Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

RE: Matching 2v2

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> RE: Matching 2v2
Page 2 of 5<12345>
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
10/25/2013 19:22:41   
Dual Thrusters
Member

Remember the first time the LvE filter was released? It was a nightmare. Currently it is still a little bad, but better than the original one.

My point is, the LvE has been improved before. Maybe Rabble could do his magic again?

Like, make it so the LvE is a priority, but if there aren't that many players waiting in 2v2 of the opposite alignment, then it mixes Exile and Legion, ignoring the filter when necessary.
MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 26
10/25/2013 19:39:12   
Mother1
Member

@ Dual

Yeah I do remember that. However everyone who is suggesting we cut the level gap for more fair fights fail to realize that by doing this you will be sentencing another group of players to this same punishment. If they played through the first legion vs exile filter which we both have we both know no one wants that for anyone. Yet here we have some people suggesting to cut the level range when we have a small group of people which would increase wait times in the least or at worst make it where they won't get fights as all for another group.

Not fair in the least either. Which was why I made my previous suggestion so both sides could be happy and no one has to get punished (the NPC filling in the holes) it worked for the infernal war, and it can work in this case as well.

as for the filter is already doing that.

However many of the fights I see sometimes are mismatched but at the same time if the legion vs exile filter wasn't there the system would have paired it to where it would have been a fair match up level wise.

EXP

33 34 vs 35 36

This happened just because the 33 and 34 where legion while the 35 and 36 where exile and the engine made it priority to pair legion vs exile first. However without this filter it would have been 33 and 36 vs 34 and 35 which would have been a fair fight level wise. In cases like that the filter is screwing up the balance level wise.
Epic  Post #: 27
10/25/2013 19:45:35   
Predator9657
Member

quote:

In cases like that the filter is screwing up the balance level wise.


Totally. And since the filter doesn't really have much use, removing it would prevent those cases.
Epic  Post #: 28
10/25/2013 20:09:47   
CN2025
Member

then people would complain about legion vs legion ... exile vs exile making 1 group happy = another mad. but i do agree we should make the bigger group happy then only a few will leave

< Message edited by CN2025 -- 10/25/2013 20:10:45 >
AQ DF AQW Epic  Post #: 29
10/25/2013 20:20:39   
Dual Thrusters
Member

@CN

Exactly why we should have the LvE filter only prioritize these matches.
MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 30
10/25/2013 20:26:44   
Mother1
Member

@ Cn2025

I have to ask who wanted this filter in the first place? If I remember correctly very few if anyone wanted it because of the havoc it caused.

When they did it in the infernal war it was balanced because they had NPC to fill the holes as well as a larger group of players. Here they add something that splits the population in half, and worse to wear there aren't enough people on both sides to support it. Not smart in the least. We don't even have NPC to fill the holes so the fights will be at least balanced.

Plus if they do what some have been suggesting guess what? both sides still lose. Why? because those who want fair fights still won't get them. The entire level range would need to be removed to do that. With that being said they will still get unfair fights, and those who want to get fights and don't care about this will be made to wait.

So as I said unless you remove the level range completely and make everyone only fight their own level there will never be any fair fights.
Epic  Post #: 31
10/26/2013 4:44:12   
CN2025
Member

balance update next week :p
AQ DF AQW Epic  Post #: 32
10/27/2013 13:56:00   
lionblades
Member

Every time my partner has no gear I have decided to just leave. No point in playing to lose. Rather leave and join a battle with a decent partner
AQW  Post #: 33
10/27/2013 13:58:09   
Ranloth
Banned


 Well, by leaving you still lose but don't get any rewards & -20 Influence for your faction (if one).
AQ Epic  Post #: 34
10/27/2013 14:02:59   
lionblades
Member

^Trans
ik but I left my faction because I am not very active (very hard courseload in school; 4 AP classes) and of the little time I have to play ED I do not want to waste time in an impossible battle
I dont mind lv32 and 35 vs 35 and 35, but out of experience if I have a no gear partner I tend to lose nearly all the time
AQW  Post #: 35
10/27/2013 14:03:39   
Ranloth
Banned


 Ah, yeah, that seems fair - somewhat.
AQ Epic  Post #: 36
10/27/2013 14:25:41   
toopygoo
Member

how about the option for a player to set filters for 2v2?

like LvE, Faction members, level gap etc.

this would eliminate the whole deal with people who like fast games, and players who like very narrow specifications.
AQW Epic  Post #: 37
10/27/2013 14:30:11   
Ranloth
Banned


 And essentially, you're giving people access to the database by being able to set such options thus impossible to do so. Yet alone being able to code something like this to work for every player and save the information in the database for every player in-game.
AQ Epic  Post #: 38
10/27/2013 14:33:55   
toopygoo
Member

well the same way that you can turn on simple functions like quality and home items to be shown, one should be able to turn variables such as level gap, and fation alignment on or off without having to access the database. i dont think players would actually ahve access to any databases with this function. and i dont care if it saves or not for players. if it bugs you, then you can set it how you want each time. otherwise, deal with the default settings, IMO.
AQW Epic  Post #: 39
10/27/2013 14:37:40   
Mother1
Member

@ toopygoo

Difference is with the quality settings you are only affecting your game play experience while if players were given access to being able to set a level gap for themselves or a alighment switch they are affect not only their own game play but everyone else's as well.

One person if they aren't the staff should not have that kind of power.
Epic  Post #: 40
10/27/2013 14:40:07   
Ranloth
Banned


 Altering minor items such as showing house items or friend requests only affects yourself. Changing variables such as level gap affects everyone - will you be the one to join the queue with them, what players do you want to search for, what players do others want to search for, etc. It'd require extensive coding and giving a certain amount of access to the database to edit such things via Settings (in-game), and security issues would also arise.

You should care if the settings save. Total amount of players in ED * settings = amount of space it takes in the database. Space is limited, and once you're out of it, you gotta expand servers/buy new ones. This is the reason why increasing Inventory Slots or expanding your Friend List costs Varium - because Varium is bought using real money and it takes space in the database, which is also paid for with real money.
AQ Epic  Post #: 41
10/29/2013 5:04:44   
beaststyles
Member
 

 Why not take the middle route and just change the level range to 2 or 3 instead of 5 or 6 or whatever it is at the moment for 2v2. 1V1 can be handled in a similar manner.

What do you guyz think?
Post #: 42
10/29/2013 10:52:27   
Mother1
Member

@ BEaststyles

That wouldn't be taking the middle route, that would be doing what one side wants (players who want fair fights with longer waits) while punishing the otherside (people who don't want wait times longer)

A middle route would be doing something that makes fights more balanced without punishing players who don't like wait times because of it.
Epic  Post #: 43
10/29/2013 11:25:04   
beaststyles
Member
 

 @ Mother1

Actually that is the middle route.

On one side u have 2v2 with all same lvls and on the other side you have 2v2 with 5-6 lvl range.

2-3 lvl range is bang in the middle.

With 2-3 lvl rage the waiting time is increased but not too much at the same time the fights are a bit more balanced but not perfect. Hence middle route.

Beast.
Post #: 44
10/29/2013 12:20:12   
Mother1
Member

@BEaststyles

A middle route as I said would be doing something to make both sides happy not just satisfying one side for the other and anything that increases wait times is punishing one side. I have seen that suggestion (cutting the level range) cause of all the lower levels who complained especially at the level cap where there are the smallest amount of players. If there were enough players to go around and this wouldn't affect wait times for them it wouldn't be an issue however this isn't the cause.

Cutting level ranges especially for a group of players who has the smallest level range would hurt that group or players. Not only that, but it is not even granteed to make those crying for fair fights happy either. In other words this is granteed punishment for those who hate wait times, and not granteed to make those who want fair fights happy. The only true way for fair fights to come would be to remove the level range completely and make it so no one could fight anyone higher or lower than them.

A middle route would be something like the suggestion i made in this thread. (Check and earlier page)

With that idea wait times wouldn't be increased but possibly shortened, and those players who want fairer fights would get them since if no one is found a NPC with a random build (to prevent abuse) would come in and challenge to player on their level. This solution isn't perfect either however it does take care of the wait time problem, and the outcry for more fair fights.
Epic  Post #: 45
10/29/2013 13:51:50   
wireclub1990
Banned

 

 ^So don't cut the level range and the guys wanting fair fights aren't happy but the ones who want fast fights are happy cause their not waiting longer till the guys unhappy stop 2v2ing and they have to wait longer anyway . Good plan !
Post #: 46
10/29/2013 14:43:44   
Mother1
Member

@Wireclub1990

And cut the range without a 100% change of satisfying the complainers (since I remember some wanting the level range completely removed) while having the grantee of punishing those who just want to play without waiting too long to the point where they rage quit due to longer wait times at best and at the worst not getting a fight at all? Right back at you good plan as well.

Also did you even read the last part of my post? I didn't say do nothing which you seem to be always missing. I said come up with a solution that doesn't punish either side and makes both sides happy. Why is it that you keep missing that?

Everyone who keep suggesting "Cut the level range!" is only thinking of those who want fair fights at the cost of longer waits for some. How is that a solution in the middle when a solution in the middle works for both sides? How is this benefiting those who don't want longer wait times? Answer it is not. It is punishing those who don't want to wait in favor of those who complain about unfair fights.

That was why I suggested them abandoning their idea of making the game pure PVP and throw NPC into the mix if no one is found. Please try to come up with some solutions that will help out both sides, not punish one side for the other.

We have that now in the form of those who want fair fights suffering for those who want to play. having the staff do a 180 isn't fair either.
Epic  Post #: 47
10/29/2013 15:01:08   
beaststyles
Member
 

 @ mother1

My point is that those who dont want to wait are fully satisfied (forget the number of people that play the game for the moment), whereas those who want fair fights are not satisfied at all.

Decreasing the level range by a little to like 2-3 would mean that it would be better for those who want fair fights and still ok for those who don't want to wait. My idea half satisfies both hence the middle route. Currently only one side is satisfied that is the don't want to wait side.

Furthermore, your suggestion to include a NPC if a close lvl is ok but has some drawbacks. I am sorry but it turns 2v2 epicduel into PVM not PVP. Furthermore it will render the kill/death ration useless. Plus for it to work you may need a time limit so when that time limit is reached a NPC is added or else it will always be a p+npc vs. p+npc.

Regards,

Beast.

< Message edited by beaststyles -- 10/29/2013 15:13:46 >
Post #: 48
10/29/2013 15:14:21   
Mother1
Member

@ BEaststyles

That was what I saw from the start. That your solution would only half satisfy people at the best, and would upset anyone who doesn't like waiting since their player pool was cut even smaller.

Next up before omega came along guess what? The game was PVE as well as PVP. There are people who actually left the game because the staff took away that part of the game from them without repairing balance issues within the modes.

Also I have to ask did you play in the infernal war? Cause if you did they did have this idea that I mentioned in 2 vs 2 and 1 vs 1. When this happened the number of people playing in this event were actually very high if not higher then the normal numbers I would see in delta.

There were 2 full servers and a 3rd being used when this event was going on. This means we had a lot of people playing in this event and there weren't any complaints regrading wait times, or fair fights which is actually what the aim should.

My point is let's try to make a solution that ACTUALLY keeps both sides happy, rather than as you and the others have suggested try to appease one side at the expense of the other.

Cause as you and wireclub1990 have mentioned before that as the game is now anyone wanting a fair fight is punished for those who want to battle without waits. Doing what you suggested will only shift punishment from one side to the other with no grantee that the side you are favoring will even be happy while ensuring those who don't like waits being unhappy especially near the top where the level range is the smallest.

Epic  Post #: 49
10/29/2013 15:25:48   
beaststyles
Member
 

 @ Mother.

Hmm.

Got me thinking :D

I in actual fact wouldn't mind a bit of PvM. tbh I think PvM in general could do with improving in epic duel.

Your idea seems ok why don't you create a new thread to get more attention?

Beast.
Post #: 50
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance >> RE: Matching 2v2
Page 2 of 5<12345>
Jump to:






Icon Legend
New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition