Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

This is a joke


TrixxieTriss's Avatar


TrixxieTriss
06.27.2019 , 10:22 PM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
yolo produces far better matches than regs. I understand ppl may hate arenas and therefore consider any arena bad. but the matches themselves are much much closer than your average reg match. and when an arena IS a blowout, it's over quick unlike a WZ where you either farm or get farmed for 10 minutes or everyone quits.

personally, I just don't like the anxiety or butterflies all the time, so I only dip in occasionally.
Shame there is no dedicated reg arena queue

JediMasterAlex's Avatar


JediMasterAlex
06.28.2019 , 07:26 AM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by TrixxieTriss View Post
Yeah, but ask yourself, why is the rank population so low?
I think the ranked population being low is due to a lot of factors, not just one thing. I have no doubt that some people stay away from it purely because of its perceived toxicity, but I doubt it's that high a number. There are really two kinds of people complaining about toxicity in ranked that I see. 1. Players that don't ever play ranked. 2. Players that played ranked a literal handful of times, played very poorly in all of them, got yelled it, and now think ranked is "toxic" all the time. If you can find a player that actually plays ranked consistently that thinks ranked is a toxic cesspool, please get them to post to prove me wrong.

Quote: Originally Posted by TrixxieTriss View Post
There is competitive banter and sledging, which are fine, and then there is toxicity, which doesn’t help or make anyone feel inclined to play with it.
This gets into the problem that Lhance and I discussed at length in another thread. Everyone defines "toxicity" differently. To some people, the language has to be especially harsh to be considered toxic, to others, simply saying "you have no clue what you're doing, you shouldn't be queueing for ranked" is toxic. The line from what you call competitive banter to "toxicity" is far from clear. If you presented people with a hundred in-game statements with context and asked them to classify them as toxic or not, no two people would come out with the same results.

Quote: Originally Posted by TrixxieTriss View Post
You should not need to have a thick skin or turn off chat just so you can play without harassment.
I think this is a pretty important point to discuss. It's been discussed before in other threads, so I don't want to rehash all of it again, but here are my views briefly. I do think you need to have a thick skin to thrive in a competitive online game. Dealing with trash talking is a fundamental part of the experience. Every single online game I've played, be it counter-strike, Overwatch, TF2, they all have it. If you mentally can't handle people calling you out for mistakes, or calling you bad, or calling you names, then that's up to you. Those things are inherent parts of competitive online games that need to be accepted, in the same way that a Yankee getting booed at Yankee stadium if he strikes out 4 times in a row is par for the course.

Now, there is clearly a line into harassment territory. If someone starts whispering you telling you to kill yourself or using racial slurs, then obviously you shouldn't have to deal with that. You should report the person and hopefully Bioware will take action. I know of a person that got permabanned for doing that (he used the n-word a lot). He made a new account and is playing again. Similarly, I don't think new players should have to deal with getting kicked from ranked matches. **** talked? Yes, that's inevitable if you play poorly in match after match, but kicking someone for that is uncalled for as long as they're trying.

Quote: Originally Posted by TrixxieTriss View Post
People are wary about trying it if they are still trying to learn the format and tactics. Others who could play just avoid it so they don’t have to put up with the grief.
So here's a legitimate problem. On the one hand, obviously we want new people trying ranked to increase the population. Therefore, you would surely say, it would benefit the whole ranked community to be nice and welcoming to those people. To help them along, teach them, and make them into better ranked players so that they can benefit ranked play as a whole.

That all sounds great until you're actually in game with such people, and your own rating is on the line, and you have a merc that pops reflect as he runs into combat before anyone even touches him, or a mara that uses force camo to engage the enemy, or a sniper that doesn't even have entrench on his bar. Such players shouldn't be queueing until they are ready for ranked. While it's true that there are certain things you can only learn from doing ranked itself, people need to have a basic understanding of how to do damage and most importantly how to use their dcds to survive. If they don't have that basic understanding, ranked isn't for them. Ranked is for serious competition, not hand holding. And if my attitude is part of what keeps ranked small, so be it. I doubt you could find many, if any, ranked pvpers that would disagree with me.

Here's a final thought that ties some of my points together. When I started playing this game again last year after not having played it for 4 years, I was obviously pretty bad. I played regs for months before I got fully used to my main class again. And when I first started playing ranked again, I was bad. I was making stupid mistakes, like using my breaker too early, getting netted and dying. I also didn't know the target priorities, and wasn't at all clear on what the right strategies were. I got yelled at a decent amount in those first bunch of matches, and rightfully so. I was messing up and I didn't really know what I was doing. But I still basically knew how to play my class, and I kept playing and trying to improve. Why should the opinion of random strangers stop me? I just needed that ranked experience to get back into the swing of things, which I did rather quickly. Now I don't get yelled at (except by 1 or 2 people that just hate me lol).

So if someone new is starting ranked, they should expect to make mistakes, and to get yelled at for those mistakes. And if you can't handle that, then ranked probably isn't for you. If you can persevere and continue playing until you actually improve, then you will be all the better for it. I've personally seen plenty of players get way better at ranked over the last year, so it's certainly possible.

I could go on and on on this subject, but I'll stop here

foxmob's Avatar


foxmob
06.28.2019 , 07:36 AM | #23
Quote: Originally Posted by JediMasterAlex View Post
I think the ranked population being low is due to a lot of factors, not just one thing. I have no doubt that some people stay away from it purely because of its perceived toxicity, b
agree that it's not nearly as high a number as those who stay away because they don't want to get roflstomped (same reason granked is barren).

however, if said players were to frequent ranked more often, I predict an exponential increase in toxicity, because BW matches high ELO with low ELO on the same team for balanced matches and faster pops. It's frustration with teammates who aren't on the level of themselves that is the root of most of the nasties that I've witnessed in this game's pvp.

edit:
point of clarification on the harassment analogy: booing is a privilege one pays for with a ticket. singling out a player and telling him he sucks is an actionable offfense at yankee stadium (speaking from experience here). personal attacks are actionable offenses. "you don't know what you're doing with your dcds!" is fundamentally different from "you're a sh-tter!" one is a direct reference to game mechanics. the other is a personal attack. "you suck. get out. don't queue. etc." are personal attacks. BW implicitly opened ranked to everyone with their asinine monumental weekly. ranked has no gate. there's no dps check. BW designed the quest so that you could fail 50 times and get your reward. I don't know whether I agree with you or not about who should be in ranked, but I'm certain BW does (or did) not. it is what it is. I'm not judging your opinion on the matter. it's just not what evidence suggests.
Krack

JediMasterAlex's Avatar


JediMasterAlex
06.28.2019 , 07:47 AM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
however, if said players were to frequent ranked more often, I predict an exponential increase in toxicity, because BW matches high ELO with low ELO on the same team for balanced matches and faster pops. It's frustration with teammates who aren't on the level of themselves that is the root of most of the nasties that I've witnessed in this game's pvp.
But if more people queued to the point that more games started happening at once, then the high elo and low elo players would be separated into different games. That already happens now occasionally.

KendraP's Avatar


KendraP
06.28.2019 , 07:48 AM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
agree that it's not nearly as high a number as those who stay away because they don't want to get roflstomped (same reason granked is barren).

however, if said players were to frequent ranked more often, I predict an exponential increase in toxicity, because BW matches high ELO with low ELO on the same team for balanced matches and faster pops. It's frustration with teammates who aren't on the level of themselves that is the root of most of the nasties that I've witnessed in this game's pvp.
I guess I'm overly generous and assume that if the matchmaker could put 8 people of similar skill in a match it would. The issue with low population is that there aren't 8 people of similar skill - theres some really good, some really bad, some in the middle. So.in an attempt to balance it, the really good get stuck with the really bad to even it out. In theory this works sure, but in practice? Idk how to do it better though, without solving the underlying "need more peoole" problem.

foxmob's Avatar


foxmob
06.28.2019 , 07:52 AM | #26
no to alex and kendra.

do you remember back in s1-3? caprica had a rating in the 2ks and was complaining that he never got a pop anymore because there weren't any other players online near his ELO rating. the matchmaker would still have to work those 2k players into the matches, and there aren't enough of them to fill their own queue. you'd still have to change the fundamental way matches are made, and doing so would effectively sideline the best players, thus punishing them for being good.

it would, however, benefit the newer and weaker players who fluff the population.
Krack

KendraP's Avatar


KendraP
06.28.2019 , 07:58 AM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
do you remember back in s1-3? caprica had a rating in the 2ks and was complaining that he never got a pop anymore because there weren't any other players online near his ELO rating. the matchmaker would still have to work those 2k players into the matches, and there aren't enough of them to fill their own queue. you'd still have to change the fundamental way matches are made, and doing so would effectively sideline the best players
This is exactly the problem I just mentioned. Literally, I just stated this problem - if there arent 8 similarly skilled players it currently matches the best with the worst to effectively average it out. I.e. how do you handle the fact that there aren't 8 2k players sitting in the queue? (4 each team, for the truly challenged among us).

I merely added an assumption that, by some miracle 8 - 2k players did happen to be all queueing at the same time, they'd all be in a match together

no, I wasnt playing pvp of any kind back then.

JediMasterAlex's Avatar


JediMasterAlex
06.28.2019 , 08:08 AM | #28
Quote: Originally Posted by KendraP View Post
I guess I'm overly generous and assume that if the matchmaker could put 8 people of similar skill in a match it would.
It does. When there are multiple matches going at once, it groups all of the highest elo players into one game, and the lowest elo players into the other. I've seen it happen enough times that I'm quite sure that's how it works. But often there's only one game going at a time, which is when the mixing inevitably happens.

Quote: Originally Posted by foxmob View Post
do you remember back in s1-3? caprica had a rating in the 2ks and was complaining that he never got a pop anymore because there weren't any other players online near his ELO rating. the matchmaker would still have to work those 2k players into the matches, and there aren't enough of them to fill their own queue. you'd still have to change the fundamental way matches are made, and doing so would effectively sideline the best players, thus punishing them for being good.

it would, however, benefit the newer and weaker players who fluff the population.
That already happens to some degree. I get skipped a lot, and when I look at /who I see all lower elo players.

Also, the reason some had such high ratings back then is because of how matchmaking frequently ended up stacking teams in favor of higher rated players. As soon as they added in cross faction, and made the changes in matchmaking, players aren't reaching anything close to those ratings anymore, because matches are much fairer now than they've ever been (the population problem notwithstanding).

foxmob's Avatar


foxmob
06.28.2019 , 08:14 AM | #29
fair for the overall match, not the individual.

i'm a proponent of everyone being in ranked, btw. if everyone were ranked, there would be a large enough population for everyone on the same team to be close to the same ELO.

however, as alex stated above, ego prevents players from queuing, not just to avoid roflstomps, but if they start seeing a .500 batting average instead of the .750 that their ego demands, they'll stop queuing to protect their self-image. it's human nature and applies to all of us. so I'm not attacking ppl for doing this so much as stating that the sun is hot.
Krack

Sir-steve's Avatar


Sir-steve
06.30.2019 , 06:45 PM | #30
PVP has become unbearably toxic - and I don't just mean smack talk, I can handle that, I mean the same players gating people through abuse of vote kick.... planning to vote kick people (typically new) the minute a Ranked WZ starts and doing so right at the last minute to prevent a completion count.

I've had toons griefed for an entire day by what are clearly the same people and their alts gating new toons from even completing the 10 matches to start getting a rank on leaderboards....originally I figured they were just jerks, now I suspect they're doing it as a form of win trading. They kick a non-grouped member, throw the match and thereby throw off suspicion for a loss. That's my theory anyway.
My friends....we have fought monsters together and we have won. On my own, I fear I may not do as well.

"OMG RUN! It's Sir-Steve The-Adequate!".....said no PvP opponent ever.