40enSun, 16 Sep 2012 10:19:38 GMTSun, 16 Sep 2012 10:19:38 GMTPussycats (who are actually quite good in DTs).]]>Sat, 15 Sep 2012 11:44:46 GMT OR just the max u can have is 2 is a deck ( not including Pussycats)]]>Sat, 15 Sep 2012 06:10:10 GMT
]]>Thu, 06 Sep 2012 00:11:36 GMT
Just faced someone using 6 DRs

Graks/Uranus/Spiaghi/Vermyn/Clover/Ella In random combo's, i didn't see their last two cards. I faced this person 3 times in a row... Ruined DT right off the bat.]]>Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:32:48 GMTAmbre? does the staff not know how discouraging Ambre/Dregn/C Beast/ Sunder hands are to play against? do they not care?

These are the kinds of decks i specifically play low star counts to avoid -- and I'm forced to either:

A: try "tier 1" which has no matches
B: Play tier 2 and accept that I'm going to be matched against some scrub in about 1/5 matches, and instantly lose simply because my deck can't compete with Ambre + 5 stars.

The entire system is exactly as ghelas described it : arbitrary.]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 20:51:39 GMTAmbre and 3 5*'s is a little ridiculous when i'm using a 9 card 25* deck.]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 20:44:26 GMT
I just faced the same player 5 times in a row in the same DT. I have a 25* deck, and after counting his *'s. He has 30*'s. So where is this evenly matched players? it's in extended by the way.]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 14:22:28 GMT
Standard is like playing chess with half the pieces arbitrarily removed from the board, and an extra pair of rooks added. It's not easier for newbies, because the rules are altered *arbitrarily.* Cards like Caelus Cr, Spyke, etc. still give a huge advantage to older players, and newbies will still lose to them almost every time. I think Standard's striking unpopularity shows that in its current form, it's not the future of anything.

I completely agree that having a newbie friendly format would be a boon to UR, but Standard is just counter-intuitive in every way. Why not have a level 10-25 room for "ELO with training wheels," with some kind of tournaments separate from both DT and ELO, with lesser prizes to discourage exploit-happy players from rolling new accounts to participate? ELO is our most balanced mode of play. It protects new players from getting crushed by overpowered, too-expensive cards, by default. .. And, thanks to 14 life, these games are less likely to end in a coin flip situation where the game is determined by whether the player who won Round 1 will or won't attempt to KO.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 07:07:51 GMT good to hear you are getting matches now. yes playing extended definitely increases the pool of players and decks you can get matches with.

i agree with you in thinking standard is the future of UR since it is easier for newbies to access. however, as it stands, standard still does not have its own niche that makes it a "must play" format.]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 07:00:41 GMTTue, 04 Sep 2012 06:41:11 GMT

The longest I've had to wait for an opponent is 30-40 seconds, 1 minute at most. Any longer and it's not the games fault, it's because my internet has shat it's pants (which in itself is frustrating, but not a game related issue). I can tolerate waiting 30-40 seconds because I know it is probably happening to hundreds of other players through the course of the hour. Although the 5-10 minute screw ups you're encountering are indeed ridiculous.

Pretty much the majority of comments in threads like these are negative, but usually only because the people without any issues have nothing to post about. I appreciate that the issues you are having with the matchmaking are extremely irritating for you, and in no way am I saying that "there is no problem, stop complaining." I'm just saying that I haven't had an issue, and I doubt that I'm the only one.

Is there anyone else like me actually fine and dandy with the matchmaking system at the moment?]]>Tue, 04 Sep 2012 02:10:40 GMT

i don't think the problem is the low number of players. deathmatch accommodates 16 people tops (and normally there's about 10), and it's still very playable, with not much wait time in between battles. true, you often get the same opponent twice or more in a row, but that is to be expected.

well, that's deathmatch. now, how do you explain that it's impossible to find opponents in the tourney room, given that there are hundreds of players in there? even if you take in consideration the room split between standard/extended, and decks with different star counts, there should still be at the very least 50 opponents that fit in the same category as you.

ok, so let's say worst-case scenario, all of these opponents are currently battling each other. fine. a typical tourney match lasts for about 3 minutes. so i hit the "retry" button for 3 minutes... still no opponent found. 5 minutes... 10 minutes... WTF!!

so no matter how you look at it, it's the opponent selector that's not working right... because as soon as an opponent frees up and clicks on "battle" again, i should be first in line to fight them, right? otherwise the system has no respect for priority. and if someone else had priority before me, well that wouldn't make sense because we'd both be searching for opponents but not being matched with each other ]]>Mon, 03 Sep 2012 16:49:59 GMT And I've noticed that playing against the same opponent is too frequent, usually with thousands of players online, sometimes is a little bored to play against the same player over and over... (my record is like 7 or 8 times against the same guy in one DT), in those moments you think something like this: omg!, you again? are we playing alone in this level? play fast!

After several weeks with problems I must admit that I'm disappointed... after my last DT (35 minutes ago), where I have only played 2 games in 10 minutes, I think that I won't play this game mode anymore.

I recognize the hard work of the staff trying to do their best for this game and this mode in particular, but this should be fixed in one way or another.]]>Mon, 03 Sep 2012 08:59:45 GMT i dont know the specifics... im guessing you are playing the DT during "slow" hours. With the changes in the match making... the quick battle is more selective. more selective means, it is not letting you match up with some of the decks out there

double edged sword here... a less selective match maker was matching up opponents that some people felt were mismatches. a more selective match maker leads to longer wait times.

solution 1)more players needed in the room in increase odds that someone with a similar deck is pressing quick battle around the same time as you. 2)change quick battle back to be less selective]]>Mon, 03 Sep 2012 03:12:18 GMTWed, 25 Jul 2012 16:10:47 GMTWed, 18 Jul 2012 14:42:58 GMT
Both decks can and do win.]]>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 04:39:31 GMTTue, 17 Jul 2012 15:35:27 GMTTue, 17 Jul 2012 04:06:08 GMT