Recent Topics

Ads

The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Let's talk about... everything else
Supremax67
Posts: 3

The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#1 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:34 pm

So at this point, it is no secret that premade really kills it in scens; but in reality, it is not the premade that is killing it but all the high Renowns.

At this very moment, there is an observable phenomenon where higher Renown gets more renown and lower renown gets shut out. In other words the stronger gets stronger and the weaker gets nothing.

A while back, when EA was in-charge of the original game, their solution to counter is to group up scenarios per renown rank range, in theory, this would work great, in practice, it prevents more scenario match up. Well I have a counter proposal that would both address the issues; renown matching totals.

Have the cumulative renown from both sides add up within a 50 pts difference, no more. So instead of seeing matches where you have 12 RR80s vs 12 RR40s, you would get 6 RR80s vs 12 RR40s (total renown on each side is 480 in this case). Not only you would have less 500 to 0 games, but higher renown may actually find the game fun from a more challenging match. Everyone is happy and scenarios still pops just as often, no downside.

This is about saving the game down the road. I am simply tired of ending up in winning scenarios with no challenges, I can only imagine how bad the other side feels losing 5 games in a row.

So in sum up, match people based on the total renown pts within 50 pts range, if there is a lot of high renown on one side, add more players on the other side to even the numbers. Things are already bad as it is, imagine how bad this is going to get when people reach RR100 and you are trying to level your renown 31.

P.S.: If this idea gets rejected, I'll just re-submit in 1 year when people will be more receptive to the idea. If the game hasn't killed itself over a high renown only of players saturation and new players gets discouraged and quits.

Ads
User avatar
Manatikik
Posts: 1249

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#2 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:14 am

Wow this is a horrible idea. Purposefully having an uneven numbers of players per side is and always will be the worst suggestions brought forth for scenarios. It takes literally no time to get to a decent RR; takes like two-three weeks MAYBE to hit 60 if you really try.
<Montague><Capulet>

Supremax67
Posts: 3

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#3 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:13 am

Manatikik wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:14 am Wow this is a horrible idea. Purposefully having an uneven numbers of players per side is and always will be the worst suggestions brought forth for scenarios. It takes literally no time to get to a decent RR; takes like two-three weeks MAYBE to hit 60 if you really try.
Not a terrible idea, just an idea you don't like. Big difference.

Supremax67
Posts: 3

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#4 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:17 am

Talasar wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:22 am
  • RR = time played.
    High RR is no indication for 'skill' - gear and renown points are meaningless if you don't know how to use them effectively/efficiently.
I guess someone didn't read the post, I am not the one struggling, my opposition is, and as much as color coding and formatting you want to use to impress your argument, it doesn't change the fact that a random RR40s will get their arse handed by a random RR80s. 9 times out of 10.

You shutdown an idea that hasn't been tried is the first indication of someone who doesn't want to start losing fights after winning so many. Great deflecting, but until it has been tried, you are biased towards your high renown characters.

User avatar
Jabba
Posts: 344

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#5 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:30 am

Supremax67 wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:13 am
Manatikik wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:14 am Wow this is a horrible idea. Purposefully having an uneven numbers of players per side is and always will be the worst suggestions brought forth for scenarios. It takes literally no time to get to a decent RR; takes like two-three weeks MAYBE to hit 60 if you really try.
Not a terrible idea, just an idea you don't like. Big difference.
No, it's a terrible idea
Tushi Splats Tush Emoalbino Podge

User avatar
Nefarian78
Posts: 460

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#6 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:49 am

Supremax67 wrote: Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:13 amNot a terrible idea, just an idea you don't like. Big difference.
Do you honestly think 12 pugs stand a chance against a coordinated 6man? The only thing this would do is encourage the pugs to focus entirely on back-capping and pveing objectives cause they wouldn't stand a chance against a 6man. It's a terrible game experience for the 12pugs and a game of cat and mouse for the 6man that will inevitably murder them all if they get caught in a fight.

Also, it would greatly increase queue times for 6mans.

It's just a terrible idea.
They done stole my character's names. Can't have **** in RoR.

Flavorburst
Posts: 350

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#7 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:53 am

RR isn't even that big of a deal. Do you really think that's where the big power disparity is?

The extra crit or whatever is easily outmatched by gear (which can be gained through pve, which has no rr requirement), and the synergy that's created by just playing with people a bunch.

I could name several players that are 80+ I can routinely crap on all day, regardless of my RR or class. It comes down to whenever or not you want to be competitive and put in the work to accomplish that goal.

User avatar
Phantasm
Posts: 676

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#8 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 8:08 am

Agree with Flavorburst, crapy players stay crappy if they dont want to be better. Making easier game mechanics for them is not a solution. Solutions are all around: guilds provide helpful specs and gear, forum with class section with deeper information on better play, LFG channel, etc. I confirm RR is not a indicator how good player is. I met so many good players with lower ranks when they outplay high RR players.

Ads
User avatar
Ysaran
Posts: 1220

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#9 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 8:11 am

if you use the experience scroll you can easily reach r40 with rr60+. which means that even if you are 60+ you wear annihilator. rr isn't a problem
Zputadenti

User avatar
Yaliskah
Former Staff
Posts: 1973

Re: The vicious circle that Scenarios generate

Post#10 » Sun Nov 10, 2019 9:47 am

Supremax67 wrote: Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:34 pm Have the cumulative renown from both sides add up within a 50 pts difference, no more. So instead of seeing matches where you have 12 RR80s vs 12 RR40s, you would get 6 RR80s vs 12 RR40s (total renown on each side is 480 in this case). Not only you would have less 500 to 0 games, but higher renown may actually find the game fun from a more challenging match. Everyone is happy and scenarios still pops just as often, no downside.
You idea would be very good, like any ranking based matchmaking system, but you forgot some very important data.

To work efficiently, your sytem would need a very large pool of scenario players, like thousands of dedicated players. (atm there are 42 players in T1 and 250 in T2+)

According a scenario drain 12 players per side (24) in a non scenario dedicated game (some are doing SC, some PvE, some craft, some ORvR...), on 3 bracket of player (previously 4), with the possibility to choose a specific scenario...

Sadly, following your propsotion would remain to remove scenario even more surely than the matchmaking system we have right now.

This is precisely for this reason we removed it for 1-39 players. Because according feedbacks collected on forum, having a very balanced "nothing" (like 1 sc every 2-3 hours) is worst than unbalanced frequency

(no need to say, that creating a group to play SC -like when you go for a dungeon, or form a semi organised warband- is something any player should consider before saying "unbalanced" :) ).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 45 guests