What the moderator says is very counter-intuitive. There cannot be balanced matchups if the queue does not contain at least one hundred players? Less than 10 players in queue, then yes there can be no matchup.
Now if there are at least ten players in queue, how is it so hard to come up with something balanced?
Here it goes:
-) Rank individually all the players in queue. With their Elo if they have enough pvp sessions under their belt, using statistical knowledge otherwise.
-) put #1 in blue team, #2 in red team
-) put #4 in blue team, #3 in red team
-) and so on. For the last player of red team, calculate the (sum of five blues) minus (sum of four reds) and browse the queue until you find the player with nearest Elo.
What is complicated there? It could be done with a pen and a paper and it would take less than 30 seconds.
But for some reason, as it has been exemplified by the posts in this thread, the current queueing algorithm does the opposite. If blue team has four 20k+ and red team has four 10k, it adds yet another 20k to the blue team and yet another 10k to the red team.
I didnt read through all the replies so if If I make a repeat suggestion , not intended to be copied but....
when tenacity came out there was a system that was implemented to help with this very thing. The trouble was no ques ever popped up because not enough diversity in pvp was there and caused ques to take forever so they disabled it. The trouble with PVP and you going to have to realize this and face the fact that its a pay to win aspect of the game, I do not pay to win myself still play and scrape by. with that said... Gearscore based pvp would work. if there wasnt a matter of PVE guys doing Astral diamond pvp dailies not built at all for PVP would never get anywhere in pvp. it would be nice to have certain levels of pvp queing even then it would be MInmaxing to get the top of that level and still have BIS stuff to just pulverize people who actually suite the class. in conclusion does not matter what type of system is implemented itll still be unfair without an absolute class balance ,, and with my experience in MMos over the past 10 or so years theres no such a thing as balance... with one game i played it was nukers, with another it was Faceroll tanks, and this game has almost more balance than any game I have played thats Free to play ,,,, you want true class balance this isnt the game for you. or is any free to play model.
I do hope to see a 1v1 type system implemented some day. and maybe a true open world server for pvp orientated people to go. but I will keep on dreaming there lol.
m1nuendMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited October 2014
I returned recently from being absent a year and one among many things that seem peculiar to me is the increased tankiness of all classes. A year ago, there was a problem with too tanky sentinel GWF, which many complained about. It seems now they decided to solve this by applying the problem to all classes.
I think some of the problems lies in how well regen, defense and tenacity stack together to make an immortal mean fighting machine?
And as for people who say there won't be enough people for a different PvP matchmaking system, well some of the reason there are few playing PvP is because of how the system works now. People who enjoy PvP more than PvE are also more likely to be turned off by the game at level 60 and quit all together. ("I have to grind for 2 months PvE content before I can play PvP? No thanks")
Even if a different matchmaking system would occasionally put high geared or good players with newbies, it's not as frustrating when it happens once in a while as it is when it happens every time.
But yeah, winning by gear is much less satisfying (not satisfying) than winning by cleverness and skill.
I know I'm very clueless because I've been absent for so long, don't hate :,(
Comments
Now if there are at least ten players in queue, how is it so hard to come up with something balanced?
Here it goes:
-) Rank individually all the players in queue. With their Elo if they have enough pvp sessions under their belt, using statistical knowledge otherwise.
-) put #1 in blue team, #2 in red team
-) put #4 in blue team, #3 in red team
-) and so on. For the last player of red team, calculate the (sum of five blues) minus (sum of four reds) and browse the queue until you find the player with nearest Elo.
What is complicated there? It could be done with a pen and a paper and it would take less than 30 seconds.
But for some reason, as it has been exemplified by the posts in this thread, the current queueing algorithm does the opposite. If blue team has four 20k+ and red team has four 10k, it adds yet another 20k to the blue team and yet another 10k to the red team.
when tenacity came out there was a system that was implemented to help with this very thing. The trouble was no ques ever popped up because not enough diversity in pvp was there and caused ques to take forever so they disabled it. The trouble with PVP and you going to have to realize this and face the fact that its a pay to win aspect of the game, I do not pay to win myself still play and scrape by. with that said... Gearscore based pvp would work. if there wasnt a matter of PVE guys doing Astral diamond pvp dailies not built at all for PVP would never get anywhere in pvp. it would be nice to have certain levels of pvp queing even then it would be MInmaxing to get the top of that level and still have BIS stuff to just pulverize people who actually suite the class. in conclusion does not matter what type of system is implemented itll still be unfair without an absolute class balance ,, and with my experience in MMos over the past 10 or so years theres no such a thing as balance... with one game i played it was nukers, with another it was Faceroll tanks, and this game has almost more balance than any game I have played thats Free to play ,,,, you want true class balance this isnt the game for you. or is any free to play model.
I do hope to see a 1v1 type system implemented some day. and maybe a true open world server for pvp orientated people to go. but I will keep on dreaming there lol.
~Vladimar Zul - Fury build SW ~
~Takadump onzcrapper - Iron vangaurd GF~
I think some of the problems lies in how well regen, defense and tenacity stack together to make an immortal mean fighting machine?
And as for people who say there won't be enough people for a different PvP matchmaking system, well some of the reason there are few playing PvP is because of how the system works now. People who enjoy PvP more than PvE are also more likely to be turned off by the game at level 60 and quit all together. ("I have to grind for 2 months PvE content before I can play PvP? No thanks")
Even if a different matchmaking system would occasionally put high geared or good players with newbies, it's not as frustrating when it happens once in a while as it is when it happens every time.
But yeah, winning by gear is much less satisfying (not satisfying) than winning by cleverness and skill.
I know I'm very clueless because I've been absent for so long, don't hate :,(
Venril- SW
Lurch- GF
Mini Ven- DC