Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.

I would gladly play all 10 to get that 1.
Looking at the leaderboard all you need to get to the top 10 is a 55ish% winrate.
So those 1/10s will add up.

Would just say uninstall celo, go in blind and so what if you lose.
Diamonds are made under pressure sometimes these games where the odds are against you are best for improving yourself.

Never /l'ing any game. +2.5% wr
Never afking yourself and having some patience with afk teammates. +2%wr
I even stay in games that look 3v4 to see if i can beat 2 humans with an ai or if they have an afk. +0.5%

So its not a elohell or mm issue its a (severe) mentality issue.

This thread made me want to try agin 4vs4 yesterday. First 4vs4 game since long and directly vs an arranged team, probably casted on twitch btw. Game lost.

I'm geniusly curious how 1 person can uplift his random teammates vs a team. I can agree, understand, that 1 really good player using a cheesy strat can do it at really low level but even then it all depend on the rest of the team to not themselves colapse vs their proper opponents.

In my opinion, with Coh3 Relic should enhance the most their new non-ranking lobby where people could simply play chill&learning at low level and within this enhancement have a pretty serious ban politic on who would have the "funny" idea to come there with a smurf and fuck it up for the new comers and learners.

There is definitely a need for a safe place for new players to learn the rope of multiplayer.

I totally agree on what esxile said player who want som "chill" game should have a space and right now, coh2 4v4 is hell for low rank players. They should really adress this point. As Rosbone said, when you want some casual play who is not vs AI where do you really go? like the open lobbys are mostly modded games so...

This thread made me want to try agin 4vs4 yesterday. First 4vs4 game since long and directly vs an arranged team, probably casted on twitch btw. Game lost.

I'm geniusly curious how 1 person can uplift his random teammates vs a team. I can agree, understand, that 1 really good player using a cheesy strat can do it at really low level but even then it all depend on the rest of the team to not themselves colapse vs their proper opponents.

That's not really what the discussion is about. Not adjusting for arranged teams is indeed a big problem in Coh2 matchmaking. But the point that Rosbone and others were trying to make - agree with it or don't - is that once you lose too much ELO, it is hard to regain it. This must be true for matches with all randoms as well, not just for arranged teams.

In my opinion, with Coh3 Relic should enhance the most their new non-ranking lobby where people could simply play chill&learning at low level and within this enhancement have a pretty serious ban politic on who would have the "funny" idea to come there with a smurf and fuck it up for the new comers and learners.

There is definitely a need for a safe place for new players to learn the rope of multiplayer.

I'd doubt that another lobby will hugely benefit CoH3, as it would just split the player base further. They need to optimize their matchmaking though.
I think everyone understands that it will take some placement matches in the beginning, which is what every ELO system does to estimate your skill. Losing a game or two more than usual should not matter for the benefit of the system. If someone quits the game because he lost 6-7 out of 10 placement games, he wouldn't be around for long anyway.
The other option is also already existing: Custom matches. There just needs to be a proper and easy way to estimate the skill of each player in the lobby as well, and then you can kick people who are too good and want to stomp new players.

That's not really what the discussion is about. Not adjusting for arranged teams is indeed a big problem in Coh2 matchmaking. But the point that Rosbone and others were trying to make - agree with it or don't - is that once you lose too much ELO, it is hard to regain it. This must be true for matches with all randoms as well, not just for arranged teams.



I'd doubt that another lobby will hugely benefit CoH3, as it would just split the player base further. They need to optimize their matchmaking though.
I think everyone understands that it will take some placement matches in the beginning, which is what every ELO system does to estimate your skill. Losing a game or two more than usual should not matter for the benefit of the system. If someone quits the game because he lost 6-7 out of 10 placement games, he wouldn't be around for long anyway.
The other option is also already existing: Custom matches. There just needs to be a proper and easy way to estimate the skill of each player in the lobby as well, and then you can kick people who are too good and want to stomp new players.

Yes it is hard to recover from ELO Hell I experienced it myself and this is why I think we need a specific lobby for non ranking game with strict rules against smurfs.
Many people don't care at all about ranking, they just want to play a fair game and have fun and for those people there is absolutly no reason to force them to continuously be stuck in the ELO HELL.

Then ELO HELL will always exist, there is always a bottom side for everything where toxic low level competitive players are living but at least it only affect competitive players.
A non-ranking lobby will be beneficial for all of us. A safe place for newbe to train on competitive maps so when they decide to hit the competitive lobby button they'll already be superior to toxic competitve players making the ELO HELL even further away to anyone. And if the new player feels he's in it, he can always go back to the safe lobby to train more.

At the end the idea is that people in the ELO HELL are there by choice not because they're new. But it requires strong enforcement rules to protect the safe-lobby from toxicity.

---
Custom games are dedicated to stomp, stomp IA or stomp lower level players. Even if you create a game you'll only have stomp players to join your game and leave if they understand that's not a stomp game or that they are the one who's going to be stomped.

My first 10 games as USF were all wins. Out of those 10 games, I carried 8 or 9 of them (and I was a worse player back then). After those 10 games I got the rank of ~480 if I'm not mistaken. I proceeded to carry games up until rank 300. After oscillating around rank 300 I slowly but surely started improving my game and adapting and reached rank 100 as USF in 3v3 only random.

All those MM fails and leavers and crashes work both ways.

I've literally had a losing streak of 9 games where in each of those 9 games my teammate either left or joined but were afk for 10 minutes -> can't surrender -> have to leave

I've crashed on won games, crashed on lost games. Although after the 64bit patch, I seldom crash.

I've had MM fails where I got paired with rank 5000 and wondered why I'm playing 2v1 when I check the ally base to see mass retreated IS spam, no AT gun, no vickers and I figure, amazing.



However, all those things happened to my enemies.
I've had games where top 10 axis players got paired with top 6000 against an average rank of 100 in my team. Meaning that the games were laughably easy.
I've also had games where the enemy crashed and we turned a losing game into a winning.
I've also had games where I had a winning streak of 3-4 games purely by random enemy crashing on load screen.

So in other words: "God giveth and God taketh away"
Statistically it all evens out and I believe that by being top 100 for more than 2 years now proves the point that, while ELO hell exists, it's not inescapable.
Again, I ONLY play 3v3 RANDOMS as USF. I play OKW mostly custom games here and there on random maps with random people and OST/sov/brits if I want a nice calm 4v4 with expert bots (eg. 20 panthers minute 13 on Lienne and USF "expert" bot charging them with HE Sherman or Brit "expert" bot placing a mortar pit on middle VP).

You win some, you lose some. The point is that when you get into a 3v3 game where you're the outlier (recently had such a game, 2 easy bots on my team vs 3 easy bots on the enemy team, PGren blobs, 222 ultra spammers, penal spammers, etc) you need to show skill and carry. You NEED to push back the enemy in your lane and flank to help your bot teammate.

Examples:


.
.
.


.
.
.

.
.
.



You win some of those rank MM Hellspawns, you lose some. Sometimes I get paired with 2 mouthbreathers, sometimes I get paired against mouthbreathers. Point is, if you're good, you'll get where you want to be.

EDIT:

ALSO, never leave games. CELO is a cancer and doesn't paint the whole picture. Uninstall it. 3v3 or 4v4, doesn't matter, never leave games until you see they are unwinnable. I've played against top 100 mouthbreathers and I've played with rank 800 exceptionally good players. I've played against top 50 premade teams that had the skill of a boiled potato. Great teamwork, but poor individual quality. They knew how to coordinate and throw stuka sector + zeroing + offmap arty to completely deny 80% of the frontline but when it came to micro skill -> EXTREMELY POOR.
Don't leave games.

Want an example of a great coordinating top 10 premade team that is just abusing one meta?


If the abuse fails, they lose. I owned OKW Gardening Lelic in Lienne town part of the map even though he played triple SPIO with flamers (abuse of spio strength and town part of map CQC), flanked to help out my teammates (who are also premade and EXTREMELY BAD) and they just ragequit all 3.

snip

So in other words: "God giveth and God taketh away"
Statistically it all evens out and I believe that by being top 100 for more than 2 years now proves the point that, while ELO hell exists, it's not inescapable.

This. Even though there might be something like ELO hell where games are an absolute pain to play, your own skill is what puts you in there or gets you out. It's that simple. Bad matchmaking or people leaving, crashing or failing miserably at the game happens on both sides equally, and if you're on average better than the players you get matched with you'll climb the ladder nonetheless. There's surely much more statstical jitter involved the larger the player count gets, increasing the time you potentially spend below your true skill level, but this again works in both ways.
That of course assumes you are better than the average ELO-hell dweller populating the lower end of the skill spectrum - but if that's not the case matchmaking won't help in any way either.

Can someone explain to me how “better” matchmaking will fix someone’s rank who /ls at the start on 40% of his games?

Yes it is hard to recover from ELO Hell I experienced it myself and this is why I think we need a specific lobby for non ranking game with strict rules against smurfs.
Many people don't care at all about ranking, they just want to play a fair game and have fun and for those people there is absolutly no reason to force them to continuously be stuck in the ELO HELL.

Then ELO HELL will always exist, there is always a bottom side for everything where toxic low level competitive players are living but at least it only affect competitive players.
A non-ranking lobby will be beneficial for all of us. A safe place for newbe to train on competitive maps so when they decide to hit the competitive lobby button they'll already be superior to toxic competitve players making the ELO HELL even further away to anyone. And if the new player feels he's in it, he can always go back to the safe lobby to train more.

At the end the idea is that people in the ELO HELL are there by choice not because they're new. But it requires strong enforcement rules to protect the safe-lobby from toxicity.

---
Custom games are dedicated to stomp, stomp IA or stomp lower level players. Even if you create a game you'll only have stomp players to join your game and leave if they understand that's not a stomp game or that they are the one who's going to be stomped.

I don't really get what 'new mode' you want.
If you want fair games, play competitive. The MM screws up at times, but splitting the playerbase to have two populations with even less players on each is not going to improve it for sure.
If you don't care about the rank but still want a fair game, then just play it non-seriously and have fun. These players end up at the bottom anyway, where they will get matched against other low skill players and everyone can just have fun fully separated from the meta. Otherwise, go custom game.
Custom games being stompers is no argument if you can check the opponents skill level somehow. Open the lobby, kick everyone that does not fit, play with people on your level.

How is your new mode supposed to function? What makes it safe? Are high skilled players not allowed to just have fun at times and play non-competitively? Where should they go? At which point are you too good to play in the chill out ladder? 50 games? 100? Or is there still some hidden ELO calculation to determine that? How will the new lobby create matchups if there is no ELO?

The whole ELO system is 100% supposed to deliver what you want: Fair games. If this system doesn't work, there are two possibilities. Either the implementation is faulty, which is a fix on Relics part, or the playerbase is too small so the MM is forced to make bad matchups. Introducing an additional lobby won't help.

I heard you like anecdotal evidence.
If i /l'ed after my teammate dropped after 1:30 i would have lost.
We sucked it up and gave it everything we got and we won.

Can someone explain to me how “better” matchmaking will fix someone’s rank who /ls at the start on 40% of his games?

Yes I think I can. You wont /L out of any games if the MM was working correctly.

And it is /L out of 60% of games. Thus the slow descent into ELO hell.

The whole ELO system is 100% supposed to deliver what you want: Fair games. If this system doesn't work, there are two possibilities. Either the implementation is faulty, which is a fix on Relics part, or the playerbase is too small so the MM is forced to make bad matchups. Introducing an additional lobby won't help.

^ This

sniper

I'd also like to point out one logical fallacy in Elo Hell conundrum.

If you leave games because CELO said that the MM skewered it to one side, you have never tried to entertain the notion of other players existing in the said ELO Hell.

If Elo Hell exists, then surely there must be many more players in it. Meaning that if you get paired with lower ranks, you might actually be getting good players stuck in low ranks (I have played with plenty of low rank players that were ACTUALLY QUITE GOOD).

So if ELO hell exists then you are not the only one in it and should play every game until you can clearly make an educated guess that the game is unwinnable. You lost too much, the enemy has a much stronger grip, etc. If you leave games because of bad MM, then you are lying to yourself by saying that ELO HELL EXISTS and I'm the SOLE occupant. No other low rank player is good but me, so I'll leave and not even try to win a game.

I mean, do have a quick glance at those pictures that show endgame result/stats and tell me which I've won and which I've lost. Go ahead.

To quote the words of great Ghandi: "Gid Gud and don't leave"

Arguing about 4v4 is a waste of anyone's time. But the site has been dead lately so I think we did our jobs and gave people some entertainment.

you definitely did for me!

also i think a mandatory 4v4 teamgame tutorial before entering ranked 4v4 gamemode could help

I would gladly play all 10 to get that 1.
Looking at the leaderboard all you need to get to the top 10 is a 55ish% winrate.
So those 1/10s will add up.

Example:
You have about an hour to play. That means 1 good game or 2 fast games. And you wont have time to play for a few days.

The game comes up and its you and 3 monkeys vs a premade team of killers.

You can /L and get a better game to enjoy for your only hour you will get to play for a couple days. Or you can get your butthole rearranged by a premade team for 20-40 minutes depending on how badly they meme you.

Now its 3 days later and you get the same bullshit matchup?

Now its 6 days later and you get the same bullshit matchup?

At what point do you delete the game? Any sane person would after day 2. Coh2 players just keep playing and spouting nonsense about how their skill will win the day eventually.

You paid the fucktards at Relic cash money to have fun. They have made absolutely sure that you will have NO FUN for over a week. That is a breach of contract. Relic owes you cash money in form of a refund.

I have played 100's of games where my team was way higher ranked than the enemy. And at the end of each game the enemy angry about Coh2 balance and saying they are going to delete the game cause axis/allies are OP. These people have no idea it is Relic who is screwing them. It is not balance or factions. It is shit match making.

Relic needs to fix their shit. It cant be explained any simpler than this.

you definitely did for me!

also i think a mandatory 4v4 teamgame tutorial before entering ranked 4v4 gamemode could help

That is a great idea. A short cut scene explaining the basics of that mode and then a 10 question test. Start it off with a CAPTCHA dealie so they cant even take the test if they are too dumb to get past the CAPTCHA.

I've played against top 100 mouthbreathers and I've played with rank 800 exceptionally good players.

This does not sound anything like ELO hell or the fact that skill has very little relationship to rank in 4v4

I don't really get what 'new mode' you want.
If you want fair games, play competitive. The MM screws up at times, but splitting the playerbase to have two populations with even less players on each is not going to improve it for sure.
If you don't care about the rank but still want a fair game, then just play it non-seriously and have fun. These players end up at the bottom anyway, where they will get matched against other low skill players and everyone can just have fun fully separated from the meta. Otherwise, go custom game.
Custom games being stompers is no argument if you can check the opponents skill level somehow. Open the lobby, kick everyone that does not fit, play with people on your level.

How is your new mode supposed to function? What makes it safe? Are high skilled players not allowed to just have fun at times and play non-competitively? Where should they go? At which point are you too good to play in the chill out ladder? 50 games? 100? Or is there still some hidden ELO calculation to determine that? How will the new lobby create matchups if there is no ELO?

The whole ELO system is 100% supposed to deliver what you want: Fair games. If this system doesn't work, there are two possibilities. Either the implementation is faulty, which is a fix on Relics part, or the playerbase is too small so the MM is forced to make bad matchups. Introducing an additional lobby won't help.

DOTA2 use it with fairly good success. You even must play a certain amount of game or having a certain playtime in non-competitive lobby before being autorized to hit the competitive button when you're new.
Bottom end of competitive ladder is still full of toxic players but new players are not mixed with them. I don't know what you don't understand with this concept.

This. Even though there might be something like ELO hell where games are an absolute pain to play, your own skill is what puts you in there or gets you out. It's that simple. Bad matchmaking or people leaving, crashing or failing miserably at the game happens on both sides equally, and if you're on average better than the players you get matched with you'll climb the ladder nonetheless. There's surely much more statstical jitter involved the larger the player count gets, increasing the time you potentially spend below your true skill level, but this again works in both ways.
That of course assumes you are better than the average ELO-hell dweller populating the lower end of the skill spectrum - but if that's not the case matchmaking won't help in any way either.

I am not so sure about that since prearranged teams play in the same league and for the first 10 games count as "unranked".

That can translate to high number of "smurf" fights that can impact random 4vs4 players.