Thank god you’re removing at least some of the boot from up goliath’s rear. Poor guy needs it.
I’m so glad you are going to tune the repulsor to affect each monster differently, or have each monster consume the Repulsor’s ammo differently.
YEEESSS! I’m so happy to hear this. hunter’s effectiveness drastically varies between monsters. Jack is too much for Goliath, where maybe he isn’t as effective against Kraken.
Well, not to berate, but my team and I were all a Golden Team, we even went against of a couple of the TRS guys, one nite, we start up a match, i get the uber awesome DXGI crash, team loses, we get flung immidietly into Silver Skilled.
I take it the hunt win ratios are messed up by the good monsters who have no similarly skilled players to fight against and end up stomping the lower levels?
Yup. Since we allow players to specifically choose sides now, we have a team imbalance. In the old system some of those good monster players would have been forced to play Hunter and some of those mediocre Hunter players would have been forced to be Monster. Now we have two distinct player pools fighting against each other and they are completely asymmetrical.
Additionally, we need to do a better job of sorting the Hunters. We didn’t take into account player experience when grouping Hunters into the placement matches. So you could very well have a 500 hour player teamed up with a day 1 player which isn’t going to go well for the Hunters. It’s a bit messy. A lot of stuff going on with the matchmaking that is or isn’t affecting balance which is one of the reasons I have been reluctant to share a lot of data so far. I didn’t want people to start making assumptions about character balance based on numbers that may or may not be matchmaking related.
We are getting stuff figured out and have been making improvements on a daily basis, most of which happen behind the scenes on the server side.
It would be nice to see if this kind of thing can be included in the matchmaking where possible, for the sake of both parties. It can’t be guaranteed all the time with current player numbers but when possible would be great.
I can see that it’s a difficult thing to appease the masses craving information without shooting yourselves in the foot or backing yourselves into a corner. Very much appreciate the insights you can give when you are able to, like this. Thanks @MacMan.
What is the difference between arena and hunt overall. I am guessing arena is holding fairly steady at around 50% as it was before, due to it not being heavily affected by the matchmaking change.
How drastic is the hunt w/l ratio, 60/40, 70/30?
The big problem is the matchmaking, uh, complication?, which just caused an issue of putting the hunters rank in the hands of the lowest player,
I know it is only semi relevant, it would be interesting to know where it lies now, to compare for the future.
This is something I’ve been curious about since day 0. My gut feeling is that no matter how good the individual hunters are at their roles, throwing 4 randoms together (especially if they’re not using voice) will never be quite as good as a team that knows both the game and each other, and I’ve had no idea whether that’s true or how it will end up affecting balance if it is.
Will be interesting to watch play out, if nothing else.
Bring the Kraken down!
Can we make Jack say “down boy, down i say” in his typical Jack like way, when he does that?
@MacMan can we get a chart compare the damage of markov and torvald pre and post patch please?
You are correct.
Arena mode was 49.4% Monster wins yesterday.
Hunt was 62.4% Monster wins yesterday.
Hunt was 51.8% Monster wins on Tuesday when we had matchmaking real strict.
The problem with Tuesday was super long wait times for everyone. When we loosen the restrictions, time to get into a match improves but the quality of the matches declines. So it’s a balance that we are trying to find. As we collect more data each day and continue to adjust the numbers, we keep learning more and making more progress. Additionally, if we can group skilled Hunters more reliably, the system can afford to be more strict because there are more high level Hunter teams available for high level monster players.
What’s the challenge with reliably grouping skilled hunters?
The current system only determines your personal skill based on whether or not your entire team wins or loses a match. Obviously mixing good and bad players together results in consistent mediocre performance. The problem is separating the good players from the bad ones when the system only looks at the entire team.
The system doesn’t determine skill level based on the entire team winning or losing.
Individual performances play a big role in the number of points each player gets/loses for each fight.
I’m afraid individual performance doesn’t go into it, only individual points. Check out this:
I dunno then how I have the exact same rank and similar points to a friend of mine, yet we both get drastically different points at the end of a match.
also depends on how many games you have played. when you play more games the system memorizes how you usualy preform and predicts off of that. Its hard to explain but me and my friend have the same thing going on.
Also depends on how consistant you arem for example if you take 1 month break from the game, your score will be the same when you come back, but winning or losing your first few matches will have huge amount of point gain or loss.
Are you guys going to make new maps for Hunt 2.0 or Defend in the future ?