|
ok, mods before you click on the "close"-button give me a chance to elaborate on this - yes this looks like a QQ-thread (and admittedly it was created after a 0-10 2v2 loss-streak...) nevertheless I want to discuss something that hopefully will be interesting
many know it, many have been there: you wanna play a quick 2v2, be it to warm up, be it because you are tired...it doesn't really matter; what happens is, you get teamed up with somebody who doesn't really know what he is doing; it doesn't have to be something incredibly stupid, it suffices if he screws up basic macro and you end up losing because of it
what happens to me is something that I can't really explain with the match making system: in about 95% of all 2v2s I've played I was - both concerning the in-game "feeling" and points-wise - the better player; now if you check me up at sc2ranks, I'm far from being a good player; I'm low diamond, can't really play 1v1 thanks to my connection and therefore mainly stay with customs and 2v2s;
now getting teamed up with worse players that you have to babysit throughout the whole game is INCREDIBLY frustrating; what I wanted to ask or discuss is....why the hell is something like that even theoretically possible? I mean, basic probability theory tells us that I should be the worse player in about 50% of all matches; yet, mostly I'm the overall "best" player even if our team LOSES (with my teammate obviously being the worst by far); after several losses in a row it normally gets even worse because my teammates then sometimes don't even know how to play eg. a basic 3 rax with terran or 4-gate with toss; I feel like I've already hit a "skill-ceiling" thanks to my teammates...because I just can't overcome the weaknesses of my allies after a certain point;
am I just incredibly unlucky or does this happen to you to? why do you think is this the case? I mean, I'd LOVE to be the "newb" in a kinda "advanced" 2v2 for once...only for once I'd like to have a far better teammate "guiding" the game which means I could focus on macro and micro and didn't have to bother with couting both opponents, deciding the tech for me AND my ally etc.
it also seems like the MMR doesn't adjust for this problem, because once I start losing, my allies also get A LOT worse - the only difference then is, that I can compensate for this since my opponents also make much more mistakes...which means I can win these kinda 1v2 matches regularly;
is 2v2 just really screwed up or did anybody overcome this stupidity by mass-gaming? because I'd love to play 2v2s to relax, especially after work or after I haven't played for a couple of days and don't want the "stressful" 1v1-experience; but not being able to get some decent matches with both decent opponents AND decent teammates after nearly 200 games doesn't make sense to me
|
I do stupid shit in teamgames, because I play teamgames for the purpose of doing stupid shit. Don't really care if I lose em, because goddamn I am having a blast.
I also dont really pay attention playing team games. Don't feel like stressing myself to keep my macro up, I save that for my actual 1v1 games.
I doubt I am the only person who does this.
|
Yea happens to me aswell. I've never actually played with someone who was plat or above, never.
I guess it's because good players have more important things to do than to fool around in 2v2, but you'd still think that atleast some would be playing.
I'd like to see custom games where only diamond players can join, or only silver/gold. So that you could choose who you'd be against, and who your teammate would be.
Instead, you have to get lucky, and even if you get a good teammate, 95% of the time the other team is so bad it's not even funny.
It's almost ironic that custom games are called CUSTOM games, there is nothing custom about them, you can choose map and thats it. Custom implies that they are customizable, but whatever 
|
They really have to sort this out, it's not fun for the newbie if he's worse than you. On a related note, doing your random team placement matches with bronze players, where you basically steamroll every enemy player yourself, isn't fair, they should take in to consideration your 1v1 skill level rather than having to go through placement matches for team games, it's not like a platinum 1v1er is going to play at a bronze level in team games...
|
United States22154 Posts
The reason why you get allies that dont know what they are doing is usually not because they are unskilled players but rather because they play team games for fun, and thus dont use conventional builds. When I play 4v4s I not only play my off races but I go for the most ridiculous possible builds, like my terran no rax all game build. Is this conducive to winning games? No. But its fun, if you want to play 2v2 seriously you need to find a partner who you know is good and stick with him, otherwise you'll get to play with me and my baneling only build
|
I dont care about win/loose in 2v2. Just doing fun strats i alwas wanted to do but they wont work in 1v1. Like Carrier rushing, or Warp Prism/DT's, mass Archons.
Just usual fun stuff.
|
I totally understand where you're coming from. I started playing random team games too and almost invariably I end up with the highest score, win or lose, even though I play random to offrace in team games.
I just assumed that people who are mid diamond or higher tend to not play random team games thus as a mid diamond player you are literally as good as it gets for the randomized team system to choose from. To offset your high skill level (in comparison with other random team game players), you get put with lower skilled players.
I'm not sure if that's exactly how it works but if so, a system that puts the top 8 vs each other, then the 9-16th, etc for 4v4 for example, would make a lot more sense.
Its silly when your teammates are so vastly superior or inferior to you in skill.. Its very hard to coordinate and play as a team
|
I play almost only 1on1 and have not much interest in playing teamgames, so it doesn't really bother me, but i still agree that the system is flawed.
If you get better in random 2on2 you will get worse allys because the system tries to even up the teams and minimize loading time. So if you are low diamond you will most likely get a silver player and play against two platinum when they are a team or another diamond with another silver ally.
So either you play half a 1on2 or you play a 1on1 with bad allies doing something on the side.
I think they should change the system so that you get matched up with someone who is about the same skill as you are. This will result in longer loading times but better games. At least for 2on2 there should be enough players so that the loading times don't get out of hand.
|
I had similar feelings for a while. But after I got into diamond in random 2v2 I feel like my allies have been consistently quite good. Maybe I have had good luck the last two weeks, or maybe people are really better.
Anyway, if you are stuck in gold or plat with crappy partners try not playing a straight up macro game. Go for dts or something. You dont even have to rush for them because usually at least one player will never get detection, or get one turret in their mineral line but not have any thing to actually defend it.
|
Same here, I also go archivement hunting.
I once cannon rushed 3 players in a 4v4 haha
I also mass archong + mothership and toilet trick them (also got distorted reality)
mass sentrys
mass marines
mass drops
mass infestors
mass zerglings
MASS MUTAS
mass cannons
mass thors
oh man, i love team games 
|
Sometimes I feel really bad for my teammates in team games, because I really dont give a rats ass about winning or losing. Usually I go and do some quick opening BOs just for fun and then afk to do something else lol.
|
United States12237 Posts
On October 29 2010 03:49 IPS.ZeRo wrote:
I play almost only 1on1 and have not much interest in playing teamgames, so it doesn't really bother me, but i still agree that the system is flawed.
If you get better in random 2on2 you will get worse allys because the system tries to even up the teams and minimize loading time. So if you are low diamond you will most likely get a silver player and play against two platinum when they are a team or another diamond with another silver ally.
So either you play half a 1on2 or you play a 1on1 with bad allies doing something on the side.
I think they should change the system so that you get matched up with someone who is about the same skill as you are. This will result in longer loading times but better games. At least for 2on2 there should be enough players so that the loading times don't get out of hand.
Yeah, I think that's what happens too. That seems to be what a lot of Diamond-level players report. What's unclear is who the system prioritizes: finding your ally or finding your opponents first. If it prioritizes your ally, then you really will just get anyone and your opponents will be around the level of the average between you and your ally. If it prioritizes your opponents, then your opponents will be completely random and your ally will have to be someone who tries to balance out your team so that you're close to your opponents' level.
Or it could try to group you evenly for allies and opponents, but I don't think it does this... maybe it would take too long?
|
I hate people who know what they are doing in team games, therefore they end up making *NOTHING* but Marines and Zerglings for 15 minutes till they kill 1 of you or lose.
My impressions of a 2v2 Terran CHAMP.
"1a2aa3s1a2aa3s1a2aa3es1a2aa3s1a2aa3s1a2aa3es" 15 minutes later
"1a2aa3s1a2aa3s1a2aa3s1a2aa3es1a2aa3" Oh I missed a Forced Field, GG, yes I know I'm a nub.
2v2 Diamond, but I don't play enough 2v2 games anymore to comment on whether I get bad partners that often. But I'd have to say its 50/50, and since I'm toss I usually have to rely on a Z or T helping me defend early, which makes me feel like the weak player (even though every 2v2 game now just seems like some form of my first comment)
Long story short, 2v2 is for fun, but it can be infuriating.
EDIT: I forgot the Terran Champ had a reactor. DUR.
|
It gets even worse in 3v3 and 4v4. It becomes an incredibly frustrating experience when I want to warm up by playing some 3v3 or 4v4 when I get a string of matches where my partners are complete retards. There are times (last night) where it gets so bad that I wipe out 2 of the opponents alone and the other three on my team are so bad that I just get worn down and end up losing because they did literally nothing. I don't claim to be the best player, it just crawls under my skin to get stuck on the team full of idiots match after match after match. Highly frustrating to come in #2 if not #1 on the overall rank and still having lost while my three teammates are so far at the bottom it is almost sad.
|
Just played with a guy that against T T went mass roaches, when I scanned there was mass marines, I told him to switch to Blings.... he continued with the roaches..... -_-
|
On October 29 2010 04:26 zeeQue wrote:
Just played with a guy that against T T went mass roaches, when I scanned there was mass marines, I told him to switch to Blings.... he continued with the roaches..... -_-
Roaches beat up Marines, anyway....
They are not so effective as blings, but, they dont suck either..
|
Team match making is simply ridiculous. Random team players can get matched against arranged team, that causes so many problems. For 3v3 or 4v4 you can simply form a party with one friend, and search for these game types. That gives you a huge advantage putting you in a random team 3v3/4v4 game with a friend on your side. It would be much more fun for everyone if they changed this.
|
have u ever considered that ur a noob too and your team mates think that they too are cursered o.o?
|
On October 29 2010 04:39 MrArarat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 04:26 zeeQue wrote:
Just played with a guy that against T T went mass roaches, when I scanned there was mass marines, I told him to switch to Blings.... he continued with the roaches..... -_- Roaches beat up Marines, anyway.... They are not so effective as blings, but, they dont suck either..
Mass Roaches loses to 2 players going mass Marine. Banelings with Roach support, however, is a different matter.
OT: This is ultimately why I stopped playing random team games. I only ever play team games with friends I know and trust to not play at sub-copper.
|
On October 29 2010 03:36 Seide wrote:
I do stupid shit in teamgames, because I play teamgames for the purpose of doing stupid shit. Don't really care if I lose em, because goddamn I am having a blast.
I also dont really pay attention playing team games. Don't feel like stressing myself to keep my macro up, I save that for my actual 1v1 games.
I doubt I am the only person who does this.
This guy nailed it lol
|
If you're playing a game to warm up, you shouldn't be too concerned with winning or losing. You should be focusing on keeping up with your macro, etc. and "warming up"
|
On October 29 2010 03:34 sleepingdog wrote:
what I wanted to ask or discuss is....why the hell is something like that even theoretically possible? I mean, basic probability theory tells us that I should be the worse player in about 50% of all matches;
Well if you're in diamond then you're in the (for the sake of arguement) top 5% of players. Add to that the fact that more skilled players probably play fewer 2v2s, and the vast majority of players who queue for a game will be worse than you.
Now of course the MMR should compensate for that... perhaps there aren't many players of your skill or above queuing for a game at the same time as you, so it's hard for the system to match you with those players.
|
I use team games just for fun! In a 4v4 I once built up a 200/200 army of almost entirely ghosts with the original intention of just getting the "Professionals Have Standards" achievement but wound up playing one of my most hilarious and fun games. I highly recommend the "all-ghost" build for someone looking to have a good time.
|
United States13896 Posts
This OP is unreadable. Please capitalize and learn to use periods for God's sake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
