matchmaking makes u lose players
Posts: 598
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
Posts: 85
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.
Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5
Posts: 1963 | Subs: 1
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.
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
How the hell I was supposed to win or even stand to fight with such teammate? There is something wrong with this automatching...
Posts: 209
Posts: 224
Posts: 786
...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
Posts: 1664
Posts: 14
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
Posts: 1355
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
Posts: 332
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.
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.
Posts: 1740
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.
Posts: 12
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.
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.
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.
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM