Lobbies are magical places.
Here are some quick brainstorming ideas.
- If someone is searching for a match on Arabia and there are players hosting Arabia lobbies, then the matchmaking system can place that player in a lobby.
- When a matchmaking game is created (either 1v1 or TG), keep that game in a persistent lobby when the match is over. That makes it easier for rematches, either for players who want to play each other again or who want to play the same setting again. Also makes it easier for spectators.
- Allow custom settings in the lobbies that arenât in the matchmaking queue. That way people can play maps like HyperRandom, custom versions of Arabia, CBA, or whatever else they want, but still have a ranked system to be able to find games.
- Players can be queued into âongoingâ lobbies. That is, if someone wants to play BF and they see a BF game, they can be placed as a spectator for an ongoing match. Then they play the next game while the losing team gets kicked off. That way players actually have something to do (spectate a match) while they wait, rather than just sitting at a screen with a clock.
- Quickmatch doesnât need to be a separate queue and menu system. It can be an option when matchmaking to place players into unranked lobbies.
I actually feel like the matchmaking system is one of the key issues where DE needs a major overhaul. Donât get me wrong, itâs very convenient for finding some types of games. But there is such a wide variety of ways that people play Aoe2, and the âranked queueâ represents merely a small number of them. I think thereâs a lot of room for experimentation and new ideas.
5 Likes
itâs not hypothetical situations. waiting times were literally hours for the most popular maps
only benefit of lobby was that i could boot all the people who picked civs
DE got a lot of things wrong, but copying SC2 matchmaking was what they did right. they just need to adjust the MM so that itâs fairer and to stop revealing the map. if someone wants to pick civs, then they should have to deal with the possibility that they might not get the best map and position for it
Or just lock civ upon entering the queue and making it so colors no longer represent civ positions.
Hidden pick civ is a wonderful boon to the playerbase. Itâs wonderful to no longer be forced into random civs or suffer intentional counter civ picks.
Honestly, long before de I avoided random civ lobbies like the plague, I still do, because they are not enjoyable to be forced into.
locking civs before entering the queue only works for 1v1. you donât know who your teamgame allies will be and you donât want to end up with duplicate picks or you lose a team bonus
Picking civs with allies is fun, itâs only the picking of positions thatâs not.
In anycase, civ picking as a team with the enemy team civs hidden from you is well within the realm of good sportsmanship.
When I play 1v1s, I always turn the random civ tick box on, and then also pick my civ. With Arabia though, I make a conscious effort to not pick the S-tier civs though. I agree that color linked to position should be removed.
1 Like
It would be great for team lobbies to also integrate into the ranked match making system - to queue from a lobby with a set team with prearranged civs if wanted(hidden from viewers as well as hidden civs from prying eyes of lobby interlopers unless they join the lobby.
As well as for the team to return to that lobby upon completing a game to better increase the ability for a squad to stick together.
Well, time to make a thread.
Delusional, legit bordering insanity
But this is EXACTLY what Voobly was. On Voobly everyone played Random civ, making the game skillfully instead of giving Elos to build order zombies and Franks, Britons OP picker. The incapability of the devs to nerf these civs aside, ranked lobbies would be fun because it refreshes the meta and allows player to grow and needing them to adapt to what the game gives to them.
The best solution is just matchmaking that places players in persistent Lobbies and balances the teams accordingly and with infinitive map bans. But this wonât happen cause they wonât and probably canât do it.
And HealFortress thinking counter picking civ is âbad sportsmanshipâ is justâŠ, I know why I put him on Ignore. This civ picker thinks he can just go on skipping 1/39 of the game and calling it skill, probably playing the most broken civ like Franks 100% of the time. This dude seems to defend it so hard, that I just wished civ picking isnât anymore and ranked would be about skill again.
He actually plays Teutons most of the time. Have you ever seen him play? It is very much off meta, and not a style Iâm a fan of, but it isnât what you think it is.
Wait in voobly 1v1 huns is like the majority of majority of game. Did you even play 1v1 at voobly? at mid level (20+) at least?
Title of game lobby is literally â1v1 Arabia / GA Hunsâ for 50% of the 1v1 games
The main issue of ranked lobbies is that itâs not automatic. If I am not mainstream player (aka Socorta lovers, Hoang, tower rushâŠ), I am likely to get banned or have a much lengthed waiting time, itâs sacrificing diversity for nothing.
The argument that it fixes the meta is pretty weird. If I play at 4v4 TG, and I actually wish to play some sub-meta strategy (just saying, e.g. double archers on one side), I will simply be kicked from lobby the second time because itâs sub-meta, so in the end everyone in ranked lobby will just play archer+knight builds.
1 Like