it’s closed/patented because, gasp, blizzard activision make money from it
the rest of your post makes no sense, why would you want a random grab bag of tiers for a comp match?
maybe you just expect a completely different kind of match than what comp mode is designed to give you. have you tried QP or the arcade modes? they may be more like the kind of game you’re looking for.
haha yeah i know, i’ve seen it happen. he was called receipts in the same extended ascii text last time i watched one of them.
Right. Nothing to patent if it’s fair and unrigged. Fair and unrigged are known open/public domain methods.
Because after 4+ years and 6000+ comp wins, I’d rather take my chances with/vs. a statistically average backdrop of players and normie-equivalent matches, than wait in line for a rigged swamp I’m expected to sweat like a monster for 15sr at 610sr night after night.
Yeah a match that isn’t rigged. That is hosted and labelled properly.
Same guy, same warped attitude where he wants to be boosted up because “I won 4000 games in my career” we’ll just ignore the 9000 he lost along the way.
I don’t even bother replying to him or discussing with him. Trolls like him will continue to troll no matter how much you call them out or how often you prove them wrong. These guys are all the same if you disagree with them you’re either a fanboy, a paid off shill, or work at Blizzard.
We’ll just ignore that SR is supposed to be a SKILL RATING of players by raw talent/skill, not longterm winrate. You have to lose a lot to get better. And I’ve lost enough to be better than the bottom 0.01% of wherever you have me classified “by all players ranked by skill”.
High bronze at least i mean come on.
Same shilling for a 4+ year no-reset season1 smurf ladder using their blackbox patented engagement making. There really is no defending it.
I said “fair/good” which you changed to just “fair.” But for your rebuttal to work, you sort of had to omit the word “good,” otherwise your comment becomes “If it’s even handed, it’s fair/good” which is of course untrue. So in a real sense, you’re reframing my statement and responding to something I never said.
i omit it because it’s a value judgement and not something we can actually measure. it’s emotive, not descriptive.
It’s not a value judgement, it’s a qualifier. I didn’t say the system was fair/good or otherwise. I asked someone’s opinion if it was. My statement was not a value judgement since I placed no value on anything.
And even if it was value judgement, one would answer accordingly based on the qualifier. If you want to ask a different question, ask it (you were not the original recipient of the question, you’re a 3rd party to this conversation), but changing my question to something not asked and then answering a different question is non-sensical and literally irrelevant.
This would be like asking someone “Is Disneyland good?” and they say “I will say that Disneyland is a place. I will not answer the question because ‘good’ is a value judgement.” It’s an absurdity.
What are you qualifying with the description “good”? From the original question it looked like you were using it as synonymous with “fair” ie. a fair system is a good one. This makes it redundant and this entire tangent pointless.
(Asking someone “is Disneyland good” is a pretty bad example, btw. You’d necessarily have to make the assumption that they mean “do you enjoy the experience of visiting Disneyland”, because there’s a ton of other things that the question could mean depending on the context such as whether the actions of the company are ethical, to wit I would bring up the example of Mulan being filmed in Xinjiang and using the forced labor of genocide victims as a Not Good Thing)
Now is the time, and I’m currently 2221 sr up from 1400 last season. lol
This is not our first dialogue, and I’m now coming to understand that talking to you is not really worth the while. Your thinking and wording is sloppy, and because of that, things devolve into a meta conversation about the conversation rather than a discussion about the topic.
What I’m qualifying – is in the quote! Why would you need to ask me this?
And a slash between two words doesn’t mean they’re synonymous. Moreover fair and good were used together to provide context and to avoid the mistake you made anyway: only considering whether something was evenhanded without also being desirable. That’s precisely why I didn’t just use the word fair, but fair and good.
Asking someone “Is Disneyland good” and their refusal to answer the question as posed because of the word good was a fine example to demonstrate the problem with your response. Whether “good” is adequate or not at best requires a follow up question “what do you mean by good?” “define good” etc, not supplying the answer to a question that wasn’t asked. Again, that is literally of no value, it’s irrelevant. It takes the conversation into a random direction.
You said the question wasn’t descriptive. Are you under the impression that every question must be or even should be? If the question can be answered “yes/no” then the conversation progresses as intended, according to why I asked it. Whether you feel the question was sufficient as stated is clearly irrelevant, since the motive for asking the question was mine and not yours.
You’re projecting. And if you’re going to get personal because you’re out of your depth, I’m done with you.
I didn’t get personal, I made an observation.
Nope, definitely still within my depth.
Played my OQ placements (Plat) yesterday. It was one of the worst experiences this year.
8/10 games were total stomps. In these games, my team went 0-5-1 or 1-5-0 nearly all the time, while the enemy played a perfectly valid 2-2-2 comp. I really tried playing a tank or healer for the team, but got shut down immediately.
Okay, it’s OQ and one of the most common issues without role lock, but why did I play only AGAINST 2-2-2 comps and not WITH one? By random chance it should have been 50:50 for both sides, to either play coordinated or chaotic. But even when I made the first step and went tank/sup, nobody followed or picked the most stupid heroes in combination.
But…
… I think it’s not ONLY the system. The players are also very much accountable for this misery – apart from smurfs and hard throwers.
People below Diamond just play the game like a typical FPS. They don’t have to be mechanically bad to be hardstuck or unintentionally soft-throwing. They just play Overwatch like Quake, CoD or CS:GO and only think in 1-vs-1 situations.
Their main concern is how they can secure the KILL – not the FIGHT…
That leads to overextending, soloing, trickling, getting killed out of position and picked all the time. In their mind, it’s just FFA deathmatch.
I just don’t get it, why people refuse to accept, that a “strategy” (how they call it) simply doesn’t work. I really have to assume a mental handicap and some sort of learning disability, if you pick Genji and charge into the enemy again and again, only to get hardcountered by Winston, Moira, Torb and Sym. Is this really fun for them? Do they actually realize that they are playing the game wrong?
Even if you are in your “correct” SR range, these games happen way too often. It’s not about climbing per se, it’s about these unpredictable team fails, where you can’t really do anything, beside watching the tragedy unfold before your eyes. You know, because you actually ARE where you belong and CAN’T hardcarry. But the rest of the team is either throwing or feeding.
In short: Teamplay always wins. And teamplay is totally rare in lower ranks. Everybody just choses their favorite hero flavor (Dark Ninja is sooo kewl) and weapon and starts feeding.
Yeah OQ is actualy pretty bad, i definitely agree with that. Toxicity, non stop blaming, like twice more leavers than in normal comp, unbalanced games and players in it often dont care and play it like deathmatch.
You could expect 50:50 if you played like 1000 matches. 8 games is way way low number to have 50:50 chance for 222 in open q.
System cannot control decision of players to give you people who will make good 222 comp for you. You should not be even expect that in OQ. So why play it and be salty about it? Role Q was introduced just because of OQ faild with making proper comp setups.
Placement matches. No intention in playing any more than that, because even these 10 plat games were unbearable.
Is this really a good user experience for a product? To have absolutely no fun for two hours?
The only logical consequence would be to just stop playing Overwatch. It looks like most of the sane players have already said goodbye.
Not really thats why I play role q primarily. Open q is not so bad because of system or blizzard. Players made it bad because they had too much freedom in it.
It’s not about OQ vs. RQ, because the core problems are quite the same.
People without a competitive mindset playing competitive.
And people who exploit that issue.
(and a crappy matchmaker 
)
Players making terrible comp in open q is not about having good or bad comp mindset. They can be simply dps mains and it is not their problem to make proper comp. They can have good comp mindset but if they would pick support, they would basicly throw on that role for example.
Only good comp mindset for me is that player want to win. Its up to play how he/she will achieve it.
Single word reply 
I love you