Nice Matchmaking.

General Discussion
01/06/2018 11:48 PMPosted by Drothvader
01/06/2018 11:30 PMPosted by Toastytoast
URD is not a safe haven, if anything its worse then QM because the draft adds another 5-10 minutes onto the overall game.

URD is just QM with a draft screen. People are just going to play whatever hero they want and expect you to be the one to fill.

Telling people to go there is just going to make that problem worse.
I think the problem is not really URD itself but rather the fact that QM can be so horrendously silly that a lot of people do exactly what people and Blizzard say and play URD, except they just play it like QM and lock in whatever the hell they feel like.

I have a strong opinion about QM cause I play it a lot with my friends cause they do not like draft and I am convinced that if QM would be changed in some way the clowns in URD would at least be less numerous.
IMO

QM should be fair, let the comp aside, the match should be fair for bot teams, if one team has 3 warriors and 2 dps, the other team should have as well 3 warriors and 2 dps, or if one team have 4 supports and 1 specialist the other team as well should have 4 supports and 1 specialist, even if it takes more than 2 seconds to find the match, in example, in lol a normal match, the equivalent of qm, could be from 1 min minimum to 5 or more, and no one complain, so i dont think waiting will be a problem, and get rid of the stupid rule of no mirror matches that contribute as well to unfairnes in qm, like one team getting dva or sonya an the other getting alark or thrall as the only meelee in their respective teams.

And maybe the same level ranges and groups, lately I been in matches where one team has like two groups one of 2 and another of 3 and the other team is full solos, I remember one match were my team has a group of three all of them above 1000 lvl and the enemy where full solos and the highest of them were 350, we completely destroy them and win in less than 5 mins, and by min 8 or something like that we were ending, was in braxis, so if someone of the enemy team was a new player or not so veteran probably have a very bad experience ,

TL DR

I dont care about a weird comp as long as the enemy team has the same weird comp (not same heroes, just same rols)
01/07/2018 12:03 AMPosted by Derpanite
I think the problem is not really URD itself but rather the fact that QM can be so horrendously silly that a lot of people do exactly what people and Blizzard say and play URD, except they just play it like QM and lock in whatever the hell they feel like.

That's exactly what I'm saying though. The people that play QM play QM because they want to play a specific hero. When the experience is so bad that they can't take it anymore, people tell them to go play URD or HL and they go into those modes with the same mindset that they're just going to play the hero they want to play.

All it does is pushes a different problem into the draft modes and drags those modes down.

Draft modes should be for people who actually want to play a draft mode. Those looking to play a specific hero shouldn't be told to just go play a draft mode if they want better games. It doesn't fix any problems, it just makes a new problem.
01/06/2018 10:49 PMPosted by spinner198
01/06/2018 10:05 PMPosted by StrikerJolt
It's as if quickmatch mode is completely chaotic and can't always be perfect and unranked exist to have balance comps!

You're right. How dare somebody think that they can play a roughly balanced match of HotS without having to sit through drafts full of toxic players shouting at you for playing the hero you enjoy instead of "No you idiot GO SUPPORT!"

QM is just supposed to be the place where you don't have to draft, where you can play the hero you enjoy instead of the hero that your super pro teammates tell you to play or else they blame every lost team fight on you the entire match. Yes, it can be chaotic, but that doesn't mean the matchmaking in QM should be pants on head like it has been.

01/06/2018 10:34 PMPosted by Werbs
You do realize, Zarya pushes harder then Cho'gall does, you could have and should have raced that team.

Why would their team let you do that though? They just have to turn around and wipe you, and now they are up a level or two and you're all dead.


It sounds like you just don't enjoy the Moba because you're not skilled enough to be competitive.

Maybe you're just in the wrong genre and should find a genre that suits you more.
01/06/2018 09:43 PMPosted by spinner198
Edit: Were they a pre-made? Because that comp definitely looks like a pre-made.


it'd have to be to play cho'gall. chances are pretty good it'd be a group beyond just the cho'gall pairing as cassia and cho-gall are famously good auriel enablers and I wouldn't trust qm to just match that up on its own. I'd guess 3 + 2 parties or 4,1.

other bit to note is qm tends to class cassia as a bruiser, so matching her against dva or even zarya makes a bit more sense than a raw assassin. Other side doesn't have a 'sustain' for matching zarya though, and I'm not sure if the game will sometimes consider her a bruiser if a 'main healer' is on the team. But for typical qm matches, zarya is more likely the oddball unless she's in a party.

to the topic as hand, I would say the match is a bit more 'winnable' than not, but its less the hero classes matched (what you fixate on) and more the composition themselves.

Zarya is a hero than can swing sweeping all the stats if she can keep the energy. Not only is there plenty of damage to soak to keep shields up, dva is pretty good ally bait for taking hits too, so resources on zarya shouldn't be an issue. The rest, then largely comes down to specs.

most of the team comp can spec to enable more damage with aa talents, so you could have run a bloodlust comp, esp if the enemy team is deathballing. However, early game, you'd prob have issues locking cho'gall down, and cassia's armor + blind can negate a decent chunk of the effort — so even if you say, had a raynor in place of a warrior, you'd have similar difficulties on the composition.

The other rough part is a lack of % damage as parties built for cho'gall can cheese qm pretty hard if the game lacks a solid anti-cho'gall hero. So even with a bloodlust romp, your team is kinda lacking on a hero w/ giant killer to really burn down cho, which is significantly harder as the enemy side leans a bit more on disengage than your side had in functional dive heroes.

I will say i think damage numbers could have been better, and I think some talent specs could have helped with that, but overall, yea, it is a hard matchup, though a bit less i'd say for the lack of assassin, and more on the specific choice of heroes at hand. Getting anub instead of etc could have done wonders; I'd almost venture to say that just about any other warrior would have made for a better match
01/07/2018 01:23 AMPosted by Xenterex
other bit to note is qm tends to class cassia as a bruiser, so matching her against dva or even zarya makes a bit more sense than a raw assassin.

There is no such thing as a bruiser rule for QM.

The only roles that are mirrored are tanks, healers, and sustain (but not if there's a healer on your team)

Outside of that, you can't have more than 3 warriors, more than 4 assassins, more than 2 specialists, more than 2 supports.

No further QM rules beyond the above exist, except to state that Varian is considered a tank, Zarya is Sustain, and D.Va and Sonya are not considered tanks.

Everything else is fair game to the system.
01/07/2018 01:45 AMPosted by Drothvader
There is no such thing as a bruiser rule for QM.


That has been explicated stated. The last update on the rules for qm were what, in april, may of 2017? even that list says varian was a bruiser ruling at the time that's since been changed. Similarly, some topics on these qm topics often point out stuff regarding stealth, so there's been questions if that ruling has changed too.

Funnily, the phrased on how the warrior/support rule is vague, esp since last I checked, the 'blue' listings on qm rules don't specify there is a 'tank' rule, esp since the blog back in what, 2014 or '15 said blizz didn't find much occasion then to make a warrior/tank rule, but that has since changed.

I digress, but the latest phrasing i found only said that warriors were being classed as 'tanks' and 'bruisers' not that bruisers are an exception to the warrior mirroring for roles.

'bruiser' classing has been brought up in your other complaint threads before, and iirc, you chose to disregard those, but I don't think you claimed there wasn't a ruling, you just didn't reply anymore.

So sure, there's not 'official' source that deliberately says "there's a bruiser rule for qm"... but there's also not one for tanks. The phrasing is 'warriors'. I've been under the impression that the 'bruiser' ruling is akin to the sustain one and if there isn't a superseding role, then it might mirror roles in the matching.

My qm experience has generally been that if I queue a 'bruiser', I'm going to be matched against a 'bruiser'. I have generally found that some of these "but muh matchmaking" topics tend to reinforce that notion, or rather, suggest that the game 'made sense' to the ruling if there's an implied bruiser rule.
No SS, but yesterday I had:

KT, Jaina, Auriel, Valla, Abathur

vs

Nova, Tracer, Graymane, Uther, illidan

Guess which team won.
Anub ETC Dva Lúcio Murky here :D Fortunately it was garden terror
01/06/2018 09:41 PMPosted by Drothvader
https://imgur.com/a/HSFrn

D.Va, ETC, Zarya, Lucio, Rehgar vs Cho'gall, Uther, Cassia, Auriel

3 warriors and 2 support up against 1 warrior, 2 supports, and 2 assassins. We had absolutely no mathematical chance of winning.

In before some apologist tells me that this game was winnable.


Dunno what's worse, going against that chogall comp or playing pve against 3 specialists when we have 0 waveclear/specialist.
sorry but 3 support no wave clear and mathael on coins land is !@#$ not that your game was winable but having a game where you have to be 5 vs 1 to kill anything just suck.
I quote Blizzard when they are asked about the matchmaking (obviously not 100% how they said it but close enough, basically the same):

Blizzard: We like that matchmaking is basically about playing really quick and not knowing what may come at you or who your allies are. We like how it's currently just a a random quick to play feature.

Translation: We don't really care about quickmatch at the moment because thats not about e-sports and we are too busy with lootboxes and filling it up with skin colours and pointless avatars.

Or some bs like that, check out the latest blizzcon Q&A or wherever it was if you dont believe me.
You people b.itch and moan, and it makes it so obviously clear you weren't here a few years ago when qm matchmaking was completely random. Complete mash ups of roles and characters. No rules, just quick ques and horrid matches.

If you don't like random, go play draft. Its what its there for. You really sit there and expect to be able to play whatever hero you want and expect every matchup to be good? Jesus, you're thick
01/07/2018 12:07 PMPosted by BeefyBruce
You people b.itch and moan, and it makes it so obviously clear you weren't here a few years ago when qm matchmaking was completely random. Complete mash ups of roles and characters. No rules, just quick ques and horrid matches.

If you don't like random, go play draft. Its what its there for. You really sit there and expect to be able to play whatever hero you want and expect every matchup to be good? Jesus, you're thick


Just because it was really bad years ago doesn't mean it's not bad now, people can still complain mr.im-so-cool-i-played-for-years!
I played since the alpha and i complain about the matchmaking even now, its still bad even if they changed it a bit.
01/07/2018 04:05 AMPosted by Xenterex
So sure, there's not 'official' source that deliberately says "there's a bruiser rule for qm"... but there's also not one for tanks. The phrasing is 'warriors'. I've been under the impression that the 'bruiser' ruling is akin to the sustain one and if there isn't a superseding role, then it might mirror roles in the matching.

The bruiser role actually exists, and there are heroes classified as such, however, bruisers are not mirrored per side.

There are sources confirming the following rules are in place.

If one team gets a Tank, the other team will get a Tank, but no more than 2
Tanks per side.

If one team gets a Healer, the other team will get a Healer, but no more than 2 Healers per side.

If one team gets a Sustain, the other team will get a Sustain, but only if neither team has Healers, with no more than 1 Sustain per side.

The following heroes are designated as warriors but not considered tanks.

D.Va
Zarya
Sonya

All other Warriors, including Varian are considered tanks.

The following heroes are classified as Sustain

Medivh
Abathur
Tyrande
Zarya
Tassadar

All other supports are classified as healers.

As far as matching rules are concerned, there is no such rule that attempts to mirror the bruiser role across teams. Only tanks, healers, and sustain are mirrored, but not in exact numbers.
01/07/2018 12:07 PMPosted by BeefyBruce
You people b.itch and moan, and it makes it so obviously clear you weren't here a few years ago when qm matchmaking was completely random. Complete mash ups of roles and characters. No rules, just quick ques and horrid matches.
I was here. Yes, we could play against tank without a tank or support without a support but we had talent diversity to conform. We never had to face 5 specialists as 5 heroes with zero siege and never got 4 supports from autoselect when we queued as 5. Never had issues like "we need cc vs. X hero" and lost a match just because nobody had any.
01/07/2018 01:56 PMPosted by Amei
01/07/2018 12:07 PMPosted by BeefyBruce
You people b.itch and moan, and it makes it so obviously clear you weren't here a few years ago when qm matchmaking was completely random. Complete mash ups of roles and characters. No rules, just quick ques and horrid matches.
I was here. Yes, we could play against tank without a tank or support without a support but we had talent diversity to conform. We never had to face 5 specialists as 5 heroes with zero siege and never got 4 supports from autoselect when we queued as 5. Never had issues like "we need cc vs. X hero" and lost a match just because nobody had any.

That has more to do with heroes being more general in the past.

Blizzard has made active attempts through reworks to specialize heroes more and more.
Lost all my respect when you admitted to rage quitting out

For all you knew they were awful

Ive had comps FAR wonkier and still won. Its an uphill battle but it only takes a couple mistakes at endgame on their end...
01/07/2018 02:12 PMPosted by RisingDawn
Lost all my respect when you admitted to rage quitting out

I didn't rage quit out...

You can see a DEFEAT screen, something I wouldn't see if I didn't finish the game. I played the entire match.
What I don't understand is why Blizzard doesn't simply implement categories like "Sustain Bruiser" or "Offensive Support" and then match people with similar heroes? To answer my own question, now that I'm thinking about it, I'd have to say that the hero pool is simply not deep enough to implement that kind of system in quickmatch without turning it into just... match. I mean, how many offensive supports are there...? Two? Rhegar and Kharazim? How many sustain bruisers? Sonya? Dehaka?

Personally, I'd be fine with a slower QM for a more solid experience, but I know a couple of my friends I play QM with would not be. They don't know enough about the game to understand why a QM comp is fubarred, nor do they care, for the most part. They just want to get into a game in under 30 secs. If QM suddenly took 5 minutes to find a match, they (along with many other people) would certainly not be playing that mode, or possibly the game, at all. Now, in terms of overall player skill, that might not be such a bad thing, but losing a large chunk of your player base will make Blizzard less invested in the game and that's bad for everyone.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum