| 1 |
There's multiple things about multiplayer that just seem off.
|
1 |
There's multiple things about multiplayer that just seem off.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
Take this battle as an example: http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/125870
|
3 |
Take this battle as an example: http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/125870
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
If you are in team games room, !balance will tell people what the matchup would be if the game started right now. If there is an odd amount of players, the faction with more players can start the game without the agreement of the outnumbered team. So if i don't pay 100% attention i might be caught up in an unfair matchup. Looking at the above, 1600 and 1300 don't match up with 1450 elo. The 1600 guy should be playing alone with 2 coms, if at all. And the fact that the game can start without the agreement of the solo player makes this even more of a pain.
|
5 |
If you are in team games room, !balance will tell people what the matchup would be if the game started right now. If there is an odd amount of players, the faction with more players can start the game without the agreement of the outnumbered team. So if i don't pay 100% attention i might be caught up in an unfair matchup. Looking at the above, 1600 and 1300 don't match up with 1450 elo. The 1600 guy should be playing alone with 2 coms, if at all. And the fact that the game can start without the agreement of the solo player makes this even more of a pain.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
And
what
is
the
result
in
this
case?
The
solo
players
lost
20
elo
at
once,
in
a
game
he
likely
didn't
want
to
play
and
had
basically
no
chances
of
winning
(
except
for
if
he
can
play
for,
which
the
highest
points
player
would've
been
more
likely
to)
.
This
just
doesn't
seem
right
to
me.
If
one
team
is
outnumbered,
the
other
team
shouldn't
get
massive
elo
for
winning.
|
7 |
And
what
is
the
result
in
this
case?
The
solo
players
lost
20
elo
at
once,
in
a
game
he
likely
didn't
want
to
play
and
had
basically
no
chances
of
winning
(
except
for
if
he
can
play
for
2,
which
the
highest
points
player
would've
been
more
likely
to)
.
This
just
doesn't
seem
right
to
me.
If
one
team
is
outnumbered,
the
other
team
shouldn't
get
massive
elo
for
winning.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
On the other hand, look at this battle: http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/125622
|
9 |
On the other hand, look at this battle: http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/125622
|
| 10 |
We managed to win 2v3 (needless to say, neither of us wanted to start the game). The 1800 elo guy lost 3.7 elo, the 1400 guy 18. The 1330 guy also only lost 3.7 elo. What the hell is going on here?
|
10 |
We managed to win 2v3 (needless to say, neither of us wanted to start the game). The 1800 elo guy lost 3.7 elo, the 1400 guy 18. The 1330 guy also only lost 3.7 elo. What the hell is going on here?
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
So guys, what's your take on this?
|
12 |
So guys, what's your take on this?
|
Multiplayer imbalances