Teammates Who Don't Build AT

Well in retrospect to my last post, I just played a game with a USF ally who built too much AT. 3 AT guns and Zooks on all his riflemen, no bars or grenades... Needless to say Obers walked all over his infantry and AT guns, leaving him with nothing when the Panthers started rolling into our base.

The fact of the matter is, a lot of players, play the campaign or against AI, get a lot of rank and playtime, but then hop on random search, get matched with same rank people, who have spent more time facing actual human opponents, and have no clue how to properly build and micro against non-AI opponents. Some are casuals who jsut want to build their favorite units and throw them at the enemy.

The truth is that Relic needs a real ladder system, so the casuals can play together and the competitive players can play together. When the two mix it produces unsavory results for both sides. Casuals get rolled and bitched at by competitive players and competitive players get frustrated with lack of proper build and cooperation from causals.

I just wanna point out that today i played a game with a friend in 4v4 and although early game was hard cause 3 usf and 1 rus vs 4 wermacht mg 42 spam, I essentially played 1.2 vs2 on my flank cause my friend was building caches while i was building up my arms while constantly contesting that flank then at some point our other flank was collapsing so i was left alone vs 2 players i started dealing pain with artillery and ultimativly i wore down their defenses in meantime our other flank which entirely was without any sort of at was getting crushed by tiger spam and best part is when the other 2 americans were complaining that jacksons are crap and were just using zook blobs, and we all know what happens to zook blobs they get crushed, i held on to my part of map for as long as i could hell we wiped everything and then i sent there to help them but what am i supposed to do with 2 jacksons when 2 americans just have rifle blobs that are dieing left and right and they are suiciding their " newly built" shermans to panthers. At that point my friend with 4 t34s gave up after he saw them playing, tehnicly we could have won that game but we had a discussion after that giving those 2 americans wins would have been a waste cause they flamed without knowing their forces and complaining about how bad jacksons are, I defended my flank with 1 jackson and 1 pak gun for 20mins against p4s,flaks,panthers, IS it that hard to learn how to use at properly?

This is my rant from a game I had something like ninjaW said that he had to get it out of the system... Sometimes some people dont deserve to win even if I am forced to lose

it's not random cough cough... don't assume that im assuming

Then it is a clan mate or a steam friend


Have you considered talking to them?

The fact of the matter is, a lot of players, play the campaign or against AI, get a lot of rank and playtime, but then hop on random search, get matched with same rank people, who have spent more time facing actual human opponents, and have no clue how to properly build and micro against non-AI opponents. Some are casuals who jsut want to build their favorite units and throw them at the enemy.

You are aware that XP and rank have naff all effect on matchmaking right?

You are aware that XP and rank have naff all effect on matchmaking right?

Yeah, I am just raging at the overall awfulness of the match making system, I would rather wait an extra 10 minutes to be ranked with an ally and opponents of equal skill; then be matched in 2 minutes with a under 1000s ally and against top 100 opponents (yes this did happen).

•  
  

  0

  VS

  broodwarjc yurigoodoo

  Shrillo [42] dRK'

  2v2 OKW AI ally vs. 2 Sov humans

  by: broodwarjc map: Road to Kharkov

  1

  -

There is also the problem of Arranged Teams being matched in the Randoms matchmaking and that just gives an unfair coordination advantage to that side.