Something which can be done on DE...?host your own games if you dont like the settings other people play there every day with 7 other people lül
Something which can be done on DE...?host your own games if you dont like the settings other people play there every day with 7 other people lül
Yeah host your own lobbies but noone wants to play anything but Arabia huns so you don't get a game.host your own games if you dont like the settings other people play there every day with 7 other people lül
Right now (4 pm CEST) There are 15 active TG lobbies on voobly that play BF, Nomad, LN and Arabia (a far superior version of Arabia like HC2 compared to DE)Yeah host your own lobbies but noone wants to play anything but Arabia huns so you don't get a game.
Or I could just queue up, chill out for 2-5 mins, get a notification that a game is ready to start and jump into a game on a map that's randomly selected from the ones that me and my opponent haven't banned, with random civs or a civ that I preselected.
How a Voobly-like system would work with DE is a very open ended question.Yeah host your own lobbies but noone wants to play anything but Arabia huns so you don't get a game.
Or I could just queue up, chill out for 2-5 mins, get a notification that a game is ready to start and jump into a game on a map that's randomly selected from the ones that me and my opponent haven't banned, with random civs or a civ that I preselected.
1) Its bad on its own.I don't know how ranked TG lobbies would end up working and I don't think anyone does really. But with how clearly unhealthy the current system is is there really a reason to not try it?
I guess you never heard of FR (or the other one that I forgot)You cant show your "multiple map preference" in a classic lobby system. As a host you can write it in the title as well as selecting multiple maps; but you cant join multiple lobbies, and the hosted lobbies dont always 100% match your map preference. (Not saying the current system does)
It somewhat worked back then because 90% of the games were played (voluntarily or involuntarily) on 3-4 maps, plus the community was small.
EDIT: Its straight up objectively worse than an opt-in / unlimited ban system.
Sorry to break it to you, almost no one played FR/BR/MR.I guess you never heard of FR (or the other one that I forgot)
Player/ map | A | B | C | D | E |
1 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
2 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
3 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
4 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
5 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
6 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
7 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
8 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
9 | ✓ | ✓ | |||
10 | ✓ | ✓ |
No one is going to ask for 1x1 ranked lobbies, because if something has worked from the MM system has been for 1x1 so those who play 1x1 aren't complaining at all, but for team games the rant is growing and growing, the experience is not recommended, sub optimal and unfair and affects a larger player base.1) Its bad on its own.
2) People will then ask for ranked 1v1 lobbies non-stop.
3) Then they are ****ed no matter they implement it or not.
Youve been here for 10+ years and still dont know about the community?No one is going to ask for 1x1 ranked lobbies, because if something has worked from the MM system has been for 1x1 so those who play 1x1 aren't complaining at all,
30 min? Super rare.The idea and the expectation about a working MM on team games was really high, but after 1.7 years it has done more damage than good, i would prefer to wait 30 mins to get a balanced game on a map we all enjoy, rather than 30 mins of failed attempts just to get a boring and unfair game.
Sadly you can't show it in the current ladder system either 11You cant show your "multiple map preference" in a classic lobby system.
Would you say they need to be all at once to be a problem? If mildly annoying things happen with high frequency then they become quite bothersome, like having a rock stuck in one's shoe.Youve been here for 10+ years and still dont know about the community?
30 min? Super rare.
**** map? I dont really hate any map.
Unfair teams? Sometimes.
All at once? Close to 0% for me.
WowSadly you can't show it in the current ladder system either 11
You cant show your "multiple map preference" in a classic lobby system. As a host you can write it in the title as well as selecting multiple maps; but you cant join multiple lobbies, and the hosted lobbies dont always 100% match your map preference. (Not saying the current system does)
Would you say they need to be all at once to be a problem? If mildly annoying things happen with high frequency then they become quite bothersome, like having a rock stuck in one's shoe.
30 min? Super rare.
**** map? I dont really hate any map.
Unfair teams? Sometimes.
Sorry that was a lazy joke. I wasn't implying you said otherwise.
There is so much ambiguity in the terms we are using that didn't mean anything but to ask a question. There also were other things left unsaid that could be annoying. It would be interesting to work through the specifics and see how common it really is.Woooow
They could also just display the rating they already have for custom lobbies (and deactivate it's adjustment if an AI is present in the lobby). AoE skills are transferable enough that using the same rating for RM 1v1, Teamgames and Empire Wars (not sure about DM) would result in fair enough matchups. Especially since this will still be lobbies, so people will most likely allow a wider elo range than most mid elo people will face on the ladder.2) People will then ask for ranked 1v1 lobbies non-stop.
Disagree, but giving players free selection with the cost of less balance games sounds alright. CS / DM / casual players would have some (visible) ratings to rely on, while RMers wouldnt have the reason to cry for ranked lobbies.They could also just display the rating they already have for custom lobbies (and deactivate it's adjustment if an AI is present in the lobby). AoE skills are transferable enough that using the same rating for RM 1v1, Teamgames and Empire Wars (not sure about DM) would result in fair enough matchups. Especially since this will still be lobbies, so people will most likely allow a wider elo range than most mid elo people will face on the ladder.
Disagree, but giving players free selection with the cost of less balance games sounds alright. CS / DM / casual players would have some (visible) ratings to rely on, while RMers wouldnt have the reason to cry for ranked lobbies.
Tournament seedings and ego boosting will continue relying on ranked ladders, but TG ladder might still be an issue, lets see how they fix that in the coming weeks (or months).
It has not been implemented yetSo has this been implemented and how does the dm community feel about it?
I want to play BF but apparently 1250 is not noob enough for any of the lobbiesWhen rankend lobbies for BlackForest community???
BF was the teamgame map most played on voobly
In this discord You can find good bf games (maybe the level its too high)I want to play BF but apparently 1250 is not noob enough for any of the lobbies
I mean, everyone from normal schools know typing and talking, its not that hard.LOL. Hongey kong needs a ****in life. thousands of posts in such a short time. Dork