Apb matchmaking fixed, a fruit story

[Fruitini 12]

We can all agree everyone has their own skill level and to determine that is very difficult because we all preform at different levels each day. Apb is none like any other, its missions are random and in different (almost) spots every time that's why normal conventional systems for matching will not work.

 

This is what I propose...a system build around mission end stage, difficulty of mission and area of the map. Because each area comes with it's own skill cap. For Instance we can all agree in waterfront near the water missions are down right dreadful it's very hard to attack for some. But easy to defend. In financial the hospital is another example, hard to defend easy to attack for some because skill and time played (map knowledge) will allow you to overturn the objective. This will accumulate points over time giving you rank color and symbol. Instead of a team member gaining points for objectives the whole team gets the score, because you helped him get to that point. Dr borus snake oil I remember is a super pain mission to do, repo racers is another one these types of missions I believe being able to compete shows at least some skill. 

 

I'm still working on a system where if another team fixes the game where they allow the other team to win and so on I realize there are some flaws but I feel like it's a really solid idea.

 

[vsb 6171]

im still confused

 

 

are you saying threat should take mission area and objective location into account? because that can get subjective af, not to mention it would 100% have to be done manually

[Fruitini 12]

Just now, BXNNXD said:

im still confused

 

 

are you saying threat should take mission area and objective location into account? because that can get subjective af, not to mention it would 100% have to be done manually

Yes it should, and we need an entire revamp on how matching works because let's face the facts what we have now even if we attpemt to fix it, it's still the old way and it's not working at least not in my point of view 

How hard would it be able to dethreat with my system? I would say very also it has many positives. Listen the threat system sucks everyone should be gold literally 

[vsb 6171]

1 minute ago, Fruitini said:

Yes it should, and we need an entire revamp on how matching works because let's face the facts what we have now even if we attpemt to fix it, it's still the old way and it's not working at least not in my point of view 

from my laymans pov, assigning every objective location and mission area a specific threat modifier is basically impossible

 

 

not only would someone (likely an 8 person team) have to go through every single objective and mission area manually, but missions are so fluid that 2 objectives right next to each other could very well have different threats

[SelttikS 224]

After going over this for a few weeks i have decided No to your request. Good luck in your future posts.

[Fruitini 12]

1 minute ago, BXNNXD said:

from my laymans pov, assigning every objective location and mission area a specific threat modifier is basically impossible

 

 

not only would someone (likely an 8 person team) have to go through every single objective and mission area manually, but missions are so fluid that 2 objectives right next to each other could very well have different threats

Yea I was thinking about that say the item spawns In a lower tier area and you move it to a higher one, well the item would only count for the area it spawned in. I know like I said it has its flaws but it can all be worked out. Which is why you make the areas quite large you can't have several low tier areas like really small either near a larger high tier. I really like this idea I believe it can work.

[vsb 6171]

2 minutes ago, Fruitini said:

Yea I was thinking about that say the item spawns In a lower tier area and you move it to a higher one, well the item would only count for the area it spawned in. I know like I said it has its flaws but it can all be worked out. Which is why you make the areas quite large you can't have several low tier areas like really small either near a larger high tier. I really like this idea I believe it can work.

but if its not precise then you'll have people artificially gaining threat for completing easy objectives that just happen to be very close to hard ones

[SelttikS 224]

Much like other games, some times you get a shitty map sometimes you get a good one. It evens out in the end so no need to make up some random value system for crap that will only be a shit ton of work and have nothing but problems to try to get it to work half decently.

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

This is next to impossible to actually implement well.

[Fruitini 12]

7 minutes ago, BXNNXD said:

but if its not precise then you'll have people artificially gaining threat for completing easy objectives that just happen to be very close to hard ones

Yea when I made a mock up map about it I had some areas not really overlapping but running next to another tier area. There has to be a way to make a certain intersection neutral or let's say it all works perfect your objectives spawn in the same areas as the same area threat. Maybe if we piled missions Into that category we could filter out that happening....so I was thinking how you would scale. You don't wanna always play hard mission what if it was RNG but you where teamed with liked skilled players who have played many missions like yourself with the same skill 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Fruitini

[Fruitini 12]

3 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

This is next to impossible to actually implement well.

I know it's way out there but this has to be it because completing missions well, imo determines, map knowledge, and game mechanics on attacking and defending. It's going to be hard but it will be so worth. Also I'm like your biggest fan.

 

[SelttikS 224]

I am now picturing op with map print outs and crayons coloring areas different colors for how randomly hard they seem to them.

 

Ok for real why would this in any way be better than... well than anything else. Like a cabbage could give as good results determining the infinite number of variables that can happen.

[Fruitini 12]

1 minute ago, SelttikS said:

I am now picturing op with map print outs and crayons coloring areas different colors for how randomly hard they seem to them.

 

Ok for real why would this in any way be better than... well than anything else. Like a cabbage could give as good results determining the infinite number of variables that can happen.

All you're doing is spreading hate, constructive criticisms would be appreciated. And fyi not crayons so ha there 

[Dopefish 248]

This would require to manually tweak the threat multiplier for both mission type and location. This is extensive work for little to no improvement to the system as it is now.

 

 

I agree threat and matchmaking should be overhauled, but I don't think this is a good way to go about it.

 

 

Besides missions and objective locations need to be rebalanced as well, so there would be way less "difficulty gap" (read Repo Racers) between them.

[Fruitini 12]

Double post sorry 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Fruitini

[SelttikS 224]

3 minutes ago, Fruitini said:

All you're doing is spreading hate, constructive criticisms would be appreciated. And fyi not crayons so ha there 

OMG I was right, sorta. I gave you plenty of criticism, you can choose how to take it though. You are asking to make something that would take a supercomputer to implement in any useful way. Something that is in no way needed nor worth the effort.

 

 

Not to be more harsh but, you have areas labeled as one thing when i am sure many would agree are on the other end. All of this is based on opinions of an area not facts not data.

 

Now if we had years of data from all the missions ran in the forever, we could in theory look for trends in that data to maybe have some clue to something like what you want to think about. But we don't.

Edited June 27, 2018 by SelttikS

[Fruitini 12]

2 minutes ago, Dopefish said:

This would require to manually tweak the threat multiplier for both mission type and location. This is extensive work for little to no improvement to the system as it is now.

Yea I agree having your whole team go n5 would be kinda lame. I wonder of the score would be throughout and kills would push players above each other not only to eliminate threat multiplier issues but allow a "team winner or opposing winner"

[Dopefish 248]

7 minutes ago, Fruitini said:

I approve of people coming up with new ideas and being willing to discuss them seriously. Not to mention going through the effort of making illustrations.

 

 

But I have no idea how to read your image. Difficulty based on specific objective? It doesn't help that some streets have multiple difficulties.

 

 

Edit:

 

I think I get it. It illustrates areas rather than the streets, though there are some gaps here and there.

 

 

I'd use this reference for how the map can be improved instead.

Edited June 27, 2018 by Dopefish

[Fruitini 12]

Just now, Dopefish said:

I approve of people coming up with new ideas and being willing to discuss them seriously. Not to mention going through the effort of making illustrations.

 

 

But I have no idea how to read your image. Difficulty based on specific objective? It doesn't help that some streets have multiple difficulties.

Yea I was working on that I should of waited a little longer before posting but at first I wanted areas like squares and then it turned to street names. I know it's tough to gauge and read it really. I'll have to make another one 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

12 minutes ago, Fruitini said:

 Also I'm like your biggest fan.

 

But why

 

 

 

[vsb 6171]

Just now, NotZombieBiscuit said:

But why

 

 

 

he also enjoys watching gore videos and train wreck footage

[Fruitini 12]

9 minutes ago, SelttikS said:

OMG I was right, sorta. I gave you plenty of criticism, you can choose how to take it though. You are asking to make something that would take a supercomputer to implement in any useful way. Something that is in no way needed nor worth the effort.

 

 

There is a huge difference in critising them with their ideas than "constructive criticism" which basically means asking a question or helping me with a counter to my idea. You can Google criticism and constructive criticism...they are different 

 

Anyway back to my topic....

Edited June 27, 2018 by Fruitini

[Dopefish 248]

Come on guys, we might not agree with the idea, but we should appreciate the effort. No need to belittle him and turn every post into shitposting.

[Fruitini 12]

4 minutes ago, NotZombieBiscuit said:

But why

I dunno thought you where a good person to admire. Maybe even stal...talk a about in a good way....

2 minutes ago, Dopefish said:

Come on guys, we might not agree with the idea, but we should appreciate the effort. No need to belittle him and turn every post into shitposting.

Thanks I thought it was a great idea...i know its not the unflawed system but it's an idea to show there is something else out there. Maybe not my idea but someone else will come along with something better 

[Fruitini 12]

something else a little rough maybe better to read just a concept though