Why would you have left FAF?

@RedX That's how the system works though? But first of all, the "0" wasn't a zero rated player. It only shows 0 for the very first game they play. The rating is actually global-400 or smth like that iirc.
So the 900 is accurate. The 2000 global should be like 1600 ranked if it was his first game and it is possible to get matched if you wait long enough since the rating range increases a bit over time.

So yes. It's a general problem with newer queues that ppl tend to be ~300 pts underrated, but that's smth every game has and is mostly gone now since 2v2 isn't that new anymore. However it does still happen as you can see.

@sladow-noob said in Why would you have left FAF?:

@RedX That's how the system works though? But first of all, the "0" wasn't a zero rated player. It only shows 0 for the very first game they play. The rating is actually global-400 or smth like that iirc.
So the 900 is accurate. The 2000 global should be like 1600 ranked if it was his first game and it is possible to get matched if you wait long enough since the rating range increases a bit over time.

So yes. It's a general problem with newer queues that ppl tend to be ~300 pts underrated, but that's smth every game has and is mostly gone now since 2v2 isn't that new anymore. However it does still happen as you can see.

I'm not I understand what you're saying here. Regardless of being underrated across the board or not, the game put both better players on the same team by a large margin. A 1200 and 1000 vs 1400 and 2000 makes no sense. I'm sure somewhere in the bowels of the rating system it made sense, but that doesn't make it any less demoralizing when that's what you get, especially after so many failed launches. Is it actual problem? Idk, honestly. Just saying I understand where people are coming from.

But one of them was 900 rated in 2v2 or not? Global rating is only important for 'setting up' the starting rank so ppl don't start at 0, but the system sees them as 900 and 1600 ranked, not as 1400 and 2000 ranked.

RedX, are you talking about the game you won? Your 1200 global teammate won against the 2k and 1,4k globals (both from DualGap of course). The game didn't look unbalanced, you just got killed fast because you overextended with your com. So pretty much a complaint, especially considering you even complained about your teammate in-game.

https://replay.faforever.com/21079317

For anyone who wants to watch... I won't even say anything. Just look at RedX and what he did, while his 1.1K rated teammate took on the 3.5k worth of gap players alone and won.

Not my fault they decided to turn off their brains and essentially AFK what should've been an easy win after denying me any enjoyment of FAF at all. Funny how often that happens.

dang, they're out to get you man. i think you should compile a list of all players that have offended you and give them to the moderator team. they'll deal with those bastards!

Lmao my dude. You are just mad that some imaginary global number doesn't mean shit in matchmaker Q which is totally different environment from the easily abusable global. I bet you would have a brain meltdown if you were to see just how good the 3k astro crater warriors are on anything that's not astro.

You literally lost the game to your own weak mental.

This dude got carried by his teammate after he died due to being out of position but it's because the enemy was too high rated or something? What???

Only "out of position" because I got mobbed by both players tanks, tanks that then somehow failed to stop a whole 2 factories worth of arty. If I'm not allowed to be pissed I had to sit and watch the stupidest win in human history after that, what am I allowed to be pissed about? I just want to play the game, not sit in queue for 30 minutes and then die in 5 minutes because people double my rating ganged up on me and then turned into potatoes.

Maybe I shouldn't have posted but I can't delete it now so I guess go ahead and mock me for the next week, that's all this thread is for right?

@redx said in Why would you have left FAF?:

I had to sit and watch

I'm not here to judge you and in general (less hate) would apply, but you did not, in fact, have to sit and watch if you didn't want to.

@deletethis said in Why would you have left FAF?:

@redx said in Why would you have left FAF?:

I had to sit and watch

I'm not here to judge you and in general (less hate) would apply, but you did not, in fact, have to sit and watch if you didn't want to.

You're right of course, but the other option was go sit through another half hour of queue failures (and in fact I got a 30 minute timeout when I tried after this, so...) It's just a shit waste of time.

Whole lotta tantrum to throw over one game, maybe a break will do you some good

Step 1: Stupid post

Step 2: Attack them so they reply

Step 3: "Gee man that's a whole lotta posts, why don't you just quit?"

I swear it's like you guys want the game to be even more dead than it already is. It was a stupid post, I get it, you can stop now.

I'm with Red here, it is getting a bit personal. I understand both sides, because a high rating simply looks scary and ppl wil automatically play different until they realise it's e.g. Gap or Astro rating and doesn't say anything. For the ones who know it it's obvious.
But don't forget that type of input is exactly what we do want here / what the thread is about to notice further flaws or in general problems in the system, even though this specific one is none of them.

@sladow-noob said in Why would you have left FAF?:

even though this specific one is none of them.

I mean it still is a problem though?
The problem is just not that their rating should be different, but that it's hard to tell how accurate their global rating is, for the current gamemode.

Maybe as was suggested display percentages for most played maps in player profiles? So you know on which maps you can expect the most from this player and on which maps he isn't strong.

Or maybe add more matchmaker queues for the most popular played gamemodes / maps? (astro, dual gap, setons)
To 1. get them a seperate rating and 2. bring more people from custom games to the matchmaker, where they don't have to commit to either sitting in an astro or 3v3 lobby, but can instead queue both and see which fills faster.

redx said in Why would you have left FAF?:

Step 1: Stupid post

Step 2: Attack them so they reply

Step 3: "Gee man that's a whole lotta posts, why don't you just quit?"

I swear it's like you guys want the game to be even more dead than it already is. It was a stupid post, I get it, you can stop now.

my fault, i misread the situation. my apologies for the harassment

I’ve been playing for a long time, and tried to bring friends. However, the story always ended with the fact that a person could not overcome the barrier of complexity of entry and the jungle of the interface.
This game needs some kind of sandbox for newbies, where they could get help in mastering the interface and game mechanics.

@test777 said in Why would you have left FAF?:

This game needs some kind of sandbox for newbies, where they could get help in mastering the interface and game mechanics.

Did your friends try playing all of the story missions from the base game (in the coop tab, all of the missions with a faction logo next to them) starting on easy mode and then medium and then hard mode? That's the closest thing we have to teaching interface and game mechanics.

There is a general consensus that it would be nice if we had more custom missions designed like story missions but intended to teach more lessons (the story missions primarily teach how to use units, they don't teach things like how to take reclaim, the importance of scouting/raiding, being aggressive) that it would be a good thing. BUT it's just too much work, we don't have enough skilled volunteers to make story missions to teach fundamentals of competitive gameplay.

@nex That's why the gamemode exists though. You simply can't tell which global rating is real and which is inflated, I fully agree, but since MatchMaker is quite old the queue-ratings are mostly accurate. There I don't think there is a problem with it, not to mention it gets over time cuz nearly everyone will eventually play.

Also for the played maps you can just look into their replay. Put it on showing 200 at once, scroll down and you alrdy know everything you need to know.