vs. peer-to-peer, and client-server telemetry). Any explanation must consider all of them.
The rest of this article breaks down the evidence, the mechanisms that plausibly explain the effect, the limitations of the observations, and practical takeaways for players and developers.

---

The empirical signal: what players actually observed​

Anecdotal beta numbers​

Multiple players, including reporters in the open beta, found the Open playlists regularly reporting lower ping on the in-game overlay. Examples reported during the beta:

• Regular Moshpit playlists: steady readings around ~19–21 ms.
• Open Moshpit playlists: readings often drop to ~10–11 ms.
• The improvement is frequent but not guaranteed; some Open matches still show the higher latency.

These observations are short, repeatable, and consistent across different users in similar regions: the Open playlists often show lower ping than the corresponding standard playlist, and the regular playlist rarely (if ever in early testing) drops down to the lower Open-playlist values.

What the numbers mean (and what they don’t)​

Those integer ping values displayed in a match overlay are useful signals but not the whole story. They typically report latency between the client and the match server or matchmaking relay, not full end-to-end responsiveness (which depends on server tick rate, interpolation, and the server’s own processing backlog). A 10 ms vs 20 ms difference is noticeable for twitch shooters — it can reduce perceived shot-delay and improve aim responsiveness — but other variables (server tick rate, packet loss, and client-side smoothing) often have equal or greater impact on actual in-game experience.

---

How matchmaking, SBMM, and server selection interact​

What is SBMM and what does it change?​

SBMM (Skill-Based Matchmaking) is a matchmaking heuristic that prioritizes putting players into matches with similarly skilled opponents. It typically uses player performance metrics to bias the match search, which narrows the eligible player pool as the system tries to balance skill levels.
Key consequences of SBMM:

• The matchmaking pool becomes geographically and temporally narrower when seeking skill-matched opponents.
• Longer queue times are possible if there are fewer same-skill players available nearby.
• Matchmaker may accept higher-latency candidates to preserve skill balance.

When SBMM influence is reduced (as in the Open playlists), matchmaking has fewer skill constraints and can prioritize other objectives: lower ping, faster matchmaking, or simply filling matches quickly from local population clusters.

Matchmaking vs. server selection: two separate decisions​

It helps to split the overall flow into two distinct steps:

• Matchmaking (who is grouped together) — the matchmaker picks the set of players that will form a match based on a scoring function that may include skill, ping, party composition, platform, and queue time.
• Server selection (where the game will run) — once players are chosen, the service assigns an authoritative game server (or host) that the players connect to.

SBMM primarily alters the first step (who is matched), but that indirectly affects the second step. If the matchmaker’s skill constraints force pairing players from widely separated regions (because same-skill players are distributed), the server selected might be a compromise location with higher ping for some players. Reduce SBMM and the matchmaker can often match locally clustered players, enabling the server selection to pick a nearer, lower-latency host.

Population and playlist-specific server pools​

Large live-service shooters often route specific playlists to separate server pools for load management and tuning. An Open playlist with high population may get optimized routing and more available regional servers than a smaller, niche, or test playlist. Conversely, some competitive playlists are routed through specialized server pools tuned for anti-cheat, parity, or controlled conditions, which can have different latency behaviors.
In short, three interconnected factors can reduce measured ping when SBMM is relaxed:

• Matchmaking can group geographically closer players when skill is deprioritized.
• Server selection can therefore choose a closer server or a local cluster.
• Larger playlist population in Open playlists reduces the need to fall back to distant servers.

---

Why the observed differences are plausible — technically speaking​

1. Expanded candidate set allows lower-latency matches​

When SBMM is strict, the pool of candidate players that meet skill constraints shrinks. The matchmaking algorithm then has two choices: wait for more candidates (longer queues) or accept more distant players to maintain skill parity. Accepting distant players increases average latency. In reduced-SBMM playlists, the pool is larger, which can yield local matches more often and therefore lower ping.

2. Faster match fill leads to better server placement​

Matchmakers often use heuristics that include both ping and queue time. If the system can fill a match quickly from local players, it can pick a local server that minimizes total latency rather than a compromise server between remote players.

3. Different playlist routing and capacity​

Open playlists may be routed to larger server clusters or less strict service nodes that emphasize throughput and low-latency allocation. The standard competitive playlists may be routed through different infrastructure for fairness, telemetry, or anti-cheat reasons, which can bias latency upward in some situations.

4. Measurement artifacts and telemetry differences​

The number displayed to players may be the ping to a matchmaking or relay node rather than the authoritative server. If Open playlists use different relay topologies, the displayed ping could change independently of true game-server responsiveness. That is: lower displayed latency might reflect a change in what is being measured, not purely better in-game responsiveness.

---

Limits and counterarguments​

Not guaranteed for every player or every match​

The effect is probabilistic. Observers have recorded Open-playlist matches with high latency and regular-playlist matches with low latency. The effect depends strongly on:

• Your region and local player population.
• Time of day / population load.
• Whether you are queuing solo or in a party.
• Platform mix (cross-play) and how the matchmaker weights platform separation.

Netcode and tick rate often matter more than raw ping​

Even if the overlay reports a 10 ms vs 20 ms difference, other networking characteristics can dominate perceived responsiveness:

• Server tick rate (how often the server updates authoritative game state) determines granularity of input acknowledgment. Higher tick rates reduce perceived lag more than small ping differences.
• Client-side interpolation and smoothing can mask or exaggerate latency.
• Packet loss and jitter cause stutter and warping independent of average ping.

So a lower ping in Open playlists is encouraging but not the only determinant of a better experience.

Measurement can be misleading​

• The overlay ping may be to a matchmaking node or a regional relay; the actual authoritative server might differ.
• Beta telemetry can be noisy; server pools are frequently rebalanced in a beta and may change between sessions.
• Some playlists might show apparent improvements simply because they draw different kinds of players (e.g., players on the same platform, local friends) which affect server choice.

---

What this means for players: practical takeaways​

• If you prefer lower ping, try the Open playlists. Early testing showed a statistically meaningful chance of lower displayed latency in Open Moshpit / Open Search and Destroy.
• Expect more “sweaty” competition. Reduced SBMM often concentrates high-skill players who want to avoid skill-based restrictions; the player base in Open playlists can be more competitive.
• Queue solo vs. party: Parties influence matchmaking choices; a party containing players from different regions will force the matchmaker to compromise, potentially negating the Open-playlist latency advantage.
• Watch for server tick rate and packet loss. If your game feels laggy despite a low ping number, check for packet loss and server tick behavior — those matter more than small ping improvements.
• Use our diagnostic checklist for consistent results:
• Make sure your connection is wired and not using Wi‑Fi hotspots prone to jitter.
• Test during peak local hours (population affects matchmaking).
• Queue several times and record displayed ping averages — single matches are noisy.
• Note whether differences are consistent across playlists, times, and party sizes.

---

Recommendations for developers and operators​

• Expose clearer telemetry. Show both ping to matchmaking / relay nodes and ping to the authoritative server. Distinguish these so players understand the numbers.
• Make matchmaking weighting transparent. If SBMM is tunable per-playlist, publish the high-level priorities (skill vs. ping vs. queue time) so players can make informed choices.
• Route playlists by intent. Casual/Open playlists should be optimized for low-latency population clusters, while competitive playlists should be optimized for fairness and anti-cheat without sacrificing responsiveness.
• Monitor and publish tick-rate goals. Players understand ping, but tick rate is often the more meaningful metric for responsiveness; public goals help manage expectations.

---

Netcode notes and broader technical context​

Black Ops and Call of Duty titles historically use dedicated server architectures with regional pools. Those servers often run at a specific tick rate (commonly 20 Hz or 60 Hz variants are discussed in the community), which defines the rate at which the authoritative game state updates. A server running at 20 updates per second inherently introduces ~50 ms of server-side granularity alone, whereas a 60 Hz server reduces that to ~16.7 ms. When comparing a 10 ms vs 20 ms client-reported latency, remember that tick rate and input-processing intervals can dwarf small ping differences. Improving perceived responsiveness often requires both lower latency and higher server tick rates.
Anti-cheat systems and platform attestation can also change server routing. For instance, servers that enforce stricter anti-cheat checks, or regions requiring certain attestation paths, may be on separate infrastructure which can impact latency for a subset of players. In short: network latency, server tick rate, and security/anti-cheat topology all interact to define real-world play feel.

---

What remains unverified and what to watch for​

• Whether the Open-playlist latency behavior in the beta will persist at launch. Beta server pools are frequently optimized for testing and may not reflect retail day-one routing.
• Whether the overlay ping reported in the beta maps directly to authoritative server responsiveness or to an interim relay (measurement semantics matter).
• How platform distribution, cross-play weighting, and party composition will change matchmaking decisions over time as population stabilizes post-launch.

These points are important caution flags: the observed lower ping in an Open playlist is a meaningful signal, but it’s not a definitive proof that removing SBMM always produces lower latency for every player in every situation.

---

Final analysis — why the finding matters​

Two simple facts make the observation worth attention:

• Small latency reductions matter in twitch shooters. Reducing ping by 5–15 ms can meaningfully improve aiming, shot registration, and feel for high-skill players.
• Matchmaking policies are levers that change network outcomes. SBMM hasn’t just been a fairness/skill question — it can materially affect who you are matched with and therefore which servers you connect to.

For players, the short-term takeaway is pragmatic: if lower ping is your priority and you can tolerate fiercer opponents, Open playlists are worth trying. For developers, the takeaway is strategic: matchmaking logic is a network-performance lever as much as a competitive-balance lever. Treat it as such when designing playlist priorities and communicating trade-offs to players.

---

Conclusion​

The reduced-SBMM Open playlists in the Black Ops 7 beta delivered a repeatable but conditional reduction in displayed server latency for many players. That outcome is logically consistent with how matchmakers and server selection work: relax skill constraints, widen the candidate pool, favor local fills, and you often get lower-latency matches. However, the effect is not universal, and real in-game responsiveness depends on several additional layers — notably server tick rate, packet loss, and client-side smoothing — which can be as important as raw ping.
Ultimately, the beta finding is a reminder that matchmaking is both a gameplay and a network design decision. Players chasing low ping can often find it in Open playlists, but they should weigh that against tougher opponents and remember that latency is only one part of the netcode equation. Developers should take note and treat matchmaking weighting, server routing, and telemetry semantics as first-order engineering choices — not just matchmaking knobs — because they directly change the experience players feel in every match.

---

Source: Windows Central Is server latency really lower with less SBMM in Black Ops 7?