Leaderboard matchmaking system broken?
21 Oct 2013, 13:50 PM
#21
Posts: 2425
Permanently BannedYou had to play 10+MP games in dow2 to get an ELO that counted for matchmaking in DoW2. Dunno if that was translated to CoH2 too.
21 Oct 2013, 13:59 PM
#22
4 
Posts: 813 | Subs: 1
They have stated 10-20 games on one of their casts/posts (cant remember sadly, getting old) a while ago. So dont count on the ELO matching you up with anything resembling your skill within the first 10-20 games.
21 Oct 2013, 14:18 PM
#23
Posts: 83
As a 2v2 player, I have run into something similar. Although it is more anecdotal than based on checking my opponents ladder ranks.
Basically I seem to be very streaky. I will win a few then get hammered with 4+ losses. It happened so much with Soviets that I basically gave up playing them for the last few weeks because losses with them are so much more frustrating than Germans.
I suspect any issues with matchmaking are based on the pool of available players. Barring any major code flaws, not enough players is always the problem with matchmaking.
21 Oct 2013, 14:55 PM
#24
Posts: 101
@Topic I think it would be interesting if you could actually check a box or something, where you accept long waitingtimes for better ELO matches.
+1, I'd like that too.
It's not going to happen though.
That would be like admitting that the player base ist too small. A death knell for any (competitive) online game if there ever was one.
Personally I am playing purely for fun, I don't give a damn about my ladder rank.
21 Oct 2013, 15:19 PM
#25
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
You are referring to level not rank in this case. Not a biggie but the using the wrong words for things like level and rank can be very confusing.
@Topic I think it would be interesting if you could actually check a box or something, where you accept long waitingtimes for better ELO matches.
+1
21 Oct 2013, 15:30 PM
#26
Posts: 409
in a team game tonight, i got matched with a player 100,000 ranks lower than me. even so, its better than playing a computer or not playing at all.
No, it's really not.
Those players give less challenge than the AI.
I really hope Relic does something to give more incentive for players to start learning and playing in multiplayer. There are a lot of CoH2 owners, it's just that only like 1% actively play MP (not a precise number but you get what I mean).
21 Oct 2013, 15:34 PM
#27
Posts: 878
I really like the idea of a check box for a longer wait time to get a better match as well. Bad matching is not fun for anyone. And maybe if you force the top players to play each other more, they will get all tired out and you might have a chance of winning!
21 Oct 2013, 20:42 PM
#28
Posts: 409
Out of curiosity, anyone know exactly how the ladder decay works?
Does it decay for completely inactive players only or does it decay based on the last time you played a particular faction/mode? How fast does it decay?
These are questions that I don't remember being answered very specifically in the stream.
Does it decay for completely inactive players only or does it decay based on the last time you played a particular faction/mode? How fast does it decay?
These are questions that I don't remember being answered very specifically in the stream.
21 Oct 2013, 20:52 PM
#29
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
Out of curiosity, anyone know exactly how the ladder decay works?
Does it decay for completely inactive players only or does it decay based on the last time you played a particular faction/mode? How fast does it decay?
These are questions that I don't remember being answered very specifically in the stream.
I believe if you don't play a faction for a week your EOL will start to decay.
21 Oct 2013, 20:54 PM
#30
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
+1, I'd like that too.
It's not going to happen though.
That would be like admitting that the player base ist too small. A death knell for any (competitive) online game if there ever was one.
Personally I am playing purely for fun, I don't give a damn about my ladder rank.
I'm not 100% convinced, the playerbase is there for anyone to see via steamstats.
22 Oct 2013, 07:53 AM
#31
Posts: 829
You are referring to level not rank in this case. Not a biggie but the using the wrong words for things like level and rank can be very confusing.
Yeah, true. Not the clearest post I ever made. It made sense in my head
I think it would be interesting if you could actually check a box or something, where you accept long waitingtimes for better ELO matches.
Amen to that
23 Oct 2013, 07:23 AM
#32
4 Posts: 813 | Subs: 1
It's not going to happen though.
That would be like admitting that the player base ist too small. A death knell for any (competitive) online game if there ever was one.
A matter of phrasing I think. Also, as stated above, the stats are all there on steam if you know where to look.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
41 | ||
 |
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
9 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
547 | ||
 |
|
|
41 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.278110.716+16
- 2.270144.652+2
- 3.29446.865-1
- 4.558230.708+2
- 5.253150.628+14
- 6.968566.631-4
- 7.22491.711+11
- 8.8120.802-1
- 9.19078.709+4
- 10.399200.666+8
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
7
Download
780
Board Info
4 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
145 posts in the last month
39 posts in the last week
145 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45326
Welcome our newest member, xotip14389
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, xotip14389
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM