Make solo 3s groups depending on rating

[Grimjoe]

You can be put on a team with 2 1400's vs 3 1900s

It should be evenly dispersed, not unfairly like this.

It's not fair, please fix MMR system. Thanks.


Edit: It would also be nice if there was a system in place so players can't abuse the 1 class per team to only fight bad players. It's pretty easily done if you pay enough attention to the players queueing

[Henhouse]

I think we've responded to this numerous times, but it would drastically affect queues if we did so. This season has been the highest participation due to the reward, and rating gain changes, so it's possibly something we consider if the queues have been very filled, but I've not actually had the available time to look at its current status. Are the queues small still, or quite filled?

[Grimjoe]

The queues are filled pretty well during peak hours, my point is mostly to make it so it makes teams more balanced rating-wise, so one team isn't 2 low players and 1 high player vs 3 high players, but instead 1 low player 2 high players, 1 low player 2 high players each team, so each team has a proper chance of winning, rather than it being a completely 1-sided 30 second loss.

It still won't do away with that, some players dont know LoS, others dont know kick etc., but I think it would be healthier in terms of not making players tank rating when they queue nonstop and repetitively get put into these situations. I've had it happen multiple times on multiple characters, the main being my warlock and warrior.

It's strictly due to the roles played, and when one player is new and doesn't know how to fill their position in the team, it makes it so you have to carry, it'll make it less stressful for everyone I think to find a system around this.

[mirok]

I think we've responded to this numerous times, but it would drastically affect queues if we did so. This season has been the highest participation due to the reward, and rating gain changes, so it's possibly something we consider if the queues have been very filled, but I've not actually had the available time to look at its current status. Are the queues small still, or quite filled?

I'm sorry to say that you are wrong. This season was the most active in 3's solo que because certain people who destroyed 2's environment, so it was either leaving the server or playing 3's. Casually, those "certain people" are the same who made it happen few seasons ago. So don't say it's because of the rewards because rewards are the same as the previous season. The increase of the 3's solo que ladder was due to a decrease in 2's ladder.

[Grimjoe]

Mirok you have a point, 2's currently is, for lack of a better phrase, a shit show. There are currently top1 skilled players who farm lesser players regularly, IE: Moskito/Serennia, and it causes players to neglect to queue 2s, and instead vie for the easily accessible Solo 3s queue, as it's nearly instant and teams are randomly selected (Outside of players who abuse the 1 class per team rule to counter-queue certain players, but this generally happens at lower population hours)

I'm curious about the number of 2s games played per day vs the number of 3s games, the times at which these games are played, and who the players are who win the majority of those games. I can almost guarantee that Azie, Eaz, Moskito, Serennia, and a few others will be the prime names seen winning 2s, and there will be a long list of lesser known players who lose 1-2 games vs them and stop queueing.

There's a massive lack of diversity in 2s as a result of a low population and that's the key issue. Plus, solo 3s rewards more points per 10 games, and it yields the same rewards for less work as you can rely heavily on your team and less on individual skill in MOST cases. You're only going to see the number of players queueing solo 3s increase, and those in 2s decrease.

Personally, I'd prefer a PvP alternative to arenas and BGs both, as it's all getting quite stale with how repetitious the cycle's becoming.

[lis]

Maybe you can just creat a "STEP" for player under 1600 and player above 1600

all beginner and "noob" play under 1600 and the competitor for the "podium" and 2k50 rusher are less clamped

[Grimjoe]

You can't split it by rating, it would cause issues with queue times, and would turn the ladder into a more elitist situation than it already is. You'd be restricting the player-base and causing too much of a separation. It would hurt peak times and low-peak hours alike. It wouldn't work.

[mirok]

Maybe you can just creat a "STEP" for player under 1600 and player above 1600

all beginner and "noob" play under 1600 and the competitor for the "podium" and 2k50 rusher are less clamped

Lol

[mirok]

Mirok you have a point, 2's currently is, for lack of a better phrase, a shit show. There are currently top1 skilled players who farm lesser players regularly, IE: Moskito/Serennia, and it causes players to neglect to queue 2s, and instead vie for the easily accessible Solo 3s queue, as it's nearly instant and teams are randomly selected (Outside of players who abuse the 1 class per team rule to counter-queue certain players, but this generally happens at lower population hours)

I'm curious about the number of 2s games played per day vs the number of 3s games, the times at which these games are played, and who the players are who win the majority of those games. I can almost guarantee that Azie, Eaz, Moskito, Serennia, and a few others will be the prime names seen winning 2s, and there will be a long list of lesser known players who lose 1-2 games vs them and stop queueing.

There's a massive lack of diversity in 2s as a result of a low population and that's the key issue. Plus, solo 3s rewards more points per 10 games, and it yields the same rewards for less work as you can rely heavily on your team and less on individual skill in MOST cases. You're only going to see the number of players queueing solo 3s increase, and those in 2s decrease.

Personally, I'd prefer a PvP alternative to arenas and BGs both, as it's all getting quite stale with how repetitious the cycle's becoming.

My point is when same people have r1 to r4 teams with same setup and noone is actually able to pass them, you gotta think something is being doing wrong. Not gonna say anything else because that'd be dirty from me but I hope GMs actually realise what's going on and take action against that.

[lis]

Maybe you can just creat a "STEP" for player under 1600 and player above 1600

all beginner and "noob" play under 1600 and the competitor for the "podium" and 2k50 rusher are less clamped

Lol

I think you note understand my think when the "noob" or the beginner have take skill for up above 1600
they will fight against the category of 1600-2k+. There is a cotegory 1500-1600 and category 1600-2k+