After the (chaotic) release of the Standard mode and the first feedbacks, we have taken decisions on several things we want to let your know. We think you will be satisfied with the future improvements we will add first.
• Improvement of the quickbattle system in DTs.
We already made corrections, it seems that the small decks vs big decks problem is far less met. We will keep on working on it until the partition T1/T2 is not a problem any more.
• Penalties on some characters in DTs.
The first 2 points penalties per character are already operational and you can find the list here: http://www.urban-rivals.com/help/?category=9-0
Except for Leader, for the moment there are no penalized Standard characters. It may change, we give ourselves time to analyse DTs.
• DTs divided in two.
Finally we won’t alternate DT’s. We will let you have two DTs at the same time, 1 Standard, 1 Extended. With two different rankings.
• Length of a DT shorten but increase of its frequency.
DTs length will decrease from 1 hour to 45 minutes with a 15 minutes break between each tournament and then you can play again. It means there will be 24 Standard DTs and 24 Extended DTs per day.
To prevent abuses, a limitation of 8 DT credits per day and player will be added (you will receive all other rewards if you play more than 8 DTs).
• Survivor Standard and Deathmatch Standard rooms.
They will be open soon, we are working on an update of the flash game.
Questions you may want to ask:
• The number of CR remain at 5. It might change in the future.
• A PM will be sent to you each evening if you made a top 150 during the day so as to inform you if you have won a collector (or not).
• The timer will be reduced from 60 to 50 seconds again.
Perception is reality huh... if we play that game then every point ever raised in a forum is beyond logic reason or fact
perception... matchmaker is broken... no stats to back it up. perception.. majority perceive it is broken.... no stats. Therefore matchmaker is broken. logic = broken
fix = tell us the stats that create the match making.... we actually understand what is going on... perception goes bye bye. raises a new issue... people will optimize deck builds to maximise points based on the match making rules.. one problem solved but new one is raised by some players saying the matchmaker is broken since it is being "abused" -- translation of abused is people understand the meta better and continue to do better than those who dont
A newcomer who is not spending money and who is not playing the game (grinding) should in no way ever be close to those who are
2) paying and playing
3) not paying at all and playing
4) not paying much and playing
but the game is actually newbie friendly enough that those who are not paying (or hardly paying) and playing will eventually close the gap. 3k per pack average... you are doing something wrong mate
if the perception is that each pack nets you a generous estimate of only 3-4k... then it must be the case
Does Standard change that? Not at the moment; Standard is currently too underused to affect anyone's market decisions.
What will happen when it does become important? Will those cards that dominate it become more expensive and further from new players? (I'm not being rhetorical, I'm actually asking.)
yep sadly if and when standard format becomes popular, the prices will eventually go up. Those that leave new blood will get manipulated by the super rich. those still in new blood are typically hard to price manipulate since copies are constantly entering into circulation. but it will be a slight improvement to the current market manipulation going on now
anyway, i think (perception here) the UR community knows that it is in their interest to make the game a bit more newbie friendly.... i say bring on stronger starting decks to let them get into DTs immediately
For the purpose of argument:
Matchmaker is working as intended, but people perceive it as broken. Telling them it is fine will not make them believe against what they already believe. Providing stats will provoke meta-gaming? Isn't meta-gaming already present? Telling them that they can't be trusted with information is certainly not going to stop them from asking.
What I'm asking for is just an idea of how the match-maker is supposed to work. What is valued and how important are they? I don't need the exact numbers.
Also, why? Why replace a system that people like with one they don't? Why replace a simple two-room set-up with a complicated match-maker that may not be working right? If it is working properly, why are so many people having issues with it? What is the motivation? If people were abusing certain cards (Nellie, Zatman, etc), why not just penalize them and see how that affects the situation? There have been so many things changed that I doubt the staff can tell what has caused what.
On the topic of perception, remember that the card market values (like the real world stock market) are driven largely by public opinion. If people think the game is going under or that the staff don't care, they could decide to take their time and money elsewhere.
As a moderator, you are a representative of UR in some official capacity. Yet, virtually all I see you do on these boards is defend features that people feel are broken. I understand that it's impossible to make everybody happy, but haven't you noticed that the amount of complaints has increased rather drastically since the implementation of these new features? How can you look at that and not be concerned?
-Nobody here has suggested that perception is reality. You can check web analytic sites and see what's happened to UR's visitors over the last 3 months (down 30%!) That's reality.
-Abuse of the broken matchmaking system is only what any reasonable person would call what's going on. You get most points in a DT these days by optimizing your deck to run into weaker players as often as possible, and simply by playing fast. How often you would win against an opponent of the same skill level, using comparable cards, barely matters in DTs anymore, because an intelligent player can avoid that situation almost entirely!
-If you don't feel that 4k/pack (I was using 4k, not 3) is the average gain from packs for a player who buys 3 packs every 2 weeks, maybe you would like to suggest a better number?
@TheDoomBug: "Why replace a system people like with one they don't?" Very well said! If less people are visiting UR and the people who still do are screaming that the game is broken, it might be time to fix some things instead of stubbornly trying to validate them.
Ghelas i think you are not making a distinction between perception of a problem vs solution to a problem
feel free to read all my posts on the changes.... worth a second read probably for comprehension
my disagreement with proposed solutions is completely different from an agreement with perceived problems
so let me give a summary of recent posts
standard - broken? yes, needs a tweak as ive said numerous times (but those who want it scrapped might then perceive what i say as in i dont see a problem with it
newbies - need a break? yes, as ive said already. should they be getting free credits for logging on an watching 15 videos.... um no cause that would be broken
matchmaker - broken??? i dont know and wont decide unless proof one way or the other is provided. people spraying on forums about how good it is or how bad it is without stats won't convince me.
but if the perception (yours) is that i dont think anything is broken.... feel free to keep thinking that
oh and you did say 3k-4k and that would be a generous estimate.... which means closer to 3... scroll up
im out of this thread unless someone posts something new based on something concrete
@doombug.... again i am not sure how the matchmaker is working.... only way to know is if UR tells us the formula or we track statistics and deduce as much as we can. but if all you want is a general idea of how it works... i do believe admin posted a general explanation of it
I never said you don't believe anything is broken. You do, however, seem to be trying to convince people that the problems are lesser than they appear, and that everything will eventually be okay.
We agree that Standard is broken, but a "tweak" does not imply the massive overhaul many people are begging for. You keep treating Standard like it needs some fine-tuning and it will be okay. In reality, many people, myself included, feel that several cards need to be removed from the mode, that it should have a different set of penalized cards, that prizes need to be readjusted, that it needs its own identity... In short? Everything about Standard is broken.
"A newcomer who is not spending money and who is not playing the game (grinding) should in no way ever be close to those who are" So, the opinion that you are expressing: Money and/or time put in > skill. I certainly don't agree with that.
Again, replacing a system that people more or less approved of with a system that people don't approve of at all is bad. Whether matchmaker is working as intended or not, since it's failing at its purpose (which is to create fair matches) it is definitely broken.
Here's something concrete:
You're a mod, a UR official.
Our concerns should be your concerns.
When you try to glaze over what people are complaining about, and act like it's not that big a deal, it makes the entire game look bad.
My deck: 18*; my opponent's hand: Askai (5*), Radek (3*), Scotty (4*), Hugo (5*) - total 17*
ok, let's say he was EXTREMELY Lucky and drew this hand from a deck where all other cards were 2*; 17* + 4x2* = 25*
quote from Fraggle: "I think the min/max (for extreme case) can be around 5*-6* difference between the 2 decks."
25* - 18* = 7* > 5*-6*
so either the info they gave us was incorrect, or the "win rate" stats override the star count... this usually happens to me after i've had a winning streak of 3 or 4 matches. then, i go back to facing decks with similar star count after i lose a few times.
to me, it seems UR wants to "control" the flow of DTs by having the system match you with far superior decks when you're on a winning streak. i've experienced this too many times for it to be a coincidence.
there's no way that players would want this. so yes, the matchup system is broken, and needs to be fixed. how? i don't know. but i'm sure that a lot of people have suggestions they'd be happy to share, if UR would listen.
The real problem with the tourney matches is the lack of transparency.
Why not just let players know exactly how the match-ups work?
@waster of time
I do have everything I need to say what I have
Read thread 123 in this discussion Fraggle clearly tells us the maximum difference is 5-6 stars in deck (Not Hand values)
in thread 133 Fraggle states that player values used to select opponents are worked out as
Player Value = avgstars (between 1 and 5, obviously) + globaldeckwinrate (between -X/+X) + playerwinrate (between -X/+X)
therefore it is simple to see that you should only be playing opponents at the extreame differences 5-6* (See comment 123) if your win rate and deck win rate are at extreames
Fraggle also states in thread 133
if diff between player_a_value and player_b_value inferior something (like 0.25), then ok to fight
so if we use the 0.25 and ssay deck win rates and player win rates are the same then the maximum difference in stars between decks should be 0.25x 8 = 2
A very small difference indeed, now maybe this base difference has moved slightly but as neither myself or my deck are at extreames on the win rates then I should either be facing decks within 2 stars of my own (Hands averaging within 1 of my own) or poor higher star decks with poor players, or great low star decks with great players, not continously strong higher star hands with strong opponents. Hence it is safe to say the opponent selector needs alot of work