Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Not necessarily.



Again, not really. Potentially slightly longer waiting times if you use the optional filter. But honestly, the difference in waiting times should be negligible if the player base is large enough.

As a concept I said three tiers, but that's not entirely what I meant. There shouldn't be predetermined rigid tiers at all.

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..



I honestly don't understand the point you're trying to make.

We probably just have different estimations. In a set up such as you describe, if you want a fair match and you prefer to play with a low rated fighter, I can see you easily and frequently being forced to "choose no" or back out of the search a bunch of times, as it is broadening to accomodate for the stats' justice (keep in mind it is also already split into 10 classes (just for ranked), connectivity and player skill. I'd much rather be matched withs omeone just based on player skill and connectivity, then go for my prefered fighter and adjust, if necessary, to my opponent's pick.

But they've done away with overalls, and apparently even the same stat rating can mean big differences still

It is indeed a good thing that the OVR isn't being displayed. And you make a good point about the stats having different values. However... maybe... in the future... just maaaybe we could figure out the actual value of each stats with just enough accuracy to have a Pondered OVR that would guide official tiers. Maaaayyybe.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

We probably just have different estimations. In a set up such as you describe, if you want a fair match and you prefer to play with a low rated fighter, I can see you easily and frequently being forced to "choose no" or back out of the search a bunch of times, as it is broadening to accomodate for the stats' justice (keep in mind it is also already split into 10 classes (just for ranked), connectivity and player skill.

You wouldn't have to back out at all.

- Yes, range gets increased search continues.
- No, range stays the same search continues.
- Cancel search.

A person that opts for this will have a harder time finding matches, yes, but that's their choice. If they think it takes too long they can widen the range or remove the filter entirely.

Having that option is a good thing.

I'd much rather be matched with someone just based on player skill and connectivity

That's what would happen if you don't use the optional filter.

then go for my prefered fighter and adjust, if necessary, to my opponent's pick.

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.

[Giorgos78]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Ufc undisputed cherry picking is dead . You all going down

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Ufc undisputed cherry picking is dead . You all going down

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

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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.

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]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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

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

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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



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

Yes. I still hate blind pick with a passion, though.

[ZombieRommel]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Both players cannot have this advantage so to keep things fair, blind picks are the way to go. Just pick who suits you best for your own reasons.

If you don't, you encourage an endless shuffle of trying to counter-pick your opponent until you both run out of time and end up with random characters.

Exactly. Thanks for stating all of this so I don't have to.

[Evil97]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Exactly. Thanks for stating all of this so I don't have to.

You should, because a majority of the roster is not getting used in ranked. All because of blind picking.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

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.

That's not what I said at all. Fighter specific advantages are not exclusive. Both players have equal access to the roster.

The exclusive advantage is the ability to pick a fighter after your opponent does. That's zero-sum and unfair by definition.

But that was EARNED, and it was FAIR. Get better at picking (but that doesn't matter in this game that much).

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

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.

What part don't you agree with?

[Evil97]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

That's not what I said at all. Fighter specific advantages are not exclusive. Both players have equal access to the roster.

The exclusive advantage is the ability to pick a fighter after your opponent does. That's zero-sum and unfair by definition.

Double confirmation does not allow this. You don't lock in and then your opponent picks. You come to an agreement. The entire roster will actually come into play.

Also, taking quotes and highlighting out statements out of context is jarring. For instance, "And say" is a figure of speech. I could of also said "Let's say". It doesn't mean I was actually saying you said it....my head hurts just typing that.