1 
Posts: 311
I totally agree with you, but if you have good RT and win over AT. It is amazing experience.
And smaller player base. If Relic separate AT teams in 2v2 and above, thus destroy 3/4 player base.
10 
Posts: 871
But it is possible to beat an arranged team with 4 good players with a random team with 2 experienced players and 2 beginners. Watch a picture of it here!
1 Posts: 311
Are you classing them as good players because they are max prestige?
Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1
1 
Posts: 640
 | Playercard of SwonVIP | |||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1
Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4
Permanently BannedI would more focus on matching players with diffrent rank. Like someone said before, i prefer wait longer, just don't match people from top50 with guys with rank 1000+. Lower rank should play with lower rank and that's it.
I hope we gonna see two seperate divisions one day.
1 Posts: 311
Would be interesting how the winrates change when 4v4 AT Teams only play versus 4v4 AT Teams and the same with 4v4 randoms tbh
Posts: 862
It really depends on who you are playing with / against. I've had plenty of random partners where you can use team work and strategy, just requires communication at the start of the game. Communication is a big part of the problem - whenever I play with randoms (2v2, 3v3 or 4v4) so many people are confused just by writing "Hey" and quite a lot are just dicks about it. Your never going to get any kind of team work going with them because they have no desire to play as a team.
Decent randoms can beat teams, even good ones but more often not someone gets screwed by the matchmaker. Its not uncommon for me to be matched either with or against people with only a handful of hours in the game. This isn't the end of the world as long as the rest of the players are (relatively) balanced around this. I would much rather wait longer for a more balanced match than just stomping people / being stomped. I'm not against playing against teams, but prefer playing against randoms. Shame the player base isn't big enough for more balanced games.
It generally seems people would rather wait for games, shame relic wouldn't add some kind of option for this.
Posts: 862
Some players would cry, because they have only played 4vs4 in arranged teams, and mostly against randoms. They would not be able to win so much either in AT vs AT, or in randoms.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Vast majority of that are comp stompers and campaign warriors.
There isn't enough players to support it without having 60 minute queues.
1 Posts: 311
Vast majority of that are comp stompers and campaign warriors.
There isn't enough players to support it without having 60 minute queues.
Posts: 1072
All these threads imply that having a at is better than rt. Just get a at-mate which is a complete disaster and youll start loving rt. Trust me, it works.
Posts: 199
Current Peak
3,971 6,730 Company of Heroes 2
^^ That is from this morning in the UK, 6730 peak for a weekday is pretty decent mate...
Posts: 199
If the matchmaking were more kind to the new players, maybe we would see a bigger playerbase in automatch. Who knows...
1 
Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4
6730 peak
1/4 of these guys are roughly playing the gamemode you are playing right now, something around 1700 players. Most of them are playing with random teammates, but let's say it's 50%. So good luck with matchmaking with only 850 players searching.
Blalord is right, the playerbase is simply too small and too divided by diffrent gamemodes. It would work if all of the players played a single mode. Note that probably a good bunch of people are playing the AI/Campaign aswell and that some gamemodes like 4v4 have a higher percentage of players compared to the rest, so there are most likely even less people in the queue.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
1 Posts: 1276
Posts: 513
Posts: 1124
 |
|
|
66 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
224 | ||
 |
|
|
27 | ||
|
|
|
|
16 | ||
|
|
|
|
11 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
