I feel like I'm spending more time in the queue than actually playing. I sit in the queue for an average of 10 minutes. I understand that it is trying to find a balanced game but 95% of the time it doesn't find a balanced game anyway - so why not skip the waiting?
The queue for AT is too damn high!
12 May 2015, 14:24 PM
#1
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
12 May 2015, 14:34 PM
#2
Posts: 17889 | Subs: 8
High ranked players wait longer as there is not enough high level players playing.
You need to wait until search will expand to people below your level or play at different times, you can check at steam charts when most players play during the day and adjust your play sessions is possible.
You need to wait until search will expand to people below your level or play at different times, you can check at steam charts when most players play during the day and adjust your play sessions is possible.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
12 May 2015, 14:34 PM
#3
1 
Posts: 764
If you want easy wins, why don't you just play AI bashes?
I'd go for the opposite, stop the newbie bashing... just gonna force more people to leave the playerbase. :/
I'd go for the opposite, stop the newbie bashing... just gonna force more people to leave the playerbase. :/
12 May 2015, 14:42 PM
#4
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
If you want easy wins, why don't you just play AI bashes?
I'd go for the opposite, stop the newbie bashing... just gonna force more people to leave the playerbase. :/
My point was the waiting is in vain. So we wait 10 minutes for the search to expand, just to be put in an unbalanced game anyway. So why expand and wait when it almost never finds a balanced game anyhow? Personally, I'd like to spend my time playing not waiting.
12 May 2015, 14:50 PM
#5
1 Posts: 764
My point was the waiting is in vain. So we wait 10 minutes for the search to expand, just to be put in an unbalanced game anyway. So why expand and wait when it almost never finds a balanced game anyhow? Personally, I'd like to spend my time playing not waiting.
So do i, but have you ever considered what your opponents might feel like?
I used to play random Axis in 3v3 / 4v4 a lot, which was mainly:
- start search
- found a game and play the first 5 minutes
- tab out for 20 minutes
- get back in and win, because nothing happened in those 20 minutes
ATs are like this anyways.
These easy wins wreck the game for the majority of players, and plenty of them may never come back, which will lead to some sort of downward spiral, meaning: people who could be one day your balanced opponent will leave the playerbase before they ever even reach your skill level in a particular mode.
And yeah, the game should NEVER throw you into a heavily unbalanced game. There's no point in playing with or against people that are way outside of your skill range. They won't understand what you're doing, saying, trying... it's a waste of time, it's win farming, stats grinding, it's... just bad.
12 May 2015, 14:57 PM
#6
Posts: 732
I feel like I'm spending more time in the queue than actually playing. I sit in the queue for an average of 10 minutes. I understand that it is trying to find a balanced game but 95% of the time it doesn't find a balanced game anyway - so why not skip the waiting?
Try searching as allies
12 May 2015, 15:04 PM
#7
1 
Posts: 2885
Try searching as allies
I guess that's the point in fact. +1
12 May 2015, 15:07 PM
#8
1 Posts: 764
Nobody actually seeing his attached playercard apparently 
12 May 2015, 16:54 PM
#9
Posts: 1484
Try searching as allies
 | Playercard of WingZero | |||||||||||||||
|
12 May 2015, 17:01 PM
#10
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
-Play 1v1
-Play 2v2 and search for the faction with least players OR once you find a good opponent just keep searching inmediatly with the opposite faction (you'll just get matched inmediatly)
-Playing 3v3 or 4v4 as Axis? GL, take a number and wait.
-Playing 3v3 or 4v4 as allies? Enjoy stomping those waiting for 10mins which are lower rank.
PD: if you want don't want "ez mode", just look for randnubs. You'll have to carry.
-Play 2v2 and search for the faction with least players OR once you find a good opponent just keep searching inmediatly with the opposite faction (you'll just get matched inmediatly)
-Playing 3v3 or 4v4 as Axis? GL, take a number and wait.
-Playing 3v3 or 4v4 as allies? Enjoy stomping those waiting for 10mins which are lower rank.
PD: if you want don't want "ez mode", just look for randnubs. You'll have to carry.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
12 May 2015, 17:10 PM
#11
Posts: 1122
I think there should be option like "yes, i want to spend 10m to search +_balanced in skill terms teammates and opponents", so nobody would go for fast search ever again 
Actually, we are fighting decent opponents quite often.
Actually, we are fighting decent opponents quite often.
12 May 2015, 17:45 PM
#12
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
For the record, I was talking about allies, but waiting as axis as well.
The 10 minutes is a waste because 99% of the time its not finding a balanced match anyway. So why the wait, why not just let us play with the next available group.
Kamk, it doesn't make sense to punish teams for playing well together. Losing is part of the game and its also a great learning experience for those who may not have as much experience. If you are worried you are going to get stomped then I think the onus is on the player, not the other teams.
12 May 2015, 18:05 PM
#13
1 Posts: 764
...
Kamk, it doesn't make sense to punish teams for playing well together. Losing is part of the game and its also a great learning experience for those who may not have as much experience. If you are worried you are going to get stomped then I think the onus is on the player, not the other teams.
I'm not talking about punishing teams, nor certain modes & factions, i'm talking about complete bullshit matches and free wins.
If you consider free wins as glorious gameplay, then you'll probably won't understand, but i doubt you're like that.
Think about it differently: the majority of COH players doesn't play COH for the competition, they play for fun. And getting instantly owned is the opposite of fun. So they will quit, and so do the actual competitive random mates they may have had once (they give up on certain random matches, because they just get literal scrubs anyways, so what's the point)
So what happens?
- you lose the casual playerbase
- you lose the competitive playerbase
... and you face even more beginners who are still brave enough to roll the dice, till they also give up.
Maybe it's just me, but my most enjoyable games were the ones that lasted, or where i could at least see what i did wrong / right, and not the ones when i had to play 1v2 from start, or could base siege the enemy 5 minutes into the game - both are utterly, excuse my language, retarded.
12 May 2015, 18:12 PM
#14
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
I'm not talking about punishing teams, nor certain modes & factions, i'm talking about complete bullshit matches and free wins.
If you consider free wins as glorious gameplay, then you'll probably won't understand, but i doubt you're like that.
We play as a team because we enjoy the team aspect and each others company - wins are wins, free or not.
Think about it differently: the majority of COH players doesn't play COH for the competition, they play for fun. And getting instantly owned is the opposite of fun. So they will quit, and so do the actual competitive random mates they may have had once (they give up on certain random matches, because they just get literal scrubs anyways, so what's the point)
So what happens?
- you lose the casual playerbase
- you lose the competitive playerbase
... and you face even more beginners who are still brave enough to roll the dice, till they also give up.
If you are going to run away because you are losing then goodbye
Maybe it's just me, but my most enjoyable games were the ones that lasted, or where i could at least see what i did wrong / right, and not the ones when i had to play 1v2 from start, or could base siege the enemy 5 minutes into the game - both are utterly, excuse my language, retarded.
Agreed, the longer competitive games are much better but I dont see why waiting 10 erroneous minutes has anything to do it with.
12 May 2015, 18:19 PM
#15
1 Posts: 764
Agreed, the longer competitive games are much better but I dont see why waiting 10 erroneous minutes has anything to do it with.
Doesn't have to be long, but at least around the same skill range, so both sides "understand" what happened, and may improve upon that.
The match making expands it's requirements over time. Sadly that's bad for everyone. You waited longer just to do
They should limit MM alltogether, and your wait time would "count" at least.
Hope you get my point.
Edit: nevertheless, the higher ranked you are, the more you wait - at least around player peaks it's rather fast.
12 May 2015, 18:44 PM
#16
Posts: 862
I'm not talking about punishing teams, nor certain modes & factions, i'm talking about complete bullshit matches and free wins.
If you consider free wins as glorious gameplay, then you'll probably won't understand, but i doubt you're like that.
Think about it differently: the majority of COH players doesn't play COH for the competition, they play for fun. And getting instantly owned is the opposite of fun. So they will quit, and so do the actual competitive random mates they may have had once (they give up on certain random matches, because they just get literal scrubs anyways, so what's the point)
So what happens?
- you lose the casual playerbase
- you lose the competitive playerbase
... and you face even more beginners who are still brave enough to roll the dice, till they also give up.
Maybe it's just me, but my most enjoyable games were the ones that lasted, or where i could at least see what i did wrong / right, and not the ones when i had to play 1v2 from start, or could base siege the enemy 5 minutes into the game - both are utterly, excuse my language, retarded.
+10
12 May 2015, 18:58 PM
#17
Posts: 1678 | Subs: 5
That post doesn't make sense though, because it's completely contradictory and it's ignorant of the challenges associated with matchmaking algorithms.
First of all, it says "the majority of CoH players don't play CoH for the competition" and follows it up with "getting instantly owned is the opposite of fun". Which is it? Competing is simply the act of trying to beat someone else in an activity. If you don't care about competition, by definition you don't care about winning or losing. Except the post says people do care about it because people don't like losing. Which means people are competing. Make up your mind.
It's also incredibly unrealistic. Sure, you could put hard limits on skill gaps, but that means the very real possibility that players at extreme ends of the skill spectrum (very good and very bad) may not find games even after multiple hours of searching. That's unacceptable. Equally unacceptable is matching players regardless of skill level, because while it drastically reduces wait times, it also reduces match quality.
The correct solution is somewhere in between. Some system that balances finding even matches with limiting players to reasonable queue times. If only Relic implemented a system like that...
Wait a minute...
First of all, it says "the majority of CoH players don't play CoH for the competition" and follows it up with "getting instantly owned is the opposite of fun". Which is it? Competing is simply the act of trying to beat someone else in an activity. If you don't care about competition, by definition you don't care about winning or losing. Except the post says people do care about it because people don't like losing. Which means people are competing. Make up your mind.
It's also incredibly unrealistic. Sure, you could put hard limits on skill gaps, but that means the very real possibility that players at extreme ends of the skill spectrum (very good and very bad) may not find games even after multiple hours of searching. That's unacceptable. Equally unacceptable is matching players regardless of skill level, because while it drastically reduces wait times, it also reduces match quality.
The correct solution is somewhere in between. Some system that balances finding even matches with limiting players to reasonable queue times. If only Relic implemented a system like that...
Wait a minute...
12 May 2015, 19:05 PM
#18
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
The correct solution is somewhere in between. Some system that balances finding even matches with limiting players to reasonable queue times. If only Relic implemented a system like that...
Wait a minute...
Yeah and that was kind of the crux of my post. Whats the point in waiting 10+ minutes when the games are generally not competitive anyway. Halo had an option where if you didn't want to wait for a balanced game you could speed the process up. Coh2 doesn't have the playerbase to warrant this so we may as well skip the waiting time because those teams with similar skill aren't going to magically appear. We wait the 10+ minutes just to get put in an unbalanced game.
As far as the first part of this post I couldn't agree more. Its not my fault if you play a team game with the thought that its all for fun and expect everyone to shelter your feelings. If you want to win - play comp stomps or custom, not in a team ladder game mode.
12 May 2015, 19:09 PM
#19
Posts: 1678 | Subs: 5
Because if you say "I don't care, match me with anyone", you're potentially screwing over a less-skilled person who may have found a more balanced matchup in the time it would have taken for the algorithm to expand your player pool enough to get matched with him anyways.
12 May 2015, 19:18 PM
#20
Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1
So maybe a fast track option would be beneficial.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
35 | ||
 |
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
94 | ||
|
|
|
|
12 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.968562.633+23
- 2.555227.710+11
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.275110.714+13
- 5.259143.644+3
- 6.250150.625+11
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.250135.649+1
- 9.19265.747+5
- 10.672425.613+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
744
Board Info
576 users are online:
576 guests
11 posts in the last 24h
30 posts in the last week
144 posts in the last month
30 posts in the last week
144 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45040
Welcome our newest member, jacantonh81
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, jacantonh81
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM