Please, fix the quick match

General Discussion
21

To my knowledge, only two people on my own team were matched, but it’s still nonsensical to not give us a ranged assassin slot. #blizzardbalance.

And sure, every game like this has the ‘tools’ to win, but a team with 5 assassins vs a tank/healer/assassin team has the ‘tools’ to win too. Personally, matches like this aren’t fun, and they’re typically uphill. Our Leoric could have handled ChoGall, but the fact we had to be a cluster wasn’t advantageous to us.

But that’s a hill that’s been fought on too much. Blizzard obviously doesn’t care, and thankfully these type of comical match-ups don’t happen too often.

22

except they do, that’s why these things try to weigh priorities that other people themselves don’t care about, and then they flaunt it at others.

I’d almost use past-tense but the latest patch attempted to change something with matching – notable for storm league getting broken – but the general bottom line is people disregard matching, look for something else to blame, and when given additional information, they choose to double-down on the fault-finding. That’s why these topics are “fix matching” instead of “what I tips I can use…” as if no other option exists to quell ignorance and woe.

Free will still exists, so regardless of how the game tries to match – as direct mirrors are ‘generally’ hated vehemently so those options is minimized – it’s still down to players to make use of a tool, not the other way around.

23

I’m curious, did you use this same rhetoric when QM matching was absolutely broken years ago?

24

I think the QM matchmaker could have some improvements made, but as it stands now, your options are to deal with its randomness, or you can close out of HOTS during 5 second countdown where you see your team if you don’t like the comp.

25

That will keep being an issue as long the game is free. What solo que goes for it wont happen. Solo these days are just canon foder for stacked teams who want same que times as solos gets.

26

Oh I deal with it.

Again, these matches are very rare. I just say so to contradict anyone saying the matchmaker is perfectly accurate.

1 Like
27

then you’d need to find someone that actually says that instead of pretending that they did and ignoring what they actually write.

A hammer might improvise as a mattock, but it makes for a terrible saw. Several matchmaking complaints do not understand the ‘tool’, and default to near-mindless complaints that would be just as pronounced if the game didn’t have any match making.

The capacity for people to complain does not mean they have identified a serviceable problem, but a number of topics about QM convince themselves that by complaining they have excused themselves from being a contributing factor to the fun/fairness of their games. That’s why the ‘meme’ tends to be stuff like “if I win it’s skill, if I lose it’s rigged” – a sentiment finding itself becoming more visible in ‘real life’ these days – or ‘all games have bad matching’.

The problem with HotS is that it was not built for QM, or rather, QM is a terrible way to play HotS. So any adjustment that still allows players to chose the hero they play before the match is found is simply not going to function the way common-complaints think. Hero talents do not provide the variety needed to make divergent roles (though that approach is considered to have ‘failed’) and ‘needed’ roles do not make up enough of the game’s roster to provide the demand needed for them.

But even if that supply existed, the same complaints would persist as that issue isn’t what topics like these are actually trying to address.

Regardless of matching or not, the fundamental issue of online multiplayer is that select players are not playing the same ‘game’ as everyone else in their match. Matching cannot fix that as it’s simply a tool for sorting numbers, and the means to repeal ‘free will’ or correct ‘human nature’. It’s far and away from ‘perfect’, but it’s also not the source people cite for the scapegoat addictions.

28

Given that my initial comment was to the assertion that the matchmaker never deviates, I haven’t ignored anything. The movement of the goalposts to explain away this assertion doesn’t contradict my initial point (that it does, in fact, deviate from matching key roles).

Again, I repeat my question. Did you use this exact same rhetoric before matchmaking was adjusted to (mostly) match key roles? Back in the days where one team could be matched with a hero and another team without one? Because even Blizzard clearly agreed that matches can, in fact, be extremely unfair.

Not every loss is a skill issue. Some are indeed bad match-ups that come from uphill battles. Are they winnable? Sure. However, that’s not the point. It would honestly be very easy to fix this and make sure that match rules are followed 100% of the time, even in theory. If two ranged assassins aren’t found, match doesn’t start. The only exception I see is if one team is a five man team and voluntarily doesn’t pick any key roles, because that’s on them.

Do I think OP’s suggestion is good? No. Not in the slightest. Part of QM’s fun is improvising to a degree. However, I’ve always been an advocate that every match should have one tank, one healer, one ranged attacker.

29

What exactly do you think happened? I don’t think you actually understand the rules as demonstrated by your Cho example, or even what used to happen. The game has NEVER matched ranged assassins.

30

Well tell that to Xen. My point was that they don’t all the time.

31

I agree on this. Some matches you cant just tell anyone if you did X thing instead of Y then you would have won. Any uphill battle where the opponent steamroles your team in every possible way to the point it does not matter what you plan to do. You will always get countered. Only way you would win is if enemy team started to show mercy on you or went afk. In any scenario you would have lost anyway no matter what. Thats why most people can easy figure out how a match will end just by comparing team comps on loading screen. They know they lost but still tries to ball it out and still lose hard even while giving all they have.

Waiting time is your biggest enemy when it comes to balacing a game mode that prio fast ques. People select a hero and expect both balanced games and fast ques. Ye that wont happen even in a dream world. Thats where people need to just accept that they cant get everything they point at and be realistic. UR would have been a great mode to compensate for lack of hero choices for more balanced games if people truly wanted that.

You need to sacrifies one thing to gain something better. But sadly thats not what people want. Hence why you got all the people complaining everytime something happens to thier fav mode that they dont like. And Blizzard tries to cater to them all but failed.

32

Xen never made the claim that they did though. And you are the one who is complaining that they should be or somehow implying that they used to?

This applies to you so much. You have no idea what the matching rules even are and when confronted with the actual information, you double down on your own ignorance and blame the comp, when there’s nothing inherently wrong with the comp.

33

Volun, I’m aware you still have a hate hard on for me, but if you’re gonna talk passed me and not read what I say in full, then go away.

34

I asked you a question, you haven’t answered it and are sidestepping, what exactly do you think happened with matchmaking? I would imagine you didn’t actually know, and you’re moving goalposts just like you’re doing with Xen.

35

You asked a question on assumptions and proceeded to lambast on my “complaints” even though I have specifically I play my games and don’t give up.

Xen previously said in a post that the matchmaker matches tanks, healers, and ranged assassins. I pointed out this was false. He then later clarified it is indeed not always the case.

On the matter of skill, I simply pointed out that not all losses are “skill issue”. Some matches are just genuinely stacked against you. I still try my best in these matches, but it does happen. People who dismiss all complaints add nothing of value to the conversation.

Try reading and comprehending what I say in full before flinging out accusations.

36

I never said that you give up, merely that you don’t know rules and you’re scapegoating comps.

Well he is wrong as written. Ranged assassin has never been an essential role. What might happen though is if your team does not have a tank or bruiser, then neither will your team, which can as a consequence seem like there is ranged assassin matching, but it’s not because the system tries to match ranged assassins. It’s sort of what is just “left” besides melee assassins.

You would know that if YOU read carefully.

But if you consider melee assassins front line, some people use that as an excuse to say this is unfair too.

37

I’m not scapegoating anything, buddy boy. I have never once said “My loss was unfair and it shouldn’t count against me.

“Not all matches are perfectly balanced” and “I can use a match to improve regardless of circumstances”. Can be simultaneously true.

Xen specifically said the matchmaker treated ranged dps as an essential role. He only corrected himself later. Which is fine. I’m not holding anyone accountable (I don’t care), but these strawmans and projections are getting old.

38

Some heroes are not meant to be assassins or bruisers but rather a new role and the game should balance these even in team composition.
Even if you get a team composed of assassins (ranged and / or melee) and tanks but no pushers VS a team with at least 2-3 pushers, you can kill, ofc, but you simply cannot have the same push power like the enemy.
Think of some Azmodan, Murky and Zagara (or any pusher combination), the game is lost. OFC it’s not 100% the case, but most probably you will get your base eaten while you chase some other heroes.
Even if you try to split push, you will most likely lose in the long term.
Just my 2 cents.

39

Yea, you’ve been trying to talk past me in your posts here.

The initial reply you gave me has misunderstood my post here in addressing another poster: I quoted their claim, and I addressed that that specific match did not ignore the “role rules” that the poster claimed to have done.

One of the uses of quotes is to establish direct context. That is why i said “the match” and not “the matchmaker” as you have apparently chosen to read. Or rather, you chose to ignore what was written in favor of putting something else there instead.

I even replied to you with:

which indicates that yes, QM rules are going to deviate, and I have since relayed specific examples of when it does that, to which you seem to have ignored what I have posted in favor of trying to continue to stress your thesis that misses what I actually post instead of some other strawman. That’s part of why I could already predict an example you would post before you actually posted it.

You took my reply to thus mean I said matching is ‘perfectly accurate’ – which I didn’t – and I addressed that with my previous post. The posts read like you chose to ignore that too.

Then stomp doing them. You’re trying to read that other people are being inherently wrong instead of considering they might be consistent in what is being posted.

My point is that, as ‘best’ it can, matching in QM will stick to select rules, but if it deviates there are reasons for that, and they’re usually not the ones people claim on one-off complaint topics, esp since these posters refuse to give relevant details on the match.

Furthermore, some players refuse to read into these things to understand how matching works, and instead make disconnected complaints about it instead. They generally don’t want to know more, they want validation for their opinion, and they can disregard what people write in favor of projecting something else to suit their claims instead.

When people don’t want to know more, then the ‘skill issue’ tends to be ones they didn’t consider, but also ones that the ‘matchmaker’ cannot influence since ‘free will’ still trumps the results of games more so than team compositions.

That’s part of why I’ve not directly addressed your question about matching prior to matching having rules. Asking that seems to far disconnected from what I’m actually writing that that should have clued yourself into realizing how much you were strawmanning this.

  • Initially, Call of the Nexus also introduced a set of matchmaking rules that guaranteed a tank, a healer and a ranged assassin in every team composition. The shortage of players willing to queue as healers and tanks, however, caused massive rise in queue times for other roles, leading to this part of the update to be soon reverted.

https://heroesofthestorm.fandom.com/wiki/Quick_Match

The ‘call of the nexus’ function (the XP bonus) will still occasionally offer the boost for ranged assassins. So yes, there was a time where ranged assassins are ‘essential’, but in reading over the article again, it also holds that the older rules don’t actually specify that ranged assassins will be matched outside of the initial Call of the Nexus feature on ensured matching. Due to the over-saturation of assassins, it may only be really likely that both teams (minus parties) could have at one.

However, there is also speculation that select heroes have other matching exceptions, or rather, lower priority rules, but I haven’t seen a consistent source for tracking those.

e.g. in previous patches of the game, Arthas isn’t matched as a tank.

40

You blamed your comp on why you lost. That is scapegoating. Advocating for a reversal of a win, something I never said, is not only a straw man but irrelevant.