|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 44 post(s) |
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 04:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:Matchmaking seem to be good, but there is still a step that must be done, it's probably the most important thing of all.
SERVER ZONE, it's clear that most of the community do not like to have people playing from different continents on their server. All you need to do is locate the IP (many sites do that) and use the nearest server.
We are all tired to fight lag, we are all tired of immortal players and teleporting people. This situation is only going against you, because if i get stomped by a player who don't reg hits, when i have the possibility i will stomp a player with less SP than me.
Technical aspects of the game are influencing players behaviour. It's normal that someone who is beaten by the other team wants his revenge and he will have his revenge on another player that can't defend himself. This goes down step by step from the higher to the lower skilled player and the last one will cancel the game.
We do prioritize - or I should rather say only - put players into battles in the region that has the lowest latency for Public Contracts, unless you're in a squad, in which case we'll take the squad leader's region for the whole squad.
It's unfortunate that some players may have bad latency to our battle servers, but splitting up our player base into more regions would only make the whole matchmaking worse.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 04:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Balistyc Farshot wrote:Ok, if everyone hasn't figured it out, CCP is tweaking the settings while looking at all the data for the matches. Give them a break and stay positive.
This is them hearing the radio stations are fuzzy so they are twisting the rabbit ears. You listen and try to tune in to the best it will ever be. Some people will still complain when this is done, but bow down to Ratiti Wheaton because he has yet again made an awesome change we have been begging for since beta. Nice move!!
Overall I hear all of our newer corp members talk about how much better the matches have been. Usually they want to squad up so the vets can even the playing field against other vets but this lets them play on their own when they want to grind.
I am sure we will see the same thing with simple trading. Implement then fine tune.
Please be sure to keep this logic out of FW. The vets need somewhere outside of a PC to fight anyone they want.
FW logic isn't touched, and no plan for that in forseeable future either. So enjoy it as always
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 04:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mad Syringe wrote:Considering the matchmaking:
I had a few games with different characters, and I must say, compliment to our saviour, The Ratatwheaton has finally given us a lot of good battles. The noobs can play against noobs, and the vets against vets.
I got dropped in battles nearly over, where my team was on the backfoot, and we managed to turn them around on several occasions. So even the late entrys are worth a fight. I only had one very late one, where my team had only 12 clones left on my entry and we got cloned. But still, since all the other battles where such a good experience compared to the last months, I was happy to search a kill in that one and be good with it.
All in all, the matchmaking works brilliant for me. It might be because I always ran in basic and advanced fits, and it seems that my crappy kdr is also considered. My KDR seems to profit from those games, so I'm fine.
And even in some of the late entrys, I managed to get nearly 1000 WP, so it's really worth to hang in and try to do your best.
63mil SP if anybody is wondering...
BTW, I've seen a lot of the high kdr vets chickening in the redline or sniping... what a bunch of pathetic scrubs... LOL
Sorry but we're still working on how to ensure people don't get refilled into a "lost" battle as Rattati stated before, we'll update once we have some concrete progress, please wait and see - for just a little while more
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 07:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:Kain Spero wrote:So, I was brainstorming ideas about the whole leaving match issue.
Why not just keep putting the people that leave back into that same match until they get the idea?
Flag their MU rating as a squad. If they left because they needed to pick up someone then their MU rating will have changed.
If they left battle because they needed to log off for a bit it wouldn't effect them.
BUT... if they left because they thought the fight was going to be too hard just keep putting them back in that same match. Like it. A lot. Plus thinking about those squads getting dumped back into the match they ran away from makes me giggle like a matari schoolgirl.
May work, but what if when they left some other players got refilled into this battle, then we can't just simply lock those left to an unjoinable battle - because it's now full - I would rather first fix the issue where a squad quit because of a single member didn't make it.
That being said, we would try all means that could possibly fix problems and we could work out together the best way for DUST.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 09:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:
Thank you.
By the way, HELLO! You look new here... at least for the forums. Time to train up your Forum Warrior Skillbook to Level V!
I'm indeed new to the forum, still learning many slangs you've been talking about... This skill must be 10x
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 09:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:
Thank you.
By the way, HELLO! You look new here... at least for the forums. Time to train up your Forum Warrior Skillbook to Level V!
I'm indeed new to the forum, still learning many slangs you've been talking about... This skill must be 10x Associate Programer at CCP Shanghai?
Yep, so be a little bit patient while I'm still improving both myself and DUST.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 09:45:00 -
[7] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote: You're another confirmed programmer on the DUST team. It's a good sign to the less daft among us. It meansthe game isn't dead yet. We can be patient.
Hmm, I just sometimes help DUST on various "little" things, but this matchmaking thing we really need to work with our player and find out the ideal solution for both of us.
And of course DUST isn't dead, I still have strong believe in it
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
98
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 03:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Just writing to let you know we're still monitoring this and already have many ideas on how to further improve this, but since the last several days are holidays in both Shanghai office and Reykjavik office, we couldn't deploy some fix, starting today we'll continue our work on matchmaking, fixing many other issues surfaced with the new engine as well.
We need your continious help and contribution to make it better. So keep playing and post your feedback!
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
We've deployed a fix around refilling, if you still find yourself joining battle like 2 vs 14 or so, let us know, but remember, this is only for Public Contracts.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
119
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 08:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
KalOfTheRathi wrote:Update on the mini-match making update. I am unimpressed.
My day consisted of a single match of 7 vs 14, which devolved to 4v14 then 3v13 and of course then it only me versus the pond scum you threw at me. A full squad dropping Maddy v.0 and ADS while tossing their meager, lone warbarge gas bag fluff and missing not only me but my droplink.
[Deleted all I really wanted to say]
Off to Dark Souls, where death has more meaning. KR
Checked the battle record, seems a common issue that big squads left right in the beginning because someone DCed, and then the battle cannot be balanced anymore, this issue cannot be fixed solely by matchmaking itself, but as I'm monitoring the active pub battle list, I can see there're way more full battle ongoing all the time, so I'm sure if you try more, you'll find yourself in full battles most of the time.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
128
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 13:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:Initial feedback for last 24 hours. Fuller battles, running solo as well as in a squad. Hopefully those guys with poor experiences see improvement if they try some more. I have 102 million SP and it takes me forever to find a match and my guys have not been getting into matches. Half the team being put the game while the others wait for deployment and can't get in. It's broken for me.
We tweaked configurations a bit, now the engine would wait longer so high skill players/squads should have better chance to find battles if there aren't enough players wiith similar skills in queue, would you try it and give us more feedback?
If the queue kicks you out after 6mins before, it's intended from the configuration, but after some thought increase it a bit would make more sense.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
133
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 14:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
M1tch Rapp wrote:
Overall it seems better to me. People just need a bigger carrot to keep pushing for the win. No telling how much easier this matchmaking dream would come true for you guys if people were playing like they are properly motivated.
Thanks, but I think it's unfair to blame our players too much, there're indeed issues with some related systems, what I also want to say is we're aware of them and have been thinking of fixing them, one by one.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
133
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 15:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
DarK KNigHT007 wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:We've deployed a fix around refilling, if you still find yourself joining battle like 2 vs 14 or so, let us know, but remember, this is only for Public Contracts. i had 3 skirms our team 3v10 3v6 6v12..stopped playing that char Just switced my character i had full 16 v 16 games It was balanced and had big corps in both team So why is it like this .......
What character did you encounter those very unbalanced battles? Are you being pulled into it half-way or in the battle from start and seeing people leave?
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 15:24:00 -
[14] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:
... and getting pulled into battles that I haven't queued up for. ...
Not sure what you mean by this, is it like you joined Ambush when you only select only Domination? the ping? or your team always lose?
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
164
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 02:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:God this sucks, keep getting paired with vets. A lot of them are scouts adding insult to injury by shredding my ADV Heavy's shield and armor with freakin' "Bullsh*t's ass chunks and cheese SMG" knowing I can't damage even the Light class they're using. Still tweaking or is it official that 3Mil+ SP is capable of taking on 40Mil+ SP Vets? Didn't get this on my new char as far as I know..
From SP point of view, I can tell you there're evenly 30mil, 40mil or >50mil players on both team, and they all fight to the end, so it should still considered even if you look at teams not individual players.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 02:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:
O k so the situation is as follows. I will be in a squad of 6, often with many of us having high SP. We will be queued by the squad leader into, for, example Skirmisk and Ambush. If we don't get into a match, we will have been waiting about 6 minutes before being scottied for the first time. We will then try to queue up the search again (there are a few things that happen here and where I am having huge problems with the game and the main crux of what I am complaining about).
We will get scottied repeatedly. Often with the time, for the brief second that it is up reading "Estimated time to deployment 00:57" before scottied the entire squad. This will repeat over and over again. We will switch squad leaders, we will wait, and then, with the squad be queuing for a game that none of the squad leaders queuing for, in the case that I am describing, we would be pulled into a Domination match. The squad will be pulled into the battle and anywhere from 5 seconds into the match until almost 5 minutes where my squad and I will be removed from the game and then we will be pulled back into the merc quarters. When this happens my team will be repeatedly pulled in a pulled out of battle. We have tried switching squad leaders, resetting our systems, switching servers, even singing guitar songs to Scotty but it is all for naught because in all these circumstances, even when we all reset our systems, and log back in and get to the merc quarters, we will continue to be pulled into battles that we ultimately get removed from, losing suits, vehicles, and weapons that we were using at the time. I have been doing a lot of faction warfare to avoid this where the competition is non existent, not rewarding in regards to ISK, and generally not as fun as the public matches I have played before.
To be fair, when all 16 players on both side start at the same time and fight it out, they are very good games. It's just a shame that I can only say that about a 5 games that I have played since April 1st. I am playing more PC and FW than pubs these days and it is reflecting in the relative emptiness of my merc's wallet...
Ah... I would say it's some dirty corners in the battle system, our GM and QA had noticed some weird bugs a long time ago, but it's so hard to find a solution or sometimes even reproduce the bug...
Speaking of matchmaking, if you squad up with really really high skill players, then unless there's an equally good squad queueing at the same time, it's doomed to find a battle, because we cannot find 2 balanced teams with enough players... Can you try solo? Is it better?
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
174
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 03:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:this game for what it is: a tactical wargame that requires dicipline, situational awareness, some skill, and a thrist to win a ****ing game that a lone Ramboesqe mercenary cannot win. Now I'm being told to play solo?!?! Is this guy serious?
So as a diciplined group, do you want to stomp players which are much lower skills than you or you want to fight a similarly diciplined group to fight against, at least we don't want the former one to happen.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
174
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 04:00:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:From SP point of view, I can tell you there're evenly 30mil, 40mil or >50mil players on both team, and they all fight to the end, so it should still considered even if you look at teams not individual players. Did you just say what I think you did? It's like in a 16v16 match Vets of 30mil, 40mil or 50mil+ SP are equally divided in slots on both sides and the rest are filled with Low ranks like me? That's how the matchmaking works?? *Double posted for some reason? Can't delete that other one, dunno what happened.. *
It will do this only if it cannot find enough players with similar skills (within certain time limit), as a last resort, also we do not determine "skill" of a player by SP.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 04:14:00 -
[19] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:
No. **** that. I personally take offense to that coming from a dev. I was going to cut into you AquarHead, but I erased all of scathing remarks... I have always played this game having a full squad for a myriad of reasons. Would you like me to list some? 1) A well organized squad can single handedly win a skirmish. No question. If you say I'm wrong, your squading with unorganized one or your squad in just terrible 2) Squading with people is a lot of fun. It creates comradeship in your team. 3) Team work is extremely effective in battle 4) this game DC'd people so much that I want to have some people with me in the event that 1 or 2 players gets DC'd, ect. The list goes on, there are no disadvantages to running a squad.
I agree with the good parts of running a squad, and we do prioritize putting high-skill squads into battle, if squad keep getting scottied, its only reason is it cannot find another similarly good squad atm.
Just like you said, a good squad can win a match, but what's the point of a battle where 6(sqaud) vs 16 and still the squad wins? But we'll rethink how to deal with such case and try to fix it.
Also, this is really a mini update, we aren't touching any system other than matchmaking itself, problems like DC etc.. isn't actually related to this.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 05:04:00 -
[20] - Quote
Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:It will do this only if it cannot find enough players with similar skills (within certain time limit), as a last resort, also we do not determine "skill" of a player by SP. Uhm...maybe you should because this game is based on the weapons, gear and armor you have, skill doesn't count for sh*t. If me and a vet shoot at each other who's going to win? Me with ADV Heavy and ADV weaponry or the Vet with Proto Heavy and Proto weaponry AND gear? In case you missed it earlier, I raged at the fact that I couldn't damage a Vet in Light armor and they shredded my shield/armor with an smg. I have an average of 20 or more kills and 10 or likely less deaths in a game with no Vets fighting people on my level. 5 kills if I'm lucky and 19 or more deaths in games with Vets. Is my "skill" lacking or is this game based on SP??
Skill seems to create confusion, it's better called "ranking"
Several facts: 1. There isn't much battles where vet and non-vet mixed together 2. If a good player with low ranking from matchmaking's view, he will move to high ranking pretty fast by winning, so you wouldn't face them in just a few (or maybe one) match after 3. Even in a battle like you're talking about, you still have many low ranking players in the other team for you to counter, and what I'm saying is on your side you also have vets to counter enemy vets. A battle shouldn't be decided solely by one or two vets, it's also about the whole team, so killing other players also contributes to your victory 4. When fighting against higher ranking players, if you lose, it's kind of expected, so you won't lose much ranking, but if you win, your ranking would increase by a lot, so losing a few matches because of vets isn't that much of an issue from ranking point of view.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 06:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
nelo kazuma wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:It will do this only if it cannot find enough players with similar skills (within certain time limit), as a last resort, also we do not determine "skill" of a player by SP. Uhm...maybe you should because this game is based on the weapons, gear and armor you have, skill doesn't count for sh*t. If me and a vet shoot at each other who's going to win? Me with ADV Heavy and ADV weaponry or the Vet with Proto Heavy and Proto weaponry AND gear? In case you missed it earlier, I raged at the fact that I couldn't damage a Vet in Light armor and they shredded my shield/armor with an smg. I have an average of 20 or more kills and 10 or likely less deaths in a game with no Vets fighting people on my level. 5 kills if I'm lucky and 19 or more deaths in games with Vets. Is my "skill" lacking or is this game based on SP?? Skill seems to create confusion, it's better called "ranking" Several facts: 1. There isn't much battles where vet and non-vet mixed together 2. If a player with low ranking from matchmaking's view is actually pretty good, he will move to high ranking pretty fast by winning, so you wouldn't face them in just a few (or maybe one) match after 3. Even in a battle like you're talking about, you still have many low ranking players in the other team for you to counter, and what I'm saying is on your side you also have vets to counter enemy vets. A battle shouldn't be decided solely by one or two vets, it's also about the whole team, so killing other players also contributes to your victory 4. When fighting against higher ranking players, if you lose, it's kind of expected, so you won't lose much ranking, but if you win, your ranking would increase by a lot, so losing a few matches because of vets isn't that much of an issue from ranking point of view. Quick question pretty sure youve been asked already but is ranking determined by sp win/loss ratio kdr or average war points or all the above. Ir is it determined by players killed based of certain numbers such as those listed above
It is determined by win/loss currently - not by ratio, it's calculated after each match, it can be optimized by involving more metrics, but we didn't do it for now at least. I'm tempted to do it, but it's hard to say how much improvement it could bring.
But as I stated, if you lose to a higher ranking guy, you'll lose less rankings because it's predicated as lose from the ranking system, but if you win, you'll gain a lot more rankings because it's not as predicated, so he/she will lose a lot and you gain a lot of rankings.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 06:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:1. I just seem to find em all. 2. So it encourages people to be bad or be thrown in with Vets using gear suited for fighting low ranks. Nice. CCP AquarHEAD wrote:4. When fighting against higher ranking players, if you lose, it's kind of expected, so you won't lose much ranking, but if you win, your ranking would increase by a lot, so losing a few matches because of vets isn't that much of an issue from ranking point of view. Of course it's expected that I lose, I'm not saying I should win, I'm saying I don't wan't the "opportunity" to try and beat them. You replaced "skill" with ranking..now I'm confused..I think I want to say I don't wan't the chance at higher ranking by fighting Vets, I want the ranking for fighting my own low ranks so I can actually enjoy the video game I'm playing. *Intense staring* :D
2. I don't know how you interpret it to this, what I'm saying is the player's true ranking will be corrected as they play more matches, it's not about "encourages people to be bad", it's about if the ranking is not reflecting his real skill, it will be corrected.
Skill is an abstract definition, and we realized it by representing it as "ranking", I just don't want to confuse it with skill points.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
188
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 07:32:00 -
[23] - Quote
E-Rock wrote:
Ohh. I agree fully. I can stomp one way or another though, it doesn't really matter to me. I just want to get into a game, man. I, and the other not get pulled in and out of battle with no reward at all and losing suits to no one and losing isk. I imagine that you guys know how messed up the matchmaking is and that's why the next event is focused on FW instead of pubs. It starts in a few hours and now everyone with be q syncing so you probably won't be hearing much about that from me after that. I just hope that this problem is fixed after the event is over...
We'll try to fix the problem of scotty by accepting some unbalanced battle if player really waits too long, do come back and try pubs after the event I'll also update when the fix is deployed.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
204
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 15:13:00 -
[24] - Quote
IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:E-Rock wrote:Six-man squad can't play the game coz of Scotty Ah... I would say it's some dirty corners in the battle system, our GM and QA had noticed some weird bugs a long time ago, but it's so hard to find a solution or sometimes even reproduce the bug... Speaking of matchmaking, if you squad up with really really high skill players, then unless there's an equally good squad queueing at the same time, it's doomed to find a battle, because we cannot find 2 balanced teams with enough players... Can you try solo? Is it better? Honestly I think players getting an error trying to queue for a battle is the one thing you should avoid at all costs. If you put them against a poor bunch of lesser ranked mercs, then it's only as bad as before matchmaking came in,and I would suggest that is better than basically telling a squad, nah sorry, you can't play right now, you're too good. Of course this means you'll get problems on the other team because they are more likely to lose (or get stomped) but I'm not sure you should prevent a high-rank squad joining a battle. That has to be the fastest way to lose players. If matchmaking is on some sort of timer, then when that runs out, you really have to put people into a battle rather than tell them to try again. That's no different to having them wait 6 + 6 minutes for a battle. 6 minutes is kind of long as it is but maybe acceptable.
But I keep thinking that the longer a player/squad waits, the more they deserve a balanced battle to fight, probably you're right, but it bothers me so much that you wait much longer than the old matchmaking - which is totally random - and still get same results.......
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
204
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 15:15:00 -
[25] - Quote
SponkSponkSponk wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:We'll try to fix the problem of scotty by accepting some unbalanced battle if player really waits too long, do come back and try pubs after the event I'll also update when the fix is deployed. from a game design standpoint, it's fairly easy to achieve this. Simply add a 'revenge bonus' to your next win based on how badly you've lost so far, a bit like a jackpot in a lottery. A certain percent of the ISK you lose in a match that you see through to the end will be stored away, and given back when you finally win a game. So, if you're on a six-match losing streak and finally win a match, you'll be showered in isk to recoup some of the isk you've lost since your last win. This will encourage people to a) see matches through, even if they are losing b) push harder for a win to get their jackpot And since there will be people in each match in category A and people in B, it's a virtuous circle of cause and effect.
Interesting idea we did talked about changing the reward mechanism after this matchmaking change so players can still benefit from probably less battles (due to longer waiting time).
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
230
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 05:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
CELESTA AUNGM wrote:CCP AquarHEAD wrote:Kinyuhk Goluhh wrote:1. I just seem to find em all. So it encourages people to be bad or be thrown in with Vets using gear suited for fighting low ranks. Nice. CCP AquarHEAD wrote:4. When fighting against higher ranking players, if you lose, it's kind of expected, so you won't lose much ranking, but if you win, your ranking would increase by a lot, so losing a few matches because of vets isn't that much of an issue from ranking point of view. Of course it's expected that I lose, I'm not saying I should win, I'm saying I don't wan't the "opportunity" to try and beat them. You replaced "skill" with ranking..now I'm confused..I think I want to say I don't wan't the chance at higher ranking by fighting Vets, I want the ranking for fighting my own low ranks so I can actually enjoy the video game I'm playing. *Intense staring* :D I don't know how you interpret it to this, what I'm saying is the player's true ranking will be corrected as they play more matches, it's not about "encourages people to be bad", it's about if the ranking is not reflecting his real skill, it will be corrected. Skill is an abstract definition, and we realized it by representing it as "ranking", I just don't want to confuse it with skill points. GǪUmmm. I know we live in a world obcessed with the "transparency" ideal. But I think the ultimate proof of the matchmaking experiments the Devs are coming up with (and, yesGǪthey seem to be a fun improvement) will be for the final structure of the "matchmaking" to be JUST LIKE THE "Aim Assist" system. Meaning, ---It will be SO fluidly "in the background", that players no longer will sense that it's working for them, and how well it's working. --It, like the "Aim-Assist", will work better when players DO NOT learn the full details of what it's measuring-----so as to minimize any players starting right away to try to circumvent it. No offense, Devs, but please don't give it all away. You have a promising mechanic going on here, and I'd like to see it succeed. We are PS3 Dust Players, and we're not at all as benign and harmless as you think we are. Seriously, sometimes keeping your lips closed about some areas of a new invention is BETTER. Pretty-Pleeeassee
Sure, this is as far as I can go.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
CCP AquarHEAD
C C P C C P Alliance
247
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 11:32:00 -
[27] - Quote
As promised, we've mini updated the mini update again to allow some slightly unbalanced battles to happen for those who waited long enough.
We've also noticed currently the engine may have problems dealing with some players in special circumstance, we'll fix that in a recent update as well.
a passionate developer
|
|
|
|
|