|
On May 13 2016 17:15 tokinho wrote:
Game will have hackers day 1, at least this will help with bans. Its just once you have to do it. The only reason i can see complaining is if you were planning on hacking.
Yep, that's probably the only reason...
No it's not.
2 reasons:
1) I just didn't wanted to wait 2 weeks to get into competitive (I can't go so hard on the game as I did on the beta, it wasn't healthy) but I get it, lvl 25 is good for the vast majority.
2) But I still feel that the best option is to chose a skill level (even after lvl 25) in order to split up the packs a little bit to not make it extremely hard on those who never played a FPS multiplayer on PC or versus PC gamers, or did u miss the "balance feedback posts" on blizzard forum every 30 seconds about balance issues ?
Reaching lvl 25 will not make your aim or fps awareness better, not if you are a complete newcomer to competitive FPS in PC or to what OW is. There is a lot of players that are into OW because it's blizzard IP, because is damn pretty, because there is a story behind it.
Those guys were MAD because they were being raped and many are not buying or getting into it because they were absolutely pwnd and had horrible experiences. Get in their shoes... They matter. And no, not all of them will see your guides (that are good) in TL, or whatever place you post it. Not all of them and everyone matters.
I'm just talking about giving starting mmr to people and then they will go down if they chose wrong and there is no harm in that (only to your ego).
Why not? I'm not proposing anything new or something that broke games.
Poll: Should players be splitted at lvl 25 ?No. (11) 79% Yes, let people chose a knowledge lvl like in Dota 2 and SC 2 (3) 21% 14 total votes Your vote: Should players be splitted at lvl 25 ? (Vote): Yes, let people chose a knowledge lvl like in Dota 2 and SC 2
(Vote): No.
|
1) I just didn't wanted to wait 2 weeks to get into competitive (I can't go so hard on the game as I did on the beta, it wasn't healthy) but I get it, lvl 25 is good for the vast majority.
I cant get it. You need around 12-15 hours of game to reach lvl 25, if you go hardcore, you can achieve that in a weekend, if you dont have time, why so anxious to get into competitive? If you want to be a hardcore overwatch gamer, then you will play at least 3 to 5 hours a day, but if you dont have so much time (as me and the vast majority of people with +25 yo), you need to chill and relax, have a good time and try your best when you can, why are you so worried about grinding some games? compared to other games, its really fast and easy to get into competitive.
2) But I still feel that the best option is to chose a skill level (even after lvl 25) in order to split up the packs a little bit to not make it extremely hard on those who never played a FPS multiplayer on PC or versus PC gamers,
I suffer in Quake, UT, CS and many more "old school FPS games", but i think that OW, (and sadly all new Blizzard games), are noob friendly. You can get achievements, find our revenge soon after u get raped, and play some characters that dont required honed shooting skills. If you want to go beyond that, then you need to develop a strong mentality and be prepared to sweat blood and crush your fingers before you get REALLY good at the game, because the real challenge are the players not the game.
|
On May 12 2016 12:07 DrakanSilva wrote:
I just feel extremely worried about players between 16 to 22 years old that grew playing FPS on consoles or just some single player stuff on PC and MOBA getting to play against grouped guys that will try to get to lvl 25 as fast as possible...
This will only be an issue for the first couple of days. Plus, it might do some bad players good to experience what good play feels like. Also, will the PC player pool be mixed that of the MOBAs?
|
This thread is discussing the symptoms and not the root problem. Matchmaking based on rank like in Hearthstone is simply bullshit because it does not match based on skill but only on a loosely related parameter. There simply should be good old Elo based matchmaking as in almost every other competetive game. Then this would not be an issue to even talk about.
Although they said they would look at the ranked system again. I dont know what the latest is on this topic, but I really hope they get a real matchmaking system for ranked. Would be such a joke if unranked would use Elo matchmaking and therefore had far superior matchmaking compared to ranked.
|
Didn't mind the beta ranked. With enough pop it won't matter that there is an additional restriction in form of your rank. Even if it prioritizes over your MMR. Issue was that it was just a farming game, because you got boni for consecutive wins. And you only lost half the points if the game got a draw.
So even really bad players could get into heroic if enough of them spam games.
Another problem were disconnects in group. But yeah the ranking system in general was fine, its a nice fluff. But god the Sudden Death crap has to go or atleast be softened. So I hope they concentrate on the right thing. Which is not how ranks are displayed lol.
|
Matchmaking in Overwatch appears to be based on some kind of hidden MMR like in SC2. I didn't play beta enough to get a very high rank but I was consistently matched with players who were higher level than I was.
|
On May 16 2016 09:04 FeyFey wrote:
Didn't mind the beta ranked. With enough pop it won't matter that there is an additional restriction in form of your rank. Even if it prioritizes over your MMR. Issue was that it was just a farming game, because you got boni for consecutive wins. And you only lost half the points if the game got a draw.
So even really bad players could get into heroic if enough of them spam games.
Another problem were disconnects in group. But yeah the ranking system in general was fine, its a nice fluff. But god the Sudden Death crap has to go or atleast be softened. So I hope they concentrate on the right thing. Which is not how ranks are displayed lol.
I think they mentioned that one rank before heroic you will lose the same points as you win (+20 or -20) so you will have to win more than losing, before that is +20 and -10, and you can't drop out of the rank (which I think is silly).
Levels are other thing, you can be lvl 100 and still never be in heroic, that's XP based.
I still like it how SC2 ranks worked, I'm not sure if they changed that.
They limite the playerbase to %. If I recall Master is 1% and grand master is 0.1% of the server population. Or I'm completely wrong ? So instead of being wins vs loss points it's a relative win vs loss ratio compared to other players in the same server which I think is nice.
Still waiting for release and what will be the decision for competitive play. Good thing is that Blizz will change it if it's needed.
|
On May 16 2016 14:02 DrakanSilva wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2016 09:04 FeyFey wrote:
Didn't mind the beta ranked. With enough pop it won't matter that there is an additional restriction in form of your rank. Even if it prioritizes over your MMR. Issue was that it was just a farming game, because you got boni for consecutive wins. And you only lost half the points if the game got a draw.
So even really bad players could get into heroic if enough of them spam games.
Another problem were disconnects in group. But yeah the ranking system in general was fine, its a nice fluff. But god the Sudden Death crap has to go or atleast be softened. So I hope they concentrate on the right thing. Which is not how ranks are displayed lol. I think they mentioned that one rank before heroic you will lose the same points as you win (+20 or -20) so you will have to win more than losing, before that is +20 and -10, and you can't drop out of the rank (which I think is silly). Levels are other thing, you can be lvl 100 and still never be in heroic, that's XP based. I still like it how SC2 ranks worked, I'm not sure if they changed that. They limite the playerbase to %. If I recall Master is 1% and grand master is 0.1% of the server population. Or I'm completely wrong ? So instead of being wins vs loss points it's a relative win vs loss ratio compared to other players in the same server which I think is nice. Still waiting for release and what will be the decision for competitive play. Good thing is that Blizz will change it if it's needed.
The ranks in games like sc2 or LoL are rather irrelevant anyway. They are just some trappings obfuscating what actually matters for matchmaking, your MMR/Elo. MMR is hidden from players and rank points are used instead to give players a feeling of advancement even if they are not advancing in skill. Imo its stupid but I am kinda ok with it as long as matchmaking is still skill based and uses MMR/Elo to create the most fair and competetive matches possible.
Now if those nonsense ranks are actually used for matchmaking like in hs and apparenty like it was in OW that is just a travesty. Because it creates more unbalanced matches although an objectively far superior matchmaking could be used.
If MMR/Elo is used for matchmaking the issue you raised in the op does not become an issue at all. Because matches will be made based on the actual skill of the players as it should be, and not something rather arbitrary like "years of fps played before" or whatever. The latter seems complete nonsense to me.
|
Both LoL&Hearthstone use some form of MMR/Elo, the ranks are a charade as you've described. Imo it's going to be the same in OW and I really don't have any issues with that as higher ranked players will actually see the actual rank they belong to(like legendary in HS).
|
On May 18 2016 07:44 Andre wrote:
Both LoL&Hearthstone use some form of MMR/Elo, the ranks are a charade as you've described. Imo it's going to be the same in OW and I really don't have any issues with that as higher ranked players will actually see the actual rank they belong to(like legendary in HS).
Sadly the ranks in hs are not just a charade. At the end of the month I am about a rank 6 player. After the monthly semi-reset (which is poison for good matchmaking in itself) I always wait a little. Then at the lower rank I only get to play against people of the same rank (or 1 rank above when at the border of the rank). No exceptions. With Elo/MMR matchmaking I should play against the rank 6 players I played before the reset that have ranked up by now. This way I can bash new players with legend level net decks and have 80% win rate. Nice fair system they have there. But I take advantage of it to get my daily quests done fast.
A similar system for OW which I consider to be a much more competetive and esports suitable game than hs would be just sad. Btw it should not only be the highest level of play which should have even matches but the lowest as well. With an Elo system it is actually much easíer to get even low level games than for high Elo.
Another problem with the ranked system in HS (and OW beta) is that streaks get rewarded by giving you double the points. Like if you win 5 in a row, then lose 5 in row you will have a higher rank as if you had win / loss in alternation. Therefore ranks are subject to an additional random factor that makes no sense for matchmaking.
In addition to that the variable group sizes in OW ranked queue (players consistently carrying others in their group or consistenly dragging them down, thus distorting their rating or rank) will amplify the matchmaking problems and make things worse than in HS. Although I understand why game developers do not want to give up on that.
|
On May 18 2016 22:28 Redox wrote:
Another problem with the ranked system in HS (and OW beta) is that streaks get rewarded by giving you double the points. Like if you win 5 in a row, then lose 5 in row you will have a higher rank as if you had win / loss in alternation. Therefore ranks are subject to an additional random factor that makes no sense for matchmaking.
I don't play HS so I had no idea this was in place. What's the reason behind it ? Are win streak rewarded in professional sports ? It doesn't make sense.
|
On May 19 2016 17:19 DrakanSilva wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 22:28 Redox wrote:
Another problem with the ranked system in HS (and OW beta) is that streaks get rewarded by giving you double the points. Like if you win 5 in a row, then lose 5 in row you will have a higher rank as if you had win / loss in alternation. Therefore ranks are subject to an additional random factor that makes no sense for matchmaking.
I don't play HS so I had no idea this was in place. What's the reason behind it ? Are win streak rewarded in professional sports ? It doesn't make sense.
The purpose of win streaks is to advance stronger players to better ranks more quickly. Essentially a way to help fix the problem caused by throwing better players back into low ranks every month.
edit: It can also give a sense of progression I guess, as a 50/50 player will generally increase in rank due to occasionally getting free stars from win streaks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
