Hello I admit I don’t know how the system can recognize this… but… why someone should be punished by a loss if someone literallyy throw all game?
(just had one with a reddit lucio refusing to heal all match)
there isn’t any possible solution?
We are all human sadly, and its the human element that introduces chaos to things like online team games. Reporting players who deliberately throw will always be the appropriate course of action.
Group up with reliable friends. Though this makes the games harder as you face against other group stacks.
2 Likes
This needs to be changed. Groups should be allowed to face solo players. If there’s an advantage, you climb.
I would be in agreement with this assessment, however the development team, most notably Scott Mercer, is not.
1 Like
It’s because they cater to players who are too lazy to form groups and build a team, the same reason they pushed Role Queue on everyone.
This is fair against solo players for you? Sorry but I don’t see why we should allow this, solo players shouldn’t be punished because they play in solo.
edit, personally I don’t have any rl friend that play ow, and most of the time I wanna play solo because the kind of people I meet are just raging kids.
is not that ‘‘we’’ are lazy, is just that some ppl like to play in solo.
3 Likes
I understand - I myself prefer to play solo - but I accept the consequences of doing so/any disadvantage it may put me at in a team game.
It’s like showing up to OWL with a bunch of randoms… Vancouver and expecting to do well.
1 Like
I am glad it’s not that way.
Groups often have smurfs, actually it’s very common, when I 6 stacked with my friends every other match was against at least 2 smurfs
2 Likes
I mean I don’t expect to win 100% of games, I don’t expect the team do well…
but if I have to lose just because a guy wanna play reddit lucio all the game, while the other healer is doin 2 men job, or because someone at some point just jump off the map…
well no. I’m not agree to be punished in their place.
In an individual match perspective, it doesn’t seem fair. However in building a competitive experience for a group of players in their overall “career” it is perfectly fair.
Yes groups could be carrying others, and if such a system would be in place there would have to be even more restricted grouping rules including reducing the skill rating variance allowance AND not allowing relatively low-XP level players from grouping up with high ones. However that is the nature of team-based competition.
In the end, there is no perfect system, but my personal argument is that we as players still don’t have 100% perfect control of our match experience. Grouping up is a difficult option in its current state because it plays against groups AND the queue times are even more severe, and that I find to be unfair.
On a side note, Valorant has deliberately formed their matchmaker to not have group priority matchmaking, while I have no intention to switch games (I am not a fan of tactical shooters), I am looking forward to seeing how the matchmaking philosophy impacts the community perception of that game.
1 Like
Excellent, Riot definitely has the rioght (sorry) idea here.
Why does VALORANT allow any premade size for ranked? Why not a true solo queue?
It's important to us that competitive matchmaking in VALORANT is focused on teamplay, because we believe that playing as a team is a major component in your overall mastery of the game. If players have a group of teammates they perform well with, we don't want to discourage them and set a precedent that the real test of skill is in solo play.
Having a solo queue can easily lead to that becoming the definitive test of someone's skills and the primary way to play competitively. We've opted instead to allow players to play at any team size they prefer. We also think it’s valuable for players to search for good teammates now for competitive play, so when higher-stakes competition becomes available, they already have teammates they can rely on.
If you are playing solo or with smaller group sizes, we’ve worked to make it so our matchmaking will favor placing players against similar premade team sizes. Also, outside of playing at the highest rank, we’ve included measurement on a small degree of ‘performance’ in determining how your rank increases or decreases. So if you perform exceptionally well and have an outsized contribution to your team’s win, you‘ll rank up faster.Overwatch devs, take a leaf out of their book!
You might want to use the quote tags and not the code tags. Things like apostrophes mess with the coloring the text due to how code formatting works.
Also if I am reading this right, I am mistaken and Valorant is running their matchmaker nearly identical to Overwatch including having group priority matchamking. I swear they said groups of different sizes would face off differently if needed for matchmaking.
1 Like
There’s a good reason for it (which is rarely something I say about the dev teams’ decisions).
Especially in lower ranks, you see a lot of boosting, which means more smurfs. Not really fun for the solo-queue players that are appropriately ranked and already have to deal with the solo smurfs.
Believe me if valorant don’t look like an old fps game and is not just about camp corners I will have left here.
I wonder why is so hard to work more on comp issues and less on owl or other useless things like voice line spams