+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 30 of 30

  Click here to go to the first Atlas Reactor Team post in this thread.   Thread: Captain in ranked should ALWAYS be given to the highest or 2nd highest MMR player

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Nales View Post
    After all, swapping as captain means you have less pick / role choices: it's good for the team but not for you, and I'm not sure high MMR players are any less selfish on average. Besides, knowing they're the highest MMR would make captains even less likely to draft, as they know they're (supposedly) their team's biggest asset, and feel they "should" pick their best freelancer and role.
    That's a pretty good point. I guess I should clarify that most of the time this "drafting" I'm talking about is really as you say just the captain selfishly picking one of his best lancers for himself to play rather than picking anything to swap with someone else, but good players/drafters know to make this selection also be a top tier/contested pick, such as to pick lockwood, quark, asana, phaedra, etc for themself to play.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nales View Post
    If I'm captain then I'm not going to trade Nix or Blackburn for the 4th player if Phaedra is available.
    I probably lose far more games due to players picking difficult freelancers like Kaigin or Rampart, having no idea how to play them, and ending up with 200 contribution and 2 deaths.
    So yeah we're more or less talking about the same thing I think. Nix and Blackburn are not tier 1 contested picks so picking one of those to swap a teammate would be a bad draft imo if you are captain, regardless if someone on your team is begging you to do it. Picking the Phaedra for yourself is absolutely the right choice there. On the other hand, if that Nix player was captain he would probably 1st pick the nix for himself, and that would imo be a bad draft and put your team at risk of losing since the other team might draft something much better like lockwood/asana right afterwards

  2. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    17
    So yeah we're more or less talking about the same thing I think. Nix and Blackburn are not tier 1 contested picks so picking one of those to swap a teammate would be a bad draft imo if you are captain, regardless if someone on your team is begging you to do it. Picking the Phaedra for yourself is absolutely the right choice there. On the other hand, if that Nix player was captain he would probably 1st pick the nix for himself, and that would imo be a bad draft and put your team at risk of losing since the other team might draft something much better like lockwood/asana right afterwards
    Actually, it could very well be the opposite - that the "Nix player" being captain and picking Nix, would be better than me being captain. Let's say this player mostly plays LW and Nix and has very little experience with supports. He's first pick but LW is banned. What should he do? Pick Nix, or trade a "better" freelancer with the 4th player? In that last case there's a very low chance that he'll be able to play Nix, as Nix might not be available anymore, or (considering how most players tend to prefer playing firepowers) he'll have to fill another role. He will end up with a freelancer he barely knows, in a role he's not good at. It would be better for the team if he played a decent Nix rather than a crappy support, even if that meant the other team might have a small advantage in overall freelancer power.

    Of course, players should ideally seek to be good at all roles, and with many different freelancers. But that's just not always the case. And TBH, getting good with a freelancer takes quite some time, so I won't blame players too much for having preferences.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Nales View Post
    Actually, it could very well be the opposite - that the "Nix player" being captain and picking Nix, would be better than me being captain. Let's say this player mostly plays LW and Nix and has very little experience with supports. He's first pick but LW is banned. What should he do? Pick Nix, or trade a "better" freelancer with the 4th player? In that last case there's a very low chance that he'll be able to play Nix, as Nix might not be available anymore, or (considering how most players tend to prefer playing firepowers) he'll have to fill another role. He will end up with a freelancer he barely knows, in a role he's not good at.
    That's another pretty good point. I guess it becomes purely hypothetical at this point. It's hard to say whether him 1st picking Nix for himself is better than playing someone he has 0 games on but allowing the opposing team to get two tier 1 picks. I'm actually someone that doesn't mind if our 3rd or 4th player want to pick a 3rd or 4th firepower or w/e off-meta comp they are more comfortable with, so I'd be fine with this guy 4th picking nix instead of a filling a support. As for the lancer Nix himself, imo (this is a big imo, I'm sure many won't agree) there are probably less than 5 players in whole atlas community that still pick Nix in ranked and are actually good with him in the current patch/meta. So I would actually guess that is it indeed better for the team putting this player on a lancer he has 0 games on rather than letting him 1st pick nix even if it's the only thing he knows how to play. But again I could be wrong, it's just hypothetical and not much hard data to prove one way or the other.

  4. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    17
    Nix was just an example, you can replace him with any mid-tier (?) freelancer like Grey or Blackburn. Here are a few more things to consider IMO:
    - Some of the "high tier" freelancers are hard or at least special to play. Like Celeste, Kaigin, Quark. They're only priority picks for players who're good with them. I know how strong Kaigin can be, but I shudder everytime I see one on my team because he'll probably autofollow enemies to his own "swift demise". Unless I know he's good, I feel safer with a Blackburn.
    - Conversely, some "niche picks" can fit certain players surprisingly well. For instance I'm pretty mediocre with "standard" firepowers including top picks like LW or Celeste, and I actually get better results with Elle.
    - I don't find the power difference between freelancers to be that high. Of course I'd rather have a Phaedra than a Brynn (actually I played as Phaedra vs a Brynn as I was writing this... and we got trashed), but that's a rather extreme example. Brynn and other low-tier freelancers like Juno are rarely picked anyway. Especially not as first or second pick.

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    2
    This is an interesting discussion.

    First, I like the new system. Season 1 tried too hard to emulate LoL and other similar games, but without the player base (hopefully this will change).

    After only about 50 games, I stopped playing ranked. With the new system, more people are playing and wait times are 1/10th of what they were. My fiance and I would often wait 10 minutes for a game in duo ranked before we just gave up and went to regular pvp.

    As for the captain issue, I would have to disagree with OP on this. Simply put, the same issues you face, are faced by the other team. Over time, the inexperienced captain problem balances out. And, TBH I don't want to play the Meta game, or be told who to ban, who not to ban, or whatever or have the same champions and the same bans picked all the time. In essence I prefer the variety and slightly wild west flavour of the game. I REALLY LIKE not knowing who will be banned and what the final 4 v 4 will look like.

    I also find in a holistic sense, the more random nature of the draft actually improves my overall game. I have learned every champion to some degree of competence and a few I can play very well. In contrast, when I used to play LoL It is totally true to say I could play about 3 out of 100 plus champions in ranked with any real hope of doing well with them. I was not alone in this. In AR, I could be given in freelancer at random and feel confident playing them.

    So yeah, the other team gets quark, cause your newbie captain did not ban him. And you are going to be at a disadvantage in that particular game. BUT now you have the chance to actually play against a quark, instead of seeing him banned 100% of the time, and improve your play against him. And yes, your captain plays really bad, but there are ways to support bad players, where you might have to alter your standard game style, but again you are learning how to adapt to difficult situations and if you do that and you also happen to win, its a very good feeling.

    Sometimes I have bad games, but it annoys me to no end when a player, who has a worse game than me, but is perhaps higher ranked, thinks this gives them the righteous imperative to crap all over me or any other player in the game. Your argument, while respected, sort of pushes a more elitist agenda. I respect this because of your high rank in the game, most players know who you are - but what you do not realize, is you are the 1% of this game. If the game is to succeed it must now and always cater to the average gamer - the 99% that will always make mistakes, always draft off meta and always make your personal experience a little less than ideal.

    As for me, I am banning Nix when I am captain. I would rather play against quark than Nix. That is just my personal choice, I enjoy the game more when there is no Nix in it. With Quark, at least I know where he is. and I would like the chance to ban this champion when my turn comes up to be captain because practically every other game, my captain is banning Quark or Helio. Tomorrow, this might change and Ill start banning OZ because he is beginning to get under my skin as well. IS this the best mathematical ban? I don't care. Its about having a chance to alter the game slightly in a way that I prefer. That is the point and that is why everyone must always have an equal chance to be captain.

    In summary, given you will suffer in some drafts and games because you are matched with new players, if you do make it to diamond+ it is an even further testament to your own personal skill.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Exqzr View Post
    If the game is to succeed it must now and always cater to the average gamer - the 99% that will always make mistakes, always draft off meta and always make your personal experience a little less than ideal.
    Your post boils down to this line, which is very true. Smaller games usually need to focus on the average casual player much more than the 1% in order to survive/grow. I believe a lot of Trion's balance changes are also based off general matchmaking winrates and data rather than caring much about competitive results/opinions, which is arguably the right choice. So yeah, I can agree with this. Maybe this issue affects very few people in actuality.

  7. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Nekojin View Post
    I disagree with this completely. The only way to get experience is by doing. And usually by making mistakes in the process. If you're not the Captain, and the person who is seems to be clueless, take the opportunity to teach, to educate, without being a rager when and if they make mistakes. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

    This is how you make friends, teammates. This is how the BEST guilds/clans/whatever operates - when a team member needs help, help them. They'll thank you later*.

    * Or maybe they won't - some people don't appreciate good advice, but that's their problem, not yours.
    That doesn't help you at all in the game you're already playing. Sure, you can teach someone to be better on their next game. But is that what RANKED is for?

    Ranked is supposed to be for playing a competitive match, not for teaching newbies how to pick freelancers. The OP's suggestion is really the only thing that makes sense in a ranked environment.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    We actually used to structure the ranked draft in the manner you suggested, and we intentionally moved away from it. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, at almost all ranks, your matchmaking rating is intended to be hidden information. The more in-the-background it is, the more it can do its job of helping make good matches and the less it has to be manipulated to also provide mechanical incentives to play more matches. Secondly, we were unhappy with the social scenario that was created by giving lead to the highest-rating player. Players gain rating primarily by being good at piloting their characters during actual gameplay, and there's no definitive correlation between a player's piloting skill and their overall strategic knowledge of the game, or their social skills to be a good leader responsive to their teammates' specific strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we think it's important that your overall rank represents your ability to play every position, and that we give all players a chance to get high priority on their personal picks, and a chance to fill in and counterpick late in the batting order.
    These are all words, but none of them make sense when you put them together.


    "Firstly, at almost all ranks, your matchmaking rating is intended to be hidden information. The more in-the-background it is, the more it can do its job of helping make good matches and the less it has to be manipulated to also provide mechanical incentives to play more matches."

    - This sentence means nothing. It's just word salad. Whether or not MMR is hidden has absolutely nothing to do with how accurate it is, and WTF are "mechanical incentives to play more matches?"

    "Players gain rating primarily by being good at piloting their characters during actual gameplay, and there's no definitive correlation between a player's piloting skill and their overall strategic knowledge of the game, or their social skills to be a good leader responsive to their teammates' specific strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we think it's important that your overall rank represents your ability to play every position, and that we give all players a chance to get high priority on their personal picks, and a chance to fill in and counterpick late in the batting order."

    - Now the developers are trying to argue that there's no correlation between experience and skill and strategy, which is a very weird assertion to make in a strategy game. It's completely bogus. Furthermore, even if Captain was given to highest ELO, each player would still only have a 1/4 chance of getting it because you have a 1/4 chance of being the highest ELO on your team. Making it effectively random (as it currently is) doesn't impact anyone's chances of being Captain, except for literally the top 4 players in the world.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by kugelblitz View Post
    That doesn't help you at all in the game you're already playing. Sure, you can teach someone to be better on their next game. But is that what RANKED is for?

    Ranked is supposed to be for playing a competitive match, not for teaching newbies how to pick freelancers. The OP's suggestion is really the only thing that makes sense in a ranked environment.
    I think you make a great point Blitz. I have no problem with allowing for the fact that the growth of the game necessitates some games with randoms who are still learning mechanics, match-up, maps, positioning, etc. I don't even mind being matched against Contender duos in my Gold matches, as I understand it keeps the queue times shorter, and I can just hope my MMR and ranked point loss won't be punished too hard for a loss. That said, I see no reason why highest MMR should not be made Captain in ranked draft. Just as a player with more experience needs to be patient with the newer players, the newer players need to understand that they're NEWER, and don't know everything. In a ranked game, everyone participating's time and standing are on the line, not just the newer player. Not to mention, newer player experience is enhanced by winning

  10. #30
    Reactor Team
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by kugelblitz View Post
    These are all words, but none of them make sense when you put them together.


    "Firstly, at almost all ranks, your matchmaking rating is intended to be hidden information. The more in-the-background it is, the more it can do its job of helping make good matches and the less it has to be manipulated to also provide mechanical incentives to play more matches."

    - This sentence means nothing. It's just word salad. Whether or not MMR is hidden has absolutely nothing to do with how accurate it is, and WTF are "mechanical incentives to play more matches?"
    I think what Hawk was saying is MMR is hidden now for good reasons, and the "mechanical incentives" of trying to make a number go up or down no longer exist since you don't see your actual number. I can totally see why that phrase could be confusing, though!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts