Jump to content
MattScott

Matchmaking and Threat

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, xHenryman90x said:

You mean that they were forced back to gold districts before at some point but they reverted it?

Yup. It used to be a thing but all it did was usher in the era of dethreating and dethreating has been a problem ever since. Due to this epic failure on the part of G1 and the infamous Tiggs they had to revert it to try to quell the amount of dethreating. It helped but it didnt stop it so at the end of the day you can thank the quality of this community for that. If segregation is brought back dethreating will only get 10x worse once more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2019 at 12:21 PM, TheDogCatcher said:

At this stage any discussion of matchmaking is pointless,

 

when the pool of available players is little more than a puddle nothing you try and do will make any difference.

что то не работает ?

Edited by olo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2019 at 5:50 AM, TheSxW said:

There is some problem with points earning

1. killing player with 1% hp left still gives 100 points maybe system kill equals 100 minus assists

 

2. doing points should be rewarded on time you spent on them from 20 up to 20 points

 

3. demerits shouldnt give minuses points it should interfere with threat but not using points system may e some flag on character etc.

 

4. arrests shouldnt be such rewarded

 

5. arrest freeing should be intouchd or even boosted with additional $ ( with abuse prevention ) 

 

6. stunning should be more rewarded

 

7. killing stunned enemy should give other players except stun osner less points maybe 50 or something like that

 

 

 

1. Yes, good idea.

2. What points do you mean?

3. There shouldn't be minus points for demerits, neither it should have any effect to threat level.

4. Stunning and arresting is already harder compared to lethal weaponry, maybe the rewards for stunning and arresting should be more equally rewarded.

5. Doesn't it already take less time to free someone compared to arresting?

6. Sure.

7. LTL already does soft damage. What i'd like to see is demerit for players who kill a criminal while someone is attempting to arrest them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4.5.6,7 it has nothing to do with the matchmaking system .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2019 at 6:38 AM, xHenryman90x said:

1. Yes, good idea.

2. What points do you mean?

3. There shouldn't be minus points for demerits, neither it should have any effect to threat level.

4. Stunning and arresting is already harder compared to lethal weaponry, maybe the rewards for stunning and arresting should be more equally rewarded.

5. Doesn't it already take less time to free someone compared to arresting?

6. Sure.

7. LTL already does soft damage. What i'd like to see is demerit for players who kill a criminal while someone is attempting to arrest them.


3. yes it has affect on threat level and very huge now ... thats why ppl hate derankers

i will rewrite them and expand abit

1. killing player with 1% hp left still gives 100 points maybe system kill equals 100 minus assists so [ 100pt - (assists done to this character as SUM) = {actual points received} ]

2. doing points should be rewarded on time you spent on them from 20 up to 200 points ( if point is done in <5 seconds apply 20 points to Score Tab after complete / if time to done point is for example 30seconds or more apply 200+ points to Score Tab etc. )

3. demerits shouldnt give minus points it should interfere with threat but not using points system maybe some flag on character etc. (that will let know system that this is derank *D*ucker)

4. arrests shouldnt be such rewarded ( example make an arrest spree like 15+ arrests and kill each one arrested player = INSANE ammount of APB$ and derank to silver i preffer to do 10-15 ) - earnings are insane even using TG-8 u can rekt almost anyone on CQC ( FBW partisan in stunning )

5. arrest freeing should be intouchd or even boosted with additional $ ( with abuse prevention ) - to force players to help their mate if they can or told them its profitable to do so in mission

6. stunning should be more rewarded ( 20 points for stunn is derankers paradise ) - Stun player wait untill he shoots or wait 5 seconds and stun him again ... repeat untill

7. killing stunned enemy should give other players except stun osner less points maybe 50 or something like that

@Yood - Score is a base factor to threat level and because Score rewards are deprecated old and broken it allow players to earn gold not even doing anything in mission or doing just the points
+ each pickup points in the mission should be removed or replaced with time events even 2 second will be good enough
+ each of my points interfere with thread obtaining i find out that it takes 1 to 10 missions to obtain thread from lower one to upper one depends on score u obtain
+ if u are a T player and finished tutorial after finishing mission with 4k points u will be granted with a gold thread after mission

im cheched that long time with a few friends so i propably know what im talking about ( some of the things in thread obtaining could depend on LUCK and shit RNG coded too )


sorry for a interpunction and some language fails ;(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2019 at 12:38 AM, xHenryman90x said:

7. LTL already does soft damage. What i'd like to see is demerit for players who kill a criminal while someone is attempting to arrest them.

That would require killing anyone to be a demerit. Killing someone regardless of whats going on counts as a kill and killing a stunned opponent or one being arrested counts as a kill in the system, just like shooting someone at any other time. If there in cuffs then its a demerit but up until that point its free reign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TheSxW said:


@Yood - Score is a base factor to threat level and because Score rewards are deprecated old and broken it allow players to earn gold not even doing anything in mission or doing just the points
+ each pickup points in the mission should be removed or replaced with time events even 2 second will be good enough
+ each of my points interfere with thread obtaining i find out that it takes 1 to 10 missions to obtain thread from lower one to upper one depends on score u obtain
+ if u are a T player and finished tutorial after finishing mission with 4k points u will be granted with a gold thread after mission

im cheched that long time with a few friends so i propably know what im talking about ( some of the things in thread obtaining could depend on LUCK and shit RNG coded too )


sorry for a interpunction and some language fails ;(

as a whole.   score and threat rating are working PROPERLY ! The PROBLEM : players remake the rules for themselves - to be a winner always .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

все хорошо 

Edited by olo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2018 at 12:26 AM, MattScott said:

I’m curious why threat calculation hasnt been adjusted to fallback to asymmetrical matches. 

 

For instance, I wonder if we could match 3 medium threat with 2 slightly higher threat to make it more even. Or 3 vs 4.

it is viable and correct .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2019 at 10:38 AM, Romique said:

with population that low and mixing the golds vs bronze vs silvers - we cant find a solution - would work better if the silvers only alowed to play with bronze and gold/silvers - and golds vs golds and sivers - and bronze vs bronze/green/t and silver......that should works - or we need bigger size distrs

also this yeah let the T play vs greens and mb bronzes no ilvers or golds !

I've opened a topic specificly regarding golds in bronze, in the sugestion section, that speaks about this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest issue of the game: very low playerbase and the stigma the game has got, that when anyone turns an eye to it will instantly see its backstory.

Solution: Complete re-design of the game from scratch in the same concept, but a much better version 2.0

People you are trying to fix a game, that had 2 companies fail at, prior to LO and the fact that the community and the game have been handled terribly by the former dev companies.

No wonder no new players come steam-rolling into the game when they all know what a bad history it had, they wouldn't invest time into it, this whole conversation is approached from a pointless angle.

The solution is straight-forward... Generating the funds and the excecution of it is the near impossible task. This game needs to be completely re-built and marketed as a reincarnated version of its former self. That's it. Fixing the de-threating, ranking, threat or any matchmaking on a peak 600 playerbase will NEVER work.

And trust me... I would love to see this game thrive again. I've been in this game since the CB era and then left for 5 years due to it dying and the playerbase continually shrinking. But I love the concept and the game itself, but without a playerbase of more than 5000, it's just broken.

Edited by I-Reaper-I
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2019 at 4:59 PM, Darkzero3802 said:

That would require killing anyone to be a demerit. Killing someone regardless of whats going on counts as a kill and killing a stunned opponent or one being arrested counts as a kill in the system, just like shooting someone at any other time. If there in cuffs then its a demerit but up until that point its free reign.

The lack of punishment for killing a stunned enemy is an issue that has existed since the beginning. It severely impedes less than lethal gameplay, another thing in the long list of reasons people don't bother with it (despite how strong it can be). Demerits would be pointless though, as nobody cares about demerits as it is. They don't actually hurt you in any way, they don't reduce your mission rewards or anything. In fact, they actually help you because they reduce your threat gains (which is why demerits are highly sought out by dethreaters).

 

There's only one actual solution to the stun killing issue, and it's a really tough sell for many reasons. Killing a stunned enemy triggers kick to lobby, similarly to teamkills and suicides. This would instantly cause people to stop killing stunned enemies, fixing the problem. However, there's then the question of how strict will it be?

 

Requiring five stun kills like the existing systems means it'd never trigger in the overwhelming majority of cases, so it would be pointless. Kicking on the first stun kill would be a problem, because there's plenty of times the stun kill isn't actually intentional (the LTL'er and lethal user happen to be going for the same target, LTL manages to get the stun right before the lethal kills them).

 

So maybe two? Three? It's hard to say, and ultimately depends on how skilled the LTL user is in getting their stuns. The average LTL'er won't get many stuns, so a higher number is increasingly less useful for this... but then there's career LTL'ers like myself who constantly get stuns and thus lower numbers would potentially cause our non-malicious teammates problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Hexerin said:

The lack of punishment for killing a stunned enemy is an issue that has existed since the beginning. It severely impedes less than lethal gameplay, another thing in the long list of reasons people don't bother with it (despite how strong it can be). Demerits would be pointless though, as nobody cares about demerits as it is. They don't actually hurt you in any way, they don't reduce your mission rewards or anything. In fact, they actually help you because they reduce your threat gains (which is why demerits are highly sought out by dethreaters).

 

There's only one actual solution to the stun killing issue, and it's a really tough sell for many reasons. Killing a stunned enemy triggers kick to lobby, similarly to teamkills and suicides. This would instantly cause people to stop killing stunned enemies, fixing the problem. However, there's then the question of how strict will it be?

 

Requiring five stun kills like the existing systems means it'd never trigger in the overwhelming majority of cases, so it would be pointless. Kicking on the first stun kill would be a problem, because there's plenty of times the stun kill isn't actually intentional (the LTL'er and lethal user happen to be going for the same target, LTL manages to get the stun right before the lethal kills them).

 

So maybe two? Three? It's hard to say, and ultimately depends on how skilled the LTL user is in getting their stuns. The average LTL'er won't get many stuns, so a higher number is increasingly less useful for this... but then there's career LTL'ers like myself who constantly get stuns and thus lower numbers would potentially cause our non-malicious teammates problems.

The problem with that is the number required, and as like tks and suicides you can stop and the timer will reset so in the end it wont end the problem. The solution is changing the community from its current state of me only others dont mean jack. This is a team game and as such teamwork should be a thing, toxicity shouldnt. Everybody complains about it yet nobody is willing to actually change so the community gets better which makes the game better. As long as this happens nothing will get better and this circle will keep going round and round.

Edited by Darkzero3802

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the game has four levels of threat than bad if everyone will play in their arenas ? argue please

 

Merged.

 

greenpeace can save one mutated fish and kill millions of tons of plankton .

Share this post


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

greenpeace can save one mutated fish and kill millions of tons of plankton .

I'm not too fuzzed about mutated fish and plankton. The bigger issue is, how should we handle silverpeace and goldpeace to protect bronzepeace?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

think about who benefits to the situation remained in the current position and you will understand on who and why this makes  -  golds .

 

the game and forum for a long time occupied by the clans and cheap gold . they are very disadvantageous to change the situation in the game .

 

AsgerLund we'll have to play in the Golden area against the gold , clan players .

Edited by Yood

Share this post


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

think about who benefits to the situation remained in the current position and you will understand on who and why this makes  -  golds .

 

the game and forum for a long time occupied by the clans and cheap gold . they are very disadvantageous to change the situation in the game .

Changes in matchmaking, player threat, and district threat have been discussed extensively for years and years now. No good solutions have been found, because there are no quick-fixes. Maybe it would have been possible to make changes during the G1 regime when /pop was higher, but by now we all know the G1 modus operandi. LO are left with a low-pop game, and they have to think out of the box to solve the matchmaking/threat problem. One of the options proposed by LO was/is district phasing from a global pool (as far as I remember), to make the amount of players available to match bigger - which should result in a larger number of fair matches. However this solution is requires the Engine Upgrade before it can be implemented (as far as I remember).

 

Almost all other suggestions we have seen for matchmaking/threat results in splitting up the player-base even further, making matching pools smaller and smaller - which is objectively not good.

 

The only band-aid fix I would propose is to make it impossible for gold threat players to ready up in bronze district. I know this is not even close to being a solution to the issue, but it would give a tiny amount of new-player protection in bronze (down-side is that it would be a nuisance to the players caught in the "too good for bronze districts, but too bad for silver districts"-limbo, possibly reducing the number of those players).

 

These are my quick views, and I myself am a silver player caught in the "too good for bronze districts, but too bad for silver districts"-limbo.

Edited by AsgerLund

Share this post


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

Changes in matchmaking, player threat, and district threat have been discussed extensively for years and years now. No good solutions have been found, because there are no quick-fixes. Maybe it would have been possible to make changes during the G1 regime when /pop was higher, but by now we all know the G1 modus operandi. LO are left with a low-pop game, and they have to think out of the box to solve the matchmaking/threat problem. One of the options proposed by LO was/is district phasing from a global pool (as far as I remember), to make the amount of players available to match bigger - which should result in a larger number of fair matches. However this solution is requires the Engine Upgrade before it can be implemented (as far as I remember).

 

Almost all other suggestions we have seen for matchmaking/threat results in splitting up the player-base even further, making matching pools smaller and smaller - which is objectively not good.

 

The only band-aid fix I would propose is to make it impossible for gold threat players to ready up in bronze district. I know this is not even close to being a solution to the issue, but it would give a tiny amount of new-player protection in bronze (down-side is that it would be a nuisance to the players caught in the "too good for bronze districts, but too bad for silver districts"-limbo, possibly reducing the number of those players).

 

These are my quick views, and I myself am a silver player caught in the "too good for bronze districts, but too bad for silver districts"-limbo.

bla bal bla . nothing new .

the game and forum for a long time occupied by the clans and cheap gold . they are very disadvantageous to change the situation in the game .

 

Edited by Yood
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Yood said:

bla bal bla . nothing new .

the game and forum for a long time occupied by the clans and cheap gold . they are very disadvantageous to change the situation in the game .

 

tenor.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. Phasing will solve player pool issue
  2. removing the threat will make it harder for people to complain about imbalanced teams, but wont stop it.
  3. fixing the broken objective areas will fix the "winning when shouldn't based on skill" situations thus giving a more balanced outcome for matches and regulating the skill ranking.
  4. increasing weapon availability/balancing weapons will create even playing field, but will never fix lack of skill.
  5. a premade team will almost always be at an advantage compared to a similar skill level of randoms, better voip quality might help, but people are difficult, match making based on premade and skill rather than just skill would help.
  6. if they are "gold" in bronze, then what you are actually fighting is a Silver/gold edge player who cant handle the golds who hang around in silver for matches, they are a silver at heart. 
     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2019 at 2:01 AM, sTr8-jAcKeT said:

I'm going to copy/paste something I just mentioned in another thread. (Also MattScott, would you please check your private messages on the forum.)

 

Remove the threat system altogether.  People don't need to know if others are gold, silver, bronze or whatever. If you play most shooter games, you connect to a server & play the people that you're playing. End of story. if you're with a good group of players and get newer players as back up, that gives you a chance to show them how to play right. It gives you an opportunity to improve leadership skills. If you're a newer player & get better players as back up, that gives you an opportunity to learn from tactics you might not be aware of.

 

People put too much emphasis in thinking other players are drastically this much better or worse, this is psychologically damaging & dampening to the spirit of playing games. It subconsciously keeps people from playing to their full potential infusing comparative mentalities to one's own abilities; much like the flaw with social media.

 

The only way to get good at things in life is to get your patootie kicked in it, period. That's the entire concept behind training & practice. This isn't an easy game to level up in a hurry. This game takes a lot of time, over that time people will get better by practice & communicating ideas and tactics on the forums or their VoIP servers with comrades.

 

Threat is the nuttiest idea & the fact that so many people still support it or any other balancing & matchmaking system is mind-boggling. This has been debated for years & it's absolutely pathetic that it's still an issue.

Great idea!
Hide threat for players and remove limit on entry to districts by threat. Only system know about players threat for make matchmaking in game. 🗃️
About "psychologically damaging" - it's true. This is the same as returning to display player death statistics to the game. 😵

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been THE issue with Apb since Rtw days. Different things have been tried, nothing made it better. Partly it is the community as well, but hey, if the game allows stuff you should be able to do stuff, right? I dunno, personally I don't agree with that mindset but hey, that's like my opinion, man.

 

Too bad it's still a waiting game for a new try, the game really needs it. What has been said for 3.5 still sounds promising to me.

Edited by Jazeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people want to play - they don't want to play PRO!!!!! they want simple opponents ! they don't want to lose 3 matches , die with 2-3-17 kills .

 

you don't let players play .

On 6/20/2019 at 12:40 AM, DORIUS said:

Great idea!
Hide threat for players and remove limit on entry to districts by threat. Only system know about players threat for make matchmaking in game. 🗃️
About "psychologically damaging" - it's true. This is the same as returning to display player death statistics to the game. 😵

how to make the boss it's his decision, his money . 

 

players don't want to see you !!!! GOLD PRO in bronze !!!! the first post of the old forum ! the balance of the teams and the Golden menace combined !

 

Pro !!!!! you'll die if you don't have plankton !

 

GAME SHOULD HAVE SEPARATE QUEUES FOR PREMADE AND SOLO PLAYERS

Edited by Yood

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...