[Matchmaking Abuse] Why is Duo = 2 and GuildTeam = 50% ... a thing? [Merged]

[Saiyan.1704]

3 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

The data supports that soloq is and always has been the most popular way to queue in ranked spvp since its inception by an overwhelming majority.

Popular does not mean more efficient.

The vast majority wants a soloQ, Lone-wolf style pvp, with its own leaderboards preferably... but we'll never get that.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

2 hours ago, Saiyan.1704 said:

Popular does not mean more efficient.

The vast majority wants a soloQ, Lone-wolf style pvp, with its own leaderboards preferably... but we'll never get that.

I wish. There's a place for teamq too so long as its separate from soloq with a leaderboard that emphasizes teamplay rather than individual performance.
If they're going to force it on us; either teamq or don't play, then no. They can miss me with that communist bs. Don't tread on me 🐍

But in all likelihood, you're right. Not a thing will change and neither side will get what they want.

[jdawgie.1835]

9 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Yes it is lol

No brother its not. Solo que for pvp is not a normal desire, take, request, or want. PvP is a team activity. Not a solo activity. Espeially in MMOs/FPS/and MOBAS. 

9 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Especially in League

Its interesting you cited league - as LOL is a team based game that cares the least about solo quers.

9 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Especially in League I can point you to over a dozen posts in the last month asking for duo to be removed

Right and it didnt get removed. I can duo right now with my brother.  Solo que pvp is a fringe activity. Having an indvidualist mindset in games designed for coordinated team play is an oxymoron. I am sorry you have always refused to grasp this. Look man I like you a lot - I wont prentend like I dont value the discourse I have had with you on these forums over the years because I do, but brother..... Solo queing is a goofy thing to be looking to do in online multiplayer games with arena style pvp. Get some teamates - I'll happily have you on with me and my crew thats a genuine and loving open invite. 

9 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I can't speak for Smite, WoW, or CS because I'm not a masochist or of eastern European descent 

Wow has solo shuffle that was introduced with Dragonflight - outside of that you cant even que in with out a partner for arenas. The que button is grayed out until you get a teammate in your party. Separately where you and I have agreed in the past is that solo que and team ques shouldnt be mixed. My stance there hasnt changed. However - team que should be all 5 people. Let solo quers have their own and removed unranked. Two ques for two types of players. 

9 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

because I'm not a masochist or of eastern European descent 

What is this about lol?

6 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

The data supports that soloq is and always has been the most popular way to queue in ranked spvp since its inception by an overwhelming majority.

This is cap. BIG CAP. I am actually surprised you typed this out. While also stating you wont speak on Smite, WoW, and Counter Strike. Which are HUGE representations of gaming pvp communities. Theres a lot of "Data" with those combined communities that you are seemingly leaving out, which makes your data biased. Also, brother the drop off in GW2 after the removal of 5-man ques heavily negates your stance based on engagement data with the game mode and the game itself. Removing 5 man ques killed off OG guilds like Champion Slayer, which were fundamental communities with actual 1000's of people involved. 

Edited July 25 by jdawgie.1835

[jdawgie.1835]

On 7/23/2024 at 3:44 PM, shion.2084 said:

I'll try just one more time.   You can be winning all your fights and still lose.   Or you can completely suck and still win.   The problem with the algorithm is that it assumes that the outcome of you plus 4 other people working together, is specifically due to your sole contribution.  

Whats good my boy. Long time. Popped out to just add - at a certain point in ques the game will decide the outcome as you have described. If I loose a bunch in a row the game will start to give me wins. I could actually afk and still win. Impact is very little, and judgment based on sole contributions is to high. 

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

7 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

I wonder how do the top 100 have a winrate of over 50%?

Let me try to explain so that someone with room temperatur IQ (not you ofc :)))) can understand: If you are a top 100 player, youre mostlikely decent at the game and know what youre doing. Because there arent many good players left, you play vs worse players in most of your matches. Simply because being at p2 rating means that you wont find 9 other players with p2 rating aswell (unless its prime time i guess). That means your match is gonna get filled with p1 and gold 3 players (depending on the time even lower). As a p2 player you are way ahead of those players and can easily carry matches vs them. Means you will have a winrate over 50%.

 

8 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Sometimes even up to 90%!

Never denied that sometimes 1-2 players abuse silver q'ing or wintrade to rmt titles.

 

8 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Again, if you have way over 50% winrate in Top 100 and 'aren't good' then what could be going on here? Based on your previous statements these players played into their natural bracket, have essentially no one higher than them, but...aren't good.  

I feel like you are trolling at this point. My statement was that if you see a top25/top10 player in your match it doesn't necessarily have to mean that they are actual top25/10 players. You know that those titles are sold and can be obtained by anyone who wants to buy them. For example anyone can buy an account with top10 title or you could let someone play on your account and get you the title. When those people play on their own after buying titles, they not gonna be in top10 rating. They will be in whatever rank they belong. Means you can see a prince of the arena in g1. And the reason those people buy titles is to flex in ranked: "Look at me im a top10 player!!!"

.

8 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

So, to boil it down, the matchmaker works fine but Top 100 aren't good and titles mean nothing

matchmaking works as best as it can (in this terrible situation from anets decision making over the past years)

top 100 are good in the current state of the game (if you compare them to top100 5 years ago, they suck balls)

titles mean nothing, because anyone can just buy them

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

2 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

No brother its not. Solo que for pvp is not a normal desire, take, request, or want. PvP is a team activity. Not a solo activity. Espeially in MMOs/FPS/and MOBAS. 

It absolutely is. SoloQ is quick, easily accessible, more challenging, and just as fair as teamq since everyone is similarly disadvantaged. It also has the most accurate matchmaking since its for one person and not a group of people with different ratings. I'm not saying solos should be the only option, but it should be a option just like it is in Fortnite and Apex.

2 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

Right and it didnt get removed. I can duo right now with my brother.  Solo que pvp is a fringe activity. Having an indvidualist mindset in games designed for coordinated team play is an oxymoron. I am sorry you have always refused to grasp this. Look man I like you a lot - I wont prentend like I dont value the discourse I have had with you on these forums over the years because I do, but brother..... Solo queing is a goofy thing to be looking to do in online multiplayer games with arena style pvp. Get some teamates - I'll happily have you on with me and my crew thats a genuine and loving open invite. 

I appreciate the kind words and I have a similar appreciation for you but I'd rather be dead than red 🦅🦅🦅

2 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

Wow has solo shuffle that was introduced with Dragonflight - outside of that you cant even que in with out a partner for arenas. The que button is grayed out until you get a teammate in your party. Separately where you and I have agreed in the past is that solo que and team ques shouldnt be mixed. My stance there hasnt changed. However - team que should be all 5 people. Let solo quers have their own and removed unranked. Two ques for two types of players. 

^^ Yes
Do this pls that way commieq and soloq can both be happy
Ideally every aspect of both arenas should be separate. Separate leaderboards, queues, and unranked should stay and be given ranked's rewards so the AFKs all go away to there.

2 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

This is cap. BIG CAP. I am actually surprised you typed this out. While also stating you wont speak on Smite, WoW, and Counter Strike. Which are HUGE representations of gaming pvp communities. Theres a lot of "Data" with those combined communities that you are seemingly leaving out, which makes your data biased. Also, brother the drop off in GW2 after the removal of 5-man ques heavily negates your stance based on engagement data with the game mode and the game itself. Removing 5 man ques killed off OG guilds like Champion Slayer, which were fundamental communities with actual 1000's of people involved. 

No it's not. It's not even a ˡⁱᵗᵗˡᵉ ᶜᵃᵖ. That comes from statistics taken from ranked matches by former competitive lead(For this game, gw2) Ben P. shortly after the reintroduction of duoq in s13.
He was specifically asked if teamq would ever come back as a separate option to solos
The response:
@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: The problem with splitting the queue is that our data doesn't show that 2 separate queues for ranked would work. To put things in perspective, 92% someone queues it's queuing solo. The team queue would have horrendous wait times. And when a match finally popped, difference in team skill would likely be rage inducing.

It's not soloq that's unpopular, it's commieq by an overwhelming majority and it has been for the longest time. 
That doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist, nor does that invalidate your opinion. Both should exist whereas right now neither exists.
As Jesus Christ Himself said:
"And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? For sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again." -Luke 6:34 🙏

[arazoth.7290]

3 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Let me try to explain so that someone with room temperatur IQ (not you ofc :)))) can understand: If you are a top 100 player, youre mostlikely decent at the game and know what youre doing. Because there arent many good players left, you play vs worse players in most of your matches. Simply because being at p2 rating means that you wont find 9 other players with p2 rating aswell (unless its prime time i guess). That means your match is gonna get filled with p1 and gold 3 players (depending on the time even lower). As a p2 player you are way ahead of those players and can easily carry matches vs them. Means you will have a winrate over 50%.

 

Never denied that sometimes 1-2 players abuse silver q'ing or wintrade to rmt titles.

 

I feel like you are trolling at this point. My statement was that if you see a top25/top10 player in your match it doesn't necessarily have to mean that they are actual top25/10 players. You know that those titles are sold and can be obtained by anyone who wants to buy them. For example anyone can buy an account with top10 title or you could let someone play on your account and get you the title. When those people play on their own after buying titles, they not gonna be in top10 rating. They will be in whatever rank they belong. Means you can see a prince of the arena in g1. And the reason those people buy titles is to flex in ranked: "Look at me im a top10 player!!!"

.

matchmaking works as best as it can (in this terrible situation from anets decision making over the past years)

top 100 are good in the current state of the game (if you compare them to top100 5 years ago, they suck balls)

titles mean nothing, because anyone can just buy them

With that amount of real money to buy some fictional title, I rather buy a golden ring 😂

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

2 minutes ago, arazoth.7290 said:

With that amount of real money to buy some fictional title, I rather buy a golden ring

I mean yeah. But not everyone is like you and some people are rich enough and want those badly so they buy them.

[arazoth.7290]

13 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

I mean yeah. But not everyone is like you and some people are rich enough and want those badly so they buy them.

Still imo weird way to show rich, but yea 🤷. If they want to waste their money, it's them

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

3 minutes ago, arazoth.7290 said:

If they want to waste their money, it's them

Tbh everyone is wasting money on something. 

[Spellhunter.9675]

4 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Let me try to explain so that someone with room temperatur IQ (not you ofc :)))) can understand: If you are a top 100 player, youre mostlikely decent at the game and know what youre doing. Because there arent many good players left, you play vs worse players in most of your matches. Simply because being at p2 rating means that you wont find 9 other players with p2 rating aswell (unless its prime time i guess). That means your match is gonna get filled with p1 and gold 3 players (depending on the time even lower). As a p2 player you are way ahead of those players and can easily carry matches vs them. Means you will have a winrate over 50%.

 

Never denied that sometimes 1-2 players abuse silver q'ing or wintrade to rmt titles.

 

I feel like you are trolling at this point. My statement was that if you see a top25/top10 player in your match it doesn't necessarily have to mean that they are actual top25/10 players. You know that those titles are sold and can be obtained by anyone who wants to buy them. For example anyone can buy an account with top10 title or you could let someone play on your account and get you the title. When those people play on their own after buying titles, they not gonna be in top10 rating. They will be in whatever rank they belong. Means you can see a prince of the arena in g1. And the reason those people buy titles is to flex in ranked: "Look at me im a top10 player!!!"

.

matchmaking works as best as it can (in this terrible situation from anets decision making over the past years)

top 100 are good in the current state of the game (if you compare them to top100 5 years ago, they suck balls)

titles mean nothing, because anyone can just buy them

A bit out of topic but I want to say that you are a ray of light on this subforum. Unfortunately, the locals wear sunglasses.

[Luthan.5236]

I actually would prefer a system where swapping was not allowed. (Logging out and logging into another char should load the previous map that char was on - not the match. And of course at the match end then dishonor and rating loss.)

For swapping ... it should be implenented in a different way. To make it work for people with old computers as well. (With long loading screen. For me it is pretty fast now since I upgrade just a lil bit and the game is on SSD. :D)

Players should have different builds with different professions (like ... maybe 3) to swap (loadout) - on the same char. Without re-loading. (And them only being able to switch betwee the ones they select earlier.) Might make ArenaNet sell less char slots - that is probably why they would not want such a system. (+ a lot of coding work to implement it bug free I guess)

The gear maybe could be fixed (same gear with all the 3 builds and switching that only before the match starts).

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

2 minutes ago, Luthan.5236 said:

Players should have different builds with different professions (like ... maybe 3) to swap (loadout) - on the same char. Without re-loading.

Build and equipment templates are already ingame?

[Luthan.5236]

5 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Build and equipment templates are already ingame?

Not for different professions for queuing PvP. Currently you could just re-log with any of the other 8 professions (+ their elite) you have not queued with. The suggestion would be to allow to just select 3 (including a build) to queue with for PvP. (Maybe they could make it so it draws a build from another char. And you can select 3. But just without re-loading and keeping the visuals of cour current char - race and hair and looks and stuff.)

Edited July 25 by Luthan.5236

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

15 minutes ago, Luthan.5236 said:

I actually would prefer a system where swapping was not allowed.

You say this (which I agree since class swapping after accepting Q can be abused)

9 minutes ago, Luthan.5236 said:

The suggestion would be to allow to just select 3 (including a build) to queue with for PvP.

And then you say you want class swapping but without char swapping lol

[Luthan.5236]

If they limit it to 3 as a real "loadout" (like in some shooter games) the matchmaker could at least try to balance when he knows all the 3 of each player before. 😄 And it would be fun to then allow swapping in the match (after deaths or with a respawn button that of course should add a timer like when you are death) - to react to different situations.

But that would be too "complex" and add too much "depth" to the game. (According to an interview with the devs about the new planned game mode they actually prefer to make things simpler - for new players so they can learn easier.)

Edited July 25 by Luthan.5236

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

Just now, Luthan.5236 said:

If they limit it to 3 as a real "loadout" (like in some shooter games) the matchmaker could at least try to balance when he knows all the 3 of each player before.

The matchmaker knows the 1 class of each player before and can balance the match. Problem is once all players  accepted the match, everyone can swap off their class.

[Vancho.8750]

2 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

It absolutely is. SoloQ is quick, easily accessible, more challenging, and just as fair as teamq since everyone is similarly disadvantaged. It also has the most accurate matchmaking since its for one person and not a group of people with different ratings. I'm not saying solos should be the only option, but it should be a option just like it is in Fortnite and Apex.

I appreciate the kind words and I have a similar appreciation for you but I'd rather be dead than red 🦅🦅🦅

^^ Yes
Do this pls that way commieq and soloq can both be happy
Ideally every aspect of both arenas should be separate. Separate leaderboards, queues, and unranked should stay and be given ranked's rewards so the AFKs all go away to there.

No it's not. It's not even a ˡⁱᵗᵗˡᵉ ᶜᵃᵖ. That comes from statistics taken from ranked matches by former competitive lead(For this game, gw2) Ben P. shortly after the reintroduction of duoq in s13.
He was specifically asked if teamq would ever come back as a separate option to solos
The response:
@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: The problem with splitting the queue is that our data doesn't show that 2 separate queues for ranked would work. To put things in perspective, 92% someone queues it's queuing solo. The team queue would have horrendous wait times. And when a match finally popped, difference in team skill would likely be rage inducing.

It's not soloq that's unpopular, it's commieq by an overwhelming majority and it has been for the longest time. 
That doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist, nor does that invalidate your opinion. Both should exist whereas right now neither exists.
As Jesus Christ Himself said:
"And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? For sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again." -Luke 6:34 🙏

You explained it better then me with quotes and all, but oli don't think opinions will budge since apparently the 400 people doing teams are more important then the thousands of casuals.

Also I did mention a tin foil hat theory that anet is actively trying to kill of pvp or is it passively if  they do kitten all about the core of it. I really hate people that latch onto few words in jest to discredit me as a person instead of my point, but I take it as a win since they are not tackling the argument but say I'm stupid or ugly or both.

The best bet would probably be like LOL solo but without duo and flex(2 3 5), the flex can even add death match to the pool of 2 and 3s. 

Quite frankly the leaderboard doesn't make sense if there is no solo queue and 5 man would make even less sense if it is not based on team instead of individuals.

 

 

Edited July 25 by Vancho.8750

[Asuran.5469]

2 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

Also I did mention a tin foil hat

most peeps that say tin foil are the ones who are wearing the tin foil hat

[Gotejjeken.1267]

13 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Never denied that sometimes 1-2 players abuse silver q'ing or wintrade to rmt titles.

You're implying most of the Top 100 do this.  

I offer up a video of beating titled players, and you counter with 'they probably aren't good and bought them, but its only 1-2 people'.  Which is patently false as this isn't the first pair of titled players I've run into and done well against--but there are also titled players I know are good (like Eura) I've run into, beat in a game (one time lol) and actually felt a good challenge.

To get back to the point, still getting matched with these players at a gold 1 level.  This means matchmaker is not working anymore, blame it on population or what, but the statement about win streaks and loss streaks doesn't hold. 

There's you get lucky and go on a winstreak, and then there's the matchmaker + unlucky puts you in some insane games until you go back to 50% winrate, no matter if you are in bronze or plat.  

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

8 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

You explained it better then me with quotes and all, but oli don't think opinions will budge since apparently the 400 people doing teams are more important then the thousands of casuals.

400? 👀May God reward your generosity sevenfold, brother

8 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

Also I did mention a tin foil hat theory that anet is actively trying to kill of pvp or is it passively if  they do kitten all about the core of it. I really hate people that latch onto few words in jest to discredit me as a person instead of my point, but I take it as a win since they are not tackling the argument but say I'm stupid or ugly or both.

It's a low-hanging fruit for people that either lack a point to make or the conviction to argue for what point they think they have.

8 hours ago, Vancho.8750 said:

The best bet would probably be like LOL solo but without duo and flex(2 3 5), the flex can even add death match to the pool of 2 and 3s. 

Quite frankly the leaderboard doesn't make sense if there is no solo queue and 5 man would make even less sense if it is not based on team instead of individuals.

Exactly. It's like being part of a football team, winning the cup, and only a handful of players on the team get trophies. Playing as a team, it makes sense to be rated as a team, otherwise forced teamq is entirely arbitrary. Would be no different from soloq except that matchmaking takes longer and then when you finally get in, you're stuck with even more imbalanced games.

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

29 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

You're implying most of the Top 100 do this.  

What? I never implied most top 100 player would witrade/silver q?!

30 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

This means matchmaker is not working anymore, blame it on population or what

Exactly. And you cant change anything about that except trying to increase population.

32 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

until you go back to 50% winrate, no matter if you are in bronze or plat.

Whether you like it or not but having a 50% winrate is a logic consequence of playing a zero sum game. Meaning for every winner there is also a loser. The average winrate across all players is 50%. 

[Gotejjeken.1267]

19 minutes ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

What? I never implied most top 100 player would witrade/silver q?!

This:

23 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Just having any of those titles doest mean youre good. 

Implies most of the Top 100 would buy titles, no? If only 1-2 people buy titles, good chance I run into someone that didn't buy a title and thus was actually good.  

We're also in a matchmaking abuse topic...or multiple merged ones at this point.  So yeah, the chance of the Top 100 not only being mostly alts but a good percentage wintrading their titles (for money, clout, whatever) is very likely.  

 

 

[Mne Malo Tebya.2965]

5 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

1-2 people buy titles,

How do you come to this number?!

 

5 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

but a good percentage wintrading their titles (for money, clout, whatever) is very likely.

Man noone is wintrading a fricking top 100 title. 

[Gotejjeken.1267]

Just now, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

How do you come to this number?!

Bro...are you sure you're ok?

14 hours ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Never denied that sometimes 1-2 players abuse silver q'ing or wintrade to rmt titles.

 

1 minute ago, Mne Malo Tebya.2965 said:

Man noone is wintrading a fricking top 100 title. 

Baroness of the arena is a top 100 title my dude, specifically one I was referring to in my post about the princess/baroness duo, one which you said 'the people with those titles probably aren't good'.  

Think you've been alt'ing too long.  Only joined in January...suggests a ban of some sort? Clearly not a new player.