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

[Chas3r 926]

One thing that seems to be the proble with 2v2 random is u don't know what ur partner'a race is going to be, so maybe if u are p3 or p4 then you should be able to see your partner'a race before selecting yours

[=) Random Task (=]

(09-26-2013 11:09 PM)Chas3r Wrote:  One thing that seems to be the proble with 2v2 random is u don't know what ur partner'a race is going to be, so maybe if u are p3 or p4 then you should be able to see your partner'a race before selecting yours

yep... I second this.

---

(09-26-2013 06:36 PM)onealexleft Wrote:  

(08-31-2013 06:07 AM)Gf!sh Wrote:  The main point, really is that [b]random pairs can be matched against arranged pairs.

Point taken, but this was a decision made early on as a stop-gap of a dwindling player pool further down the road. Better to play a game than to not play a game at all.

makes sense!

---

(09-25-2013 08:09 PM)phineas94 Wrote:  

(09-23-2013 03:17 AM)Random Task Wrote:  His argument was that its not fair play and here I agree with him.

I don't feel Spillblood's stance was about the unfairness of the system as who has it been unfair to? The opponents who have just won a game and been accredited with all increases in points and hidden rank? No. Your "invited" partner who was just about to lose a game anyhow and suffer the subsequent point loss? No. The player using the system? Obviously not.

The only possible "unfairness" aspect I can see, and this is stretching it a bit, is that if a player were to abuse the system other players would have to look at that player's name at the top of the list instead of their own. Not the end of the world is it?

Anyhow, it's been 5 months or so since posting and I don't believe anyone out there has been abusing it. Again, I feel it would be fairly easy to spot - time will tell.

it is always a question where you draw the line... in terms of fair competition for top list ranks i would say the decision whether a game should count as a game with random partners or arranged teams should be fixed before the game is started and not after you know whether you will win or loose in a fair competition for a 2v2 random rank. You found a way around the original design (where you select a partner or choose random before the game starts) and I therefore join Spillblood in expressing an opinion that your "optimisation strategy" is not fair play but rather an exploit of a loophole in the game design.

[phineas94]

(09-26-2013 11:45 PM)Random Task Wrote:  it is always a question where you draw the line... in terms of fair competition for top list ranks i would say the decision whether a game should count as a game with random partners or arranged teams should be fixed before the game is started and not after you know whether you will win or loose in a fair competition for a 2v2 random rank. You found a way around the original design (where you select a partner or choose random before the game starts) and I therefore join Spillblood in expressing an opinion that your "optimisation strategy" is not fair play but rather an exploit of a loophole in the game design.

I know what you're saying and I don't think I can convince you otherwise but here goes anyhow.

Until I see or hear of evidence of players using the system unscrupulously, and this obviously only applies to players in the top 150, I remain in the corner of "useful tool" (when used with a partner who is about to time out) as opposed to "optimisation strategy" (used by some sad little gamer who wants to be top). I believe players who have fought long and hard to be in the lists would be far too proud to debase themselves by using the system just to avoid a loss where they had been outplayed or played badly. Maybe I have too great a faith in humanity Basically it's not the device that's unfair, it's the user.

And again, to explain why top players wouldn't use the system. As Juslas has stated, top R2v2 players are being consistently partnered with R2v2 Supertitans (Of which there are only about 16 active ones). The law of diminishing returns would kick in with every "invite" used in order to avoid a defeat. You would randomly get matched up with someone who you were now in an arranged pair set up with, therefore no points for your random record. 2v2 games take long enough as it is so I don't believe this is a burden any top player would carry lightly.

As for system exploits it would be preferable for a fix like Imperial Sun suggested (see above) or something along the lines of a "Career Reset" option if you suffered multiple time outs in your placement games, like I did, condemning you to Fluffy . The only other exploit I can think of in the game, and one that apparently is abused, is "queue stacking". It would be nice to see this fixed also.

[Ludo_06]

I played with a fluffy 2 days ago against 2 ST in 2v2 random

outwitters://viewgame?id=ahRzfm91dHdpdHRlcnNnYW1lLWhyZHIVCxIIR2FtZVJvb20YgICAgISangoM

[phineas94]

(09-28-2013 04:11 AM)Ludo_06 Wrote:  I played with a fluffy 2 days ago against 2 ST in 2v2 random

outwitters://viewgame?id=ahRzfm91dHdpdHRlcnNnYW1lLWhyZHIVCxIIR2FtZVJvb20YgICAgISangoM

Thanks Ludo! That really helped

But that just highlights another system problem, the matchmaking one.

While you're here though, out of the top 20 R2v2 players, how many of those have you been partnered with?

[[PETA] Doodat]

He partnered against robberjames who wasn't top 20 against my alt and Mycotic

[phineas94]

Nice replay though. I've lost quicker than that on the beach

[Flarp55]

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.

[Juslas]

To question about top payers playing against each other. There is one I haven't encountered yet. Top 10 that is.

[TheQwertiest]

(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