Big Improvement for MP

正在查看此主题的用户

Thexppkiller

On probation
Could there be a button on each player on a match where you can't select "Don't pair again with him" what basiclly removes the chance of getting him in the same team as you? This would be good as all trolls would be removed and trash people that even with 20 kills you can't carry because feels like they don't spawn not be there making you lose.
 
giphy.gif


Getting league of legends flashbacks here tryna carry a feeding top mid and bot lane as a tank jungler.
 
Talking about League of legends with a rank system perhaps based on victories or personal k/d would remove this "ISSUE"
 
k/d is absolute bull**** indicator though for this. And it will not improve the teamplay if everyone now not only wants but needs the kills to improve their ELO rating.

Archers and Cavalry players also tend to rack up a lot of more kills while Inf tries not to get gimped over completely.
 
k/d is absolute bull**** indicator though for this. And it will not improve the teamplay if everyone now not only wants but needs the kills to improve their ELO rating.

Archers and Cavalry players also tend to rack up a lot of more kills while Inf tries not to get gimped over completely.
+1 some elo system based on win loses will do the trick for casual matchmaking though
 
K/D/W/L is too easily skewed/padded by non-competitive game modes (Captain) to ever be a gauge of skill.

The only legitimate ways to improve matchmaking:

  • Impose the queue to only allow 6-stacks to play groups of 4 or more. This will slow down the queue rate for 6-stacks, but promote them playing other organized groups.
  • Introduce an ELO system that tracks performance vs players of similar ELO. A player's ELO rating is represented by a number which may change depending on the outcome of rated games played. After every game, the winning player takes points from the losing one. The difference between the ratings of the winner and loser determines the total number of points gained or lost after a game. If the high-rated player wins, then only a few rating points will be taken from the low-rated player. However, if the lower-rated player scores an upset win, many rating points will be transferred. The lower-rated player will also gain a few points from the higher rated player in the event of a draw. This means that this rating system is self-correcting. Players whose ratings are too low or too high should, in the long run, do better or worse correspondingly than the rating system predicts and thus gain or lose rating points until the ratings reflect their true playing strength.
 
K/D/W/L is too easily skewed/padded by non-competitive game modes (Captain) to ever be a gauge of skill.

The only legitimate ways to improve matchmaking:

  • Impose the queue to only allow 6-stacks to play groups of 4 or more. This will slow down the queue rate for 6-stacks, but promote them playing other organized groups.
  • Introduce an ELO system that tracks performance vs players of similar ELO. A player's ELO rating is represented by a number which may change depending on the outcome of rated games played. After every game, the winning player takes points from the losing one. The difference between the ratings of the winner and loser determines the total number of points gained or lost after a game. If the high-rated player wins, then only a few rating points will be taken from the low-rated player. However, if the lower-rated player scores an upset win, many rating points will be transferred. The lower-rated player will also gain a few points from the higher rated player in the event of a draw. This means that this rating system is self-correcting. Players whose ratings are too low or too high should, in the long run, do better or worse correspondingly than the rating system predicts and thus gain or lose rating points until the ratings reflect their true playing strength.
If you assume that it matches equally skilled players you can give players the same amount per win or lose. At this point i would welcome anything tbh.
 
If you assume that it matches equally skilled players you can give players the same amount per win or lose. At this point i would welcome anything tbh.

Well, it would take a couple of weeks of play for an ELO system to truly shape out- as everyone starts at the same value- but I believe ultimately it's really the only way to assist in balancing matches aside from locking x-Stacked players out of fighting random pug groups (Unless after a certain amount of time there is literally no one available for that stack to play- they shouldn't be penalized either for playing as a group by never getting a match. In an ideal situation, a 6 stack should never have to face 6 randomly solo queues, but in the event there is no one else, yes.)
 
Well, it would take a couple of weeks of play for an ELO system to truly shape out- as everyone starts at the same value- but I believe ultimately it's really the only way to assist in balancing matches aside from locking x-Stacked players out of fighting random pug groups (Unless after a certain amount of time there is literally no one available for that stack to play- they shouldn't be penalized either for playing as a group by never getting a match. In an ideal situation, a 6 stack should never have to face 6 randomly solo queues, but in the event there is no one else, yes.)
if the elo is for example 0-100 and your rating is 90 and you search for players that are +-10. After 1 minute it searches for +-20. After 2min +-30 etc. It will only make the queue longer not make it impossible to find a match. For teams it can just take the average elo number. Just something really simple will do the trick here. Alot of frustration comes from fighting a 6 man stack with total beginners aswell. It pushes 6 man stacks up the ladder aswell so they are more likely to get matched vs each other.
 
Alright, time to hit "Don't pair me with these guys", because they're rock bottom on the list with 0/10. Now I will only win! GENIUS!!

As stated before, not gonna happen. Don't like a guy? Mute them, but if they suck, deal with it. In Siege, I praise the noobs. I need them to upkeep my favorite classes.
 
I'm always speaking about skirmish not siege or captain as from my POV I can not ask anyone to try to play competitive in gamemodes that are not meant for that.
 
Alot of frustration comes from fighting a 6 man stack with total beginners aswell

This is my only frustration. It becomes a non contest that you might as well leave and find another game to have a shot in.

The longer they put off this ranked matchmaking the longer new players go on, get stomped into the dirt by people stacking to avoid having those new players in their team, and the quicker the multiplayer population dies.
 
K/D/W/L is too easily skewed/padded by non-competitive game modes (Captain) to ever be a gauge of skill.

The only legitimate ways to improve matchmaking:

  • Impose the queue to only allow 6-stacks to play groups of 4 or more. This will slow down the queue rate for 6-stacks, but promote them playing other organized groups.
  • Introduce an ELO system that tracks performance vs players of similar ELO. A player's ELO rating is represented by a number which may change depending on the outcome of rated games played. After every game, the winning player takes points from the losing one. The difference between the ratings of the winner and loser determines the total number of points gained or lost after a game. If the high-rated player wins, then only a few rating points will be taken from the low-rated player. However, if the lower-rated player scores an upset win, many rating points will be transferred. The lower-rated player will also gain a few points from the higher rated player in the event of a draw. This means that this rating system is self-correcting. Players whose ratings are too low or too high should, in the long run, do better or worse correspondingly than the rating system predicts and thus gain or lose rating points until the ratings reflect their true playing strength.
Wait how is captain not competitive? Feels competitive to me
 
Well for that they are going to build ranked games so you wont see them.
About Captain it still needs skill not as individual but as a team play and strategy its like playing total war arena but third\first person.
I understand that Skirmish is favorite by old folks\veterans, but god damn you are making Captain like its the ultimate amoeba go to.
I think that "Don't pair again with him" feature will kill the multi even faster, just wait for the ranked system.
 
最后编辑:
Wait how is captain not competitive? Feels competitive to me

Having a regiment of AI troops fight for you is not competitive. Killing AI shouldn't be racking up a K/D rate that also accounts for direct PvP statistics.

This would be like saying that sports coaches should be given the cumulative value of their team in statistics after every game.
 
But in Captain K/D does not play a major role it`s the team play and how squads work together like in total war.
They really should remove stats until ranked, or put it separately from each other Stats for Skirmish and Stats for Captain.
Right now we don't have even ranked so it does not count,multi is not priority it goes to SP so we just have to wait.
 
Having a regiment of AI troops fight for you is not competitive. Killing AI shouldn't be racking up a K/D rate that also accounts for direct PvP statistics.

This would be like saying that sports coaches should be given the cumulative value of their team in statistics after every game.

I don't think it should be weighted in k/d though. Win/loss would be a better measurement. It can still be competitive, just different metrics of success/ranking.

Also, I know almost nothing about sports but.... Aren't coaches ranked in some way? I'd assume it's similar to win/loss.
 
后退
顶部 底部