A View From the Road: Matchmaker, Matchmaker...
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
That's not how Matchmaking works in Starcraft 2. You play 10 games that will rank you into skill brackets(copper, bronze, platinum, diamond or something along that lines) of people around your level right from the get go. If you continue to dominate or slack in your division you'll be pushed up or down the brackets as needed.ark123 said:
Yes for every match a replay file is saved.dochmbi said:
No, when watching a replay you have the option of watching from any player's view or from everyones.
Hmmm, you have good points. I propose a sort of optional mix between john's and Shamus' ideas: the matchmaking is the same, but if you want you can challenge higher or lower ranked opponents. Defeating a higher ranked opponent ranks you up faster, the opposite for a lower ranked one. Like the system in unreal, except it's completely optional and much more tailored to individual skill (maybe you could request matches against specific ranks, to customize it further).
I've noticed this since not too long ago (maybe I'm just blind), but I like the fact that your articles complement and counter each other. I've seen variations on the opening sentence "my colleague dadida.." and "in an article written by wooweewoo..." .. It's nice. It makes the Escapist feel more objective and broadly orientated.
Just wanted to say that.
Just wanted to say that.
See, this is quite cool. Back when I used to play Starcraft and got stomped, I used to just think it was people being better than me and bitching about it - it'd be pretty cool to see where I went wrong (or, more likely, where the other guy went right).Slycne said:
Even without going into replays - when a match ends you are greeted with a number of stats that compare everything from average minerals unspent to amount of resources invested in your army. Blizzard is making it very easy for people who are not professionals to understand what they did wrong and learn from those mistakes.Chipperz said:
yar ranked games shouldnt change if the match making is good. but its still nice to have to option to go random 
That's the thing though, I'm not sure Shamus and I disagree. He's absolutely right that a game based around matchmaking wouldn't work so well if it were a FPS, but StarCraft is a different beast. Besides, there are plenty of OTHER tools if you don't want to use the matchmaker - inducing randomness isn't the optimal solution here.koriantor said:That's a decent counter-point, however, I've noticed Shamus tends to write articles on exactly what I think of situations, and very rarely has he gotten my opinion wrong.
Sorry, John, Shamus has my opinion again
Maybe it's me, but this article didn't make a hell of a lot of sense to me... It seems to contradict itself a bit...
A better player than you at SF4 will pose the same problem as a better player than you at TF2, BC2, Fifa20-nextyear, or SC2, or even real life sports, arm wrestling, card playing, or anything of the sort: He's better than you. He forces you to develop and adapt, or perish.
But this part confuses me more:
...You mean, like in the aforementioned games? 9 times out of 10, the guy that's THAT much better than you will trash you in TF2, or SF4, or anything before you get a chance to do anything. Ever faced a REALLY good sniper, scout, or soldier in TF2? Fight is over before it starts. You either get your head instantly shot off by a sniper, get double tapped with meat shots by a scout circling you before you can do anything, or just get bounced and airshot by a soldier. It's swift, it's decisive and 9 out of 10 times all you can do is watch the train wreck.
The same is applicable to SF4 where a "pro" player will just spend the whole match combo-ing and canceling you to high hell.
Again, what's the big difference between that one shot you manage to score head on in a shooter, or the epic combo breaker you manage to pull, or the one attack on your base you manage to foil, or that one attack you manage to pull off to destroy your enemy's building?
How is this any different from recording a match in SF4 and studying your enemy's moves? Hell, a game like TF2, or most shooters really, is far less transparent. If you're lucky you can see what your enemy does in the miliseconds right before he plugs you. If you wanna study his strategies you'll need to find him and ask him for a demo/record, or at the very least get a server demo. By default all you get to study are his exact actions before he sends you to the respawn screen.
As for the Matchmaking... I think Greg and Shamus put it best.
...Why? What's the big difference between Starcraft 2 and TF2? Or BC2? Or Need For Speed Flavor of the Month? A challenge is a challenge... The idea is that challenging people of equal skill ALL the time becomes a bit monotonous. Sometimes it IS fun to face someone weaker, that you'll trample all over, it's an ego boost. Sometimes it IS fun to be pitched against someone who will eat your face before you blink. It's a challenge. Whatever game you're playing isn't relevant to the level of challenge you'll encounter.
A better player than you at SF4 will pose the same problem as a better player than you at TF2, BC2, Fifa20-nextyear, or SC2, or even real life sports, arm wrestling, card playing, or anything of the sort: He's better than you. He forces you to develop and adapt, or perish.
But this part confuses me more:
Ok... This much is true... Not sure how this isn't applicable to SC2, but anyway...
...You mean, like in the aforementioned games? 9 times out of 10, the guy that's THAT much better than you will trash you in TF2, or SF4, or anything before you get a chance to do anything. Ever faced a REALLY good sniper, scout, or soldier in TF2? Fight is over before it starts. You either get your head instantly shot off by a sniper, get double tapped with meat shots by a scout circling you before you can do anything, or just get bounced and airshot by a soldier. It's swift, it's decisive and 9 out of 10 times all you can do is watch the train wreck.
The same is applicable to SF4 where a "pro" player will just spend the whole match combo-ing and canceling you to high hell.
Again, what's the big difference between that one shot you manage to score head on in a shooter, or the epic combo breaker you manage to pull, or the one attack on your base you manage to foil, or that one attack you manage to pull off to destroy your enemy's building?
Why? If anything I'd argue the exact opposite. As mentioned before in this thread, SC2 gives you a replay file you can watch after without fog of war. You can review it as much as you like and study your enemy's moves step by step. You can literally watch every action he does and how they affect him. You can see the bases he makes, the units he builds, etc, etc.
How is this any different from recording a match in SF4 and studying your enemy's moves? Hell, a game like TF2, or most shooters really, is far less transparent. If you're lucky you can see what your enemy does in the miliseconds right before he plugs you. If you wanna study his strategies you'll need to find him and ask him for a demo/record, or at the very least get a server demo. By default all you get to study are his exact actions before he sends you to the respawn screen.
As for the Matchmaking... I think Greg and Shamus put it best.
The reason the "disagreement" seems to be there is that you appear to be saying that "It's right", while Shamus is saying "It's not fun".John Funk said:
Like a lot of these games, I'd rather play for fun than prestige. And the matchmaking as it stands does the old DRM trick of waving that flag for cheaters to try and prosper, while the non-cheaters grind ranks.
What you'll be left with is a hardcore crowd and a casual crowd that will never intermix, and that's bad for a games longevity. Brilliant for competitiveness (if they can keep out the cheaters - and you know people are gearing up for it) but with the tactical play that can already be d/l'd off of YouTube, aren't we building an elite already?
From what seems to be implied, you'll have a similar situation to Eve Online where the giants play their nightmare games while the casuals ignore the ranking completely because the sheer effort to rank will be grinding the same level of play again, and again, and again...
What appears to be happening here is the same as has happened in most MMOs, where the only way to play the game is the official way, and I think that's a sad thing.
But...like I say...it's not for me anyway.