Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

What exactly is a "quality match" in your mind?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
What exactly is a "quality match" in your mind?

JediMasterAlex's Avatar


JediMasterAlex
05.17.2019 , 08:53 PM | #11
Quote: Originally Posted by Zurules View Post
To Alex,
I ask you to stop trying to tell everyone what you think my reasoning is for anything. Every time you have done this, you have been flat out wrong. Each time after, I made a post explaining my reasoning for all my opinions. You just seem to refuse or you are unable to comprehend my explanations even though I have tried to make them as clear and simple as possible. But even with all my efforts, you continuously create your own explanations for my reasoning and then try to tell everyone that YOUR explanations are my explanations. It's this repeated behavior of yours that leads me to conclude for myself that you are a simple troll and that is why I have no respect for you.
I'm just pointing out your lies and delusions, that's all. Your explanations about "high quality matches" have no basis in reality. I think it's important that people understand that the only reason you preferred the old matchmaking was because it stacked teams in higher ranked players' favor and therefore you won a lot more. It had nothing to do with supposedly "higher quality matches." The matches were never of "higher quality." In fact, it's the opposite, because the current matchmaker creates the most balanced matches possible, unlike the old matchmaker. The truth is important here, and I will keep repeating it as long as you keep denying it.

sharkfishman's Avatar


sharkfishman
05.17.2019 , 09:35 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Lhancelot View Post
I understood you were describing someone, I just left it open-ended though because I am curious if others feel the same way?

I am sure many people don't view a team that seems low-skilled can provide a quality match, but in reality for me I have had some of those types of matches be very competitive and fun.

When both sides seem to have about the same talent and skill in PVP when both teams are compared overall, that can lead to a fun game even if you find yourself as the only veteran or even if you find yourself as the less skilled player on the team.
For me, a high-quality match only depends on my own team. I could care less if the other team is awesome or sucks. At the end of the match, if people were calling out objectives, stunning/knocking back healers, stopping caps, focusing targets, doing great healing or protection, etc. I will congratulate all for an awesome job win or lose. Of course, winning still feels slightly better, lol. But if everyone played awesomely, I feel like it was an honor to fight alongside them.

On the other hand, if we only managed to win because of pure chance, one or two great players and the rest deathmatching, etc. so we almost lose because of it, it irks me.
For my friends, click my referral link for awesome free stuff.
For my enemies, click it just to spite me.

"Don't get cocky."

WayOfTheWarriorx's Avatar


WayOfTheWarriorx
05.17.2019 , 09:35 PM | #13
The OP asked What exactly is a "quality match" in your mind?

That is, therefore, a subjective view point.

He didn't ask for a definition, he asked how we construe quality matches as being.

To my view, you can have a quality match even when you lost.

If each of the players is knowledgeable and skilled in their spec and there isn't any great gear differences [even that is questionable], you would probably be in a good position to experience a quality match.

These kinds of things can get a bit colored by the elo factor, whether or not people even realize it consciously, I'd imagine.

Best way I might word it, 'you know it when you see it".

:::***** *****:::my 2 cents.

KumbayaGOD's Avatar


KumbayaGOD
05.17.2019 , 10:47 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Lhancelot View Post
I am just curious what different people consider a "quality match" in PVP. I think it's an interesting topic, because I never really thought on it much till I seen some Nautolans bringing it up in the other thread.




Personally, I call a quality match one where you literally fight a closely contested WZ till the very end, and even when the match ends you are not sure who won. I like these types of battles!

Whether it's a deathmatch that is highly competitive or an objective based map like Huttball. In fact, I don't even get angry when I lose after matches like these, because of the fun they provide while in the WZ.

How about you Rodians? What do you consider a quality match? My definition is definitely not the same as the guy who Alex describes.

for me quiality matches if we win and we kill alot and steamrolled anemy , if i lose and get rekted by premade i say that is not quality matches
http://www.swtor.com/r/vczzh2 click here for referal code you you get: FREE TRANSFER , FREE STUFFS, FREE 7 DAYS SUBSCRIPTION, FREE UNLOCK AND MORE

TrixxieTriss's Avatar


TrixxieTriss
05.17.2019 , 11:33 PM | #15
One where both teams try to win by playing properly and are evenly matched in classes and skill.

That’s all I ask for. Win or lose, they are the quality matches. Running around death matching or stomping other teams isn’t my idea of quality. I want a challenge and I also want my team and theirs to ALL try.

Lhancelot's Avatar


Lhancelot
05.18.2019 , 03:27 AM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by KumbayaGOD View Post
for me quiality matches if we win and we kill alot and steamrolled anemy , if i lose and get rekted by premade i say that is not quality matches
I figured this perspective exists, too. That's really what I was wondering thanks for posting! I figured, to some a quality match has to be a win, and one where the player enjoys an overwhelming strength that crushes the enemy team.
The Revival of SWTOR: Petition for More Funding and Resources
(Click link Below For More Information)

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=959696

ColorfulCaiques's Avatar


ColorfulCaiques
05.18.2019 , 03:49 AM | #17
Speaking from a solo ranked perspective, to me what constitutes a quality match is 2 teams who end up being virtually even in skill and the game could go either way. I've rarely had games like that but, when they do happen and they get your adrenaline pumping, your throat drying, your palms sweaty - win OR lose - you know that's a quality match.
Don't flatter yourself, EA/BW. I'm just here by the grace of a referral.

nepochop's Avatar


nepochop
05.18.2019 , 01:31 PM | #18
What ever it is, its not this.

Zurules's Avatar


Zurules
05.18.2019 , 01:46 PM | #19
I've already expressed my view on what a high quality match is for me in ranked. My view for a quality match in regs has two possibilities.

1) When a game had both teams take control of the majority of the objectives and the lead changed sides multiple times over the course of the wz duo to GOOD plays and not STUPID mistakes by the defenders. If it ends close in terms of score, that is a bonus.

2) When a team can take the lead in objectives and hold on to them even if they die 50+ times and end up winning the wz with having barely if any kills at all.

The first point is the more general format for a quality game for me in regs which is probably similar to most people's idea of a quality game in regs.

My second point, is a more specific strategy which is unconventional and a lot of people would disagree with as a quality game as it seems like the opposite of my first point. The sole focus on objectives at ALL cost, including your lives even if it leads to a complete massacre, is the strategy that I personally prefer the most when I play reg wz's. This is where I believe most pvpers would think the team doing the massacre is the better team because they dominated the "stats' department aspect of pvp. If you dominate the stats department but cannot translate that into a WIN, I think the other team deserves to say they were the better team during that wz.

Everyone goes into a wz with 1 of two goals: Win or just have fun (sometimes both). No pvper goes into a wz with the goal of losing before the game even starts. So if a team dominates but still manages to lose the wz, I can still call that a quality match if the team who got dominated committed to the all cost strategy to win and winning is what is the most important for them.

*Just want to clarify that reg wzs do NOT include regular arena matches for me as there is only one form of objective in arenas which is to kill all your opponents first.*
All Galaxy Hybrid-Clicker Shadow

Dyne-'s Avatar


Dyne-
05.18.2019 , 07:36 PM | #20
Quote: Originally Posted by nepochop View Post
What ever it is, its not this.
Hah it could be that if you manage to come out on top.

I'm not one of the players that loves objective based game types. I'll assist my team in completing objectives ( defend the ball carrier, capture points, guard doors in voidstar, ect ) but all of that is secondary to a good fight. To me a quality match ( 8v8 ) is one where both teams are of a similar gear score and even skill level where the fights are long, and a well placed cc can make or break the engagement.

The chaos of an 8v8 tends to bring out the best in me. Well placed slows, taunts, intercedes, aoe taunts, clutch guards that people don't expect, and a fair amount of duels that could go either way result in a high quality match in my opinion. One where the fights are so exciting that winning or losing the match becomes irrelevant. I only care about the quality of each engagement. I'm also partial to outnumbered fights where you have to act quickly to defend yourself and rotate cc on multiple opponents in order to stay alive for as long as possible. On occasion even win a 2 v 1.

Oh and an honorable mention to beating die hard "ranked" players in a 1v1 or our pug team ******** on their premade. Hmm...and a day of pvp is never complete without killing my fair share of mercs, operatives, and snipers.

I'm sure you can see a trend. So long as there's a trail of bodies i'm happy.