Question:
Now that we have had RSS in our hands for a bit now, let me get your thoughts on this. First, when people asked for solo queue RSS is not what anyone had in mind of course, it was just solo queue 3v3. I like RSS as a game mode, but would just a single game 3v3 solo queue be better?
Here is my reasoning: Right now if you get a bad lobby, bots, afkers, toxic players or lets say less skilled players you are stuck with them for 6 rounds. No getting out of it without getting punished. In a single game 3v3 format you are in and out. Get one of those lobbies, cool it’s over fast. I wonder if this would shorten queue times even. Maybe even help with the healer issue a little?
It’s still bad though. Bad map, bad lobby, and you’re just stuck. Sucks but there’s not really any better way to balance it because a one and done is even less likely to give you a fair shot.
I am not sure about this for these reasons you said. Instead of you being stuck for 6 rounds it’s 1. Idk in my mind know I just think it far less punishing to sit in queue for one round of a bad lobby than 6.
I feel like SS is meant to be spammed to balance those experiences out. But instead, the queues are so long that people weigh each bad experience more. Sometimes SS wins are based a lot on the comp you’re with too.
I’m a healer so I don’t have the queues but even then, we go 3-3 and gain 0 rating often. Or we get thrown into lobbies with people 400+ rating above us and we still gain 0 rating when we go even.
It’s odd right now.
but you get rounds both with and against them, so it’s not necessarily clear if 1 and done queues will average out to be any different. e.g. what if you queue against the bot 3x in a row
personally I don’t mind the current format, you can get a feel for each player and adapt accordingly
Of course they did. They just haven’t tried to do much about it because most of the incentives suggested all kind of pose their own set of issues. Or maybe they just don’t care.
I think they overvalued some players’ feedback that healing’s low popularity is a simple game design issue. The game designer’s elegant solution is to say “well we’ll just make healers fun and cc less impactful and the problem is solved”, but healing/supportive roles are fundamentally unpopular in pretty much every multiplayer game I’ve played.
Like back in the day League of Legends supports were literal cannon fodder, usually 3-4 levels below everyone else in the match. Riot put a lot of effort into making the role more interactive/impactful, and succeeded to some degree, but it still remains the most unpopular role by a discernable margin.
It is simply more fun for most players to actively kill other players. I’m sure there are some extravagant solutions they could cook up given enough time, but the game is bleeding players now. They need to bite their pride and put some mounts or real rewards in the healer lootbox
Wonder how much faster queues would be if people weren’t locked in for 6 rounds. It’s mainly annoying when you get a healer or a dps that starts to throw because they don’t like someone. Had a Disc last night get mad at the Warrior after one round, then didn’t heal anyone the next, and it screwed me over too. Would really like to see how fast it would be if people aren’t locked into 6 rounds and you’re just in and out.
No RSS is an abomination we didn’t ask for. A 6 round rotation through all the combinations of specs invites people to ragequit and makes the q forever. And the 20% dampening makes healers hate the experience.
All we wanted was soloque. A 3v3 matchmaking system. Maybe you could use a form to select what specs you want to play with, but not totally necessary. With a 1-round solo que we wouldn’t have these ridiculous wait times. Healers would be shuffled out way faster. And there’s no rage quitters leaving halfway through, there’s only 1 round.
It’s like player housing - we asked for housing and they gave us garrisons. And then when it didn’t work out, they said “oh I guess players don’t actually want housing”. NO. We just didn’t want this terrible implementation.
Yeah, and there’s plenty of people that’d zone into a healerless 2v2 and see the 29th feral and/or rogue team and know that they’re just going to lose.
The increased wait times would be optional for those looking for something specific. If the wait is too long you could always broaden the requirements. Or if you just have to play with something specific you’d eat a longer q. Either way it’s optional.
Well, random yolo comp 2s or 3s would’ve just had people leaving off coinflip matches.
[/quote]
Idk if that’s the case. Every time I have left a shuffle it’s because after a few rounds I’m clearly going to go 0-6 and it feels like a waste of time to stay. If it’s just one round you don’t know you’re going to lose yet.
Ya I don’t know about being able to choose who you play with either, but if you are giving this choice it would kind of be on the player for limiting who they play with at least. But it would also up queues in general as well.
I’m not sure soloque makes sense for 2v2. If it was done there would probably need to be healers. And bad 2v2 specs would probably avoid the bracket.
Yes and no because you expect to get random comps in a solo queue system. One round is still better than 6 imo. But also this is where harsher punishments for leaving should be coming into play.
They just haven’t tried to do much about it because most of the incentives suggested all kind of pose their own set of issues. Or maybe they just don’t care.