Login

russian armor

matchmaking makes u lose players

6 Oct 2014, 03:12 AM
#21
avatar of Jinseual

Posts: 598

This was a problem before, but now there is a lobby for players to play in, you can find many noob players there. You may find a moron or two to beat down.
6 Oct 2014, 05:01 AM
#22
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

This was a problem before, but now there is a lobby for players to play in, you can find many noob players there. You may find a moron or two to beat down.


Lmao why do you have to put it that way. Using the word "noob" and "beat down" is so mean
6 Oct 2014, 14:23 PM
#23
avatar of über alles

Posts: 85

Matchmaking in coh 2 sucks big time
The worst part of the game.


In 2vs2, as Soviet, I'm often with complete noobs, so damn annoying, when I see a noob, I leave, I don't even try to play.
Or you can face top 20 arranged team, for both case, it sucks big time. I drop the game when it happens. No time to lose.

Maybe Relic should remove 3vs3 game mode
It would increase the player base for other game modes
And Relic should make people wait longer to find a decent team mate / enemy.
6 Oct 2014, 14:31 PM
#24
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

I have to wait aaaaaaaaages to get game though. I would rather play with noobs than not play at all. I think that's why I would understand if there was some option or slider to control this, but I think the system is fine. Just small playerbase, that's all.
6 Oct 2014, 14:36 PM
#25
avatar of steel

Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Oct 2014, 14:31 PMRomeo
I have to wait aaaaaaaaages to get game though. I would rather play with noobs than not play at all. I think that's why I would understand if there was some option or slider to control this, but I think the system is fine. Just small playerbase, that's all.
Waiting a few minutes is not too bad. I've searched in CS:GO and CoH2 for an hour straight before. I actually ate my lunch while waiting for a game.
9 Oct 2014, 07:12 AM
#26
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Please, explain me this shit. I was automatched with guy who has 40lv vs well, you see. He quit after 3-6mins and leave me alone (of course it was rage quit after loosing everything).

How the hell I was supposed to win or even stand to fight with such teammate? There is something wrong with this automatching...

9 Oct 2014, 07:25 AM
#27
avatar of Jorad

Posts: 209

The automach is a different problem. The main issue is with the players. They ragequit, they spam, they lose units without looking at them. In short they are bad and they do little to improve. Last thing it is a know problem in all games if you play with random players you will always have a bad time.
9 Oct 2014, 08:10 AM
#28
avatar of I984

Posts: 224

...relic should at least seperate AT and RANDOM teams in the queue, that would almost eliminate the issues OP and others have while not hurting matchmaking-time that much.
9 Oct 2014, 09:25 AM
#29
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Oct 2014, 08:10 AMI984
...relic should at least seperate AT and RANDOM teams in the queue, that would almost eliminate the issues OP and others have while not hurting matchmaking-time that much.

for Christ sake, stop whining, this has been talked about endlessly and every time the conclusion was that the player base is to small too allow for this.

for people complaining about unfair matchmaking:
a) don't play random if you don't like it, find a mate.
b) you think the opposing factions never get a noob in their team?? they do all the time, but you think you win because of your mad skillZZ!
c) "level" doesn't mean anything to the algorithm
11 Oct 2014, 03:52 AM
#30
avatar of What Doth Life?!
Patrion 27

Posts: 1664

I am rank 1930 as Soviets in 1v1, pretty bad. I just got paired instantly with Giap who is rank 12 then with rank 43 followed by 416. should I be adapting in this situation? Perhaps Shocks in an M3 would win it for me.
11 Oct 2014, 06:29 AM
#31
avatar of Bersercker

Posts: 14

I'm playing an arranged team 2v2 with a mate most of the time, and matchmaking seems pretty great. Like, we rarely get noob opponents, and getting stomped is a non issue since we are not bad ourselves. :)
11 Oct 2014, 11:52 AM
#32
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

I am rank 1930 as Soviets in 1v1, pretty bad. I just got paired instantly with Giap who is rank 12 then with rank 43 followed by 416.

1v1 ranking is completely irrelevant to 2v2 matchmaking
11 Oct 2014, 12:14 PM
#33
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1355

jump backJump back to quoted post6 Oct 2014, 14:31 PMRomeo
I would rather play with noobs than not play at all. I think that's why I would understand if there was some option or slider to control this, but I think the system is fine. Just small playerbase, that's all.


This!
Its always the same. People whine about getting pared with noobs and bla bla bla.
Cant you see that the Playerbase is to small?
Instead of saying "bad Relic, i will leave", stay and get other people to play the game so you can have your freaking Fun Game.
Jesus, everytime the same shit:loco:
11 Oct 2014, 13:08 PM
#34
avatar of KovuTalli

Posts: 332

Also rather than flaming the noob, try to teach him stuff, like where to hold on the map, too often I see new players spreading out and going for points that don't matter while I get 2v1'd in to oblivion then they push and wipe him out too. Ping the map and say stuff like "Lets defend this area and work together" rather than "Omg noob wtf why you no help?" Some times all it takes is a ping or a "Can you help here?"
11 Oct 2014, 14:44 PM
#35
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

I'm playing an arranged team 2v2 with a mate most of the time, and matchmaking seems pretty great. Like, we rarely get noob opponents, and getting stomped is a non issue since we are not bad ourselves. :)

ur not getting stomped vs top 100 rank AT teams? u must b gud.
11 Oct 2014, 18:15 PM
#36
avatar of Bersercker

Posts: 14


ur not getting stomped vs top 100 rank AT teams? u must b gud.

Well, not sure if i played vs top 100 teams, but if we lose its usually being outplayed not stomped... Unless there is some double sniper or maxim spam or something.
12 Oct 2014, 12:24 PM
#37
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

I think the matchmaking is pretty good depending on how many players are online atm.
If the number is less than 2.000 then prepare for better enemies.
If it's about 5.000 or more than you should get good games usually.
8 Nov 2014, 06:42 AM
#38
avatar of JpHetzer

Posts: 12

According to SteamCharts, the average number of players active at a given time is around 4.000, with daily highs in the area of 6.000 (not counting those spikes going up to even 16.000) and lows in the area of 2.000.

If half of those people are playing random online games (instead of playing singleplayer, custom games, idling etc.) and if we assume an average match-duration of 40 minutes and a search duration of 5 minutes, that leaves us with only 55 to 165 players of both factions looking for a game at any given time (globally).
Not much for the matchmaking system to work with.

The following might be slightly off-topic, but I think what hurts random games more than everything else are all those leavers. I play OKW and mostly go for random games, and I have not had a chance to win a single 4on4 in the last week (and I've played several a day), because every single time one or two axis players start to rage and then quit. I only play allies in custom games so I don't know how it is on the other side, but it seems like literally half of the axis player base are just easily-angered, clueless kids.

Honestly, if it was up to me, matchmaking would look at the drop-stats and treat all these leavers like lepers: Just put them in games with each other and let the people who actually want to play do so without having to go through ten pointless 2vs4 slaughters before finding an actually worthwhile game.
8 Nov 2014, 08:30 AM
#39
avatar of BeltFedWombat
Patrion 14

Posts: 951

According to SteamCharts, the average number of players active at a given time is around 4.000, with daily highs in the area of 6.000 (not counting those spikes going up to even 16.000) and lows in the area of 2.000.

If half of those people are playing random online games (instead of playing singleplayer, custom games, idling etc.)


You assume too much. Far too much.

Relic's own metrics allegedly suggest many of those 6000 people will be playing single-player or stomps with friends versus cpu.

The player base for this game is minuscule. That is why the ranked games can feel like an impossible grind, and why some of the so-called elite players on this forum can sneer like very fat fish in a very small pond.
8 Nov 2014, 15:36 PM
#40
avatar of JpHetzer

Posts: 12


You assume too much. Far too much.


That's quite possible, of course. The 50% were just an optimistic guess to point out that even if that amount were correct, the number of players searching for a game at any given time are still not sufficient for decent matchmaking.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

543 users are online: 543 guests
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49851
Welcome our newest member, Eovaldis
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM