EPTEvery game against stacks are the worst experiences that I ever had. Skype is too strong for me to handle solo.
Ranked matchmaking coming to Dota 2 - Page 110
| Forum Index > Closed |
Please keep the QQ to a minimum if you do not like this update. We are happy to hear your reasoning for not liking a ranked system, but no "OMG VOLVO WHY" posts. | ||
|
Laserist
Turkey4269 Posts
Every game against stacks are the worst experiences that I ever had. Skype is too strong for me to handle solo. | ||
|
juracule
292 Posts
On January 18 2014 23:25 Laserist wrote: I don't want to play against stacks. This is the worst part of the ranked MM. Every game against stacks are the worst experiences that I ever had. Skype is too strong for me to handle solo. well you're outta luck cuz valve thinks it's far more important to add a server-side aesthetic option instead | ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
On January 18 2014 23:25 Laserist wrote: I don't want to play against stacks. This is the worst part of the ranked MM. Every game against stacks are the worst experiences that I ever had. Skype is too strong for me to handle solo. Assumptions. Sounds almost like the moment you identify a stack, you lose the game. Pretty sure they will eventually do something about it, like broaden the discrepancy between more and less stacked teams (what does that even mean...), seeing that everyday there has to be someone mentioning it. | ||
|
ChunderBoy
3242 Posts
On January 18 2014 20:59 Laurens wrote: One of those was Beesa right? "looking for gf 6K MMR" either him or a fanboy. Well you can tell him how to play vs solo bounty when he visits this thread later then ^^ not me. and bh is prolly the easiest hero to get fed off when he is offlaning. also sing will probably get 4.5kish teammates when he solo qs. | ||
|
phantaxx
United States201 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 19 2014 07:30 phantaxx wrote: I hate how you can abandon after all the picks are done and have no stats/mmr recorded, I'm noticing more often now and just had 2 games in a row where someone didn't like their teams lineup and abandoned, and there is no mmr change from it. Seems a bit abusive, they get out of an almost certain loss. All pick sort of sucks for that. They still get an abandon I believe, however. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On January 19 2014 07:30 phantaxx wrote: I hate how you can abandon after all the picks are done and have no stats/mmr recorded, I'm noticing more often now and just had 2 games in a row where someone didn't like their teams lineup and abandoned, and there is no mmr change from it. Seems a bit abusive, they get out of an almost certain loss. I found out that the most tryhard lu are easily beatable bc most of the times people playing them have no clue how to dota hence they pick good heroes | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22213 Posts
On January 19 2014 07:30 phantaxx wrote: I hate how you can abandon after all the picks are done and have no stats/mmr recorded, I'm noticing more often now and just had 2 games in a row where someone didn't like their teams lineup and abandoned, and there is no mmr change from it. Seems a bit abusive, they get out of an almost certain loss. Yeah but their entire stack gets an abandon, and if they do it enough they get put into lpq. | ||
|
Avs
Korea (North)857 Posts
| ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
zezamer
Finland5701 Posts
| ||
|
Jinxed
United States6450 Posts
On January 19 2014 10:31 zezamer wrote: best system was no rating but if we need to have some this is fine. if we have some performance thing everyones gonna play gankers have shadowblade and once your team starts to lose hide in trees and wait for it to end You always had a rating. No rating (at all, visible or not visible doesn't matter) means that pretty much every match you get is going to suck with the exception of like 2 or 3 really good matches every 100+ games. That being said, individual performance is bullshit. If you don't do enough to win, then that's all that matters. | ||
|
maru~
2345 Posts
On January 19 2014 10:55 LeLoup wrote: No rating (at all, visible or not visible doesn't matter) means that pretty much every match you get is going to suck with the exception of like 2 or 3 really good matches every 100+ games. So nothing would change? | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On January 19 2014 09:35 Erasme wrote: For the tenth time, its the best system. Nothing else matters. On January 19 2014 10:31 zezamer wrote: best system was no rating but if we need to have some this is fine. if we have some performance thing everyones gonna play gankers have shadowblade and once your team starts to lose hide in trees and wait for it to end Leloup wrote:That being said, individual performance is bullshit. If you don't do enough to win, then that's all that matters. This is only something very low level minds (not just DOTA, in complete general) would accept. Its entirely possible to build a set of conditions unique to each hero that gauges how good you are with them or what you did to help win especially with all stats being kept track of like in gems. If the criteria were as complex as gems with their diversity in what they can count and keep track of, it would most likely work just fine. Bringing up "K/D will be the ultimate goal" isn't even a point since there's already proof that a much more complex and involving system is already in place and could easily be implemented. This is the only possible way an intelligent mind can see this. There is no point that can be made against the complex system idea that would be considered in any way logical or correct unless the person making that decision were retarded or unthinking/uncreative at the very least. | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On January 19 2014 11:06 sCCrooked wrote: This is only something very low level minds (not just DOTA, in complete general) would accept. Its entirely possible to build a set of conditions unique to each hero that gauges how good you are with them or what you did to help win especially with all stats being kept track of like in gems. If the criteria were as complex as gems with their diversity in what they can count and keep track of, it would most likely work just fine. Bringing up "K/D will be the ultimate goal" isn't even a point since there's already proof that a much more complex and involving system is already in place and could easily be implemented. This is the only possible way an intelligent mind can see this. There is no point that can be made against the complex system idea that would be considered in any way logical or correct unless the person making that decision were retarded or unthinking/uncreative at the very least. And yet, noone ever mentions a way to track individual performance that could not be gamed and would be fair for every kind of hero and playstyle. Lots of retarded and uncreative people. | ||
|
govie
9334 Posts
 | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On January 19 2014 11:16 SKC wrote: And yet, noone ever mentions a way to track individual performance that could not be gamed and would be fair for every kind of hero and playstyle. Lots of retarded and uncreative people. Sadly, yes. Welcome to the real world. Hope it didn't shock you too much. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On January 19 2014 11:06 sCCrooked wrote: This is only something very low level minds (not just DOTA, in complete general) would accept. Its entirely possible to build a set of conditions unique to each hero that gauges how good you are with them or what you did to help win especially with all stats being kept track of like in gems. If the criteria were as complex as gems with their diversity in what they can count and keep track of, it would most likely work just fine. Bringing up "K/D will be the ultimate goal" isn't even a point since there's already proof that a much more complex and involving system is already in place and could easily be implemented. This is the only possible way an intelligent mind can see this. There is no point that can be made against the complex system idea that would be considered in any way logical or correct unless the person making that decision were retarded or unthinking/uncreative at the very least. Then go for it and submit it to Valve. It's easy to call people dumb and suggest something unrealisable just because. Low level mind. | ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
On January 19 2014 11:20 sCCrooked wrote: Sadly, yes. Welcome to the real world. Hope it didn't shock you too much. You should be the first one to enlighthen us, since it's so easy. | ||
|
Jinxed
United States6450 Posts
On January 19 2014 11:06 sCCrooked wrote: This is only something very low level minds (not just DOTA, in complete general) would accept. Its entirely possible to build a set of conditions unique to each hero that gauges how good you are with them or what you did to help win especially with all stats being kept track of like in gems. If the criteria were as complex as gems with their diversity in what they can count and keep track of, it would most likely work just fine. Bringing up "K/D will be the ultimate goal" isn't even a point since there's already proof that a much more complex and involving system is already in place and could easily be implemented. This is the only possible way an intelligent mind can see this. There is no point that can be made against the complex system idea that would be considered in any way logical or correct unless the person making that decision were retarded or unthinking/uncreative at the very least. Wow good attempt to talk down much? Alright let's indulge because you seem to have the answers and clearly feel slighted over the fact that your elite level skill are clearly not being recognized by Valve's super number system. There is a big difference between numbers in a game and actual game impact. You can sit there and have all the best numbers for a game, but considering how variable and different each game is the value of each number changes along with everything else. The difference between a good 1 man black hole/RP/Ravage and a bad one is not something that the game is ever going to accurately be able to calculate. If you land nothing but 1 man black holes, but they're always full duration and secure kills on the enemy hard carry that's a lot different than blowing one on a half health crystal maiden. Still for the most part, unless the algorithm can say what heroes you've caught in it, it will still be just 1 hero in a black hole. It's the same thing for pretty much every other statistic in the game. Kills, deaths, assists, gold earned. It's all varied based on so many other things that writing an algorithm that takes into account the 150+ factors that really go to show what is a 'good' performance that it doesn't matter at all. If you didn't make enough of an impact to win, you don't deserve to win. That's what it comes down to. That is what every match comes down to and the basic thing that 90% of the MMR Hell bs is. People think you can't get there playing a support, but the reality is that 95% of the people complaining have no idea how to actually play support. Same with the people that complain about teammates and how they manage to feed, but no one ever says about how they adapted their game to adjust for the fact that the enemy was ahead. It's always about their item timing, or their kda or their gpm. So yeah, it does come down to winning or losing. Because when you cut away all of the other bullshit, if you're really better than people, and you really understand the game, you will win more games than you lose. | ||
| ||
