no, my friend, you cant. nor will i waste either of our time letting you try. all i can say is i hope you never get the opportunity to have any form of influence on any game,
4 Likes
my resume was just submitted yesterday
Y[quote=“Tactician-11177, post:8, topic:388831”]
I don’t
[/quote]
Fair enough. We have nothing more to discuss on your “perfect balance” post. We don’t agree, and that is okay.
I don’t know about the purest for of OW being free to play, but I’m fine with OW going F2P and don’t mind discussing the game in that fashion.
Hypothetically, Blizz could pay every player $10.00 dollar for every competitive match they win, and OW would still have throwers, leavers, trolls, and griefers. “Some people just want to watch the world burn.”
The current ladder is a great competitive system that places players approximately where they belong based on their skill.
Different mediums, tactician. Sorry.
And I will read it if I come across it. I love reading.
Willfully and unwillfully. My one goal is to improve and climb with as many heroes and roles as possible.
No, revisit our discussions. We go back and forth before reaching an impasse.
3 Likes
You’re only making me more happy you aren’t on the development team
6 Likes
and my system would do the same. In the current system, someone may be 1,394,563rd away from the best OW player on the ladder. With my system, that same person would be 1,394,563rd away from the best OW player on the ladder.
you’re the one who’s missing out
I think this is the most likely answer:
3 Likes
if you don’t post on my threads, that will be one less reply I can make
Admittedly, I have no idea what this number is, man.
1 Like
Don’t derail please. We’re discussing your terrible ideas and the motivation behind them. Thanks.
1 Like
One million, three hundred ninety-four thousand, five hundred sixty three. Tactictian’s target post count, iirc.
2 Likes
Well this isn’t very nice. We may not agree, but let’s be respectful.
2 Likes
But what’s the “rd?” That is the part I can’t figure out.
2 Likes
you’re missing the point
the prime directive of the ladder is to list all the participants in order, from best to worst. (how matches are made should obviously be people of close rank, but you’re always allowed to derank if you want)
I guess the main problem is that I don’t see any harm (in the grand scheme of things) in letting a GM play in a bronze game
That transforms the pronunciation of the trailing “3” into “third” - e.g. One million, three hundred ninety-four thousand, five hundred sixty third.
2 Likes
responding to an infraction is not an infraction
But Seagull said it is, so I think I’m going to listen to him over you.
3 Likes
I don’t know your rank, but I know mine—plat. I have played with and against GM players, and I have played with bronze players. Empirically, I can tell you that a bronze doesn’t belong in my game anymore than I belong in a GM game. The skill variance is way to great. I will argue that Blizz agrees with me because a bronze cannot queue with me, and I cannot queue with a GM.
3 Likes
my profile is open, I’m 1900
3 high schoolers, 1 college kid, and 1 NBA player on each team would make for a good basketball game to watch. and the highschoolers would make hoops
but there is a difference here, the highschoolers haven’t full developed
that’s not true in a ladder, if a blizzard official came to everyone’s house before they played a game of competitive and properly ID’d them before they play a game, then I could see things your way.
but until that happens, I say let GMs play in bronze
I disagree with blizz too. maybe if I saw behind the scenes, I would change my mind.
Here I got my answer right now: Currently any GM can buy a new account for $20 and pretend to play poorly all the way down to 900sr. then they could just go 50/50 every from then on out. So it’s very easy for a GM to play in low Bronze.
I play with friends and family, but he does have a point that having the ability to choose your teammates can give you an advantage, and that isn’t fair in a competitive environment.
A good competition is like chess, where both sides start off with the same pieces. There’s data out there that shows that players who group up in competitive win more matches than those who do not. What this means is that even if the match maker only puts groups up against groups of equal size, players who group will still be higher rank than those who don’t, in comparison to their individual skill level.
1 Like
Chess is an example of a symmetrical, 1v1 game. Overwatch is an asymmetrical, team-based game. If you don’t prefer the kind of competition that Overwatch provides, that’s one thing - but there’s no comparison to be made here. That’s one of the reasons why Overwatch doesn’t use the Elo rating system.
2 Likes