For people who responded “I like the current system,” what should all the people do that don’t like it? Screw them, they can go back to HD if they don’t like it?
Play unranked seems like a solution. Having ELO show during unranked matches should solve all your problems of finding people of similar skill level to play with.
And that should be that.
If there’s a unique rating that changes with lobby play that’s fine, but otherwise that would be insufficient for the community that’s been playing for many years.
Let’s try to get more responses to this poll please!
I thought that this was about opinions, not about forcing us to choose what you think we should
I think the comments section is an excellent place to explain the logic or lack thereof of your choice. Nothing wrong with that. It does seem like some options keep everyone happy and some don’t.
I think the current map ban system is good so long as maps are rotated in and out with some regularity.
I think there should be a tier based ranking system tied to ELO (bronze, silver, gold, etc) which should display in unranked lobbies right by your name. On mouse hover, one should see your actual ELO number, number of games played, and your win/loss ratio.
I personally don’t think ranked lobbies should exist, so as to keep ELO meaningful as opposed to being able to gain/lose ELO by playing games with non-standard settings or by playing one map only.
If ranked lobbies are introduced, ELO between ranked matchmaking and ranked lobbies should not be shared.
OK, that’s a good point.
imo, I’m critical of the Pool System but I didn’t find my reasons in the options so I chose 1
Would you be OK with a rated lobbies that have independent ratings from ranked MM?
I personally like the positive selection match making and the independent rated lobbies. With positive map selection, all the people who like the current system probably won’t notice a difference while it will fix the game for the other half of the community who currently find it unplayable.
I wouldn’t have a problem with this, in fact it might be a better way of finding larger team games. I would stick to the matchmaking for 1v1s though, or for finding team games if I’ve already got a team assembled.
I personally think the map ban system is good as is (again, so long as maps in the pool continue to rotate), I don’t think players should be allowed to queue up for just one map, as that would kill diversity when 90% of the community would queue between Arabia and BF while ignoring the rest of the pool.
I get that concern, but my view is that Microsoft should incentive people to play more maps rather than force it. They can have an ELO multiplier for maps that you don’t play often or they can have tournaments to encourage those maps. However, if people still play certain maps because they are more fun, that’s fine. We don’t need diversity for diversity’s sake. There has to be a tangible reason. I don’t think you have anything to worry about though. If the majority of people like the current MM system because they like the diversity of playing BF, Arena, Islands then there should still be a good amount of people that select those maps and you will get those games. Alternatively, if no one is selecting those maps, doesn’t that tell you something?
It’s a really tough pill for most people to a swallow for a game this old. I personally lost desire to play DE because I don’t want to spend my free time playing on Arena, BF, or MegaRandom when I can only play a game or two every couple of days. I estimate half the community feels this way. Perhaps an independent rated lobby would fix this, but I think positive selection is the least bad option.
A really bad poll with weighted answears, and then attack the ones that don’t agree with you, hope you’re not getting in politics…
Also saying that half of the players thinks the same way like you without knowing…
Comon try to be neutral for the vote to make it wort something.
I recommend reading the discussion post “MM pool sucks” or what it’s called that actually contain some good ideas and discussions in between the bad ones.
I think you meant to use the term “leading” or “biased” as opposed to weighted. That’s clearly not the right term. If so, how is the poll leading or biased?
i chose the second one but im not sure if its what i thought it meant. do you mean like, players can select a map from ALL THE MAPS IN AOE2 to play ranked? or they get to select the maps in the " map pool " . for example, imagine the current map pool, but instead of banning maps in it, you can select maps from it
i want the devs to set map pools ( team games and 1vs1s should have different map pools, they can have same maps in them, but for example, BF can only be in team game map pool, not in 1vs1 map pool ) either using the community’s votes on maps, or simply discussing it with pro players, i really dont mind which one they go with personally i prefer them to discuss it with pro players and set a ranked game map pool for team game and for 1vs1, but if they want to go with " community voting " i understand that. and i want them to let the players select the maps from that map pool to queue, not banning some of them. thats exactly what valve is doing with CSGO. they introduced a map pool for ranked games years ago, and tweaked it from time to time by replacing one of the maps with a new map
I think the current maps are a step backwards. The old map pool was much better.
Solved it! I figured out the solution - positive selection of ~20 popular maps and every additional map you select will allow you to win more points. This keeps whole community happy while simultaneously rewards people who select more maps. People who want to only play one map will be able to have fun but it will before challenging for them to rise through the ladder. I’ll type up more detailed explanation soon.
You’re welcome AoE2 DE community!!!
Some people, like myself, don’t give a rats posterior about ‘rating’. If I tell girls “I have a high elo on AOE2 DE” I don’t think it will help me. The only purpose of rating should be to match players of equal skill so it is a fun game, not to ‘reward’ people for picking more maps. So I can see why they might want to hide the number and why they might want to avoid lobbies for quicker matchmaking. You cannot prevent folks from doing weird stuff just to ‘rise on the ladder’ there will always be Cumans pickers, etc. looking to exploit anything to rise.
I agree with Aetrious, just bring back the old map pool and keep the banning system, the old map pool maps were close enough to standard Arabia play, such that there won’t be ‘better on Arena’ types of players, because the old map pool maps were similar enough to Arabia, with the possible exception of too much choke pointy BF like water in one of the maps. The current map pool is too far removed from standard play. There is enough variety in the old map pool without having to resort to insane maps with weird rules and starting conditions.
For people who want to play a specific map, just show a player rating for heavens sake, in the non ranked lobbies, what is the advantage to hiding a players rating? I don’t get what the advantage is and why the developers actively are hiding it, they must have their reasons though.
With any matchmaking system comes the mismatching also. The maps obviously need work but the current systems lets me not wait 1 hour for a game where one host is the deciding person of who gets kicked and who stays. Having played over 2000 games on voobly, the biggest concern is getting a game to play. The matchmaking helps with that. On the other hand… I do like the beginner’s lobby in Voobly and would like to see if such a thing happens. On the question of maps, I like the variety it offers and I think thats how AOE2 should be played. Playing only arabia makes us think of civs on the basis of just one map and that in itself is a mistake. Giving the spread of the civs their best maps to play lets the players experience those civs at their best situations. Id say all arabia focussed players start being used to having different map because the game is not Arabia of Empires.
Oh. What’s this? Another poll with only four options worded in an opinionated way that will likely not produce any result that is substantial? Wonderful.
To be anything other than verbal… nothing, it needs to include the following and allow multiple picks:
- add maps and increase bans
- change when bans are done
- show if opponent picked civ or went random
- add option to 1v1 on arabia or arena
- add option to play team game on black forest or nomad
- show Elo during load in
- Allow pre-game chat
- Allow chat in queue
- Add tech tree to queue
- Dynamic queue where if one player decides to leave the game, the queue doesn’t reset and just searches for another player to add while informing the other players and giving them the option to wait or leave
- and many more…
Actually isn’t a half bad concept, though needs to be altered severely… I would petition instead to reduce the K-Factor for people who want to only play one type of map. Adding points will likely mess up the rating system to the point of making the game unplayable. But if games basically come out to be smaller rating increases when you decide your map ahead of time, it shouldn’t skew ratings aside for people who chose to only play those maps.