Competitive Play is live

[Manthis]

One thing that slightly annoys me is that people in general don't try to flank when defending a point or defending against a payload (save for the good players). All it takes 1-2 people to completely mess up their attacks.

Just because you have a Reinhardt doesn't mean you shouldn't attack them from the sides too.

[Radaney]

Yeh I'm passing on competitive until they first remove sudden death and second fix the ridiculous leaver skill gain penalty.

[xerus]

One thing that slightly annoys me is that people in general don't try to flank when defending a point or defending against a payload (save for the good players). All it takes 1-2 people to completely mess up their attacks.

Just because you have a Reinhardt doesn't mean you shouldn't attack them from the sides too.

Attackers are just as bad about this.

For example, there are like 5 different paths to get the the first point on Numbani. Yet most games everyone just follows the street or takes the first door in a clump.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeh I'm passing on competitive until they first remove sudden death and second fix the ridiculous leaver skill gain penalty.

So, see you late September then.

[Radaney]

Attackers are just as bad about this.

For example, there are like 5 different paths to get the the first point on Numbani. Yet most games everyone just follows the street or takes the first door in a clump.

- - - Updated - - -



So, see you late September then.

Yup, QM til then!

[CptHandjob]

I love this ranking system

[xerus]

I love this ranking system

Well it's obvious they didn't play the entire match. Did they d/c for most of it? That would explain the loss since a d/c and rejoin can bug and give you a loss regardless of win or not.

It's a known issue.

[Jester Joe]

It isn't required, it is however helpful and if you cant help yourself then you cant help anyone.

If you want to continue to use the random group button then dont come on the forums bitching that you get screwed with the random group button when you know full well what it does, gets you random groups that may or may not be bad.

If you don't know that the random group button can randomly give you bad groups, well I could insult peoples intellect but it would just go over their heads.

The point is competitive shouldn't be giving you randomly bad groups, unless you're a bad player yourself, which in that case you'd be playing with people around your skill level, and that means competitive is working great.

It should be grouping you up with people similar to your level in skill, not Reinhardts that love to just charge at turrets from across the map, or Mercys that pocket buff the Widowmaker, unless you're one to do those types of things yourself.

What you're talking about is applicable to Quick Match, not to competitive, and it certainly should not be the way competitive should be thought about.

[Deleted]

The point is competitive shouldn't be giving you randomly bad groups, unless you're a bad player yourself, which in that case you'd be playing with people around your skill level, and that means competitive is working great.

So much this. The whole point of competitive should be (or so I was hoping) that it's competitive. Nothing competitive about steamrolling one match because your team is great and the enemy sucks, and then getting steamrolled the next match because your Widow stands out in plain sight, you have two Soldier/Hanzo/Genji, and nobody will ever switch to counter the Junkrat wiping them over and over.

It shouldn't be totally fucking random, and anybody who thinks it's fine being like that doesn't understand what the word "competitive" means. Right now it's somehow worse than QM for the level of bad you encounter playing solo.

[Eapoe]

Not sure why everyone is so upset about the ranking system. Most people in the thread complaining are solo and stating how bad it is. I hate pointing out the obvious, but you're SOLO. If you're tired of playing with people that are "bad," start finding people that stand out to you in games and try to strike up a conversation. Play some games with them. Make a group based on this. Hell, make some friends. Chances are, you're playing at the same time now, you can probably play at the same times again.
I'm not saying this is some giant, easy task. Hell, I'd rather play with friends I already know and I'm kind of anti social when I meet new people. I solo queue a lot, and I play a few games with friends. I'll get frustrated when I lose a match when I'm playing with random people, but I won't take to the forums to complain about it (though I have shared some stories of bad plays and laughing at them). You have to keep in mind, you might be playing solo, but you're playing a team based game, and when those stories of Rein charging by himself might not have worked in your game, that player might have tons of stories where it has worked and how he/she stopped a push doing just that. You also have to remember, while you're complaining about them they are possibly complaining about you. Anyone who uses the arguement of medals earned is sometimes laughable as well. I had a game earlier where I had gold for objective kills and silver for total as Lucio. I didn't carry that game, but I played well and I just happened to get the final blow or tag an enemy charging in that my team finished off and was t tagged by all.

- - - Updated - - -

So much this. The whole point of competitive should be (or so I was hoping) that it's competitive. Nothing competitive about steamrolling one match because your team is great and the enemy sucks, and then getting steamrolled the next match because your Widow stands out in plain sight, you have two Soldier/Hanzo/Genji, and nobody will ever switch to counter the Junkrat wiping them over and over.

It shouldn't be totally fucking random, and anybody who thinks it's fine being like that doesn't understand what the word "competitive" means. Right now it's somehow worse than QM for the level of bad you encounter playing solo.

Some players try different characters and find they suck on them. Or maybe the comp doesn't support that character. Personally I hate seeing any sniper in comp, but we had a Widow in one match that owned the other team. The enemy Pharah was afraid to fly, Zen couldn't peek a corner, Mercy was afraid to move around the open, Rein got scared to lower his shield, and all this made it so easy for our flanker to pick them off because they were too worried about that Widow. We had a comp that supported that character though, the next match and a different map that player might have had a hard time with Widow but still picked her because it's what they know and are good with. Not saying it doesn't suck, but it happens.

[Deleted]

The point is competitive shouldn't be giving you randomly bad groups, unless you're a bad player yourself, which in that case you'd be playing with people around your skill level, and that means competitive is working great.

It should be grouping you up with people similar to your level in skill, not Reinhardts that love to just charge at turrets from across the map, or Mercys that pocket buff the Widowmaker, unless you're one to do those types of things yourself.

What you're talking about is applicable to Quick Match, not to competitive, and it certainly should not be the way competitive should be thought about.

I really wouldn't bother replying to him, he's just a troll whose trying to bait people. Posts the same shite over and over.

I agree with your post totally, I'd also add that your personal score needs to contribute more. So for example if you fulfill the role you are performing well, so healer has golds for healing and objective time etc. Even if you lose your rank should stay the same, the system punishes you for others not playing as a team.. Like how is it fair if you join a game and see 3 Genjis picked, even if you then proceed to do well personally you'll loose a full rank because none of those kids will change.

[Charge me Doctor]

The point is competitive shouldn't be giving you randomly bad groups, unless you're a bad player yourself, which in that case you'd be playing with people around your skill level, and that means competitive is working great.

It should be grouping you up with people similar to your level in skill, not Reinhardts that love to just charge at turrets from across the map, or Mercys that pocket buff the Widowmaker, unless you're one to do those types of things yourself.

What you're talking about is applicable to Quick Match, not to competitive, and it certainly should not be the way competitive should be thought about.

I have a friend with "i stuck in trench mmr because i get dumb allies" syndrome (dota). I know that him being at 2k rating is his own fault, and he is paired with players of his skill level. So, one day he came over to my place, while i was watching my replays, he kept commenting on how everyone is doing dumb things in hindsight, it was annoying me, so i run replay of his game, and he was sitting too far away to recognize any nicknames.
Well, after 30 minutes of him saying "i can't imagine people can be this dumb like this alchemist" and other stuff while watching himself playing on an alchemist, i asked him to come closer and read the nickname - his mind blown. He had nothing to say, and for some time he accepted that, probably, he is where he should be, and started improving. But after a week or so he was back with his unbearable attitude and dropped back to 2000-2150.

Same shit applies to every multiplayer game, some people just can't understand that they are matched with people of almost same skill and always think that they get scrubbies as teammates, and enemy plays as 6man stack of pro Korean players.

[micwini]

While it is accurate that you only gain / lose based on win / loss, the amount that you gain / lose is based on your performance.

I've played countless games where we compared ranked xp gain / lose after a match and it is rarely the same for everyone.

Also, this is a team game. You live or die by your team. Just because they allow you to solo queue doesn't mean it's the best idea at low ranks.

I think it's foolish to think Blizzard is going to change things just so solo players can feel special. Go play a game that isn't based entirely around a team of people working together.

What is the point of a PERSONAL skill rating, if its only based on team performance? The way my team is performing has nothing to do with MY skill. Might as well only let set teams queue and have a team rating if that's the way they want to go.

[Charge me Doctor]

What is the point of a PERSONAL skill rating, if its only based on team performance? The way my team is performing has nothing to do with MY skill. Might as well only let set teams queue and have a team rating if that's the way they want to go.

If you've played like shit in this game and lost - you lose a lot. If you've played like shit in this game and won - you don't gain much. I believe that's what he meant.

[micwini]

If you've played like shit in this game and lost - you lose a lot. If you've played like shit in this game and won - you don't gain much. I believe that's what he meant.

That's not actually true, You lose the same amount of rank everytime.

[Kelimbror]

That's not actually true, You lose the same amount of rank everytime.

No. No you do not.

[ThatsOurEric]

So much this. The whole point of competitive should be (or so I was hoping) that it's competitive. Nothing competitive about steamrolling one match because your team is great and the enemy sucks, and then getting steamrolled the next match because your Widow stands out in plain sight, you have two Soldier/Hanzo/Genji, and nobody will ever switch to counter the Junkrat wiping them over and over.

It shouldn't be totally fucking random, and anybody who thinks it's fine being like that doesn't understand what the word "competitive" means. Right now it's somehow worse than QM for the level of bad you encounter playing solo.

Speaking some god damn TRUTH right here.

I mean yeah, I'm not the greatest Overwatch player in the world, but Jesus Christ, my entire
competitive experience has been either of the following :

-Winning all matches (very rarely. I think to date, may have had 5 wins total?)
-Win 1 match, lose the rest (and badly at that).
-Win 0 matches, get stomped (the majority). I even had one jackass smugly say, "I thought
this was v.s. A.I."

All I know is I started at lvl 45, and got demoted in just 3 days to lvl 39. Like I said, I'm not
the best Overwatch player, and its not like I don't expect to lose some matches, or that I
expected to get the highest rank by the time the season ends, but come on with this "luck"
of MMR. Like Val here is saying, it should NOT be on the same level as QM.

[Kelimbror]

All I know is I started at lvl 45, and got demoted in just 3 days to lvl 39. Like I said, I'm not
the best Overwatch player, and its not like I don't expect to lose some matches, or that I
expected to get the highest rank by the time the season ends, but come on with this "luck"
of MMR. Like Val here is saying, it should NOT be on the same level as QM.

So I think there are a lot of flaws in the system, but this type of response sorta baffles me. If the same people play competitive as they play QM, you are going to have similar experiences in some ways. Blizzard can't just force you into groups with players better than you. Since they base their matchmaking on wins/losses...there is a chance you can get stuck with losses over and over.

Imagine the most leet pro player there is. Imagine he is with 5 other people that play as bastion and sit in a corner. Unless he can win 1v6, which maybe he can on some maps, he would be in the same situation. So what that tells me is that the system of how rating is applied is the problem, not actually putting people in groups. They can't force certain people to queue and only those people in this quest for 'competition'. They can change how the game perceives your performance.

So what could change? Well, if they look at individual performance and deemphasize the match outcome, it would protect your rating for being 'skilled' but it would also encourage people to go against the team play game design and just go rogue. This is exactly why they will never do this. You'll have people who think they are hot doodoo ignoring their team, getting the most kills, while never helping accomplish objectives.

So in reality, other than adjusting performance points on the backend and still letting match outcome be the major factor, there's nothing they can do fundamentally. The devil is in the details really.

[Reklia]

I got 60 after my placement matches were done. Is that good? I played mostly tank with the odd bit of Phara, and last 3 matches as support.

[Deleted]

I got 60 after my placement matches were done. Is that good? I played mostly tank with the odd bit of Phara, and last 3 matches as support.

Sadly the placements don't mean a whole lot at the moment. Play 20-30 games and see where you're at

[Zelendria]

The point is competitive shouldn't be giving you randomly bad groups, unless you're a bad player yourself, which in that case you'd be playing with people around your skill level, and that means competitive is working great.

It should be grouping you up with people similar to your level in skill, not Reinhardts that love to just charge at turrets from across the map, or Mercys that pocket buff the Widowmaker, unless you're one to do those types of things yourself.

What you're talking about is applicable to Quick Match, not to competitive, and it certainly should not be the way competitive should be thought about.

It's not giving you randomly bad groups though.

It's giving you random players at a similar skill level. Where it's failing is at the user end who assumes that at the level they play at (Say 50 for average sake) has a group of 6 players who play consistently well. That's the total false bit people aren't grasping.
Players at rank 50 are rank 50 because they're about as consistent as a wet fart. They can have an epic game one, then flop the next, then be largely missing the next, into trying a new hero and sucking at it, then being the carry of the century OMG I'm practically Seagull the next. Then trying to replicate it and failing miserably at it.
That can happen in any combination of being epic against a much better team then sucking balls against a weak team the system thinks they should be winning.