26 replies to this topic

[Pugastrius]

For those that don't know:
The ELO system does not work with team play when the teams change from match to match.

Take the StarCraft II model for example. The biggest issue here is that when you work with a pre-made group, your Rating will typically spike. Then when your team isn't around you get crushed because you're playing people that "your group" is good enough for, but not you personally.

What ends up happening is that players that "usually" have a group stop solo-queuing all-together.

Think of it this way:
- What is your win / loss ratio in a group?
- What is your win / loss ratio as a PuG?

Now, eventually (if you group considerably more than solo) the Elo system will force your win / loss ratio to 50/50 even when you're in a group. So... what happens when you decide to solo? You'll be losing every single match.

Quote

Im not sure why PGI has decided to communicate this system as if it were 1v1 because that makes no sense.

Because they are using the exact same model that SCII uses, which is a 1v1 model based on your ending rank in team games.

Edited by Pugastrius, 19 December 2012 - 09:34 AM.

[PhigNewtenz]

Pugastrius, on 19 December 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

Now, eventually (if you group considerably more than solo) the Elo system will force your win / loss ratio to 50/50 even when you're in a group. So... what happens when you decide to solo? You'll be losing every single match.

This is why games like League of Legends maintain a 'solo' (which includes small groups) rank and a '5v5' (which in League is a full team) rank. This fixes this problem.

Pugastrius, on 19 December 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

Because they are using [...] a 1v1 model based on your ending rank in team games.

Not doubting you at all, just curious, but: source?

Edited by PhigNewtenz, 19 December 2012 - 09:36 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

PhigNewtenz, on 19 December 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

This is why games like League of Legends maintain a 'solo' (which includes small groups) rank and a '5v5' (which in League is a full team) rank. This fixes this problem.

Correct and that is how it should be done here.

[Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard]

This ELO system sounds horrid. I hate all ranking systems as they turn people into idiots all the time. They dont reflect anyones true level of skill, Especially in this game and all systems are doomed to fail.

I do have an answer that the Dev's seem determined not to use and its so simple.....

A LOBBY!

WHere people meet and greet and can chat and arrange tyhings themselfs. You know, Like what we used 2 decades ago but consoles seem to have over powered this way of organising things which worked better than ANYTHING ELSE!

What i'd do for a proper lobby on this game, Current implimentation is AWEFUL

[Pugastrius]

Quote

Not doubting you at all, just curious, but: source?

Sorry got nothing for ya, simply assuming they are taking the most logical approach.

That is, those that generate more EXP, probably played better that round. This also lets them "hone in" really quickly on a good ELO because each match then allows for 15 changes per person to ELO score instead of just 8 (or fewer using some other method).

Quote

This ELO system sounds horrid.

The Elo system for SC2 was a god send...

Edited by Pugastrius, 19 December 2012 - 09:43 AM.

[PhigNewtenz]

Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard, on 19 December 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

This ELO system sounds horrid. I hate all ranking systems as they turn people into idiots all the time. They dont reflect anyones true level of skill, Especially in this game and all systems are doomed to fail.

I do have an answer that the Dev's seem determined not to use and its so simple.....

A LOBBY!

WHere people meet and greet and can chat and arrange tyhings themselfs. You know, Like what we used 2 decades ago but consoles seem to have over powered this way of organising things which worked better than ANYTHING ELSE!

What i'd do for a proper lobby on this game, Current implimentation is AWEFUL

Sorry, no. A lobby is a great idea for setting up custom, friendly games where you can choose your opponents. Most of us enjoy doing that very occasionally.

It leaves something lacking for the majority of players who want to quickly join a highly competitive game. With a significantly large player base, the matchmaker can rapidly put you into a competitive game in which the two teams are evenly matched. This will never be possible by combing through your friends list for a good game.

Pugastrius, on 19 December 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

Sorry got nothing for ya, simply assuming they are taking the most logical approach.

That is, those that generate more EXP, probably played better that round. This also lets them "hone in" really quickly on a good ELO because each match then allows for 15 changes per person to ELO score instead of just 8 (or fewer using some other method).

Hmm, sounds cool. I hope they do it.

[Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard]

PhigNewtenz, on 19 December 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

Sorry, no. A lobby is a great idea for setting up custom, friendly games where you can choose your opponents. Most of us enjoy doing that very occasionally.

It leaves something lacking for the majority of players who want to quickly join a highly competitive game. With a significantly large player base, the matchmaker can rapidly put you into a competitive game in which the two teams are evenly matched. This will never be possible by combing through your friends list for a good game.



Hmm, sounds cool. I hope they do it.

WRONG! This isnt a game for console fan boys! It's PC through and through! Lobby's work better, in EVERY aspect! There is no good points for MM or Electric light orchistrure*spelling*

Edited by Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard, 19 December 2012 - 11:00 AM.