4 ms·

Does SC2 do rank based matchmaking?

bombcar 4y ago
It does (and at least when it came out) it was relatively decent. The problem occurs when the game has been out long enough that all the active players are leagues ahead of a new player; either they wait forever for a match or get steamrolled.
- vkou 4y ago
  There's plenty of people playing SC2 online at ~every skill level, right now. Queue times are not long at all. The main problem is that it's a 12 year-old game, that's been largely abandoned by the developer. The other main problem is that unlike a skill-based MOBA, you can't blame anyone else for your losses. The third main problem is that the game is incredibly stressful, demands 100% of your attention, and the smallest mistake can lose the game for you.
  - cwillu 4y ago
    This doesn't invalidate your point, but it's worth noting that SC2 had a significant balance patch released yesterday.
    - htag 4y ago
      The patch was put on the Player Test Realm (PTR), which is almost like an open beta. I wouldn't say that it was "released", more like pushed to staging or open beta.
    - vkou 4y ago
      Sure, and it's had a minor, but excellent balance patch earlier in the year, but it's also been more-or-less abandoned for a few years, and is quite clearly not being actively developed.
  - throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
    >The main problem is that it's a 12 year-old game, that's been largely abandoned by the developer my brother in Christ, you got it backwards - being abandoned is the biggest blessing an old Blizzard game can receive.
    - 411111111111111 4y ago
      Can you imagine a modern remake with up to date blizzard strategies? They'd probably add commander level and equipable commander items which grant buffs to your units. You'd have a chance of getting one item each time you win a pvp fight and you can increase the quality/rarity of the drop by using cash shop items. Oh, and the rare items might require a higher commander level... Obviously you'd also be able to buy temporary buffs to your XP gain, so you can equip them sooner. They could maybe even focus more on group pvp (i.e. 4vs4) so the whales can carry scrubs to wins. That would give them a chance of loot even if they're just there to be farmed and will make them properly fawn over the mighty whales that let them gain their pointless upgrades. Perfect whale farm.
plushpuffin 4y ago
Back when I played it, there was a 50 game skill test for new players which determined which of the major rank pools you were placed in. Those first 50 games were crazy because you were matched randomly with other new and established players, so sometimes you would play someone really good who would steamroll you in the first 5 minutes, and sometimes you got someone who had at most played the scripted campaigns against the AI and thought they could sit there for the first 30 minutes slowly building up an army. It was actually pretty fun not knowing which way it would go, and whenever we matched with newbies my partner and I got to experiment with a bunch of different strategies that would never work in a real game.
- babypuncher 4y ago
  > played the scripted campaigns against the AI and thought they could sit there for the first 30 minutes slowly building up an army. This right here is my fundamental problem with multiplayer RTS games. The fun I get out of them is in the slow burn long buildup, but other players always find ways to optimize the early game so they win fast and never actually get to the fun part where everyone has massive bases lobbing nukes at eachother. The fun way to play is not the optimal way to play. It's now been about 10 years since I've even bothered trying an RTS online.
  - plushpuffin 4y ago
    Yeah I've felt the same way at times, especially when the armor/weapon types make it very rock paper scissors. It wasn't as blatant in the original StarCraft, but WarCraft 3 and StarCraft 2 seemed to go hard into counters against certain types of units, so someone who either scouts a bit better than you do or picks an army composition that happens to perfectly counter yours will mop the floor with you. My partner and I had way more fun in those early games when we could stretch it out to 30-60 minutes sometimes. Once you're playing against ranked people who are there to win it's just a mad rush to the first or second tech tier.
    - creakingstairs 4y ago
      > It wasn't as blatant in the original StarCraft It was pretty much the same as SC2, they just never told you in the UI. e.g. Dragoons do half damage to mutalisks. Yamato cannons don’t kill zealots.

It does (and at least when it came out) it was relatively decent. The problem occurs when the game has been out long enough that all the active players are leagues ahead of a new player; either they wait forever for a match or get steamrolled.

vkou 4y ago
There's plenty of people playing SC2 online at ~every skill level, right now. Queue times are not long at all. The main problem is that it's a 12 year-old game, that's been largely abandoned by the developer. The other main problem is that unlike a skill-based MOBA, you can't blame anyone else for your losses. The third main problem is that the game is incredibly stressful, demands 100% of your attention, and the smallest mistake can lose the game for you.
- cwillu 4y ago
  This doesn't invalidate your point, but it's worth noting that SC2 had a significant balance patch released yesterday.
  - htag 4y ago
    The patch was put on the Player Test Realm (PTR), which is almost like an open beta. I wouldn't say that it was "released", more like pushed to staging or open beta.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Sure, and it's had a minor, but excellent balance patch earlier in the year, but it's also been more-or-less abandoned for a few years, and is quite clearly not being actively developed.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
  >The main problem is that it's a 12 year-old game, that's been largely abandoned by the developer my brother in Christ, you got it backwards - being abandoned is the biggest blessing an old Blizzard game can receive.
  - 411111111111111 4y ago
    Can you imagine a modern remake with up to date blizzard strategies? They'd probably add commander level and equipable commander items which grant buffs to your units. You'd have a chance of getting one item each time you win a pvp fight and you can increase the quality/rarity of the drop by using cash shop items. Oh, and the rare items might require a higher commander level... Obviously you'd also be able to buy temporary buffs to your XP gain, so you can equip them sooner. They could maybe even focus more on group pvp (i.e. 4vs4) so the whales can carry scrubs to wins. That would give them a chance of loot even if they're just there to be farmed and will make them properly fawn over the mighty whales that let them gain their pointless upgrades. Perfect whale farm.

plushpuffin 4y ago

Back when I played it, there was a 50 game skill test for new players which determined which of the major rank pools you were placed in. Those first 50 games were crazy because you were matched randomly with other new and established players, so sometimes you would play someone really good who would steamroll you in the first 5 minutes, and sometimes you got someone who had at most played the scripted campaigns against the AI and thought they could sit there for the first 30 minutes slowly building up an army. It was actually pretty fun not knowing which way it would go, and whenever we matched with newbies my partner and I got to experiment with a bunch of different strategies that would never work in a real game.

babypuncher 4y ago
> played the scripted campaigns against the AI and thought they could sit there for the first 30 minutes slowly building up an army. This right here is my fundamental problem with multiplayer RTS games. The fun I get out of them is in the slow burn long buildup, but other players always find ways to optimize the early game so they win fast and never actually get to the fun part where everyone has massive bases lobbing nukes at eachother. The fun way to play is not the optimal way to play. It's now been about 10 years since I've even bothered trying an RTS online.
- plushpuffin 4y ago
  Yeah I've felt the same way at times, especially when the armor/weapon types make it very rock paper scissors. It wasn't as blatant in the original StarCraft, but WarCraft 3 and StarCraft 2 seemed to go hard into counters against certain types of units, so someone who either scouts a bit better than you do or picks an army composition that happens to perfectly counter yours will mop the floor with you. My partner and I had way more fun in those early games when we could stretch it out to 30-60 minutes sometimes. Once you're playing against ranked people who are there to win it's just a mad rush to the first or second tech tier.
  - creakingstairs 4y ago
    > It wasn't as blatant in the original StarCraft It was pretty much the same as SC2, they just never told you in the UI. e.g. Dragoons do half damage to mutalisks. Yamato cannons don’t kill zealots.