|
On June 29 2016 07:57 scDeluX wrote: "players are currently high latency and disconnections as a result of Ddos attack"
WHO THE FUCK DDOS BLIZZARD ON COMPETITIVE RELEASE DAY, GIVE ME THE PATCH ALREADY !!! Probably RIOT considering Overwatch is #1 in pc bang rankings
|
If you are crushing a game so hard that people on the other team leave you get almost no point gain. Can anyone else confirm this? It has happened to me 3 times so far and I got smallest increment possible.
Edit: Nm KoTH is just worth way less points. than the other game modes.
|
Definitely staying away from competitive until Blizzard fixes this dumpster fire. And I thought solo queue was bad but this is a new low on Blizzard.
|
I've played 5 of my placements. In 4 of the 5 I played Zarya the entire game and got 4 gold medals. As the only "tank." Now I know Zarya damage is nuts but why do we even have dedicated damage dealers if they can't out damage me...
|
Certainly player levels do not reflect actual player skill levels. But I just had a ranked match on Gibraltar where their team totaled level 556 against our 224, they finished attack in like 2 mins while we couldn't even take first point.
Thats by far the worst loss I've had in Overwatch so far.
Edit: Ended up at 45, started off well with 4-2 but then loss streaked into 4-6. My last game I had this lvl 25 guy in my team that round 1 whined about us having 2 supports, defense with Symmetra/Mercy and then round 2 whined about us having 2 tanks...Ironically since he was completely useless we were too low on DPS so he actually had a point, sort of.
|
On July 01 2016 00:03 Vaelone wrote: Certainly player levels do not reflect actual player skill levels. But I just had a ranked match on Gibraltar where their team totaled level 556 against our 224, they finished attack in like 2 mins while we couldn't even take first point.
Thats by far the worst loss I've had in Overwatch so far. Playing a lot certainly helps to over time give you a more holistic understanding of the game, unless you're a stupid asshole. Which I am. So level does kind of mean something to some extent. You can have very skilled low levels but oftentimes they don't have the experience to know which characters work on different maps or against certain comps. Level certainly become nearly irrelevant in a few months though.
Yesterday I played against and roflstomped a level 345 WHILE being healthily employed.
|
Almost every ranked game for me has been a landslide win or loss. I also was in a party with two friends and we got stomped 5 games straight. This was right after I finished my placement matches that got me rank 50. Each loss took me down a rank to 45. Awesome system!
|
On July 01 2016 00:45 Dizmaul wrote: Almost every ranked game for me has been a landslide win or loss. I also was in a party with two friends and we got stomped 5 games straight. This was right after I finished my placement matches that got me rank 50. Each loss took me down a rank to 45. Awesome system!
I don't think they've sorted the algorithm out for ranked very well yet. It's supposed to be based on QP MMR but yeah, most of my ranked matches have been stomps too. Like, seriously the largest stomps I've seen to date due to varying skill levels across the two teams.
|
On July 01 2016 01:38 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2016 00:45 Dizmaul wrote: Almost every ranked game for me has been a landslide win or loss. I also was in a party with two friends and we got stomped 5 games straight. This was right after I finished my placement matches that got me rank 50. Each loss took me down a rank to 45. Awesome system! I don't think they've sorted the algorithm out for ranked very well yet. It's supposed to be based on QP MMR but yeah, most of my ranked matches have been stomps too. Like, seriously the largest stomps I've seen to date due to varying skill levels across the two teams.
Give it a little time until people get their rankings stabilized. Right now the middle is probably overcrowded and will be for weeks.
Also if the rating is based on quick match rating then it will be a chaos too. Some people go full troll mode alot of games in quick match and then tryhard like crazy in competitive so their initial rating is way below their skill rating. Also there are tons of bad habits and false knowledge from quickmatch that makes games one sided when one side uses voice, discusses comps etc and the other side doesn't.
I had a game on Numbani where my team was full with people who used voice, adapted the composition, discussed initial positioning and called information during the game. It was a complete and utter stomp. We didn't have anyone hardcarry or something like that. It was just luck from our side to have 6 people with the same mindset.
|
At a 3-3 placement right now. Its so frustrating having a leaver in every game and then getting a loss because of it. I just want to get placed at a decent place where they arent landslide victories or my face getting stomped. But I know it should eventually spread itself out. Eventually...
|
On July 01 2016 04:17 climax wrote: At a 3-3 placement right now. Its so frustrating having a leaver in every game and then getting a loss because of it. I just want to get placed at a decent place where they arent landslide victories or my face getting stomped. But I know it should eventually spread itself out. Eventually...
CS:GO does that better. First off it calculates MMR/round (Bo30 rounds) and it takes the average MMR of your and the enemy team into account with leavers (replaced by bots) will count having 0 MMR. This means if you win a round against 4 players and a bot then you will gain less MMR but you will also lose less MMR if you lose a round with less players.
I think Overwatch could use a similar system. Since they cannot divide the game by rounds as nicely and granularly they could use the overall time and just divide the games by sections with different amounts of players. I must assume that they already have something like this in place because in quick play you have backfill, but they never mentioned something like this as far as I know.
|
out of my probably 30 ranked matches, I've had random disconnects that cost me the game twice. Games we were gonna easily win, but I got a loss because lost connection to battlenet, even though everything else is working fine.
Also, just had a guy on my team who had to leave, would have been an easy win. We actually still won 5v6 in overtime, but there are definitely some things that need to be fixed with competitive. Winning a 5v6, I got 5% of a rank, which is laughable. They need to give greater rewards for winning when you're down a player, and probably smaller losses too. Also, when a player is gone the "you can safely leave" message blocks the payload map, and never goes away, so you just have to play without it, and with an annoying red message at the top of your screen the whole time.
|
On July 01 2016 05:40 clickrush wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2016 04:17 climax wrote: At a 3-3 placement right now. Its so frustrating having a leaver in every game and then getting a loss because of it. I just want to get placed at a decent place where they arent landslide victories or my face getting stomped. But I know it should eventually spread itself out. Eventually... CS:GO does that better. First off it calculates MMR/round (Bo30 rounds) and it takes the average MMR of your and the enemy team into account with leavers (replaced by bots) will count having 0 MMR. This means if you win a round against 4 players and a bot then you will gain less MMR but you will also lose less MMR if you lose a round with less players. I think Overwatch could use a similar system. Since they cannot divide the game by rounds as nicely and granularly they could use the overall time and just divide the games by sections with different amounts of players. I must assume that they already have something like this in place because in quick play you have backfill, but they never mentioned something like this as far as I know.
Yeah, I play a lot of CS:GO (LEM) and I'm used to that system. But from its looking like, the problem will be the amount loss/won after a match. I've seen players win and gain little, but lose and have to win so much to even break even for the day. Also, where is my reconnect button?! Maybe some of those people lost connection for a second and then couldn't reconnect.
The salt is running deep right now and it seems I need to find some ranked parties/partners if I even want to stand a chance. SoloQ is pretty rough.
|
The ranked system is totally rushed IMO, so much feel unfinished about it, going to keep playing quick play for a while.
|
People who wants to dick around with 6x Zarya strats in ranked.. The same guys changed to mass soldier when it didn't work because "We don't have time" (With over 2 minutes left). Never took the first point..
Worst part is they weren't that bad. On defence we nearly managed to stop the enemy from taking the first point too, and lost it with 10 seconds left. If only they've bothered to try in the first place instead of doing retarded "fun" strats.
But then again I won the next match even though we didn't deserve it because of the coinflip system, so I guess that makes up for it.
|
I fucking hate the coinflip when both teams finish a payload map. I simply cannot accept that the way faster team potentially gets the unlucky side in the sudden death just because blizzard thinks it is fair that way. No it is not. Other than that koth still sucks ass and shouldn't be in ranked mode at all.
|
On July 02 2016 01:33 The_Red_Viper wrote: I fucking hate the coinflip when both teams finish a payload map. I simply cannot accept that the way faster team potentially gets the unlucky side in the sudden death just because blizzard thinks it is fair that way. No it is not. Other than that koth still sucks ass and shouldn't be in ranked mode at all.
Personally I like KotH way more than Assault. At least we can agree that Escort/Hybrid are the maps we like the most.
It is weird that there are only maps with one objective at a time though. Why can't we have maps where there are 2 or more objectives at the same time? It would make for some really interesting and different games. Is there a statement on that or a philosphy behind I'am not aware of?
|
My problem with koth is that i feel like the first teamfight pretty much decides the game. While that is not true in 100% of the cases, more often than not it holds up, at least in my games. Can you elaborate a bit? How would such a map look like?
|
On July 02 2016 07:59 The_Red_Viper wrote: My problem with koth is that i feel like the first teamfight pretty much decides the game. While that is not true in 100% of the cases, more often than not it holds up, at least in my games. Can you elaborate a bit? How would such a map look like?
I can think of alot of examples but they don't have to necessairily work or be fun. Just on top of my head:
* mode where you set a timer and put 3 points to be captured on the map, each point giving points/time. * an attack/defense mode with the attackers having a limited amount of respawns but they can increase their respawns by capping secondary targets * a map where the attackers have to steal one of multiple objectives and bring it home, you can balance that by disabling abilities of the objective carrier
I think modes that have multiple attack points can be very interesting and they would reward players/teams with better communication and tactics.
|
Well 3-7 placement. 44 rank. lose one go down one immediately...This is the most frustrating matchmaking system for me.
|
|
|
|