sc2 match making style

(Apples) #61

because it was my point all along?

zZzZzzzzZZZZzzzzZZzzz nevermind!

(system) #62

[QUOTE=Apples;263855]because it was my point all along?

zZzZzzzzZZZZzzzzZZzzz nevermind![/QUOTE]

When actually you don’t have one, or failed to express one.

This my friend, doesn’t make any sense:

[QUOTE=Apples;263646]What the point in competing versus teams that have exactly the same ranking as yours? How do you want to progress if you never play vs tougher teams?

Matchmaking can be good for pubing, and I’m not even sure about that, but definitly not for comp IMO. OFC you can still have league A, league B etc… But if the teams are too much equals all the time it will be boring for comp.

Peace[/QUOTE]

First you say it can be good for pub, but you are not sure, but it will suck for competitive. Who the hell gives a damn about competitive? Make your own tournament and setup your own rules there if you want competitive. Stop confusing pubs with competitive.

(tokamak) #63

[QUOTE=Etek;263848]During the last blizzcon, they explained why it is hidden. Mainly two reasons:

  • After playing more and more games, the rank will vary less and less so players will not have any sense of progression
  • The rank is made up of several numbers which will get 99% of the players confused. Most don’t understand the obvious exclamation, up and down signs next to someone’s name in the ladder, let alone 5 different numbers that make up their ranking.[/QUOTE]

There’s no sense of progression now either, only a fake accumulation because of the bonus point inflation.

What numbers are they using? Are these different factors and if so what factors play a role?

I want to see a rating in Brink, not necessarily to have fair games, after all, the precision of the matchmaker can be adjusted as much as the devs like. I want to see the rating because it gives player a tangible progress indicator. A rating going up or down by 50 points was a big deal during my WoW arena games. It gave a thrill to climb from 1700 to 1800, it was really bad to fall back again, but at the same time it made you all the more determined to climb up again.

(system) #64

[QUOTE=tokamak;263870]There’s no sense of progression now either, only a fake accumulation because of the bonus point inflation.

What numbers are they using? Are these different factors and if so what factors play a role?

I want to see a rating in Brink, not necessarily to have fair games, after all, the precision of the matchmaker can be adjusted as much as the devs like. I want to see the rating because it gives player a tangible progress indicator. A rating going up or down by 50 points was a big deal during my WoW arena games. It gave a thrill to climb from 1700 to 1800, it was really bad to fall back again, but at the same time it made you all the more determined to climb up again.[/QUOTE]

Ladder right now, even if it provides a fake view of the player’s skills inside of a division, still makes people worry about loosing games because they go down the ladder or keep playing in the hope they will get promoted to a higher league or division or whatever their name is.

I want to see rating used to sort the teams on a server in Brink because now I’m used and trust SC2’s system in giving me opponents near to my skill and not players who are way better or way worse.

For example, Quake live, it only has a suggested server feature based on player’s skill. And it doesn’t work because people are free to play wherever not matter their actual skill. So the end result is one team gets steamrolled most of the time and players leave the server. I think I can count on my finger how many games of hundreds were balanced and people actually stayed till the end.

And the idea that you will not get better by playing against people of your own skill is false. SC2’s system is not that strict, it allows matches with a bit higher or lower skilled players and of course, once you start winning games in a row, it will pit you against better players, or worse if you keep loosing.

(Apples) #65

[QUOTE=Etek;263869]When actually you don’t have one, or failed to express one.

This my friend, doesn’t make any sense:

First you say it can be good for pub, but you are not sure, but it will suck for competitive. Who the hell gives a damn about competitive? Make your own tournament and setup your own rules there if you want competitive. Stop confusing pubs with competitive.[/QUOTE]

I usually stay calm but you are a god damn moron sir!

What the **** are you trying to show here? that I talked about competition all along and people countered my arguments with pub ones? Yeah thats the main point, if you want to setup such a matchmaking why wont you bother to include the comp crowd? I just tryed to bring another facet of the hypothetical matchmaking system to include competition league and said that in these state it wont be really usefull nor good as you wont progress if you play only vs team that are as good as yours, that mean it need to have some sort of scale or a larger std to allow some delta in the different team’s skill, else it would be prolly boring.

People here talked about pub, I just bring the comp point of view into the table, if you cant stand another pov then go **** a flying duck…

Freaking eejit.

Oh and your last post is clearly what I’m saying since the beginning btw… arguing from the beginning for this result clearly show a lack of comprehension or at least, a lack of envy in understanding other’s POV thats why I should have /threaded this when i said it.

(tokamak) #66

This is simply an insult towards the players intelligence, as your position on the ladder doesn’t mean anything. I’m not exaggerating or joking when I say I’ve been number 1 of my division since the summer. It’s simply the bonus points keeping me there.

Ladder position is artificial, the average SC2 player is intelligent enough to understand that.

And I’m not saying the matchmaking is detrimental or anything, I’m just saying that part is just not as important as the rat(ing) race to me.

(system) #67

[QUOTE=tokamak;263881]This is simply an insult towards the players intelligence, as your position on the ladder doesn’t mean anything. I’m not exaggerating or joking when I say I’ve been number 1 of my division since the summer. It’s simply the bonus points keeping me there.
[/QUOTE]

It may be but it works. I know position in a division doesn’t exactly mean anything but I still want to get to the top and get annoyed when someone else wins some more and I loose a position or to.

Has anyone played Halo, I heard that one has a matchmaking based on player skill. How does it work from the player view? Is it fun, challenging or does it still have situations where teams are very unbalanced?

(BioSnark) #68

Aren’t ladders /etc. normally for competitive players? I thought (from the op) that that’s what it was thread about.

(murka) #69

Yes, the op even mentioned the word “competitive” so that’s what the thread was about, not pubbing like Etek likes to derail the thread towards to and make it look like others don’t get the topic. If you can’t comment on the topic, open another thread.

OnTopic:
A matchmaking system would indeed make life easier. Enter a lineup, wait, play. As simple as that. Would make organizing games on irc a thing of the past.

(Nail) #70

to me, it seemed like the thread started being about a ELO styled ranking system, a point that most people, myself included (once I figured out wtf evryone was talking about[don’t play SC2]) agreed with, then there was all this bs about delaying game, added resources, a marketing thesis on CoD and a bunch of other crap. Let’s close this thread and restart

(tokamak) #71

You use a different definition of ‘competitive’. In SC2, the pub matches are competitive. We want to see the same for Brink pubs (or at least, the option for it to take part in such public games).

(system) #72

Sc2 ladder is for public matches, competitive players join tournaments which have their own ladders. Those are competitive players. Not wannabes that play on pubs and think of themselves as competitive.
The whole idea behind sc2’s ranked matchmaking is to have equally skilled opponents play with each other and not to allow better players to rape noobs because they have nothing better to do. This allows new players to find fun and challenging matches against people at the same skill level, even if you bought the game two years later after it’s release.

(tokamak) #73

Most tournaments actually only apply diamond+ players, with only a few of them being completely open. So your league does matter.

Again, fair games against equal skilled opponents are great, but for me the real appeal is the highly thrilling process. You play to climb up in the ladder, so every game counts in your career. That’s what keeps me coming back to the game.

(Ashog) #74

The matchmaking algorythm in SC2 is FAIL. Point.

Don’t even have to explain this if you had actually played SC2.

So please no SC2 style in Brink.

(system) #75

[QUOTE=brutt01d;264205]The matchmaking algorythm in SC2 is FAIL. Point.

Don’t even have to explain this if you had actually played SC2.

So please no SC2 style in Brink.[/QUOTE]

Mindblowing. Comma!

(system) #76

[QUOTE=tokamak;264192]Most tournaments actually only apply diamond+ players, with only a few of them being completely open. So your league does matter.
[/QUOTE]

I didn’t say leagues do not matter. That’s just a requirement from the organizers to not waste time with so called “competitive” players like some here think of themselves. But there are tournaments out there that just allow anybody. GSL which is the biggest one doesn’t have a league requirement, you just go there, get into qualification and if you make it, good for you.
But would you want to go to a big tournament when you still in bronze? Or even platinum? Or better yet, if your name doesn’t appear in the top 200 of your region? Just for fun maybe.

(Herandar) #77

‘Fail’ is a verb. Ampersand!

(Apples) #78

hur durr, some people here have mastered cynism in their respective uni!

(tokamak) #79

[QUOTE=Etek;264210]I didn’t say leagues do not matter. That’s just a requirement from the organizers to not waste time with so called “competitive” players like some here think of themselves. But there are tournaments out there that just allow anybody. GSL which is the biggest one doesn’t have a league requirement, you just go there, get into qualification and if you make it, good for you.
But would you want to go to a big tournament when you still in bronze? Or even platinum? Or better yet, if your name doesn’t appear in the top 200 of your region? Just for fun maybe.[/QUOTE]

If leagues matter to tournaments, then the leagues are competitive. Otherwise they wouldn’t have any value to them.

The level of skill doesn’t matter. In SC2 players play competitively across the entire spectrum of skill. Most people are trying to climb the ladder no matter how hard they suck at the game, that makes them competitive. Even if you’ve conceded that you’ll never get into diamond or top 200, that doesn’t mean you’re not a competitive player.

And yes I would love to see tournaments in different skill brackets as well. In SC2 and in Brink.

(Humate) #80

Just my 2cents.

I think its a great idea. Its something pub players can conveniently play, with the knowledge that people are playing to win, and they are playing people of their own skill level. Its a doorway into playing comp.

That said, with a standardised in-game ladder system, comes standardised in-game rules - which if such a feature exists, would be played without weapon/class/bodytype/ability/item restrictions. As a result, the higher the level… the less likely it would be taken seriously.