agreed, the map pool is horrible. I was having fun and now this just sucks. Arena and blackforest are awful. I never get arabia or gold rush and who the ■■■■ wants ranked nomad???
2 Likes
Please please please just allow us 7 vetoes even if it’s temporary, i want to play the game again
The people who care for the ranked echelons of leaderboard are unable to understand fun comes first for many people. If we had a healthy way to play the maps we enjoy with the players at our level we will happily leave ranked for the git gut people.
1 Like
Someone show this man his rank in the lobby! pronto! get em outta here
Agreed, but it won’t fix the issue alone, if i play 4v4 Nomad on the lobby all the time and if i get gut or other players get gut or the elo per skill simply increases in general(everyone was gaining more elo when i left); elo would be outdated and won’t help.
We need a second type of elo as many people doesn’t want glorious ranked elo to be mixed with 1v1 arina elo. So a majestic elo(for the ranked map pool) and a fake elo(for people who fools themselves fun is more important than upper echelons of the Imladris) can help. The ranked would be untouched by the likes of us and we; peasants would be able to have some fun.
2 Likes
In my defense, I’m an old school player that was most active from 2001-2006 and megarandom didn’t exist back then. I was an MSN Zone player.
I’m aware that pros used to play megarandom with mirror civ briefy some time after that period and before the FE days with the new civs … but I didn’t actually return until like late 2016 (AoR time) … and none of the pros were playing that then … due to it having too much RNG for good competitive play.
And I’m unaware if it’s still popular in community games or casually because I don’t play casually.
I know Nomad, Black Forest and Arena, etc, are popular because, like I said, I’m an old school player.
So, in my defense, I said “plus megarandom” because I didn’t really have any way of knowing how popular it is. Personally, I love the map, but not for competive play. I’ll be playing it myself when I’m in the mood (I’m sure I’ll alternate between banning it and black forest).
It’s impossible to make a similar matchmaking to Voobly when Voobly doesn’t have matchmaking.
Voobly has ranked lobbies. Not matchmaking.
Personally, I’m glad there are no ranked lobbies because it’s anti-point trading and anti-farming points off of lower players. You shouldn’t be able to pick your opponent in ranked mode. I’m an oldschool player but I definitely think modernized matchmaking is a good thing. I’m just glad they changed the map pool and added the map ban system. I love every one of the 8 maps … although I’d prefer to ban the water ones at least until one day when I finally decide to learn some water map build orders 11. (It would be the second time in 20 years. I used to know an old Islands one for Vikings and 1.0c patch … but I don’t even remember that one and it wouldn’t be good anymore 11).
3 Likes
No, they know that, the thing is that in ranked balance comes first.
#ShowTheELOInLobbies
That would be good tbh
I get it now. Yeah, MR seems like a good map to play for fun, but not competitively.
I also think that matchmaking is better, but the way things are going it feels like just copying what voobly has done would have done much less damage to DE than the current system. Having a separated ladder for each map style would make things much simpler and people wouldn’t get angry, but then people start saying abt how the player base is small rn, and I agree, but something has to be done to increase it, since rn it feels like we’re losing more people than getting more playing DE. I wouldn’t mind if they used voobly’s system temporarily just so they can get people back into the game.
After the initial hype it’s normal to lose a few players as some people will still be unhappy NO MATTER how much the game is fixed and improved. And some people lack patience, too.
The important thing is it’s vastly more players than are playing HD and AoE2 is more active than it’s been for years. There isn’t really any problem finding games but there will be if you change it so it’s a different player base per map …
… I think the matchmaking is wonderful. It was good just to have it before … but the map pool was odd and there was no map ban system. Now the map pool is fantastic AND there’s a map ban system. Matchmaking is perfect now, imo.
3 Likes
Voobly has ranked lobbies. Not matchmaking.
Call it matchmaking, marriage for 30 min, or whatever you want. Point is, it is a way to bring people together for a game. To me that is matchmaking
Voobly has ranked lobbies.
On voobly you can choose to play ranked or unranked in the lobby you are creating.
1 Like
+10000 u absolutely made my point
It is all about human psychology. People hate to admit it is their fault when something ends badly. So, when you lose a game , you tend to blame everything but do not accept it is mostly your fault. When you lose , you might often cry about 
:
- the civs
- the map
- the gold placement
- the weather outside
- the president of Brazil being bad
4 Likes
Bring back player choice. Even if I was the best in the world at Arena, I wouldn’t play it because it’s boring. Allow users to pick all maps they want to play instead of map bans.
Map bans are an attempt to make the system work for everyone, but in reality this matchmaking system can never work for everyone. No one is going to stay pleased when you 1) Can’t choose the map you want to play. 2) Can’t see if your opponent has picked a civ. 3) You’re unable to play any other maps ranked outside of matchmaking.
It’s an outright idiotic system, a huge downgrade from previous lobby systems.
It’s much better to offer multiple queues per popular maptype, let players choose what they want to play. Waiting times will be tied to popularity, let them decide.
There are many other maps that players might want to play ranked, this is currently impossible in AOE2DE. This also limits opportunities for new maps to gain popularity, causing continuous damage. It’s integral to AOE2 to have a fully featured ranked lobby, the game is too organic to contain inside of a limited matchmaking system.
I hope the devs will make a 180° turn on the multiplayer section. A bit shorter waiting times or a bit more accurate elo is not worth having my freedom removed.
4 Likes
I am pleased with the system because i dont care about the map or the civs i care about the challenge. If you ever tried to find a fair match up in HD you would have noticed that some players absolutly destroy on Maps like Arena, Black Forest or Nomad because thats all they play. I cant compete with them even if the Elo tells me otherwise. I made a change in HD to playing mostly Arabia and went down 100 Elo in a week. In DE so far my matches have been really fair because of the system in place. But i still agree that we need some way of finding a a balance in unranked lobbies.
2 Likes
I assume you post here to support the system. You are pleased because you don’t care and appreciate a challenge? That’s not very specific, yet you are supporting a system that limits others. Currently you can’t pick maps and you can’t see if your opponent picks civ, you think your criteria justify or are benefitted by not having previously basic MP features?
What about a seperate ‘random queue’ that just picks a MM queue for you? Would that not keep the challenge while others can still choose their favorite map?
If you ever tried to find a fair match up in HD you would have noticed that some players absolutly destroy on Maps like Arena, Black Forest or Nomad because thats all they play.
I don’t see why DE elo would be more accurate in that regard, other than that you can’t pick opponent.
I made a change in HD to playing mostly Arabia and went down 100 Elo in a week.
You started playing arabia, and your elo adjusted. What is the problem then? What kind of miracles do you expect?
So your argument is that elo can be slightly more accurate, so let’s throw out basic MP features?
But i still agree that we need some way of finding a a balance in unranked lobbies.
Just make it ranked… Like it has been for 20 years.
You always write like the ability to play your favorit map and civ have been taken away from you when in fact you can still play like you want with the only change being that you are not getting a competitiv rank. You also say that having more options is more important then having an accurate Elo, but that is the whole point of playing competitive. The system is setup in a way to match people of equal skill together under the same ruleset. Having different Elos for the many ways Age of Empires can be played isnt feasible. Having a single pool with different maps makes sure that Elo stays comparable and that queue times are low. Adding some sort of indicator for the lobby system would solve your issue without removing the benefits the ranked queue offers.
3 Likes
I’m getting sick of casual players coming here complaining about ranked when in reality what they want is to play like unranked (aka choose any map and setting they want)
It’s the exact equivalent of you having a toy, but ur toy broke, then u decided to steal ur brother’s toy. After a bit ur bother’s toy breaks as well and now u’re going to ur parents complain that ur brother’s toy broke and u want them to fix it instead of asking them to fix ur toy instead.
Ranked needs to be competitive and to have a matchmaking, the focus is to have a balanced system and accurate elo.
If you want to have freedom and play whatever you want, unranked is exactly for that. If it feels too unbalanced rn then you should make a post complaining about unranked instead of demanding ranked to act like unranked.
7 Likes
Isn’t elo of vital importance if you want to play fair matches online? How can you act like it isn’t? You want me to slay noobs all day in the lobby? Sorry but…
You also say that having more options is more important then having an accurate Elo
Obviously, elo is just a tool. Definitely not something to be limited by.
but that is the whole point of playing competitive
.No… Point of MM is speed and convenience. The point is definitely not to make a stupid number match my skill level as close as possible. It’s important but by all means not “the whole point”.
Having different Elos for the many ways Age of Empires can be played isnt feasible.
I don’t want multiple elo’s, just seperate MM queues for the most popular gametypes.
Having a single pool with different maps makes sure that Elo stays comparable and that queue times are low.
Elo will still not be accurate per map but more like an “average”. The only difference is that DE forces players to play more varied, and you can’t pick opponent which avoids inflation. In my way queue times will be good for the maps that are popular, and if maptypes lose popularity times will be longer and it might be more beneficial to host in the lobby. This way no one is forced.
Where does this notion come from these days that you have to play all kinds of maps on ranked?
aka choose any map and setting they want
The only thing I want is pick map and know if my enemy has picked a civ, is that so weird???
Voobly and all other platforms since the beginning of time are totally wrong?
If one wants elo to be applied to a map pool equaly then it needs to be somewhat random the map u’re gonna play, AoE2 DE isn’t the first one to do a system like this by far.
This kills the purpose of having a balanced matchmaking pool system.
you can already see the civ he picked at the beginning of the match.
Voobly’s system, altho it works for it, it isn’t a matchmaking.
All other platforms use a system very similar to what AoE2 uses, some could be even more strict.
Even Starcraft 2 uses the exact same system AoE2 is using rn.
The only thing that’s an issue for sure rn is having mega random in the map pool.
2 Likes