Login

russian armor

AT vs Randoms

18 Dec 2015, 13:51 PM
#21
avatar of robertmikael
Donator 11

Posts: 311

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 13:45 PMAradan
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.

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!
18 Dec 2015, 13:55 PM
#22
avatar of Puppetmaster
Patrion 310

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!


Are you classing them as good players because they are max prestige?
18 Dec 2015, 13:58 PM
#23
avatar of robertmikael
Donator 11

Posts: 311

Are you classing them as good players because they are max prestige?

Yes, they were good players for an average 4vs4 game, but not excellent, because they didn't change their tactics, when it was clear that they were going to lose with it.

But the matchmaking should not pair an arranged team with 4 players with rank 300 against random players ranked below 100.
18 Dec 2015, 14:01 PM
#24
avatar of Skabinsk

Posts: 238

Find a friend:foreveralone: :rofl:
18 Dec 2015, 14:30 PM
#25
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

What about 2p AT playing in 4v4 match? Ok, you can get 2x 2p AT here and call it 4p AT.

What about 3p AT in 4v4 match then?
18 Dec 2015, 15:08 PM
#26
avatar of SwonVIP
Donator 11

Posts: 640

4v4 Random :loco:
18 Dec 2015, 15:16 PM
#27
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

Would be interesting how the winrates change when 4v4 AT Teams only play versus 4v4 AT Teams and the same with 4v4 randoms tbh
18 Dec 2015, 16:08 PM
#28
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 12:44 PMStark
I 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, in this week i play only 2v2 with randoms and it was terrible, coz i am around 100-150 in 2v2 and i play vs guys from 500-1500, from 7 games only 2 players from both teams was in my level. I think its a big problem to balance automatch.
18 Dec 2015, 16:13 PM
#29
avatar of robertmikael
Donator 11

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

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.
18 Dec 2015, 16:38 PM
#30
avatar of AvNY

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.



+27
18 Dec 2015, 16:43 PM
#31
avatar of AvNY

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.



Then they would just have to deal with the fact that they are not as good in reality as they have convinced themselves. This is a good thing. People's subjective self-image should fall somewhere in the realm of objective reality or life will eventually hand them a big dose of unhappiness.

(Failing that they can come on the forums and whine constantly about imbalance in game design..... )
18 Dec 2015, 20:32 PM
#32
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 13:06 PMKatitof

Vast majority of that are comp stompers and campaign warriors.

There isn't enough players to support it without having 60 minute queues.
18 Dec 2015, 20:38 PM
#33
avatar of robertmikael
Donator 11

Posts: 311

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 13:06 PMKatitof
Vast majority of that are comp stompers and campaign warriors.

There isn't enough players to support it without having 60 minute queues.

If the matchmaking were more kind to the new players, maybe we would see a bigger playerbase in automatch. Who knows...
19 Dec 2015, 16:14 PM
#34
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

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.


The friends I know in real life who I play with have taught me how to fight the up hill battle. I totally agree
20 Dec 2015, 19:49 PM
#35
avatar of Gumboot

Posts: 199

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 12:31 PMpugzii

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...


CoH2 is beaten in player base by age of empires 2 released in 1999. They are obviously nailing it.
20 Dec 2015, 20:03 PM
#36
avatar of Gumboot

Posts: 199


If the matchmaking were more kind to the new players, maybe we would see a bigger playerbase in automatch. Who knows...


Make the base game f2p. Why not? They charge an arm and a leg for the rest of it anyway. When the game first came out it had over $140 worth of I game purchases on week one. Pair the new players up with each other to not scare them off from the beginning (try playing Starcraft 2 against Koreans and it's the same feeling for new CoH2 players). They will eventually enter into the normal pool of player improving search time for all.

If that doesn't work then this game will start to decrease in player base and they should just balance the game and move on to the next DoW or CoH.
20 Dec 2015, 21:07 PM
#37
avatar of Tobis
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 2307 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Dec 2015, 12:40 PMluvnest
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.

75% of the people playing the game mode are probably already in a match, so those actually in the queue would be even more small.
20 Dec 2015, 22:18 PM
#38
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276

Make base game f2p = High player base = AT search options. IF other AT's aren't searching automatch should look for randoms as a last resort.
20 Dec 2015, 22:27 PM
#39
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513

why isnt coh2 f2p yet
20 Dec 2015, 23:23 PM
#40
avatar of Intelligence209

Posts: 1124

I don't enjoy coming home and spending my day stomping on lost noobs. 9/10 games are unfortunately like that. It's not fun at all for either team. They should never have a high ranking team play against a randoms with low or no elo. I would rather have 15 min waiting time then play against a good players then 3 min waiting time against noobs. 3v3 I find actually a lot more competitive like 2v2s. I just can't stand the map pool
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

901 users are online: 901 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49432
Welcome our newest member, weekprophecy
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM