![]() As if you can’t acknowledge that the competitive sphere is an echochamber, a meta of 99% copycat strategies. Justify it however you like, you’re only trying to find a justification for it because it’s your opinion as to what matters for balance. The cutoff you are creating here, it’s a rough opinion of what you think matters. Therefore we should pretty much only care about the opinions of the 2k bracket. ![]() I don’t think 1600’s have the tactical expertise needed to properly evaluate a civ and decide whether or not something is strong or weak. I don’t see the point of comparing vs players that basically are new to the game and have no clue how to play, the real competition starts from 1000, below 1k elo they can’t even beat the AI on hard so yeah they are relatively noob compared to the competitive playerbase, always remember to make comparison between the top and not the tail in a game like this.Īnyway this is completely offtopic, i just felt it so wrong to read that someone believe he is an intermediated player with 1k elo cause the majority of users are lower than that, the real middle in terms of skill and knowledge is around 1600, cause frankly between a 2k and a 1k the difference is gigantic in every single aspect, you can’t refer to urself as an intermediate with such real difference. That percentile some of you are using is as fake as the 5k elo tg players, first of all the majority of those nicks have even less than 50 games in 1x1, so they aren’t really good examples to use, lots of those numbers are smurfs for team games, meaning they rather to keep lower ranks in 1x1 and the last is that we have the same rank/rated number of the best players, i didn’t invent anything 1600-1850 are middle level player or intermediate since zone days, below that you do know how to play the game but you are missing lots of stuff. Wasting time in the queue or wasting your time in 1 hour of an unfair megarandom game with a team with 0 possibilities to win, you choose which one you’d prefer to waste, but to answer that you first must reach the real middle which is 1600 in 1x1, cheers.Ĭause its simple, you don’t compare to players that don’t know how to play competitively, you compare your self vs better players. You are new to the game to fully understand the issue, before giving ur thoughts you should understand this is not a new game, this is a remaster from a well and solid community who had strong preferences, the meta is quite polished so we already know which settings are competitive and which maps are deftly not competitive or fair, sc2 is an easier game so it shouldn’t be compared to aoe2, specially cause that game is now ded, you want to compare the game with moderns match makings, then its behind every single one of them, none of the all existent match making forces you to play things you don’t want, you queue up for the map and game mode, a player leaves the queue another replaces him without disbanding the whole party.Īlso you are not in the middle you are in the very button being 1k elo, there are less alt f4 on those levels, players on low levels don’t care about quality but quantity, alt f4 is far more common in middle and high levels. People who Alt+F4 waste the time of the majority of players who put up with the current ranked system and recognize why it is the way it is. ![]() I would rather play on a variety of maps, with short queue times and fair matches, than play only one map, waiting forever in queues and have more unbalanced matches. In 1v1s, having 3 bans and a favourite gives you a ton of influence over what maps you’ll play most of the time while also guaranteeing that you’ll always have at least one map unbanned, no matter who you get matched with. I can only imagine the queues get much longer at the higher and lower ends of the ELO bell curve. ![]() I’m a ~1000 ELO player at the moment, which is exactly in the middle of the bell curve, and so should have the shortest queue times, yet regularly have to wait over 2 minutes to get a game. ![]() AoE2 multiplayer is as popular as it has ever been but at ~15000 concurrent players on DE on Steam (most of whom are in singleplayer), it’s nowhere close to the ~200000 in 1v1 ranked alone in SC2, which is well past its prime. If AoE2 was a much more popular game, like SC2 at its peak, then I’d be more inclined to agree that splitting the queues is a good idea, however it’s not. Leaderboards would also need to be split because the best players in each queue would never meet each other. More than likely it would need to do some combination of both. Increase the acceptable ELO difference between players, creating more unbalanced games The main problem with infinite bans or separate map queues is that it the matchmaker would have to compensate for having fewer players in each queue. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |