Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

[Giorgos78]

Ufc undisputed cherry picking is dead . You all going down

[Solid_Altair]

Quote: Originally Posted by DaisukEasy

I've explained this before. Adjusting your pick based on your opponent is a zero-sum game. When two players want this advantage it quickly turns into a silly minigame where both parties stall and try to one-up each other until the timer runs out. It's inherently unfair and silly.

If that starts to happen, then you can simply pick your favorite fighter, or some mid tier fighter, if you want a likely small handicap. Once people (soon) realize ninja-pick is not a thing, they'll either use blindpick to match the tiers, or just beeline to their favorite fighter of the moment. Both are OK.

[Evil97]

Quote: Originally Posted by Giorgos78

Ufc undisputed cherry picking is dead . You all going down

No one is advocating being able to back out without a loss.

[DaisukEasy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

If that starts to happen, then you can simply pick your favorite fighter, or some mid tier fighter, if you want a likely small handicap. Once people (soon) realize ninja-pick is not a thing, they'll either use blindpick to match the tiers, or just beeline to their favorite fighter of the moment. Both are OK.

The thing is that it shouldn't happen. Your opponent should not have an exclusive unearned competitive edge over you.

Blind picks are fair. Basing your pick off of your opponent is not.

[Evil97]

Quote: Originally Posted by DaisukEasy

The thing is that it shouldn't happen. Your opponent should not have an exclusive unearned competitive edge over you. Blind picks are fair. Basing your pick off of your opponent is not.

Unearned edge? Not fair?

If anything, one could argue that double confirmation is more fair and allows no unearned edge.
An unearned edge would be running into Jones when wanting to finally try out some lower tier fighter in LHW. Playing the lottery that you don't run into someone using Jones or equivalent. Oh wait, you will, because they are not stupid enough to pick someone low tier because of that very risk (I guess he did earn that edge, and will continue to do so).
Let's open up the entire roster in ranked. It's so simple, but people are so worried about getting counter picked. Heaven forbid a FAIR MATCH.

[DaisukEasy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Evil97

Unearned edge? Not fair? If anything, one could argue that double confirmation is more fair and allows no unearned edge.

The advantage you gain is exclusive and 1:1 with the disadvantage your opposition suffers. So yes, unearned and unfair. You can't both win at it.

Quote:

An unearned edge would be running into Jones when wanting to finally try out some lower tier fighter in LHW. Playing the lottery that you don't run into someone using Jones or equivalent. Oh wait, you will, because they are not stupid enough to pick someone low tier because of that very risk. Let's open up the entire roster in ranked. It's so simple, but people are so worried about getting counter picked. Heaven forbid a FAIR MATCH.

I agree. Which is why I suggested an optional filter during match searching to stop that from happening.

Quote from a previous post
What the filter should do is the following:

You're using an overall 88 fighter and start searching for a match.

Algorithm initially searches for opponents ranging from 87-89.
Can't find any after x amount of seconds. Do you want to widen the search range? Y/N? Yes.
Searches from 86 to 90
Can't find any after x amount of seconds. Do you want to widen the search range? Y/N? Yes.
Ranges from 85 to 91

It allows players to enjoy the game and be competitive with all fighters, rather than being forced into a match that's borderline unwinnable.

Without the filter you're all in one big pool matched with the first person available in your division with a decent connection.

The only people who'd have an incentive to use the filter would be people who're using an overall lower fighter. If you want to use a lower level fighter and fight someone using Jon Jones, turn the filter off. I'm sure you'll run into them more than not.

I don't see the downsides really..

That solves everything doesn't it?

[Evil97]

Quote: Originally Posted by DaisukEasy

The advantage you gain is exclusive and 1:1 with the disadvantage your opposition suffers. So yes, unearned and unfair. You can't both win at it.

For one, if you really want to get to the nitty gritty and say someone got the upper hand by a few extra stats, of course someone comes out on top in the picking. lol. But that was EARNED, and it was FAIR. Get better at picking (but that doesn't matter in this game that much). Those minor differences don't make or break things like they would if you had the worst tier vs the best tier. Any minor edge in stats is made up by skill, character move knowledge, and just overall game planning for knowing who you are up against (yes I'm talking about PSN/Gametags).

By the way: I appreciate your feedback on alternative options, even though I don't agree with it because the overall stats are not the end of end alls.

[Boiler569]

Wanted to throw this into this thread ---- from a different thread I started earlier today:

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

The fighters's match-ups shall matter, too, last I heard. If your fighter is weaker, you win more points, at least for ranked... not sure about UT.

So at least to some degree, people will have incentive to use lower-tier fighters. Doesn't fix everything, but does help!, and hopefully makes this issue less important on the margin