at vs rt genius
1 Like
So which is it?
Since the patch, there’s been claims that AT and RT are queued together, and claims that AT and RT are not queued together
…and how both are the wrong choice no less.
AT vs RT has been a thing ever since Reforged launched in beta
the original RoC/TFT never allowed RT vs AT it was always separate, the only reason AT was not more popular is due to people having connection issues with portforwarding (before Reforged)
I’m pretty certain the current Bnet is still allowing AT vs RT and I doubt that it will ever change (also same goes for W3C servers… I wish one of them would stop allowing it or give us a choice somewhere)
IMO I do think it is very unfair to the RT players… Recently though, I’ve heard rumors that the new ranking system will no longer match low-ranked-RT-players against high-ranked-AT-players, so I guess its a little more fair… However, some people think it gives a bigger advantage to some RT players now (lol not really though)
I just think the current Matchmaking system sucks, its not fully tested, probably incomplete, and it does not do a very good job of balancing teams… I played an AT game just the other day against KoreaKorea (#1 ranked player) and I’m certainly not a pro lmao
AT vs RT is fine for competitive players, but it is really very bad for introducing new players to the game and it will turn some people away 
the only thing its good for is maybe improving search times slightly
Solution:
IMO there should be a window/popup that says “Your search times are taking longer than expected, would you like to allow matching against AT players? Yes/No” and it should only appear after a player has been searching for more than 2 or 3 minutes
They definitely can be. In theory, this would be kind of okay if the matching system weighed MMR more in favor of the non-AT team to offset the inherent advantages of playing as a group. But that’s definitely not happening and this is leading to early quitting often.
The intention is so that everyone finds games faster, but it also tanks match quality, so it’s probably not worth.
This serves no-one, RT can never win and AT can never lose. It’s not fun. In the end no one plays so it doesn’t even accomplish its supposed purpose of delaying search times.
Since allowing cross region play, search times shouldn’t be as much an issue anyway. This change should be reverted.
1 Like
always 3v4 2v4.win?never
1 Like
we need checkbox for enabling/disabling RT vs AT search.
4 Likes
Hyperbole doesn’t make good arguments, this isn’t true and you know it. Do premade teams have an advantage? Yes. Can they ever lose? Absolutely they can.
Please reform your argument without false absolutes. 
For me AT vs RT is a good feature and must stay. Maybe a confirm window asking on wich queue type a player wants to be queued in (allow AT vs RT → short queue time / doesn’t allow → RT vs RT only queue - longer queue time) could be a little improvement.
if they can’t play at, they will definitely play RT,ur wrong
before trying to make any argument please remember that we are talking about a company that implements an Elo system in a team game^^
do other companies do the same?
Sure!
…and maybe they are all wrong?^^
maths… such an unknown subject^^
PS
let’s remember when this game used to record all different teams to get a score… ah… the good old times…
Except when the hyperbole changes a fact to a falsehood, it suddenly becomes a lot less effective. You could have said “doesn’t often” or “will rarely” instead of “never” and it would have been totally appropriate. Hyperobole is exaggeration, not changing true into false.
“never” is entirely false as you absolutely can and will lose as a group. If groups always won, no one would ever queue solo in the first place (and then, well, your odds become 50% as they normally would lol)
And really the higher rated you are, the less impactful having a premade is. That’s probably why they were okay with this, becuase it just means the people in the premade will rise up to where they should be faster. You’re still limited by you and yours’s skill so there’s still a limit to how far you will go depending on that.
1 Like
Well, I actually agree that this kind of system is inherently flawed in a group setting. It worked at least somewhat better when ATs were pre-formed and had a single rating per team as they did originally. But now that’s out the window and it’s just individual ratings whether you’re in a premade or not. But what’s at issue here is not so much the rating system itself it’s including parties in a queue that never originally had them.
There’s a few other factors to consider here. AT-only queues are going to be slow. Further, because they are slow they will also be easier to manipulate and win-trade with, particularly since the matching system is totally fine putting the same people in a game multiple times. By combining teams into a queue with solo players, the quality of matches will be degraded (though I believe there are ways to offset this, such as by pitting a premade against higher-rated solo players); but the queue system also becomes less trivial to manipulate and games happen more quickly. Is that worth the match quality loss? The team seems to think so, though the playerrs seem largely against it.
Just playing devil’s advocate here, considering all possible angles.
Because how you say things matters. It’s not an obsession, it’s basic conversation and logic skills. The more imprecise you are, the more room there is for people to come to the wrong conclusion. And sure, you say “no one wins 100%” of the time now, but the language of your post implies exactly that. If you said that before, there would have been no room for anyone to counter-argue you.
Wrong. It isn’t a matter of intelligence at all. Entire wars have been fought over misunderstandings and language inaccuracies. Is everyone who ever had a misunderstanding just a total idiot?
In fact, the more intelligent you are, the more you analyze all the possibilities. Your post is just a thinly veiled personal attack.
I do understand and this topic not being complicated is your opinion. There are many facets to why things will or won’t work.
This is a falsehood and my other posts make very clear that I have useful and insightful things to add to the topic. You are deliberately ignoring that and simply engaging me on this one tiny detail to distract from that fact. I won’t have it any longer.
I wrote several paragraphs analyzing the possible rationale for the decision made to have the system work the way it does. It isn’t an agreement or disagreement with it, it is exactly the kind of insight you claim I haven’t given. And clearly, you haven’t read any of it because you could not make that kind of statement having read it. More than likely you’re just offended at the fact that I was correct in calling you out for your false statements- even if you made them knowing they were false and specifically assuming that other people would read it the way you intended.
Remember, just because you don’t like and disagree with something, doesn’t mean you represent everyone, nor does it mean there wasn’t a rational reason for why it was done in the first place.
Making childish insults doesn’t add weight to your argument, you might want to keep that in mind.
I’m not making anything up to argue about. I mean, everyone makes something up to argue about when they start a thread. I contributed to the thread with seeing-all-sides insight. Again: Just because you’re set in your opinion doesn’t mean there isn’t other perspectives, n or does it mean there wasn’t a rational reason for what was done. That is where I tried to provide some insight. You’re just mad and focusing on my calling you out for your bad attempt at hyperbole that could have been so easily fixed had you taken 2 more seconds to think about it.
You have no data to support this hypothesis.
But that wasn’t even what I was trying to argue. Everything exists on a spectrum. Yes, teams and solos together is not ideal- But it also isn’t as bad as your terribly worded hyperbole implies. And there are other factors to consider. All I’m trying to tell you is the team clearly weighed a variety of factors and decided that the degredation to match quality caused by matching groups and solos was offset by other factors, such as preventing direct cheating and manipulation, and getting matches to happen where none might happen otherwise.
Try to understand that it isn’t all black and white. Nor am I saying they made the right decision. I’m explaining their rationale. Nothing more.
For the record, War3 is far, far from the only game that does this. League of Legends has two ranked queues: a solo-only queue and a “flex queue” which allows solos and groups of 2, 3, or 5. If flex queue was pre-made only, the queue times would be very long, especially at higher ratings.
Overwatch also mixes groups and solos- and usually, the team with more solo players is matched to have a slightly higher SR.
In short: The devs of all three of these games, and others, decided that allowing this to happen was a fair tradeoff for reducing queue times and cheating. Is War3’s situation substantially different? I can’t say. Like I said, I’m just explaining the reasoning behind it. You can say it’s flawed if you want, and provide a rational counterargument. But calling me “edgelord” and unintellegent is not the way to make that case.
1 Like
No. You do not speak for everyone. Stop pretending you’re some sort of representative. And stop being deliberately inflammatory. My explanation is neither “cringy”, nor inaccurate.
Again: This is an explanation of rationale. Not an agreement. You don’t seem to understand that. Their rationale may be flawed, but it is important insight, whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
I AM NOT DEFENDING ANYTHING. READ THE -BLANK-ING POST. You’re so blinded by the anti-blizzard hate train that you can’t even respond to reasonable discussion. Understanding is important to good arguments. If you want to have a well constructed argument that will be understood and agreed with by a majority, then you should be covering all the bases. Consider all the possibilities, and then explain why your possibility is the better one. This is how logic works.
If you can not respond in a civilized manner, do not respond at all. You’re the only one who looks bad when you argue with insults.
1 Like
there is actually a good solution for the at vs rt (that is not removing it all at once).
let’s see if and when they’ll figure it out… ^^
You have no idea how refreshing I just found your comment. 
Now: I’m not against them trying making them seperate again. But I suspect that we’ll have a lot of “I can’t find any games” threads (that have nothing to do with the previous ones for a different reason )