Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Premades are ruining non-ranked warzones

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
Premades are ruining non-ranked warzones

Sharee's Avatar


Sharee
06.24.2013 , 12:02 PM | #3821
Quote: Originally Posted by DariusCalera View Post
Yes, you would have more scrub vs scrub matches and, technically, more pro vs pro matches but the actual number of pro matches would be small in comparison because of the rating needed to be considered "pro". So, in other words, the queue times for the pros would be longer because of the smaller "pro" player selection pool.

You did not understand the system i proposed.

There is no 'pro player selection pool'. There is only one pool, of all the players who queued. All of them are allowed to be selected for the same match. The only thing that happens is that when you get selected, another high rating player will also be selected to be your opponent.

Once again, your rating would in no way affect your ability to be selected for any particular match. It would only be considered when selecting what opponents to pit against you.

cashogy_reborn's Avatar


cashogy_reborn
06.24.2013 , 12:16 PM | #3822
Quote: Originally Posted by Sharee View Post
You did not understand the system i proposed.

There is no 'pro player selection pool'. There is only one pool, of all the players who queued. All of them are allowed to be selected for the same match. The only thing that happens is that when you get selected, another high rating player will also be selected to be your opponent.

Once again, your rating would in no way affect your ability to be selected for any particular match. It would only be considered when selecting what opponents to pit against you.
ie, skill based matchmaking. sounds good to me
Dany - Attomm - Dan'y - Fogel
The Original Stormborn Commando Representative
The King of Bads

MotorCityMan's Avatar


MotorCityMan
06.24.2013 , 01:01 PM | #3823
Quote: Originally Posted by Arunas View Post
So. You want matchmaking then ?

From some posters in this thread husband and a wife playing tank and healer together is already an evil premade, ruining poor soloers fun and should be forced to play rateds or vs 4man premades in special queue? Seriously?
Not at all. Of course all premades are not equal, nor are solo players. But there is no simple way outside of ranked for the game to discriminate between a team organized to be competitive and a random group of friends just looking to share the experience. The game only distinguishes between "group" and "solo".
But even in your rather innocent example, pre-selection has occured, matching tank with healer. A definite advantage. (Although communication between husband and wife is a huge variable and might be an advantage....... or not. )

DariusCalera's Avatar


DariusCalera
06.24.2013 , 01:37 PM | #3824
Quote: Originally Posted by Sharee View Post
You did not understand the system i proposed.

There is no 'pro player selection pool'. There is only one pool, of all the players who queued. All of them are allowed to be selected for the same match. The only thing that happens is that when you get selected, another high rating player will also be selected to be your opponent.

Once again, your rating would in no way affect your ability to be selected for any particular match. It would only be considered when selecting what opponents to pit against you.
The part I bolded is the selection pool. If my ranking was 70, then the system would try to match me against another 70. All others, at that point in time, are rejected unless another 70 can not be found at which point it starts to search through all the other players for a rating that is close to mine to create the fairest match.

If I am rating 100, it will have to find another player that is, or close to being, 100. The higher you go in your ratings, the fewer players that there are going to be. So the selection pool of fair opponents is smaller.

If the system is looking for an opponent to a rated 100 player and I am only 70, then my rating does effect my ability to be selected because the system will be looking for someone closer to that 100 rated player. If it doesn't find one, and I am next closest rated player on the list, then yes, I would be selected.

This also leads to the possibility of being in queue for an undermined amount of time because while you may have queued for a WZ first, and been in the queue for "x" number of minutes, the player that just queued up could be selected first because their rating would give a fairer match that yours might have.

I think BW considered all of this and it is why they went with a "first come, first served" type of matching system. It is also why a number of people say that a rated system would not work with out cross server queues because the population on one server may not have the selection depth necessary to create fair matches.

MotorCityMan's Avatar


MotorCityMan
06.24.2013 , 01:45 PM | #3825
Quote: Originally Posted by TimeBandit_Debel View Post
Like i said many times b4 i'll say it again. It is a learn to play issue. If you lose the problem aren't premades the problem is you. All players start on equal foot. If you lose to someone he is better than you. As simple as that. And also people form premades because they will be sure that there will be 3 less bads on their team.

And if you are so fed up with the current state of PVP, why dont you form your own premade and roflstomp pugs? Please don't come up with any excuse such as gear or casual player or any other.
1. Bolster somewhat fixed the gear issue, but didn't fix being bad.
2. Many casual players are very good and also play with a premade (yes, i've heard that b4).

And i will be honest. I like to play in a premade group because I have more chance to win. Do i enjoy stomping pugs... It is fun from time to time. But then again when i started pvping i only solo queued knowing that i will get stomped until i learn to play... And now... i still get stomped because i am a noob
You might be correct in assuming that many of those advocating a solo only queue are "bads" looking for a less competitive warzone. But some might be wanting a place to gear up their alts without the pressures and obligations of team play. Some might be wanting practice on a character they haven't played in awhile. Some just simply enjoy the complete randomness of pug play. ( I have to say I never laughed so hard playing a vid game as I did lowbie wow pug pvp. Completely random teams of half dressed characters running in all directions spamming 1 or 2 abilities over and over.) Some might be new players, looking for a place to test the waters and see what pvp is like.
Some might be players with a sense of fairness and inclusiveness who want to see the game grow. And some might even be pug stompers, here to excise the guilt from their consciences.

But who the advocates are shouldn't matter. What should matter to Bioware is whether or not there are enough of them to warrant their attention and make changes.

Doomsdaycomes's Avatar


Doomsdaycomes
06.24.2013 , 01:45 PM | #3826
Quote: Originally Posted by Comfterbilly View Post
You can't even keep your own argument straight, don't try representing mine.
Taken from Post 3534 on Page 354:

Quote: Originally Posted by Comfterbilly View Post
[*]For every pug that quits, that is one less person who's queuing up into regs. For every person less, that is X-amount of time that gets added to regs queue.
Essentially Less PuG's = Longer queues.

Now then, show me some posts where I've tripped up over my own arguments: Generally all of my posts either:

1) Say Matchmaking is the best option
2) Players have a responsibility for their own enjoyment.

Don't say things you can't back up.

Quote: Originally Posted by Comfterbilly View Post
Here's the pattern: at best, you're talking out of your butt. People who like debate don't like conversing with you because of the strong probability that someone who talks exclusively out of their butt, is probably doing it because they're not capable of contributing something more to the conversation. Like I've said before, the strategic thing to do is just give your argument enough rope to hang itself, but you're like a clumsy cat caught in a dozen nooses, but thinks it's caught a mouse. The real cruelty is to keep giving you the opportunity.

An error I've made for the last time, too. Bye Doomsday.
Oh, really?

How about you have the conviction to defend you arguments or leave the debate? Oh wait... you just did. Nice try comfty, but everyone can see you can't win against me so you hurl insults, duck, then run hoping no one will notice your posts have been tanked by your own logical fallacies and the bias you accuse others of having,

I accept your surrender. Never post here again unless you're willing to defend your arguments.
Player Responsibility: Players have the responsibility to strive for improvement before asking for changes.
Player Accountability: Insufficient credits, lack of gear, poor reputation, and inability to compete is the price of laziness, incompetence, and/or unwillingness.

MotorCityMan's Avatar


MotorCityMan
06.24.2013 , 02:20 PM | #3827
Quote: Originally Posted by Sharee View Post
One possible solution would be to give every player who participates in warzones (even regular ones) an individual rating. This rating would be invisible to the player or anyone else, and would only be used internally by the server matchmaking service.

When composing teams for a match, the service would then do it's best to ensure the sum of individual players' ratings on both teams is roughly the same.

This would naturally deal with pro-level premades, as players playing in them would have very high ratings, so the system would tend to throw premades against other premades. This would also make PUG vs PUG games more fair, as scrubs would not be put against veterans. And all this without having to even consider whether a player joined solo or in a group(so it would not separate those two).
This very well might be an ideal solution. I suspect though, that it is also the most unlikely to be implemented.
Game companies are unwilling to assign rankings to unwilling players because it opens a Pandora's box of issues. Players will challenge every aspect of a ranking system more thoroughly than a team of O.J. Simpson lawyers. Witness the debates over the assignments of medals and class balance.
Individual rankings formulas would be a complete nightmare to figure out and apply accurately compared to the simple won lost ranked team system (which is entered into voluntarily).
I have mentioned before that WoW has designed a match making system for their queue which simply pits groups vs groups and fills in with solo players, leaving a larger pool of solo players to solo fill remaining battlegrounds. I don't know the details of how it works. I have heard from friends that in their experience it seems to make a significant difference, although solo players still end up in battlegrounds with groups on occasion. Blizzard has a much larger pool of players and other systems such as cross server queuing so I don't know if such a system would translate well to SWTOR. Something for Bioware to investigate, and I am sure they will at least look at it.

sanchito's Avatar


sanchito
06.24.2013 , 02:25 PM | #3828
so a question for the pro match making crowd; could you see mixed faction teams in order to help queue times? Or would that be game breaking from a lore point of view?

Jadescythe's Avatar


Jadescythe
06.24.2013 , 02:26 PM | #3829
Quote: Originally Posted by MotorCityMan View Post
This very well might be an ideal solution. I suspect though, that it is also the most unlikely to be implemented.
Game companies are unwilling to assign rankings to unwilling players because it opens a Pandora's box of issues. Players will challenge every aspect of a ranking system more thoroughly than a team of O.J. Simpson lawyers. Witness the debates over the assignments of medals.
Individual rankings formulas would be a complete nightmare to figure out and apply compared to the simple won lost ranked team system.
I don't think you could base it on anything other than wins/losses. If you do, it will just encourage people to focus on that one thing. Example: If medals improved your rating, people would do what is necessary to get the most medals and you'd have dual spec classes naturally getting higher ratings.

People may not like to rely on 7 other people for their rating, but ultimately, if you are better than everyone you are playing with, you'll win more games and keep moving up in the long run.
I have opinions and stuff

You could get free stuff with my referral link here

Doomsdaycomes's Avatar


Doomsdaycomes
06.24.2013 , 02:38 PM | #3830
Quote: Originally Posted by sanchito View Post
so a question for the pro match making crowd; could you see mixed faction teams in order to help queue times? Or would that be game breaking from a lore point of view?
I do think mix faction teams would be kind of against the point of the game. I choose faction X for a reason, etc...

That being said, if they were to implement some kind of mix faction PvE content hell ya PvP should get some mix faction content too.

I'd rather cross server queue's than mix faction though. Other's disagree.
Player Responsibility: Players have the responsibility to strive for improvement before asking for changes.
Player Accountability: Insufficient credits, lack of gear, poor reputation, and inability to compete is the price of laziness, incompetence, and/or unwillingness.