Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ Awesomenauts



Post new topic Reply to topic Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Author Message
 Post subject: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:08 am
Posts: 138
The whole Ronimo response on matchmaking is in my view incredibly contradicting. The actual complaint is about that leaderboards are incredibly stagnant while fun for climbing. They say it's not meant as a progression system, but at the same they claim it reflects your skill. This is where Ronimo are biting themselfs, since if we look at our ratings again we then have to assume people never get better or worse over time, while people DO get better/worse over time. In fact, There is no doubt that we would see people end up with a lot of different ranks after a reset, everyone had time to develop their nauts skills in the past 8 months, but can't get into their respected rank because the stagnation and cluttering (and reserving) of the rankings. In short, the current leaderboards doesn't actually reflect players skill in the first place. Ronimo can say it's not meant for progression and then pings the leaderboards by saying with the current leaderboards are good because it says so. Eventhough everyone is experiencing problems, a skill level is personal is something personal we can't ever prove skill level, thus ronimo using this as an oppurtunity to not listen.

But experienced players just know it's fishy, we just know it doesn't reflect skill after playing the game for so long. We see it with our own eyes. How can top 10 in reality only go down in rating unless they win 95% against players of his skill level? I thought it has to reflect his skill but apparently they can only get worse over time unless they stop playing? How can some fresh account play 83 games in premade and get #2 in rankings? How does this reflect skill? The problem only gets worse when people start creating alt accounts. People have like 5 alt accounts for the lack of progression, just further increasing the problem by having 5 slots reserved for the same player. I also have to bring up the paradox how a players alts are so far apart while being played by the same person, since they should be close to each other if ranking DID reflect skill. These are just extreme examples.

Not having decay IS a problem, not so much that the skill of these people necessarily goes down, but other players can't get these ranks anymore because they are reserved. People that actually need to be on this skill level can't because it gets harder for them to get past a rating threshold when people above their rating threshold are inactive. They say decaying doesn't matter, but consistently winning is also skill. having 85% win ratio over like 1500 games is also an indicator. A reset would theoratically be this decay everyone has been waiting for. The moment for players that have practised in 8 months time to check out their new and actual skill. Ronimo keeps saying the trade off on bad matchmaking is not worth it for the sense of progression, but I think it's most definitely worth it considering all arguments that have been given and theories that have been mythbusted.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pm
Posts: 1027
Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war
Inactive accounts have zero impact on rating gain or matchmaking. The only thing they do is take up spots on the leaderboard. The number of inactive accounts could be 50 times what it is now, rating gain (and also the Matchmaking) would still be the same for everyone who does play the game.

If you make a new account the leaderboards are fairly dynamic since you have a very low certainty. It's quite easy to climb with a secondary account. The problem arises when you get people who really struggle to get a change in rating because they have so many games in this season.

The argument that Ronimo has that a reset would hurt the new players is perfectly valid. It would throw in the new players with all the veterans for a significant amount of time.

I can only hope that they are working on some alternate progression system with a leaderboard. Even if they don't go as far as that and just add in more medals for the people to aim for that would be great.

_________________
My steam profile: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198055582507

Check out my streams: twitch.tv/the_eddster27
Make sure you follow the MS Paint off!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:03 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:49 pm
Posts: 2208
Location: Tomorrowland
eddster27 wrote:
Inactive accounts have zero impact on rating gain or matchmaking. The only thing they do is take up spots on the leaderboard. The number of inactive accounts could be 50 times what it is now, rating gain (and also the Matchmaking) would still be the same for everyone who does play the game.

If you make a new account the leaderboards are fairly dynamic since you have a very low certainty. It's quite easy to climb with a secondary account. The problem arises when you get people who really struggle to get a change in rating because they have so many games in this season.

The argument that Ronimo has that a reset would hurt the new players is perfectly valid. It would throw in the new players with all the veterans for a significant amount of time.

I can only hope that they are working on some alternate progression system with a leaderboard. Even if they don't go as far as that and just add in more medals for the people to aim for that would be great.



I think this is the most reasonable comment on leaderboards I have seen.

We can only hope :ixsad:

_________________
My concise guide to balancing
Cynderp wrote:
The year is 20XX. Everyone can play Awesomenauts to niki levels of perfection. All gameplay has been deemed irrelevant and matches are decided by a game of Roflnauts. All new metas are based on Roflnauts DMs.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:50 am
Posts: 1356
eddster27 wrote:
Inactive accounts have zero impact on rating gain or matchmaking. The only thing they do is take up spots on the leaderboard. The number of inactive accounts could be 50 times what it is now, rating gain (and also the Matchmaking) would still be the same for everyone who does play the game.



was this confirmed by a developer or something as far as rating gain goes? ive never seen them comment much on the actual rating gain/loss formula, just patterns we've picked up on like the decreasing gains/increasing losses with more matches played


also season resets historically haven't hurt player retention have they? and usually the mingling of players with big skill gaps is only a few days, maybe like a week at most.

i dont remember any specific season reset dates so i cant check but id bet my bottom dollar that if growth was analyzed for that time period on steamcharts or something it would demonstrate that resets cause more people to play the game, not less (which wouldn't be a surprise at all since that's what all the anecdotal evidence is suggesting)

_________________
Mains: :thumb: :derp: :worship: :think: :facepalm: :shady: :rocco: :jimmy:
steamcommunity.com/id/MrPillow92/
stream: twitch.tv/mrpillowthegreat
Awesomenauts Rumble Tournament: http://steamcommunity.com/groups/AwesomenautsRumble


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pm
Posts: 1027
Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war
MrPillowTheGreat wrote:
eddster27 wrote:
Inactive accounts have zero impact on rating gain or matchmaking. The only thing they do is take up spots on the leaderboard. The number of inactive accounts could be 50 times what it is now, rating gain (and also the Matchmaking) would still be the same for everyone who does play the game.



was this confirmed by a developer or something as far as rating gain goes? ive never seen them comment much on the actual rating gain/loss formula, just patterns we've picked up on like the decreasing gains/increasing losses with more matches played


also season resets historically haven't hurt player retention have they? and usually the mingling of players with big skill gaps is only a few days, maybe like a week at most.

I don't remember any specific season reset dates so i cant check but id bet my bottom dollar that if growth was analyzed for that time period on steamcharts or something it would demonstrate that resets cause more people to play the game, not less (which wouldn't be a surprise at all since that's what all the anecdotal evidence is suggesting)


The ranking of other players has nothing to do with rating calculation. The rating of other players does have an effect. But that only applies to the rating of other players in that game. The rating of the other people on the leaderboards has no impact. You move up and down slower later in the season because you end up with a really high certainty. Hence why Sentry hard can start playing and get 20k+ rating in about 100 games (low certainty = fast climbing) even this late into the season.

I'm fairly confident that season resets would have resulted in player base increases in the past and probably would in the future. Most of them were alongside a patch IIRC so there may be some overlap. The player base increase however would be severely capped. It's only going to bring back experienced players who are aware of the significance of a season reset. No one is going to look at nauts on the steam page and go "yo sick this game reset it's leaderboards let me get in on this".

Resetting the leaderboards is literally only a problem for the people who have an absurd amount of games this season, and subsequently an absurdly high certainty. An increasing number of these players are hitting level caps and running out of things to do.

A progression system, either expanding on the f2p medals, or something new would appease and bring back lots of people who are annoyed at the game right now (a new tournament would be nice too). If it's a cool system then it can be used to bring in new players. (not necessarily bring in, but at the very least improve retention for players in their first 20 hours once they hit the brick wall after buying their first naut with Awesompoints). You could literally just rip off hearthstone's system and stick rewards at each League such as medals, points or drop pod parts.

_________________
My steam profile: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198055582507

Check out my streams: twitch.tv/the_eddster27
Make sure you follow the MS Paint off!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 7:37 am
Posts: 297
eddster27 wrote:
The argument that Ronimo has that a reset would hurt the new players is perfectly valid. It would throw in the new players with all the veterans for a significant amount of time.

It is? I don't think it is because the current matchmaking still puts new players in matches with or against me. So the current system already places the newer players in matches I'm in that are l2 but it's valid to not have a reset because it would put new players in my l2 matches?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 4:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pm
Posts: 1027
Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war
Top players don't get put with new players. Since f2p I have perhaps played with or against 15 or so new players. Considering the number of games I play this is staggeringly impressive from the matchmaker.

Sure even if you get mismatched with new players now, resetting the leaderboards wouldn't improve that situation. You would still be matched with new players as your rating would be within range of theirs. Additionally new players would gain rating faster when they win games, meaning that the distribution of new players would be scattered much more widely. Everyone would be playing against new players.

It would be especially prevalent given that the reduced starting rating could no longer apply as the majority of the new players have played enough to get past the cap for that.

Saying a reset would make matchmaking better is wrong, on the contrary it would make it worse. The issue lies in the complete lack of progression for the core and upper end of the player base.

edit: also saying L2 means nothing. The bottom of League 2 is just over half way between the starting rating (9000) and the highest rating the MM takes into consideration (18000). If a new player wins their first few games they are closer to the average L2 player than the average L2 player is to me.

with your rating of about 15500 the matchmaker can't really be blamed here

_________________
My steam profile: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198055582507

Check out my streams: twitch.tv/the_eddster27
Make sure you follow the MS Paint off!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:08 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:24 am
Posts: 904
Location: In the land of someone else's imagination; occasionally also marking someone else's imagination.
eddster27 wrote:
Saying a reset would make matchmaking better is wrong, on the contrary it would make it worse. The issue lies in the complete lack of progression for the core and upper end of the player base.

This is important to note.

_________________
Say no to SAM wrote:
Give this guy a duck for making such a good job with this thread

Nekomian wrote:
Give this guy a duck lololol

NekiCoule wrote:
...I'm not trying to seduce you or any kind of propaganda for your great wisdom I swear I'm not...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:45 pm
Posts: 348
If resets are so terrible for matchmaking then how come big titles do resets often and literally no one is complaining about them. Even more so, people in competitive games are happy about resets and enjoy them, form what I've read. It's a breath of fresh air for all the veterans.
Are awesomenauts' ranking formulas completely different?

_________________
STEAM


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Issue of MM and leaderboards explained 3 paragraphs
 Post Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 6:11 pm
Posts: 1027
Location: A bunker in prep for the first AI war
narol1990 wrote:
If resets are so terrible for matchmaking then how come big titles do resets often and literally no one is complaining about them. Even more so, people in competitive games are happy about resets and enjoy them, form what I've read. It's a breath of fresh air for all the veterans.
Are awesomenauts' ranking formulas completely different?


I still think a reset would be good, purely for the sense of progression.

You also have to consider that larger titles they either have a player base the size of Jupiter or are a game where factors such as ping and skill level of the players has less of an impact on the experience of the game. Both of which put less pressure on the matchmaker and allow resets to be a progression thing.
Take Hearthstone. Ping doesn't matter at all. The quality of the match between the two players has little impact on the game. Therefore you can have resets that jumble everybody up with little to no consequence. The resets are there so people can progress again. Much of the enjoyment comes from people playing when a new season starts, going against a variety of players and non-meta decks.

However in nauts this "variety of players" translates extremely poorly due to how much the skill level of the players dictates the outcome of the game.

Unlike previous resets this would be the first one where there has been an influx in new players. Currently they are only separated by artificial rating barriers that are somewhat effective at keeping them from matching with top players. If you do a reset these would be messed up.

However at this point I think it's fair to say the F2p contingent of the playerbase has shrunk enough to the point that you could say "screw it" and reset it anyway for the core playerbase. But then that's somewhat of a defeatist attitude as you would be kinda admitting that further growth to the playerbase is unlikely.

I think nauts has already crossed that point it's just whether or not Ronimo want to admit it.


A reset is completely necessary despite all the negatives. It just clogs up the rating system such that no one can progress and in some cases no one can fall back down either (e.g. someone played with their main naut gets really high then can't try any new nauts because they get dumped on). Long term it's not a viable option to leave things as they are. But since Ronimo aren't going to reset the Leaderboards until the next Ice Age an alternate progression system is desperately needed.

_________________
My steam profile: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198055582507

Check out my streams: twitch.tv/the_eddster27
Make sure you follow the MS Paint off!


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next