why? let them stack and farm, it will only put them against more players, in the long run you lose and will only be able to play with all the newbies or 2 vs 20 - if people think they are worth ten times the players then let them face ten times the players.
Yeah but every time the stackers stack theyll receive higher mmr when they win to a certain point that theyll constantly lose because of it. Why does noone have an IQ high enough to understand ELO and its system... If you keep stacking 10 vets versus 5 vets plus x noobs ( lets take it so everyone starts at same mmr and that the 10 stacking vets are stacking losers but they arent stacking together as 10 but more groups of 2 or 3) the mmr of the 10 vets will after each winning round rise till x becomes a number so great the 10 vets wont be able to win anymore so it balances out. Plus when they dont stack anymore the vets on the 10 side will start to lose more cause they have an artificially inflated mmr which doesnt suit their skill level, in theory.
I doubt it possible for everyone to agree on a skill based system. I also understand that was tried before and failed because it caused more people to play for skill points. I'm suggesting a hour based system which no one other than noobs will care about. Once they play for a year of gameplay (for example) they reach the same rank as everyone else. This does not define him to be as good as everyone else - and at that point he would certainly know there are many levels of skill that the system is not designed to represent. We have to focus on encouraging noobs to play and to rank up based on duration. They will pick up skills during that time or they will remain low skilled but fully ranked players - which we all know exist. Well at least until we figure out all the tricks you long timers like to keep secret.
there was a ranking system but it had no influence what so ever on team balance so people just jacked off to them being this high. Which is kind of stupid. Atleast when its put into action in balancing it would be all fair and shit cause people would jack off over winning and gainig more points thus trying harder. Tldr people jack off
I don't think the ranking system could be always turned on though. Players want to play with their friends. It might need to be turned on by admins based on people stacking. If one server had this system and another did not it would drive veterans away from the one that had the system. It should be clear at joining a game that you are stacking. Also it might be cool if it was announced: "JustGoFly has joined Brenodi - STACKED + 4" or whatever makes sense. This would be to discourage stacking and try to get people to do the right thing rather than enforcing something.
You can play with your friends you just have to join up fast enough. Imho the system should be off with player count lower than 20 ( in both teams not in verser ) and then when both teams have 10 players the system activates so if the teams then have a rating of 25k and 35k on the other cause stacked 5k more players can join the 25k to make up for the margin of 5k. Then its 30k vs35k with more players on one side than another to make up for skill difference.
Cause noone is going to bother actually going on an alt account just so they can win more games of empires. Like seriously are any of you guys going to do that? Faggots.
If people played even and fair games this wouldn't be a problem. Making a skilled based system would make it more of a game to stack.
Yeah but I get people want to suck their own dick with their rating so you would like to win, but start a new account just to fuck up the system and stack is just stupid cause you gain nothing except a win. You should rather win on your main already high rank account so you can suck your ever elongating dick
You do that just to avoid bans for exploiting. You have two accounts just for Dota 2. In my eyes, you will most definitely smurf it up to keep stomping.
Its different than smurfing to win, Im smurfing to win to obtain a higher rating because I got calibrated higher on my alt account. Its not the same as going on an alt that will start with a lower mmr just to win games. If I would apply what I do on dota to empires it would be me having a higher calibrated alt account playing empires, that would mean I would play harder games and win harder instead of easyer wins which you attain with new alt accounts that are rated badly.
The games on my alt account are way harder than on my main you derp. Im not using smurfs to stomp like your epic clan faggots are.
Then you'll use the alt when you magically feel like you want a challenge and just stomp on the main account, I don't see a difference.
Cause the difference is theres this thing called calibration. U get calibrated into a certain mmr pool. We wont have this cause we actually cant, I think it should jut be tied to hours played on a log scale. This way alt accounts will be calibrated really low and thus it will work but thatd be stupid to want easy wins on empires + it wont very well since the impact will decrease by the ammount of players on your team.
1:Victory/defeat (major factor) 2oints you earned and how you earned them. (minor factor) 3:The time you participated in this round. (ratio) 4:Rank point of other players in the server. (major factor) IMO a proper ranking system for Empires should at least consider those factors. I think I have a thread about this in Suggestion. But hey, it will never be implemented.
