Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Uke said:

 

Truly fair matchmaking would be based on rank, not threat.

Did you perhaps mean rank AND threat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CookiePuss said:

Did you perhaps mean rank AND threat?

No. Threat has nothing to do with fairness. It's actually the opposite, threat is what often makes current matches unfair.

Edited by Uke
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Uke said:

threat is what often makes current matches unfair

Hmmm... I'm having trouble understanding how that is the case. Could you explain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

Hmmm... I'm having trouble understanding how that is the case. Could you explain?

I think you may be confusing fairness with the outcome of the game. Fair match doesn't mean that both teams will win 50% of the time. It means that both teams play under the same conditions and better team will win 100% of the time unless something unexpected happens. Like who knows, maybe the worse team will learn something during the game that will make them equal or even better. Or maybe they were better from the very beginning but didn't believe it which made them play worse.

 

Anyway, so because of how APB works you may think that 3 silvers vs 2 golds is fair or maybe even unfair for the silvers, but it's actually unfair for golds. And who will win the game is irrelevant.

 

If you want to make a system where both teams win 50% of the time then well first of all, that's impossible, you would have to take into account a lot more factors than just threat and rank, and second why would you want to do that? Where's the fun in playing if you know that no matter what you do, you will win half of your games?

 

But most developers are still trying to introduce this scuffed matchmaking and it just doesn't work on so many levels.

 

If you play good, you win more games. If you play bad, you lose more games. No need to complicate things. And if someone can't handle that, maybe competitive games just aren't for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Uke said:

I think you may be confusing fairness with the outcome of the game. Fair match doesn't mean that both teams will win 50% of the time. It means that both teams play under the same conditions and better team will win 100% of the time unless something unexpected happens. Like who knows, maybe the worse team will learn something during the game that will make them equal or even better. Or maybe they were better from the very beginning but didn't believe it which made them play worse.

 

Anyway, so because of how APB works you may think that 3 silvers vs 2 golds is fair or maybe even unfair for the silvers, but it's actually unfair for golds. And who will win the game is irrelevant.

 

If you want to make a system where both teams win 50% of the time then well first of all, that's impossible, you would have to take into account a lot more factors than just threat and rank, and second why would you want to do that? Where's the fun in playing if you know that no matter what you do, you will win half of your games?

 

But most developers are still trying to introduce this scuffed matchmaking and it just doesn't work on so many levels.

 

If you play good, you win more games. If you play bad, you lose more games. No need to complicate things. And if someone can't handle that, maybe competitive games just aren't for them?

Thank you for that. I do see what you mean now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Hansner said:

Haven't been in that district for ages but ok lel

only because they haven't existed for ages...

 

dunno why you're lying about it you've never been a problem, i notice you mostly play solo/casual and never came across as tryhard or anything never considered you to be toxic or out to ruin peoples fun. but you're definitely in everyday, bc i'm in everyday and always play with you -_- so why lie about it when you dont even need to, bit silly

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2019 at 12:18 AM, KawaiiAlice said:

Hi guys ,

are we gonna get back bronze and silver and gold ditricts or we are stuck in no threat districts forever ? and  when is that ?

Not sure about bronze or silvers, but "diamantes are forever" 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Future matchmaking must be based mainly on kills and deaths ratio.I mean starting on clean to measure from lets say next patch for example.Theres gonna be at least 3 skill groups of players.With scores around 15 kills - 3 deaths,another group around 7 kills - 8 deaths and third group with 3 kills - 15 deaths(for example)Obviously this 3 skill groups of players dont have to meet each other(call it bronze,silver,gold or whatever)This threat/skill lvls have to be hidden probably so players wont start dethreatin.This overall score next to player name right now(mission scoreboard)wich contains also assist,objectives done,medals etc is not very objective.Same must be for premade groups again based on overall score from theyr k/d ratio and such group must be dispatch vs another similar group if available.

Edited by TheMessiah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheMessiah said:

Future matchmaking must be based mainly on kills and deaths ratio.I mean starting on clean to measure from lets say next patch for example.Theres gonna be at least 3 skill groups of players.With scores around 15 kills - 3 deaths,another around 7 kills - 8 deaths and 3rd group with 3 kills - 15 deaths.Obviously this 3 skill groups of players dont have to meet each other(call it bronze,silver,gold or whatever)This threat/skill lvls have to be hidden probably so players wont start dethreatin.This overall score next to player name right now wich contains also assist,objectives done,medals etc is not very objective.Same must be for premade groups again based on overall score from theyr k/d ratio and must be dispatch vs another similar group if available.

It makes sense.

 

 

88.png

the system should be based on medals . which needs to be finalized, take into account the difference of weapons, levels, ratings, ranks .....

 

 

problem matches under the matchmaking system are delivered by private (ready-made ) groups . solo players receive in team only cargo 200 .

Edited by yood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TheMessiah said:

Future matchmaking must be based mainly on kills and deaths ratio.I mean starting on clean to measure from lets say next patch for example.Theres gonna be at least 3 skill groups of players.With scores around 15 kills - 3 deaths,another group around 7 kills - 8 deaths and third group with 3 kills - 15 deaths(for example)Obviously this 3 skill groups of players dont have to meet each other(call it bronze,silver,gold or whatever)This threat/skill lvls have to be hidden probably so players wont start dethreatin.This overall score next to player name right now(mission scoreboard)wich contains also assist,objectives done,medals etc is not very objective.Same must be for premade groups again based on overall score from theyr k/d ratio and such group must be dispatch vs another similar group if available.

Sounds like a system where no one cares about doing objectives or winning matches. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, Tigrix said:

It's nice because it completely eliminate the de-threat problems:)

Now imo, instead of re-adding threat districts, just add a green/tutorial district for new players and make it so anyone who played more than 5 hours on their character cannot become green threat, end of story.

New peeps get those 5 hours to get used to basic mechanics & tutorial of the game.

This ! +1000
Besides, now all dethreaters can meet us real gold veterans. Dethreaters bullied legit newcomers, greens, bronzes all this years. They were/are destroying APB population.  It is time they get to see how karma works when those same dethreaters are opposed vs real gold veterans.

 

  • Like 2
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kitty Yekaterina said:

 

This ! +1000
Besides, now all dethreaters can meet us real gold veterans. Dethreaters bullied legit newcomers, greens, bronzes all this years. They were/are destroying APB population.  It is time they get to see how karma works when those same dethreaters are opposed vs real gold veterans.

 

Sounds like a recipe for losing more pop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Sounds like a system where no one cares about doing objectives or winning matches.

I was thinkin about this yesterday.This defending/attackin objectives gets like super dated and kinda slows down the entire game.The team arriving first on point always have advantage.Better every stage to be alternate for crims and enf.Like 1st stage of mission for example enf must defend but on stage 2 they must attack and so on.Otherwise is not fair.I think missions must be changed like this or only last mission stage to stay.Maybe this last stage/entire mission to be 15 min or something like that.I play other shooters and when come back to apb everything feels like in slow motion and is boring plus when u have in mind the matchmaking..like in unbalanced match u run couple of minutes to obj and when arrive-dead and u do the same again.Thats the entire game in many cases

Edited by TheMessiah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, postalgril said:

dunno why you're lying about it you've never been a problem, i notice you mostly play solo/casual and never came across as tryhard or anything never considered you to be toxic or out to ruin peoples fun. but you're definitely in everyday, bc i'm in everyday and always play with you -_- so why lie about it when you dont even need to, bit silly

I've totally played in bronze, but I main silver district now cuz fuck it 😄 

Edit: My goal was never to ruin peoples fun because I know what I am capable of YES I have played in bronze district for the "lolz" but silver district is where I belong because there are real challenges there. But hey, i'm just saying that it's not that bad to play vs good players.

Edited by Hansner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TheMessiah said:

Future matchmaking must be based mainly on kills and deaths ratio.I mean starting on clean to measure from lets say next patch for example.Theres gonna be at least 3 skill groups of players.With scores around 15 kills - 3 deaths,another group around 7 kills - 8 deaths and third group with 3 kills - 15 deaths(for example)Obviously this 3 skill groups of players dont have to meet each other(call it bronze,silver,gold or whatever)This threat/skill lvls have to be hidden probably so players wont start dethreatin.This overall score next to player name right now(mission scoreboard)wich contains also assist,objectives done,medals etc is not very objective.Same must be for premade groups again based on overall score from theyr k/d ratio and such group must be dispatch vs another similar group if available.

So you're saying I can purely play objectives, win games, and the game will tank my threat for me. That sound's great dude. It is like free dethreating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One huge problem here... dethreaters are rather rare, or at least not near as prevalent as so many would like to believe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Sounds like a recipe for losing more pop.

 


Who's gonna miss the de-threaters?
actual gold players that never see them aside when they're sabotaging your mission and killing themselves repeatedly?
silver players who are actual legit stuck silver and already can't manage?
bronze/green players who are new to the game and are trying to learn the basics before getting farmed by 2013 veterans who de-threated to get easy opp?

Sounds like it'd be quite nice losing that pop. Sounds like we'd be holding on and growing 3 other categories. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Iosono said:

One huge problem here... dethreaters are rather rare, or at least not near as prevalent as so many would like to believe 

on NA roughly 2 to 3 weeks ago half of bronze district was gold.

 

1 hour ago, Tigrix said:


Who's gonna miss the de-threaters?
actual gold players that never see them aside when they're sabotaging your mission and killing themselves repeatedly?
silver players who are actual legit stuck silver and already can't manage?
bronze/green players who are new to the game and are trying to learn the basics before getting farmed by 2013 veterans who de-threated to get easy opp?

Sounds like it'd be quite nice losing that pop. Sounds like we'd be holding on and growing 3 other categories. 

its never a good thing to put golds against bronzes now its happening more than before.

you wont lose just dethreaters you would lose everyone without a proper matchmaking threat and phasing

you cant do it half way and expect good results it just wont work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 10:54 AM, Ai-Zhú said:

Uhh, no. That is not a fair comparison. 

 

You are comparing casual game modes, where players of any skill level are being mashed up, to APB's missions, which is APB's competitive game mode. Casual game modes are the casual games in CSGO, the non-ranked matches in OW or the Fightclub in APB. These modes feature players of any skill level, but also a higher player count. Competitive or ranked modes, however, include a matchmaking system because they are competitive.

 

Being carried or stomping on players just worse than you has nothing competitive about it, nor do you learn anything from it. There is a reason why in any competitive sport (e-sports included), there is some kind of "matchmaking" system, be it football leagues, racing leagues, or in our case, threat levels.

 

HOWEVER, in this particular and odd case, the matches got more enjoyable for me. I have played several hours now since the temporary change was made and went out victorious in about 40% to 50% of the time, which is a fair ratio. I have to admit here, it was either stomping or getting stomped. That is not how it should be, but the previous matchmaking system was worse. There, it was getting smashed only. Either way, a fix is really necessary, but reverting back to the old system is not an option imo.

 

 

 

APB is a casual game, not just fight club, whether you wanna admit it or not lol. 

 

As I state in later posts, and sorry for the late reply, the game would benefit more if we had multiple tiers like the competitive modes in other games... but then you take away the social aspect of the game where you can't play with your friends since there are too many tiers - it's definitely not like sports in a sense where you can be on the same team with your best friend regardless of skill level (its usually the team that picks their teammates... not some sort of matchmaking algorithm). It would, however, definitely make matches more "fair". The current problem: gaps in skill levels between tiers/threats are currently too wide to really be of any use in terms of matchmaking. The more variables you add, the less people have a chance to play with each other.

 

Back to the sports thing, this game is nowhere near e-sport levels of good nor should it be imo. Not every game can be an e-sport, only ones that are made from the ground up as e-sports will have any sort of success or fairness. I don't think it should be highly competitive either... there's no way to add a competitive mode without killing/separating the players even further (any further and the game will basically die).

 

I would argue the opposite. Getting carried/stomped is one of the best ways to learn. Actually, it can even make you aspire to be like them - drive your motivation rather than just think you're as good/better than everyone else. But this is theoretical and wouldn't apply to everyone... HOWEVER, getting carried and seeing better players take better positions/perform certain tricks is very valuable. Getting a chance to talk to them is also very valuable - which would typically be in a match. This is why there are even sports to begin with... you look up to them, you can see what they're doing and learn from it, etc. You see your favorite team get rekt and you learn how they did (or just get angry that they lost).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MeanBetsy said:

APB is a casual game, not just fight club, whether you wanna admit it or not lol. 

 

As I state in later posts, and sorry for the late reply, the game would benefit more if we had multiple tiers like the competitive modes in other games... but then you take away the social aspect of the game where you can't play with your friends since there are too many tiers - it's definitely not like sports in a sense where you can be on the same team with your best friend regardless of skill level (its usually the team that picks their teammates... not some sort of matchmaking algorithm). It would, however, definitely make matches more "fair". The current problem: gaps in skill levels between tiers/threats are currently too wide to really be of any use in terms of matchmaking. The more variables you add, the less people have a chance to play with each other.

 

Back to the sports thing, this game is nowhere near e-sport levels of good nor should it be imo. Not every game can be an e-sport, only ones that are made from the ground up as e-sports will have any sort of success or fairness. I don't think it should be highly competitive either... there's no way to add a competitive mode without killing/separating the players even further (any further and the game will basically die).

 

I would argue the opposite. Getting carried/stomped is one of the best ways to learn. Actually, it can even make you aspire to be like them - drive your motivation rather than just think you're as good/better than everyone else. But this is theoretical and wouldn't apply to everyone... HOWEVER, getting carried and seeing better players take better positions/perform certain tricks is very valuable. Getting a chance to talk to them is also very valuable - which would typically be in a match. This is why there are even sports to begin with... you look up to them, you can see what they're doing and learn from it, etc. You see your favorite team get rekt and you learn how they did (or just get angry that they lost).

there are many words .

 

 

Current issue: skill level gaps between levels / threats are currently too large,

 

the problem is abuse . clans play against single players ( Packed groups play against noobs who don't even have all stock weapons )

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, yood said:

there are many words .

 

 

Current issue: skill level gaps between levels / threats are currently too large,

 

the problem is abuse . clans play against single players ( Packed groups play against noobs who don't even have all stock weapons )

 

There isn't really much you can do about that second issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were against threat segregation back when G1 originally implemented it. Since it was temporarily removed, we've seen a full Financial district running alongside a full Waterfront district where anyone can enter and play. With a lower population, the removal of threat segregation has allowed for a greater variety of opposition and the ability for anyone to level contacts in either district.

A mixed bag of skill levels, experience and ranks worked just fine back in beta. Being placed against more skilled players affords people an opportunity to learn through observation along with trial and error. You can't improve without playing against more skillful players. Being placed against lesser skilled players affords those of us who are tired of the same try-hard pre-made sweats five missions in a row to throttle down and mess around.

Threat segregation encourages de-threating, which ends up interfering with matchmaking anyway. We're looking forward to the planned changes after the long-awaited engine update is released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2019 at 7:08 PM, Solamente said:

this is why no segregation is a problem - because we still have the same limited pool of potential players but now there’s even more variation in threat levels

 

for a simplified example: if you have 10 golds in a district (segregation) it’s far more likely that you will get a balanced match than if you have 3 golds, 4 silvers, and 3 bronzes (no segregation)

In matchmaking 3 mediocre Golds are very close to 4 high Silvers, but 4 high Golds are very far away from 4 low Golds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...