Premade groups like this - why is that (still) a thing?

[Metzie.3451]

Every time, I ask myself, what the heck? Why does one side have one or even two (in this case) premade groups while the other doesn't have a single one. It's about time for that to change, isn't it? Give us more "options" (simply expressed), more ways to decide how to build a matchup (...) depending on the waiting time. Finally redesign the UI or bring it to a more acceptable level. We'll soon have 2021 and still the same - outdated, ungrateful system since ages.It's not gonna happen, I know, but it's just annoying. In short, I accept longer queues if I get "really and not only seemingly equivalent games" in return. 

 

I don't think that much comment is necessary at this point any longer (from my side). Let it work. It was clear from the start that we would not win with our set-up. Which did not really affect me at the beginning. As far as I remember, the following:

Their (as you can see): Thief, Warrior (premade) | 2x Holo (premade) | 1x ScrapperOur (as you can see): Deadeye | Berserker Warrior | Soulbeast | Herald | The last i cant remember

[Zagerus.8675]

I really dislike having to fight these kind of matches as well. Looks like you guys did great despite having to fight 2 duoQ's though. Looking at all of the sources that the matchmaker draws from to try and provide an environment for good matches to take place.. I guess they've about settled at the sweetest spot that you can with the current population. I don't see what would be bad about something like locking in 1 duoQ per team though. I guess it could be a really complicated endeavor to try and code that in alongside all of the other variables but it'd probably help improve matches like this one.

[Sindrener.1592]

Yeah let us pick what matchups we want, let me win every game otherwise its not fair!

[Metzie.3451]

@"bluri.2653" said:Yeah let us pick what matchups we want, let me win every game otherwise its not fair!

Given your experience and "general or even advanced understanding" of PvP, I would have expected a little more from you than such an ironic comment.I guess that's what's left, right? But I totally understand! :)

So, what do you expect from someone (or in general) who takes the circumstances (the system etc.) as they are (because everyone, better "ANet", does what it wants anyway, ...), in other words, who has accepted the given (meanwhile), because probably nothing essential (more) will change, right? There are solutions or approaches that would improve the PvP system, they just won't be implemented. According to the motto, once programmed, for eternity. Bla blub, ... (there could be more text here).

One thing is clear or should be, the current system (it works, ok, but how it works is another matter) is doomed to failure, which is reflected in the number of players and the quality of the matches themselves. Side note: Class balance is another story.

Besides that, do you like the selection window of the maps, which you can't dismiss, as much as I do? See: selection screen

Back. Apart from that, Mr. Thief, you probably didn't quite understand what I'm actually talking about - did you? :) This part of my statement is basically just one part of the whole. In other words, if something is or would be changed in this way, then "adjustments" would also have to be made elsewhere (e.g. to the leaderboard).

So it's not about a wish concert, of which you seem to think what this contribution is about.

No offense. ;)

[Sigmoid.7082]

So you would be happy with each side having a premade for the sake of both side having one?

You do realise this could result in a worse match that the one you played right?

Are you saying you only lost because of this setup?

Also you could decide how you build a match but that's also no guarantee that you would win?

[Metzie.3451]

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:So you would be happy with each side having a premade for the sake of both side having one?

You do realise this could result in a worse match that the one you played right?

Are you saying you only lost because of this setup?

Also you could decide how you build a match but that's also no guarantee that you would win?

First of all, thanks for your contribution. Since I don't want to go around in circles, which leads to nothing or will confuse or require further clarifying "conversations", I'll leave it for now with the comment that the answer(s) have already been given, see above (my first post). I may come back to this, not necessarily here or in this conversation or forum post.

[Aktium.9506]

ranked should be solo queue only from plat onwards again

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Metzie.3451 said:

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:So you would be happy with each side having a premade for the sake of both side having one?

You do realise this could result in a worse match that the one you played right?

Are you saying you only lost because of this setup?

Also you could decide how you build a match but that's also no guarantee that you would win?

First of all, thanks for your contribution. Since I don't want to go around in circles, which leads to nothing or will confuse or require further clarifying "conversations", I'll leave it for now with the comment that the answer(s) have already been given, see above (my first post). I may come back to this, not necessarily here or in this conversation or forum post.

Then you should probably properly expand of your first post when you posted it because it , and the topic title, come across as incredibly salty for losing to that setup.

[Dantheman.3589]

@bluri.2653 said:Yeah let us pick what matchups we want, let me win every game otherwise its not fair!

Yeah letting ppl pick who they q against is just gonna lead to mmr failure. The only thing I would recommend as a solution would be something like a draft pick that lets you choose a role before a match - like Qing as a side noder and/or roaming and purposely getting put with more balanced team role wise, but tbh it may not be possible in a game like gw2 where players can bend role rules by playing w.e build they want or just changing role by selecting a different amulet.Not a good idea to do this

[avey.4201]

@"Sigmoid.7082" said:So you would be happy with each side having a premade for the sake of both side having one?

You do realise this could result in a worse match that the one you played right?

Are you saying you only lost because of this setup?

Also you could decide how you build a match but that's also no guarantee that you would win?

People think because they run a build bad players call "meta" it makes them good, then they proceed to not rotate or fight on point.

[Khalisto.5780]

it happens to me too

funny thing I don't remember being the lucky one with the 2 duos, I'm always against them.

I could undertand it if I was like 1600+ and had to hard carry but i'm usually around 1500 rating

[Metzie.3451]

@Dantheman.3589 said:

@bluri.2653 said:Yeah let us pick what matchups we want, let me win every game otherwise its not fair!

Yeah letting ppl pick who they q against is just gonna lead to mmr failure. The only thing I would recommend as a solution would be something like a draft pick that lets you choose a role before a match - like Qing as a side noder and/or roaming and purposely getting put with more balanced team role wise, but tbh it may not be possible in a game like gw2 where players can bend role rules by playing w.e build they want or just changing role by selecting a different amulet.Not a good idea to do this

Perhaps you misunderstood something?! @bluri.2653 wasn't really serious about his post. :) ;)

[Miyu.8137]

There was once a poll, a poll made by Arenanet themself whether ranked should be solo queue only and people voted yes, it should. We had that for what? Two seasons? Untill some unnamed streamer cried so much that they came back with duo queue without any explanation why.

[Fueki.4753]

The match maker is designed to try and make one team stronger, which is why there are so many matches (over 80%) with one team just dominating the other.The match maker is not designed to match teams fairly.

So, putting two duos on one side is in line what the match maker is supposed to do.

[Khalisto.5780]

@Miyu.8137 said:There was once a poll, a poll made by Arenanet themself whether ranked should be solo queue only and people voted yes, it should. We had that for what? Two seasons? Untill some unnamed streamer cried so much that they came back with duo queue without any explanation why.

I have seen those streamers claim duo q improves the match quality

Ive always asked myself for whom, like instead of playing against each other they can play together. Yeah, that's better matchmaking quality for them, to the other 8 players it's mostly a luck game if you gonna be placed with or against them

[Xentera.4560]

DuoQ simply should not exist vs a random PUG. This has been brought up a gazillion times in the past. The small minority that get that unfair advantage in ranked by duoQ, start crying every time this is brought up that we don’t want them to play with their friends. And that the population is too small for them to wait for an opponent with a duoQ.

Solution is simple and straight forward:

1) Remove unranked, it really serves no purpose. This will instantly increase the population for ranked.

2) Remove duoQ entirely from ranked

3) Premade vs premade only in AT

And there you have it. Problem solved!

Any system that pits a premade vs randoms is just a kitten system.

[Goosfraba.6901]

Agreed...!!!

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

@Khalisto.5780 said:

@Miyu.8137 said:There was once a poll, a poll made by Arenanet themself whether ranked should be solo queue only and people voted yes, it should. We had that for what? Two seasons? Untill some unnamed streamer cried so much that they came back with duo queue without any explanation why.

I have seen those streamers claim duo q improves the match quality

Ive always asked myself for whom, like instead of playing against each other they can play together. Yeah, that's better matchmaking quality for them, to the other 8 players it's mostly a luck game if you gonna be placed with or against them

Those streamers benefit the most from DuoQ, that's why they will never stop making excuses as to why DuoQ is a good thing, and it can only exist like it exists now. No other implementation is acceptable to them. Only the easily exploitable clown fiesta we have now.

To their credit; i'm sure it does improve match quality for themselves, winning 70, 80, all the way up to 100% of your games played on NA.

Now that I think about it, they're actually totally right. Pretty soon match quality will actually be the best its ever been, because they'll be the only ones playing matches at all.

[Tinkerer.2167]

@Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

@Khalisto.5780 said:

@"Miyu.8137" said:There was once a poll, a poll made by Arenanet themself whether ranked should be solo queue only and people voted yes, it should. We had that for what? Two seasons? Untill some unnamed streamer cried so much that they came back with duo queue without any explanation why.

I have seen those streamers claim duo q improves the match quality

Ive always asked myself for whom, like instead of playing against each other they can play together. Yeah, that's better matchmaking quality for them, to the other 8 players it's mostly a luck game if you gonna be placed with or against them

Those streamers benefit the most from DuoQ, that's why they will never stop making excuses as to why DuoQ is a good thing, and it can only exist like it exists now. No other implementation is acceptable to them. Only the easily exploitable clown fiesta we have now.

To their credit; i'm sure it does improve match quality for

themselves

, winning 70, 80, all the way up to 100% of your games played on NA.

Now that I think about it, they're actually totally right. Pretty soon match quality will actually be the best its ever been, because they'll be the only ones playing matches at all.

Actually most people who duoq want full queues back , which is how it SHOULD be like it was before when we actually had good games instead of an RNG fest like we have now, when they took that away it pretty much dissolved the pvp population out because now you weren't getting fun premade matches, you're getting RNG and RNG is cancer.

Of course population is lower so it's too late for that. duo q is actually trash, it's just the most optimal way to have decent games and compensates for a lack of a consistent good pvp population. It's more about insurance than "fixing the match for best optimal outcome" because 9/10 times the random player you get on your team will be garbage and feed.

[Lord of the Fire.6870]

@Fueki.4753 said:The match maker is designed to try and make one team stronger, which is why there are so many matches (over 80%) with one team just dominating the other.The match maker is not designed to match teams fairly.

So, putting two duos on one side is in line what the match maker is supposed to do.

Then something is wrong every matchmaking algorithms I know match people against people with similar abilities if possible otherwise people would get frustrated and quit the game . A lot of games has more problem with the 'if possible' . The reason for this is because you win the next time you get automatically a better enemy on the other side. (otherwise I must say the one who programmed this has a s... w lose)

But I agree with your observation 80% of the match ups are very one sided. (sry late list of my 'solutions>' tomorrow)

[Xentera.4560]

Whenever this subject is brought up, I think: “Remember, this is the dev team that thought having a premade team of 3 go against a random PUG in ranked, was a good idea.”

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

@"Tinkerer.2167" said:Actually most people who duoq want full queues back , which is how it SHOULD be like it was before when we actually had good games instead of an RNG fest like we have now, when they took that away it pretty much dissolved the pvp population out because now you weren't getting fun premade matches, you're getting RNG and RNG is cancer.

Of course population is lower so it's too late for that. duo q is actually trash, it's just the most optimal way to have decent games and compensates for a lack of a consistent good pvp population. It's more about insurance than "fixing the match for best optimal outcome" because 9/10 times the random player you get on your team will be garbage and feed.

I'm sure they do want full queues back.Not to actually have a fair, close, coordinated 5v5 match, but to farm the other 90% of people who SoloQ even easier than they already do.

It's always at someone else's expense with them. RNG can be unforgiving and boring, but they're the only ones with the influence to pick whoever they want to their team to actually do anything about it. Then everyone else playing has another diceroll to deal with to avoid their powerstacked 2, 3, 4, 5 or however many top players they are allowed queue with.

It's not really insurance. The RNG is about the same if you queue with a friend or LFG someone around your rating. You get better results if you metagame, and/or queue as the top 2 players in the game, but realistically you aren't going to get anything close to the same results as a top player/streamer queuing with their top player buddies.

It also makes the population problem a self-perpetuating one. Heard this a million times from top players. It really stops any meaningful fundamental changes from happening and only keeps us stuck where we are.

And that's definitely not growing. I quit just after Season 18 and my rating placed me at rank 68 on the NA leaderboard at the end of that. If I still played today, that same rating would put me at Rank 26(Going by the season that just ended today.) Insurance didn't do those other 42 top 100 people any good I guess ?

[Fueki.4753]

@Lord of the Fire.6870 said:Then something is wrongThere definitely is, from a player perspective.every matchmaking algorithms I know match people against people with similar abilitiesThis is how it should be.But I think Arenanet was more interested in keeping most people close to a 50% win rate, so they invented a match maker that makes sure people are matched for near guaranteed wins (or losses), so people keep that ratio.

people would get frustrated and quit the game .That's what happened.That's why PvP is largely abandoned by the original PvP community.That's why win trading, match manipulation, cheating and botting exist more than legit players.

[crepuscular.9047]

duo q should be treated with +x0 rating in the matchmaking algorithm, there's a big advantage play with 4 randoms vs 3 randoms + 1 you are familiar to play with and synergy your game play with your partner

[Kachros.4751]

This may just be my opinion however having premade groups is both smart and stupid. Old pvp was better as you would vs the same stack (even if you could abuse it) but if its 5v5 all soloQ theres a high chance you win/lose solely because of your team and it makes any sort of "rating" irrelevant in that case as shown when even some of the best players were plat 3 and some who were obviously worse, in legendary. Granted this only would be an issue for those who give any sort of care for rating which is why it would be better to have separate Qs for premades and solo but even then it can be unfair even though it would be more fair than vs 2 duo with 5 solo.