Search results

Dejan said:

Greetings!

Due to the internal processes related with the official release of the game, we will be shutting down our multiplayer servers from 11 PM UTC, 24th of October. They will come back online with the official release of the game on the 25th of October.

Thank you for your understanding.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the note!

madnessario said:

Are you checking the custom list or the official matchmaking? The latter is dead for some time now I think. There are customs servers like crpg that are full usually.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, I was trying to use matchmaking. I'll use the custom servers today but I sure hope matchmaking is fixed for launch...

So there are people playing? I'm trying to play Captain. What's CRPG

Is it just Matchmaking that's broken, can I use the server browser

Okay thanks for the information guys, because I've been under the impression that multiplayer was just completely broken. I couldn't find matches in any game mode, when the infamous 1.7.2 update dropped. And like you said weeks later I am still totally unable to find a Captain game. Sounds like server crashes and bad threshold for players to start match are compounding problems.

I'll keep trying to queue in the evenings but this seems hopeless...I hope the devs have a plan up their sleeve to revive the best game mode.

e222143 said:

But it is a Hidden technique from ancient times. According to a legend, the one who uses this power has to endure the curse of being ridiculed.

Click to expand...

It's true. I have this power.

ROLL BACK THE UPDATE SO WE CAN PLAY MULTIPLAYER, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD

Dest_wastaken said:

What evidence are you proposing that, this is not happening time to time in BL? It has been observed that if you are on a win-streak you start getting very unfavourable(according to player's current rating) games and rise really fast if you win these unfavourable seeds.

On a side note, Competitive Overwatch Streamers has taken accounts that were "stuck" in bronze/silver over a year and rose them up to Grandmaster before.

Finally, I have no idea if you are completely ignorant of "Game Theory" or gone mad because you studied it too much, but I would like you to define this theoritical (with mathematics not ideas) match-making system that does not include a MMR.

What is it? a State-Machine? a Neural Network? a bird? a flying man?

Click to expand...

I don't know exactly what is happening in Bannerlord. But I know the design trends of online games, and I see Bannerlord falling into a really terrible one that I am familiar with. It sounds like you are also familiar with 'performance-based' ranking systems. Do you know this from Overwatch?

Part of my thesis is that we cannot count on PBSR and other systems to make accurate judgements about player skill. I believe that should be measured by the match result and the win/loss record of each player. The problem with MMR and other algorithmic handicapping systems is that they pervert the match result, making it intrinsically unrelated to the measurable skill differences between each player, and necessitating performance-based rating in the first place.

By the way, these systems are not comparable to ELO because ELO is designed for tournaments of a 1 v 1 game. MMR, EOM and other algorithmic handicapping systems are being implemented in games that have many players on each team, and are not true tournaments. The multiplayer aspect is crucial, because algorithmic handicapping systems depend on multiple players to balance the scales.

The alternative I propose is simple and obvious, to anyone with the slightest grasp of game theory. Matchmaking for ranked competition should be based on rank, and it should be solo-queue only. Rank should be based completely on match results. I.e., did your team win or did they lose, what is your win loss record? Anything else is a travesty.

Alkix said:

Allow me to summarize your complaints I managed to make it to:

1. MMR is too granular and instead anyone in a Skill Rank should be considered an equal to anyone else in the same skill rank.
2. Overwatch's width of MMR matching (1k) is too wide, you would prefer that people's actual MMR be obfuscated and that the bucket SR categories be used instead, which, hilariously, are probably about as wide as the MMR range.
3. Every match is unfair to the best player on the team, for both teams, even though both teams have better and worse players, so instead, one team should have all the good players and the other should have the bad players.

Click to expand...

1. I never said "granular," but I have said that MMR is a double standard which effectively lets the Matchmaker segregate players based on measured differences in skill. I believe that rank should be the basis of matchmaking, not MMR. But your take on this is respectably accurate.
2. MMR should not exist. I don't know what scale SR would exist at if the system was redesigned, but it would probably have to change on some order of magnitude. The range for matchmaking should be much more narrow, at any rate.
3. It is not the logical conclusion of my argument that all of the best and worst players should be on opposite teams from each other all the time. However that should be the case at least some of the time. MMR guarantees that it practically never happens, which is an artificially anti-competitive construct.

Thanks for your close reading and I hope you'll accept these notes.

MadVader said:

So you want some kind of fascist meritocratic dystopia that favors the established elites and keeps the newbies out?

Click to expand...

How on earth is that your takeaway? I never said anything remotely like this. At least cite a passage if you think this is what it means.

Callum said:

The number of points you gain or lose with each match depends on the average ratings of your team and the enemy team. If your team has a lower average rating than that of the opponent and you win, you gain more points compared to a game where the average ratings between the teams are more balanced. And if you lose against a higher average rating team, you lose fewer points.

Click to expand...

I have made a thread on this point, please read:

madnessario said:

If you head to the multiplayer section you will see a lot of fuss about this

Click to expand...

Now I see it. Yes I'll fuss over there thanks