2v2 random: why it really sucks. A lot.

(Rone) · 09-29-2013, 05:51 PM

(09-28-2013 09:25 AM)Bbobb555 Wrote: One suggestion I have for 2v2r is that if one person times out, then he loses twice as many league points, and his partner loses none. This makes it okay if a partner times out, and it provides incentive to see the game out to its end rather than stall.

As for just having a bad partner, that is part of the game, sometimes you will get unlucky but if you are actually good these will be minor setbacks.

On another online game you could poorly score someone based on if they dropped from a game. Especially if it was a decent game going. It would point out a player would have a tenancy to drop out of games and restrictions could be set for league games of what % you prefer a person has a rep to drop. It would help promote people not to drop from games.

Flarp55 · 09-30-2013, 01:45 AM

(09-29-2013 05:10 PM)Pastil* Wrote:
(09-28-2013 09:25 AM)Bbobb555 Wrote: One suggestion I have for 2v2r is that if one person times out, then he loses twice as many league points, and his partner loses none. This makes it okay if a partner times out, and it provides incentive to see the game out to its end rather than stall.

As for just having a bad partner, that is part of the game, sometimes you will get unlucky but if you are actually good these will be minor setbacks.

Yes i agree it is part of the game but to call it minor setbacks? lol

well bad partners aren't that common. im in fluffy, 8-10 games and not one bad partner, just timeouts.

phineas94 · (This post was last modified: 09-30-2013 04:48 AM by phineas94.)

(09-28-2013 09:25 AM)Bbobb555 Wrote: As for just having a bad partner, that is part of the game, sometimes you will get unlucky but if you are actually good these will be minor setbacks.

agreed

(09-28-2013 09:25 AM)Bbobb555 Wrote: One suggestion I have for 2v2r is that if one person times out, then he loses twice as many league points, and his partner loses none. This makes it okay if a partner times out, and it provides incentive to see the game out to its end rather than stall.

For some reason the point spread for a win/loss in the lower divisions seems to be weighted more towards the negative so 1 loss could cancel out 2 wins so what you're suggesting could go some way to addressing this, a tad harsh on a player who had a legitimate reason to time out, but hey. Also, I don't feel that this would be a deterrent to the player thinking of timing out as the majority are just out there, trying a new game, not getting on with it (tactically or due to it's asynchronous nature) and moving on never to be seen again. But, while this will be okay for your league points it doesn't take into consideration the loss in your hidden rank or the shift in your win/loss ratio so your prospects of promotion are taking a hit every time someone times out on you. As you are more likely to be partnered with players who will "time out" in Fluffy League

&

you basically want to get out of there as quickly as possible in order to play more meaningful games. The only fix that ticks most boxes in the "fairness" stakes would be to enable the remaining player to take over the turn of their absent partner. Until then I still recommend the invite.

(09-29-2013 05:51 PM)(Rone) Wrote: On another online game you could poorly score someone based on if they dropped from a game. Especially if it was a decent game going. It would point out a player would have a tenancy to drop out of games and restrictions could be set for league games of what % you prefer a person has a rep to drop. It would help promote people not to drop from games.

It would be great to have 'in game' stats, you wouldn't even have to personally score anyone as the system itself could just log "time outs" you incurred and have a "% games completed" section. However, I'm pretty sure most people would set their limit at 99-100% and I still reckon most of the drop outs are new players who just don't care.

Flarp55 · 09-30-2013, 09:35 AM

There's no such thing as a legitimate reason to time out. If you're going to time out, then just quit.

phineas94 · 09-30-2013, 06:58 PM

(09-30-2013 09:35 AM)Bbobb555 Wrote: There's no such thing as a legitimate reason to time out. If you're going to time out, then just quit.

Unfortunately real life can get in the way of playing this lovely little game and if, for whatever reason, someone is unable to or have the inclination to play the game, then I'm not going to start pointing fingers and shout "time waster". A little bit of consideration is needed methinks.

Juslas · 10-01-2013, 05:10 PM

outwitters://viewgame?id=ahRzfm91dHdpdHRlcnNnYW1lLWhyZHIVCxIIR2FtZVJvb20YgICAgKye2wkM

Doing single turn - then timing out. Scoring system does not care.
ST fluffy against master fluffy. Matchmaking system does not care either.

Lifesycle of Outwitters is ending?

2v2 game mode - league atleast, should be excluded from free version.

phineas94 · 10-01-2013, 06:43 PM

(10-01-2013 05:10 PM)Juslas Wrote: Lifesycle of Outwitters is ending?

With that pairing it certainly looks to be in a bit of a dip

(10-01-2013 05:10 PM)Juslas Wrote: 2v2 game mode - league atleast, should be excluded from free version.

I agree. Possibly all forms of league play should be restricted. Friendlies only until a purchase. Or

(04-15-2013 09:47 PM)phineas94 Wrote: On a side note, there has been one recurring thought on my journey from the netherworld and that is that OML are losing vast numbers of potential players by allowing complete newbies access to all forms of the game. In my experience over half of all new payers I met who were completing their placement game timed out. My suggestion would be to only allow 1v1 games to be chosen until you have 10 wins, this would then unlock 2v2 matched pairs. After another 10 wins random 2v2 is unlocked. This wouldn't turn every new player into an Outwitter's addict but it might claim a few.

Juslas · 10-01-2013, 07:25 PM

Phineas94 - that's an rewarding idea. Sorry not seconding it earlier. Too long a post Wink

Juslas · 10-11-2013, 03:32 PM

(09-15-2013 06:04 PM)phineas94 Wrote:
(09-15-2013 04:42 PM)Juslas Wrote: I am waiting random partner to face arranged teams ranked at top 10, top 20 and top 100.

In 1v1 the system tries to match you with a similarly skilled opponent for the first couple of days or so. Failing that it assigns you anyone from the player base as a whole which is why the Poweewees and Alvendors often get matched up with lower league opponents. If the same is happening here then you have to hope a top R2V2 player opens a game soon otherwise your partner may be a little fluffy. Let us know how it pans out. Good luck

outwitters://viewgame?id=ahRzfm91dHdpdHRlcnNnYW1lLWhyZHIVCxIIR2FtZVJvb20YgICAgJSU1AoM

I was paired with fluffy after 2 days waiting against arranged team ranked 6th.
They are now ranked 5th and partner is promoted to clever league.
We played ok. Some unnecessary moves on our behalf - wit efficiency is not something random teams are good for.
But we had FTA - opponent clearly superior with skill and we end up having exciting match. Well played all of us.

PhilAvery · 10-11-2013, 08:02 PM

HumboldtHiller was really punching above his weight there, so that was an impressive game from him. Gg all though.