Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Queues rooms

8 posts, 476 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort
Time to start a heressy thread.

As every player knows, multiple games going on simultaneously are hardly ever present even when there are more players willing to play than a room can maintain. But why is that happening?

As far as I noticed, people are very reluctant to start new room (except 1v1) because no1 is really happy to sit in empty room and wait for enough players to join. !v1 requires only one more player to join, so its not the cas,e but both smal and big teams need at least 3 more players, and that might take forever when there is a bigger game going on in otehr room, as people tend to gather in the biggest one.

The easiest solution to this may be imprelemtion of "queue rooms". What they would do is managing bigger number of players than one "Battle room" can handle, and spreading them according to their elo values to few games.

Whoel thing would be very easy. We could get queue rooms for each of PvP games named (e.g.) "Small teams (4v4) queue room". All players willing to play small teams would join it. If there are more than 8 players when the !start poll succedes they players are divided to few games according to their elo and new, Battle rooms are created under the "Games in progress" tab in main lobby. Any player may then join the room and spectate the game. After the battles end, the battle room(s) is closed and all players from the rom are moved back to queue room.

Becasue of thsi whoel thing creatign mroe than 1 game at the time would become way easier, whic hsi kinda good.

Wad da ya' think?
+0 / -0
Skasi
Good job PLrankFailer. Now everybody knows you were away for the last two months.
[Spoiler]
+0 / -0
Wut, what happen? Somebody has set up us the bomb?

Don't say it's no longer the case, I see 30 players waiting in teams room instead of creating new one right now, and we all know 10 of them will get specced.
[Spoiler]
+0 / -0

10 years ago
PLrankFailer failed again.

Queues would've been a perfect match for you, they might have even outfailed you.
[Spoiler]
+0 / -0

10 years ago
The queues are gone because the single room mentality is too powerful. Allowing the spectating of a live match ruined the whole purpose because everyone specced the 1 game instead of joining the queue.
+0 / -0
But, but, but... After they specced when the battle room is deleted, and all players including spectators are moved back to queue room they would probly join the players tab.. Thus they would join a new game...

And also Battle rooms could have name like "Battle [insert battle number here] (Spectating only)". Just in case of wubs who won't get the queueing rooms system and would join battle room (instead of queueing room) in hope of joining a new battle..
+0 / -0

10 years ago
uhm, It seem that this ideas is just a slightly worse quick match. I may be wrong though.

I mean, if you can specify the size of the battle that you want in quick match. you can spec other room while being able to join the battle type you want if enough people are available.


IIRC @KingRaptor said he was about to revamp quick match sometime ago.
+0 / -0
10 years ago
Well, I think that unless we have more than 1k players on daily basis, w shudlnt be concerned of players wanting exact size games. I would personaly like to play 5v5s or 6v6s, but that requires at least 10 more players waiting the same at the same time, and while having max 25-30 players at once it is kinda hard.

Later on, when (if) we get more players we can think about it. We could for example just make separate queueing rooms for each game - 1v1 queue room, 2v2 room, 3v3, up to 10v10.
+0 / -0