Profile of Grumpy

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1958

General Information


Thread: Further Evidence that COH3 is Trash28 Aug 2022, 03:01 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Aug 2022, 19:26 PMKurobane Acting like a white knight and setting my posts to invisible is not going to change the fact that Relic has a track record of failure. COH 2 had a terrible launch. The game was literally unplayable for years and even then the game is full of bugs that literally take 5 seconds to fix and are still present in the game. Advanced Warning launched with UKF roughly 7 years ago and it is still broken and does not work. This is one of many bugs reported that have gone on for years and never fixed. Dawn of War 3 was a failure of epic proportions almost as bad as COH 2's launch. AOE 4 only sold copies because it had the name Age of Empires attached to it. Had it came with any other name it would have flopped harder than Dawn of War 3. AOE 2 has more players on it than AOE 4 which is a huge embarrassment. I spent years being Constructive even going as far as highlighting bugs and exploits and sending them to Relic only for it to be ignored until they are forced to do a hotfix. The simple fact is that Relic died with THQ which is why all former Relic staff left and are in Blackbird Interactive making Homeworld 3. The people who are left are extremely incompetent. Look 45 seconds at the Artillery or 53 seconds when the Calliope starts shooting. The animations are way off and a huge downgrade from COH2. The entire video showcases terrible animations for different units and Relic is proud to show that off just like how they were proud of the new UI that they put in that everyone hated forcing them to respond saying that they will change it. They are out of touch and have no idea what they are doing. I'm going to buy the game, but expect that it will be buggy. There were more cringe-worthy parts of the video than the Calliope. They bragged about infantry riding on tanks, then showed video of the infantry suspended in mid-air next to the two tanks as the tanks were moving. Then the tanks started phasing through each other, like some cross between WWII and Harry Potter. It did bother me a bit that they would brag about something that poorly executed. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Further Evidence that COH3 is Trash27 Aug 2022, 19:03 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Jul 2022, 11:36 AMSturmpanther Can it be because of the war right now? I don't really agree with some of the some of the sanctions like gaming companies and fast food companies pulling out of Russia. Those products don't really help the Russian war effort, even tangentially. If McDonalds pulled out of the US, we'd have a lot less obesity here and my health insurance premiums would go down. I'd almost rather they left the US and went to Russia. I'd definitely let gaming companies and other drug dealers continue to do business in Russia. In: COH3 Central
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.22 Feb 2022, 23:55 PM Jump back to quoted post21 Feb 2022, 18:15 PMRosbone Uhhhh did anyone look at the pictures or read what I wrote? I dont think you did. I did but don't know what to make of it. I sometimes get streaks like yours. What are you using for vetoes? In: Lobby
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.19 Feb 2022, 13:55 PM Jump back to quoted post19 Feb 2022, 06:30 AMEsxile There is flaw in your reasoning, both players should have wait enough time to be matched together. But that's not the case, I've been matched really quickly against players that were not close at all to my ELO ranking. I recall having been matched vs dutchman once in like 10 seconds while I was myself around rank 200. So maybe he waited 2 or 3 minutes before getting an oponent with the searching range increasing but what about me, the other player? And that's just an example I have in mind, but it happens regularly. I don't think the wait has to be two-sided. In your case, just Dutchman might have been waiting several minutes. When I played 1v1's, I sometimes had the same experience. When my ranking would go below something like 300 is when I'd get those matchups. Those could be a little deflating when it became obvious that not only was their micro better, they knew the maps better and I found myself being constantly outpositioned. Also, the 1v1 matchmaking has a greater challenge than other modes, particularly 4v4, because of the low number of players. I play in the Pacific time zone (western United States) and the numbers in 1v1 matchmaking would sometimes bounce around from 38/62 to 43/57, etc. When I would see that, I'm pretty sure that there is less than 10 people searching 1v1 and the ratios are going from 3/8 to 3/7 (which is a lot more likely than having a lot of players and the matchups just happen to create those ratios that simplify to single digit numerators and denominators. In: Lobby
Thread: nice usf pathfinder19 Feb 2022, 03:44 AM Jump back to quoted post18 Feb 2022, 15:48 PMBasedSecretary Never ask a former inmate if they are guilty or not. My bad. I'm sure it was a case of mistaken identity..... In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.19 Feb 2022, 03:39 AM Jump back to quoted post18 Feb 2022, 15:08 PMHannibal The lower you are on the ladder, the more probable it is to be matched with a higher skilled opponent. At the same time, this loss will result in a lower ELO adjustment. I am not a computer scientist, but shouldn't the ELO system fix this scewed distribution by estimating the win chances before the game? I always though that this is how it works. I think the way that the match maker works is that it tries to find games for you with people within a certain range. My guess is that it's something like 0-30, 31-100, 101-300, 300-1000, 1001-3000, You'll get matched quickly if there are enough people in your range. If you don't find a match within a certain length of time, it starts opening up the range. It seems like it is more focused on making sure that people can get games instead of waiting forever. It's a somewhat valid point, as waiting 30 minutes to find a game would bother the legions of casual players more than the mismatches. I have had active ranks from 17 to 3000+ at the same time. On the 4v4 team that was ranked in the top 20, if we got a match right away then it was another well-ranked team. If the search went a long time, we knew we were going to get worse ranked players. I don't know how ELO gets adjusted after a match. I don't know what my actual ELO number is, I just see the change in ranking from one game to the next so I can't tell how it makes the changes. I'm sure there is an algorithm but there are too many variables to guess at how it works. I do think it would really help if Relic introduced Ranked and Unranked like many other online games have. I'd also like to see it so that in order to play ranked, you would have to beat at least a hard computer in a 1v1, or something to that effect. The other improvement that I'd like would be to give new teams a elo rating based on either the average elo of each individual or their best ELO. In: Lobby
Thread: nice usf pathfinder18 Feb 2022, 00:47 AM Jump back to quoted post11 Feb 2022, 16:42 PMBasedSecretary Pretty simple. Rush 2 mgs and put them in covering arcs, Rush 1-2 mortars put them behind mgs. Rush fuel and stall for 222 or PzIV since Paths dont have snares. GG Was your ban related to giving advice like this? In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.18 Feb 2022, 00:37 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Feb 2022, 21:07 PMKlement Pikhtura If you look closely 50% of Hell consists of 66.66% of elo Best use of statistics in this entire thread! In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.18 Feb 2022, 00:36 AM Jump back to quoted post17 Feb 2022, 07:12 AMT.R. Stormjäger https://web.pdx.edu/~newsomj/uvclass/ho_outlier%20and%20sample%20size.pdf Standard error and standard deviation decrease as sample size increases. Rosbone’s insane rumblings about matchmaking fucking him up 10 times in a row and then continuing to do so with a significant effect no matter how many games you play have no basis in reality. If you play 200-300 games, matchmaking quality will regress towards the mean and you will get very similar numbers of good and bad cases of it. Bayes theorem is irrelevant, I never said if you get 10 bad cases of matchmaking in a row you are more likely to get good matchmaking next time. Learn to read. Lol, you just keep digging....... There is nothing wrong with my ability to read. You grabbed a random article on the effects of an outlier. You probably didn't notice the portion about the article analyzing the effects of a single outlier on a NORMAL distribution. The complaint about elo hell boils down to the fact that it isn't a normal distribution, and anyone with rankings less than about 6000 will get a right-skewed distribution for matchups. If you wanted to make a counter-argument that was coherent instead of just slinging insults, you could've pointed out that people end up placed in the ladder depending on how they manage the right-skewed distribution, toxic teammates, etc. The distribution is worse for people that are higher on the ladder. If you're someone like Aerafield, Sanders, etc, practically every one of your teammates is worse than you, so you'd better learn to shut up and play. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Addressing the issue of ELO-hell.17 Feb 2022, 02:53 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Feb 2022, 21:52 PMT.R. Stormjäger Do you even understand basic statistics? The more the sample size increases the less the outliers affect the overall outcome. Please stop spouting nonsense. Um, Rosbone's statement is correct. It's an extreme example of Bayes theorem. You're talking about regression towards the mean which is a concept and not an actual theorem. In: COH2 Balance