Make Profiles visible

[Gilmund]

I read when sitting on the porcelain throne. I eat a lot. And a game takes longer as I eat a good amount of fibre so I can always add a few comments. Issue?

And no, you don't feel correctly. In fact it's ALL gone over your self satisfied, "just get better", tiny, smug head. Oh, that's the third time. Probably not the last.

I'm not bitching. I'm making excellent points about the game. You bring up how few are playing it too. Ahh, now take your deluded sense of perception and turn it in. Think way.

"just get better, ug". Nice reply.

I've nor commented on the actual game system and rules. So you are off in fantasy land doing comprehension very badly now as well. Too much time on Steel Division probably, but good on you. You can't be smug without doing the time (4).

Right, time to wipe. See ya.

Yeah cause you raise questions two hours of read or two replays watched would have answered long ago. Basic questions that sure explain your 20% winrate. But worse you take high profile when i dare tell you there are basic ways to improve your game cause there are middle ground between the total noob and the total vet.
You sure have time to answer me but you don't wanna take time to read about the basic mechanics.You're lazy and blame everything about the ranked matchmatcking system where you are probably stomped against average players with 40-50% winrate. When you have indeed choices to avoid this system or play differently.
In few words you've all this selfish attitude i hate on some players. With the silver spoon in their mouth expecting everything to go their way in a minute.
Yes, start getting better. It's a first. Cause if you start getting better, you will probably start to live your ranked experience differently.

Honestly yeah one of the big problems is that it's difficult to find an even game and I don't think it's right to be dismissive of that.

Yep and bkn would like better players to play against, i would like a 10vs10 team to play against to make better games. You'll find these players for me somewhere ?
How will you magically create players to find even games ?
I mean, we all would want the best experience and better matchmaking games. No vet has long time fun having too easy games, no new player have fun being demolished. But arn't there ways to have fun with the current system ? And can we expect with the actual playerbase to have mini-brackets for each level without facing the other players ? Is is the way to go to make people play better and make games happen ? I mean, let's think about it five minutes.

 

[bkn]

I dont need better players, they are already there. I want to do a quick match/rank match and see " Oh 1 more is searching, maybe he will get matched with me"... after not finding a match with him i want to chance the faction and try again. After we get matched i want to be sure its a fair game in terms of our ranks. If we arent at the same range of skill i dont want to get dragged into a match at all.

But currently its like that, i search for a game and instantly (after 2 seconds) get matched with a beginner that has absolutely no chance, or with the #1 of the ladder thats is currently aswell above my rank. Thats the reality. Nobody can want this, even if you are despertaly looking for a match. Thats why we have the lobby.

in the lobby i want to see profiles so as a host i can balance out the teams. You know its possible to talk to people instead of isntantly starting the game what people tend to do. Host should only be able to start the game if everyone is ready.

 

[steve1]

Yeah cause you raise questions two hours of read or two replays watched would have answered long ago. Basic questions that sure explain your 20% winrate. But worse you take high profile when i dare tell you there are basic ways to improve your game cause there are middle ground between the total noob and the total vet.
You sure have time to answer me but you don't wanna take time to read about the basic mechanics.You're lazy and blame everything about the ranked matchmatcking system where you are probably stomped against average players with 40-50% winrate. When you have indeed choices to avoid this system or play differently.
In few words you've all this selfish attitude i hate on some players. With the silver spoon in their mouth expecting everything to go their way in a minute.
Yes, start getting better. It's a first. Cause if you start getting better, you will probably start to live your ranked experience differently.



Yep and bkn would like better players to play against, i would like a 10vs10 team to play against to make better games. You'll find these players for me somewhere ?
How will you magically create players to find even games ?
I mean, we all would want the best experience and better matchmaking games. No vet has long time fun having too easy games, no new player have fun being demolished. But arn't there ways to have fun with the current system ? And can we expect with the actual playerbase to have mini-brackets for each level without facing the other players ? Is is the way to go to make people play better and make games happen ? I mean, let's think about it five minutes.

Wow! When I get time to respond properly to your gasket blowing rant I will. I'm much smiled though. Not so smug now are you (5). Oh.

There's a fair amount of rant induced gibberish so rewrite or I'll need to spend more time deciphering it.

 

[Gilmund]

I dont need better players, they are already there. I want to do a quick match/rank match and see " Oh 1 more is searching, maybe he will get matched with me"... after not finding a match with him i want to chance the faction and try again. After we get matched i want to be sure its a fair game in terms of our ranks. If we arent at the same range of skill i dont want to get dragged into a match at all.

But currently its like that, i search for a game and instantly (after 2 seconds) get matched with a beginner that has absolutely no chance, or with the #1 of the ladder thats is currently aswell above my rank. Thats the reality. Nobody can want this, even if you are despertaly looking for a match. Thats why we have the lobby.

in the lobby i want to see profiles so as a host i can balance out the teams. You know its possible to talk to people instead of isntantly starting the game what people tend to do. Host should only be able to start the game if everyone is ready.

I fear you will never have games being launched again. I guess you would rarely find people directly in your bracket as you're in the top of the leaderboard with the better players. It would be interesting for newcomers but not for you to find a game.
And WGRD players have talked about their own experience of profile visualisation in lobbies, i asked myself for it in the past cause i had issues playing in teamplay with people i don't know and consequently i do not team with people i've never encountered since then, it's not good for them nor for me. But i shall agree with their experiences, i understand very well how it will prevent games to be launched as new/vet players will be kicked from lobbies without warning.

Wow! When I get time to respond properly to your gasket blowing rant I will. I'm much smiled though. Not so smug now are you (5). Oh.

Don't bother to write your crap. It's very repetitive reading and i'm bored.
Do something useful instead, read about the game.

 

[steve1]

In few words you've all this selfish attitude i hate on some players. With the silver spoon in their mouth expecting everything to go their way in a minute.....

Yes, start getting better. It's a first. Cause if you start getting better, you will probably start to live your ranked experience differently.

But arn't there ways to have fun with the current system ?

Selfish attitude? What? By me trying to widen the player base? I've not said change the game

Silver spoon? Silver spoon? What are you babbling about?

I paraphrase your "Just get better" again.

The current system can give some fun. But if I think the implementation could be improved I'll bring it to the forum, if that's okay with you.

 

[steve1]

Don't bother to write your crap. It's very repetitive reading and i'm bored.
Do something useful instead, read about the game.

Says Mr "just play better".

 

[Gilmund]

Selfish attitude? What? By me trying to widen the player base? I've not said change the game

Silver spoon? Silver spoon? What are you babbling about?

I paraphrase your "Just get better" again.

The current system can give some fun. But if I think the implementation could be improved I'll bring it to the forum, if that's okay with you.

New players mostly don't come to play ranked. The actual leaderboard count max 4852 players having played ranked once in their life. I'm around rank 1500 myself with only a few ranked games so i can say most of these 4852 players (3/4) played max 5-10 games in ranked then stopped. The other 1500 are always the same ones, some of them obviously have stopped playing ranked (or play it once in a month as a post just did this observation about the top players), a few have aliases. According to Steam you've around 140 000 game owners, 20 000 of them played in the last two weeks. And you've between 200-400 players online on evenings european time. There are no precise way to know how many are playing single player in these 20 000 but i would not be surprised they are many. You may fairly assume with these numbers people come play multiplayer in lobbies or maybe quickplay but not in ranked.
In 200-400, you may assume 50-100 play ranked on evenings ? Maybe ? 1/4 of the online players on evenings playing ranked is imo a lot, it's probably lower.

So the very issue here is no one is playing ranked in the first place since the beginning of the game. I can also say it with my friendlist in game, i've around 30 names in it, most of them are very regular players, 4 of 30 played ranked (3 only a few games, one is on top30). 26 of them never did a game in ranked play.

It is a niche game with a playerbase coming back regularly (1/7 is not a bad ratio), most of them not playing ranked and probably most of the players not playing online at all. Like i said before, if you wanna widen the playerbase DLC are the good way to do it. New people did come with the new decks, and a part of them will make their way to multiplayer, we indeed had peaks around 600 players online in the first two weeks after the DLC. But don't expect to much in improving matchmaking to widen the playerbase and get new players. If we had around 30 000 players who made their way in the leaderboard for just one game since the start of the game i would say different but it's definitely not what people is looking for.

 

[steve1]

New players mostly don't come to play ranked. The actual leaderboard count max 4852 players having played ranked once in their life. I'm around rank 1500 myself with only a few ranked games so i can say most of these 4852 players (3/4) played max 5-10 games in ranked then stopped. The other 1500 are always the same ones, some of them obviously have stopped playing ranked (or play it once in a month as a post just did this observation about the top players), a few have aliases. According to Steam you've around 140 000 game owners, 20 000 of them played in the last two weeks. And you've between 200-400 players online on evenings european time. There are no precise way to know how many are playing single player in these 20 000 but i would not be surprised they are many. You may fairly assume with these numbers people come play multiplayer in lobbies or maybe quickplay but not in ranked.
In 200-400, you may assume 50-100 play ranked on evenings ? Maybe ? 1/4 of the online players on evenings playing ranked is imo a lot, it's probably lower.

So the very issue here is no one is playing ranked in the first place since the beginning of the game. I can also say it with my friendlist in game, i've around 30 names in it, most of them are very regular players, 4 of 30 played ranked. 26 of them never did a game in ranked play.

It is a niche game with a playerbase coming back regularly (1/7 is not a bad ratio), most of them not playing ranked and probably not playing online at all. Like i said before, if you wanna widen the playerbase DLC are the good way to do it. New people did come with the new decks, and a part of them will make their way to multiplayer, we indeed had peaks around 600 players online in the first two weeks after the DLC. But don't expect to much in improving matchmaking to widen the playerbase and get new players. If we had around 30 000 players who made their way in the leaderboard for just one game since the start of the game i would say different but it's definitely not what people is looking for.

Now that's far better than "just play better".

I could almost come to agree with you. But if the 4852 could have been tempted to cone back more frequently to ranked might they do in a different system? Seems like that for this many players to not come back realised they were too far behind the ability curve.

It's chicken and egg. Impressive numbers you've come up with there though.

 

[Gilmund]

Now that's far better than "just play better".

I could almost come to agree with you. But if the 4852 could have been tempted to cone back more frequently to ranked might they do in a different system? Seems like that for this many players to not come back realised they were too far behind the ability curve.

It's chicken and egg. Impressive numbers you've come up with there though.

I've never been against any form of matchmaking improvement. But i seriously wonder what is it good for if you've no more than 20-50 people playing ranked simultaneously on nights (potentially 10-25 simultaenous games) and start to divide these few players in their brackets.
I can't speak about others but i've had issues finding teamplay games in ranked and obviously i didn't wanna play team games with pickups anymore to face stacked teams, to have this sort of bad experience in ranked or regular lobbies is the worse thing for me cause it leads me to stop playing. Teamplay though is is the only way i would play again ranked myself as i did 1vs1 and it doesn't really interest me. I tried a few it is not my taste. I know many players are too only playing teamplay games and not liking 1vs1 like me so i guess i'm not alone with that sort of thinking.

My idea was to revamp decks to create more balanced specialised decks only for 1vs1 (like the new breakthrough ones). Everyone finds heavy german armored decks impossible to play in 1vs1, they are not viable to win. And the past just told us you canno't change decks for team games and 1vs1 at the same time.
I guess it doesn't lead people to play ranked neither as many people like to play armored decks above all things, therefore avoid any form of 1vs1. Create armored decks able to fit 1vs1 with proper 1vs1 inf deck able to counter them would be something i guess.

 

[Edgars]

No wonder that most of the players that have bought this game leaves it after few hours, because you are lucky if you get out one decent game out of ten!

In time period when I am playing it takes at least 30 minutes to get a 3v3 game, lately, and when it's finally going I find out that I have wasted not only previous, at least, 30 min, but will waste next 30 minutes too, because one of my teammates and/or opponents are WAY worse or better than me! If the profiles would be visible it may take me one hour to set up game, but at least after that hour I will get a decent game not like now when I must waste few hours per day playing noncompetitive games!

I haven't read a single VALID argument why not make them visible!

And when FINALLY this game will have a BLACKLIST feature?!? Is it that hard for devs to implement?!? I am sick and tired that my lobbies are joined by assholes who don't understand that if they are KICKED, then their are not welcomed here! Do I really have to play cat and mouse game with them and keep kicking them out 10+ times in a row before they become bored with their trolling?

 

[Gilmund]

No wonder that most of the players that have bought this game leaves it after few hours, because you are lucky if you get out one decent game out of ten!

In time period when I am playing it takes at least 30 minutes to get a 3v3 game, lately, and when it's finally going I find out that I have wasted not only previous, at least, 30 min, but will waste next 30 minutes too, because one of my teammates and/or opponents are WAY worse or better than me! If the profiles would be visible it may take me one hour to set up game, but at least after that hour I will get a decent game not like now when I must waste few hours per day playing noncompetitive games!

I haven't read a single VALID argument why not make them visible!

And when FINALLY this game will have a BLACKLIST feature?!? Is it that hard for devs to implement?!? I am sick and tired that my lobbies are joined by assholes who don't understand that if they are KICKED, then their are not welcomed here! Do I really have to play cat and mouse game with them and keep kicking them out 10+ times in a row before they become bored with their trolling?

I have 80% winrate you would be able to see, would you kick me from your lobby like you kick your assholes? Or maybe take me in your team and kick the others?
I did agree with your point of view once but it is a perfect argument based on experience of wgrd players. I sure think yours is not a very good solution to play with people neither.
What about allow joining possibilities in lobbies only if you are in a certain winrate range ? You would have something like :
0-30% winrate reserved games, 30-40%, 50-60% or larger brackets you could choose when you set up a game, 40-60%, 40-80% and so on. You would not be able to see the precise winrate of the other players but you would be able to be sure he's in the range you've chosen to have fair matches. If not he could not join.
You would have the liberty to create a game limiting the people to join according to winrate or not. And it would not be offensive at the same time.
I like pretty much the idea for lobbies.

 

[Drrty-D]

I like pretty much the idea for lobbies.

Its better without view profile button but not perfect,i think if the level of the player would be displayed it would be the perfect solution.

 

[Edgars]

I have 80% winrate you would be able to see, would you kick me from your lobby like you kick your assholes? Or maybe take me in your team and kick the others?
I did agree with your point of view once but it is a perfect argument based on experience of wgrd players. I sure think yours is not a very good solution to play with people neither.
What about allow joining possibilities in lobbies only if you are in a certain winrate range ? You would have something like :
0-30% winrate reserved games, 30-40%, 50-60% or larger brackets you could choose when you set up a game, 40-60%, 40-80% and so on. You would not be able to see the precise winrate of the other players but you would be able to be sure he's in the range you've chosen to have fair matches. If not he could not join.
You would have the liberty to create a game limiting the people to join according to winrate or not. And it would not be offensive at the same time.
I like pretty much the idea for lobbies.

To be honest, this idea is very good, but with one notice - you shouldn't be able to choose range in which you are not in, for example, player with 80% win ratio can't create lobby asking to join players that are in 30-40 range, but he can ask, for example, for 40-80 range, or any other in which he is within with.
More I think about it - the more I like it, because within this system any player would be able to find a game what he wants and is looking for, so please, devs be so kind and implement it - it can't really be that hard to add one more filter!

Its better without view profile button but not perfect,i think if the level of the player would be displayed it would be the perfect solution.

In my opinion, it wouldn't be a solution - I have seen higher level players with more mp games than me, but their win % in extreme cases is only half of mine ~25% (mine ~50%, I am level 13) and there are plenty below 40% too. If the system what Gilmund proposed would be implemented I would choose 45%-55% filter for my games - if not enough people are online in this range, then I would expand it to 40%-60% at most - anything else is not worth to play - that's just a reality!

 

[Elder Forest]

It is a very good idea though

 

[Gilmund]

To be honest, this idea is very good, but with one notice - you shouldn't be able to choose range in which you are not in, for example, player with 80% win ratio can't create lobby asking to join players that are in 30-40 range, but he can ask, for example, for 40-80 range, or any other in which he is within with.
More I think about it - the more I like it, because within this system any player would be able to find a game what he wants and is looking for, so please, devs be so kind and implement it - it can't really be that hard to add one more filter!

I meant it like that, it should not allow 80% winrate players to create 0-30% games. But they should be able to create 0-80% games. And you sure should also see in what exact range a game has really being opened, like you already see map, size, starting points, etc.
I mean with the low number of people online i expect you will have to open extra range to find people to populate your lobbies or some people will never find anyone to play with. I fear for the best ones above 60-70%.
We already are able to create private games, why not create limited winrate games based on these principles. After all, many are in the 40-60% range and i agree the 0-30% do not want to get demolished.

I agree too the level of players doesn't mean a damn thing, the level could be more about the number of played games than winrate. And winrate is indicative of something. From my personnal experience, 50-60% winrate players are not the same than 30% winrate players and under.

 

[KarampaFIN]

No wonder that most of the players that have bought this game leaves it after few hours, because you are lucky if you get out one decent game out of ten!

In time period when I am playing it takes at least 30 minutes to get a 3v3 game, lately, and when it's finally going I find out that I have wasted not only previous, at least, 30 min, but will waste next 30 minutes too, because one of my teammates and/or opponents are WAY worse or better than me! If the profiles would be visible it may take me one hour to set up game, but at least after that hour I will get a decent game not like now when I must waste few hours per day playing noncompetitive games!

I haven't read a single VALID argument why not make them visible!

And when FINALLY this game will have a BLACKLIST feature?!? Is it that hard for devs to implement?!? I am sick and tired that my lobbies are joined by assholes who don't understand that if they are KICKED, then their are not welcomed here! Do I really have to play cat and mouse game with them and keep kicking them out 10+ times in a row before they become bored with their trolling?

So, you don't consider it a valid argument that people will abuse this system to increase the number of stomps on newer players by looking at their stats, seeing that they are new to the game and then either kick them out of their lobby or force them to join the opposing side? You don't find it bad that new people come to the game, join a lobby and then get kicked out for what they believe is for no reason only to later find out it was because they were just new to the game stat-wise so the host decided "nope, not having you in here"?

You don't see how quickly that gives the game an elitist image for its playerbase? This was the sole reason why I stopped playing WG:RD way back in the day. Mediocre players who enjoyed playing for fun and not with the most optimised decks would join a lobby with their less than 50% winrate, get either kicked out from the lobby by the host or forced to the other side, then proceeds to get stomped by a full team of 75% winrate people because that is all they do all day, stomp on people who are either new to the game or mediocre, but refuse to play against actual skilled players because "muh winrate". People actually had to start wiping their stats and fake them in the early days of WG:RD if they were too good because they couldn't get a fun and decent game going, because if they were going solo, they were always playing against total noobs or were playing in a team of noobs against a team of good players.

Then you had the issue of wanting to play with a friend(s). Good luck getting a game going any time soon as you'll either get kicked out from a lobby as they see you are a stack easily from your stats or no one will join you as you are a stack. Your deck doesn't matter at this point, only thing that does is purely your stats.

The end result of viewing stats is going to be no new players and only the elite will be actually playing. If you don't mind playing with the same people over and over again, I guess there really is no valid argument to be made. If you don't want new people to join the game and learn it, then go right ahead, bring back the profile viewing.

 

[Gilmund]

The end result of viewing stats is going to be no new players and only the elite will be actually playing. If you don't mind playing with the same people over and over again, I guess there really is no valid argument to be made. If you don't want new people to join the game and learn it, then go right ahead, bring back the profile viewing.

Yes, i think you should not see the profile of players but creating winrate range lobbies could improve games. Give us your opinion about it.

 

[KarampaFIN]

Yes, i think you should not see the profile of players but creating winrate range lobbies could improve games. Give us your opinion about it.

Before I give my opinion I just want to ask a few questions so that I understand completely what you mean. Are you asking for a lobby system where you can create lobbies based on winrates? For example, I create a game normally, but I have an additional option there where I can put up a restriction that only players certain winrates can join my lobby, for example 50% - 75%, and now only people with that winrate can join the lobby. Did I understand this correctly?

 

[Vyllis]

Matchmaker would ideally solve this problem for the one who want similar level opponent.
However, we all know how much players favour custom lobby interface than waiting eternally in the quickplay menu to find a game.

In my opinion, custom lobby should only be used for private rooms and modded rooms, matchmaker used to search from "1v1" to "10v10" (from "same" skill range to "all").
But right now, as the community is used to custom lobby, i can't see this happening.

 

[Vyllis]

Give us your opinion about it.

Locked winrate "private" lobby would be a good setting to have for those searching for higher level of play.
As long as you can't see players profile and kick/move/switch to get an advantage of it.
Also match played versus AI and 10v10 results should be banned of the equation.

Problem is if it does become a very popular setting it can segregate newbies, casual players and seasoned then create two distinct casts: the one who get to enter the game rooms and the others.
Considering the actual playerbase, in this very case, it can be disastrous.

sorry my english.