Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

[Find_the_Door]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

HAHA! No. Just no..




Oh God please no. If my opponent wants to handicap themselves, let them. That shouldn't affect me in any way. You know how easy that is to abuse..?

How would that be easy to abuse if anything it'd encourage higher ranked players to use a varied roster, same for lower ranked players looking to climb.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

How would that be easy to abuse

Say that I usually use Conor and I get rematched with a Khabib player who mauled me last time. The smart choice for me is to go a super low ranked fighter.

- If my opponent stays, the match is now effectively no-risk high reward for me and vice-versa for my opponent.

- If my opponent switches to a lower ranked player and we're both not playing at our best, I potentially have a shot at beating someone I couldn't touch at the peak of both of our abilities.

Khabib player gets screwed in both scenarios.

if anything it'd encourage higher ranked players to use a varied roster, same for lower ranked players looking to climb.

People should be able to play whatever they want without the game imposing penalties.

[Find_the_Door]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Say that I usually use Conor and I get rematched with a Khabib player who mauled me last time. The smart choice for me is to go a super low ranked fighter.

- If my opponent stays, the match is now effectively no-risk high reward for me and vice-versa for my opponent.

- If my opponent switches to a lower ranked player and we're both not playing at our best, which is potentially means I have a shot at winning now.

Khabib player gets screwed in both scenarios.



People should be able to play whatever they want without the game imposing penalties.

It's not imposing a penalty. A champion should win the majority of the time in the right hands. There should he be an element of risk that's involved in picking a champ as opposed to the rest of the division.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

It's not imposing a penalty.

If decreasing the rewards for using a higher level fighter is not imposing a penalty, what is it?

A champion should win the majority of the time in the right hands.

Not at all.

Fighter matchups matter. Player matchups matter. Player skill matters. Strategy & tactics matter. And to a degree (sadly), luck matters.

There should he be an element of risk that's involved in picking a champ as opposed to the rest of the division.

Why?

[l The Spider l]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

The problem with filters/ tiered fighters is that it separates the player base and if a certain fighter comes under a tier which it stands out from other fighters in that tier it just creates a similar situation to that of people picking the top guy. When it comes to ranked I tend to just expect to be facing Jon Jones, Conor etc. But I see fun in the challenge of picking weaker fighters and strategising to get the most out of that said fighter to out skill the top tier fighters but that's just me. Ranked record dosent necessarily mean you're the best because most guys only use a handful of fighters skill to me means you can use any fighter proficiently.

[emmdeekay]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Ranked should be nothing but the most competitive mode. People should want to win at all costs and as such you can expect everyone to pick the best fighters.

Offering filters and double confirmation picks is taking away from the simplicity of what ranked modes should be about; Winning.

If you want different matchups and low tier fighters than you should either have your anti Jon Jones strats on lock or go and play quick fight.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

The problem with filters/ tiered fighters is that it separates the player base and if a certain fighter comes under a tier which it stands out from other fighters in that tier it just creates a similar situation to that of people picking the top guy.

That can't happen.

Low tier fighters get matched up with Low to mid
Mid tier fighters get matched up with low-mid-high
High tier fighters get matched up with mid-high

All the filter does is make it so that Low vs high doesn't happen. The best fighter out of Low-Mid would still end up being matched with high tiered fighters though.

When it comes to ranked I tend to just expect to be facing Jon Jones, Conor etc. But I see fun in the challenge of picking weaker fighters and strategising to get the most out of that said fighter to out skill the top tier fighters but that's just me.

Not just you. Same here.

Ranked record dosent necessarily mean you're the best because most guys only use a handful of fighters skill to me means you can use any fighter proficiently.

So if you can use all fighters to the same degree and have a record of 950-50 and someone else only uses one fighter but has a record of 1000 - 0 including 40 wins over you, they're not the best because they're one-trick-pony's?

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

Ranked should be nothing but the most competitive mode. People should want to win at all costs and as such you can expect everyone to pick the best fighters.

Offering filters and double confirmation picks is taking away from the simplicity of what ranked modes should be about; Winning.

If you want different matchups and low tier fighters than you should either have your anti Jon Jones strats on lock or go and play quick fight.

I play to win myself and other than to challenge myself against familiar opponents, I'd never willingly pick a low ranked fighter, but we're not the only ones playing.

Besides, it's not unreasonable for people to want to be able to use their favorite fighter without being doomed to lose for all eternity because that fighter doesn't have the stats to compete with the Jon Joneses of the world.

Giving players the option to compete in more even match-ups doesn't go against competition or ranked play. It's similar to why weight classes exist in real life.

[Acebaldwin]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

@emmdeekay
Man that's BS, I love being the underdog going into a competitive match. Whether I lose or not, I just like going the extra mile, what I hate though is those who pick the best fighters and still play chessy af against a guy who's stats is clear as day worst than his. How desperate are you? You ever going to brag about being in a top 100 in a game?

The feeling of playing in Ranked and Unranked isn't the same, simple as that, I like playing ranked due to the factor of having a record, and knowing my opponent has something to lose too, it's a different atmosphere. But at the end of the day, this can still be done in a gentleman way without the cheese. Just the monocle, top hat and a glass of whiskey should be enough.

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

No, you're fearmongering.

Plenty of other games use this type of filter and have comparable if not faster matchmaking than the UFC games.

If the player base is large enough (which it seems to be), there should be no significant difference in the time it takes you to find a fight with the filter turned on, let alone off.
- Even games that split the player base this much? 10 divisions for ranked and 4 for UT.

Pick a low ranked fighter. Turn off the filter. You'll be in a pool with players utilizing top tier fighters. How's that not handicapping yourself?
- Sorry. I should have been more specific. I meant more specific handicaps, like picking a guy who is a little weaker, but not a top vs bottom thingy. This one isn't a biggy, though.


You can account for that by tweaking the reward system and significantly reduce if not cap the rewards of fighting with the filter on.
- Then we'd get back to the problems of classic blind pick.

Let them. They'd be a bunch of Ben Askrens.
- Don't you think people would take issue with the leaderboards being meaningless, specially now that so much has been done to improve them?

Say that I usually use Conor and I get rematched with a Khabib player who mauled me last time. The smart choice for me is to go a super low ranked fighter.

- If my opponent stays, the match is now effectively no-risk high reward for me and vice-versa for my opponent.

- If my opponent switches to a lower ranked player and we're both not playing at our best, I potentially have a shot at beating someone I couldn't touch at the peak of both of our abilities.

Khabib player gets screwed in both scenarios.



People should be able to play whatever they want without the game imposing penalties.

You don't think the penlties should exist at all? Like... if I pick a low-rated fighter, with no filter, and fight a top guy, don't you think I should steal more points from him?

[TheGentlemanGhost]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

The only thing I don't want are the mirror matches, those are kind of annoying.

I can deal with blind pick or seeing my opponent because I'm gonna play with who ever I feel like playing with regardless tbh.

[Player2793]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

It'd be cool if we could have a ban system, or an equalized mode for ranked.

[Find_the_Door]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

It'd be cool if we could have a ban system, or an equalized mode for ranked.

No equalized stats please - takes away from the individuality of the fighter. Absolutely not.

[DaisukEasy]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

- Even games that split the player base this much? 10 divisions for ranked and 4 for UT.

I never have problems finding games in FIFA. They have divisions and a similar matchmaking filter that's not optional.

So with the ability to turn the filter off and join the entire pool of players, it should be fine.

- Sorry. I should have been more specific. I meant more specific handicaps, like picking a guy who is a little weaker, but not a top vs bottom thingy. This one isn't a biggy, though.

You could do that by adjusting the filter range.

- Don't you think people would take issue with the leaderboards being meaningless, specially now that so much has been done to improve them?

Why would that suddenly make them meaningless?

You don't think the penlties should exist at all? Like... if I pick a low-rated fighter, with no filter, and fight a top guy, don't you think I should steal more points from him?

The character you pick shouldn't reward or penalize you at all.

Rather I think the amount of points you gain/lose should directly correlate with your comparative rankings.

[Solid_Altair]

Re: Is ranked still gonna be blind pick?

I never have problems finding games in FIFA. They have divisions and a similar matchmaking filter that's not optional.
- FIFA's divisions would not count like the weightclasses at all. They're more like the ranking divisions of UFC 2, or the ELO itself. Also, I think FIFA has a larger player base.


So with the ability to turn the filter off and join the entire pool of players, it should be fine.
- Meaning the filter would take too long and would therefore not be reliable?


You could do that by adjusting the filter range.
- There would be a risk of fighting a player with worse fighter than mine, which would be terrible.


Why would that suddenly make them meaningless?
- Wasn't that your Ben Arsken point? I thought you meant that if people want to cherry pick to reach a high spot, they should be able to do it, then the community otself would adapt by branding the player a cherry picker who's rank isn't legit.

The character you pick shouldn't reward or penalize you at all.

Rather I think the amount of points you gain/lose should directly correlate with your comparative rankings.
- I disagree. I think both should count. Such bonuses per fighter would help with the variety of choices in the roster.

.................