The KD Ratio Head Scratcher
What I'm looking for is some insight into how lobbies are made, and how XP is factored in. For context, I've been playing BR's (Fortnite and Warzone mainly) for 5 years, and jumped into Apex about 3 ...
Forum Discussion
@NickBeam27
This one in particular I have not read (though I will), but I've read a few white papers on eomm. I'm not at all convinced that the concept is inherently evil, just that it is poorly implemented in this game, as is the sbmm which it overlays.
For me it boils down to the fact that whenever a game has a skill ceiling as high as this one does, ANY kind of matchmaking algorithm will struggle no matter on what criteria you base it. With that always in the back of my mind, I start to ask myself at the end of any given match: If I know I'm set to lose roughly 90-92% of my matches, does it really matter to me if they're close losses or blow out losses? To me it really doesn't. I know it does to most people, and they're not wrong. Losing 90% of matches because you had no chance of winning is not the same as losing 90% of matches in hard-fought, close call endings. Except to me it kinda is the same. I guess I'm the guy eomm was built to suck in.
This one in particular I have not read (though I will), but I've read a few white papers on eomm. I'm not at all convinced that the concept is inherently evil, just that it is poorly implemented in this game, as is the sbmm which it overlays.
For me it boils down to the fact that whenever a game has a skill ceiling as high as this one does, ANY kind of matchmaking algorithm will struggle no matter on what criteria you base it. With that always in the back of my mind, I start to ask myself at the end of any given match: If I know I'm set to lose roughly 90-92% of my matches, does it really matter to me if they're close losses or blow out losses? To me it really doesn't. I know it does to most people, and they're not wrong. Losing 90% of matches because you had no chance of winning is not the same as losing 90% of matches in hard-fought, close call endings. Except to me it kinda is the same. I guess I'm the guy eomm was built to suck in.
@reconzerobegs a question, lot of Apex players are game spammers that barely climb ranked ladder but could get 20 bomb game occasionaly,
then... why not reward more RP for kills and less for surviving?
if a guy survives but gets barely kills, give him some RP,
not enough RP to to climb a whol/half a tier... eg: 0/800 to Bronze 2 -> 400/800 to Bronze 2, just bc u survived to top5,4,3...
why not give the 9 killer +200 RP and the 0 killer +20 RP because at least they managed to survive?
"because that would reward killing instead of point of BR which is getting 1st place"
- what's the point of ranked gamemode then?
.... also it's not as if a person that is trigger happy can't run out of resources or get caught with no shields or even low HP..
"because the people would start stalling instead of fighting"
if people cared about climbing ranks, there wouldn't be so many plats/diamonds and smurfs in bronze...
- @damsonwhufndthis Less. For. Surviving. YES. The point for me is certainly not winning, it's just having a good ol' time which means a kill or two (and stumbling into a win on occasion). That 1 kill makes me feel like a superhero which is the point. Feeling great!
- @ChasingGeekdom tbh winning doesn't feel satisfying anymore, no matter how much I helped,
but kills..., getting kills vs players that don't just stand like target dummy is a good feeling, because you know if you missed 3 more bullets it would be game over...
@reconzero if only the Champions got RP, there would be only Bronze 5 players and Predator and nothing inbetween in ranked- @damsonwhufndthis
"if only the Champions got RP, there would be only Bronze 5 players and Predator and nothing inbetween in ranked"
Not true at all. Number of wins divided by number of matches played. Take the data and bell curve it. You would have a player distribution exactly like we do now. My guess is that 1 percenters would be bronze, 2-3 would be silver 4-5 gold, 6-10 plat, 11-15 diamond, 16-25 master, 25+ predator. Or something like that. It isn't impervious to boosting, or to sandbagging, or to smurfing, but neither is what we have now, and it would have the benefit of encouraging players to think about the bigger picture. BR is not TDM. And now that we actually have TDM I've noticed that BR players continue to behave exactly as if they're in TDM. It's depressing and I would like to see the game do whatever it can to punitively discourage that kind of thinking.
@damsonwhufndthis
Suddenly we've veered into a discussion of rank. And while it is related, it isn't at all what I was thinking about with eomm. I'd would even wager that if we got a look at the secret mm algorithm this game uses then we'd discover that eomm has less weight in ranked than it does in pubs. Probably a lot less.
Separately:
"why not give the 9 killer +200 RP and the 0 killer +20 RP because at least they managed to survive?"
In my opinion you're wrong on both counts. 9 kills plus second place should earn you ZERO rp. Zero kills plus second place should earn you ZERO rp. RP should be for winners. Period. Win or lose. No one cares how you get there. And no one cares how hard you worked for second place - you still lost.
"if people cared about climbing ranks, there wouldn't be so many plats/diamonds and smurfs in bronze..."
They care. But not to the exclusion of creating secondaries so they can kill scrubs for fun. Becuase in the end most people are dbags, especially when they can hide in the anonymity of the internet.
Featured Places
