State of 2v2 natchmaking (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Suggestions



Message

.Lord Ginger. -> State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 15:05:56)

Make it to where any rank past 80 doesn’t matter in matchmaking.
I’ve still been the rank 266 with a rank 5 against 2 80s, and the 5 will ALWAYS be my partner because I’m the highest rank the majority of the time.
It’s like a free screw you card. If there’s no difference in underdog past rank 80, why does the matchmaking treat rank 200 different than 80?



NDB -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 19:36:31)

This needs to happen, otherwise I'll never play 2v2 again on high rank accounts. Already haven't for months. It'd require a few more lines of code to get this working, but I'd like to think NW can figure this out.



sippingcider -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 20:20:14)

If they don't do anything to fix legendary rank points, I support this. However, I think an even better fix would just be to fix the late game legendary rank points so they actually matter. Some ideas are proposed in this thread: Legendary Levels Thread.

If they go with this route, I would even suggest they have the cap be at 70 instead of 80, since the energy core reduction category is basically useless.



NDB -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 20:33:21)

It's not about the higher legendary categories not mattering. We're talking about a different issue. It's about the fact that the 2v2 matchmaking system automatically pairs the highest rank player with the lowest rank player. In this way, if you are the highest rank player playing at a given time you'll always (as in 100% of the time) end up on the team with the lowest rank player as your partner EVEN when your higher rank means nothing, which isn't how it's supposed to work at all. If you take a look at his example: if you're a rank 266, you'll always end up with the rank 5 even when the two other players are rank 80's. Currently there's no difference between a rank 80 and a rank 266. Ideally, you should be able to have a 50-50 chance of landing on the team with the higher or lower total rank.



sippingcider -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 23:26:05)

quote:

you'll always (as in 100% of the time) end up on the team with the lowest rank player as your partner EVEN when your higher rank means nothing


Lets zoom in:

quote:

EVEN when your higher rank means nothing


So you see, fixing higher legend categories DOES matter. If ranks mattered past rank 70, as I was suggesting, this matching system wouldn't be an issue.


Just to be clear, if rank points are changed to only matter up until rank 100, then higher level ranking is still meaningless, in which case I agree 2v2 matchmaking needs to be fixed, and I still support Lord Ginger's proposal (although only ranks past 100 would be counted as 100)



NDB -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/12/2019 23:33:33)

Well, the assumption was that there's no way that they'll ever come up with a way to make ranks continuously benefit you and we wouldn't want that for the sake of balance anyway. You can make them matter past 70, but can you make them matter past 100, 150, 200, etc.? Probably not, as you said. For the record, today I'm rank 652 and I'm not even the highest in the game.



sippingcider -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 0:07:00)

holy cow 652??? Can I have 95 of those [8|][:)]

But for real, wouldn't you want all those ranks to matter if they could? I think 652 ranks should deserve something cool. I don't think many make it past rank 100, I have only seen 3 players in last month or so who are above 100, and then you and ginger. So maybe like, 10 players in all of ED are past rank 100? Do you know the highest ranked player?



NDB -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 1:01:13)

Sure, I'd want them to matter and I've thought about ideas before, but since we're such a small minority it's not worth the ED team to care about us, honestly. I think I'm the only player in the 600's currently. The highest rank player is 700+. There should be a couple in the 200-400 range I believe, and there are actually lots above 100. Way more than 10, probably at least a hundred I'd say.



sippingcider -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 13:57:38)

at least a hundred? Theres like 100 people total online on the server at a time, and most them are usually sub rank 100, id even say most are sub rank 10



NDB -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 14:01:32)

Oh, I thought you meant all the accounts that exist that are above 100. For the number of players above 100 that are playing at any given time, yeah, probably about 10-20 depending on how many people are online.



sippingcider -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 14:04:05)

I did mean all accounts that exist. U think there are 10-20 at any given time? Maybe u get matched with them more when u are higher ranked, because I like never see any. Or maybe its because there arn't many in 2v2.



.Lord Ginger. -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/13/2019 17:12:15)

Many high ranks don't because they get the low ranks... and getting low ranks is generally bad for numerous reasons.



leo07123 -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/23/2019 23:28:26)

This is actually a match fixation that works according to the system. There can't anything be done to this, it will alter the entire Dual Battle.



Mother1 -> RE: State of 2v2 natchmaking (5/24/2019 15:36:23)

Supported 100%

this isn't in the least fair especially seeing as anything past 80 doesn't do squat PVP wise. why should the highest ranked players in this situation be punished for just being high ranked? While I am not as high ranked as lord ginger and NDB I am also about rank 80 and when I play 2 vs 2 for fun outside of wars it happens to me as well.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.1132813