• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived. You can find them at the bottom of the forum in the Archives (2021) section. The archives are locked, so please use the new forum sections to create new discussion threads.

"Enforce skill bracket" for quickmatch

S

Skrylar

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Parasoul
We really need a togglable "enforce skill bracket" button for the quick match system. All it would do is turn off the fallback quick match uses when nobody equal is available.

With "enforce skill bracket": Don't "fall back" to any available person if nobody within 10-20% win chance is available, just keep waiting. Low-level player waits a while longer depending on time of day, maybe alt-tabs out for youtube, but plays more games they can learn from. Everybody wins.

Without "enforce skill bracket": What we have now where QM low-level player decides to play online (and there are no lobbies around), and QM decides he or she needs to fight someone who has been using the same 3-man team touch of death combos for the past three years. Low-level player is bored because he spends 90% of the match holding the stick in one direction until the other person resets or drops and hopes he's allowed to play some at some point. High-level player is bored because he had to fight a solo with imperfect execution and 2 months experience.

I know why quick match does what it does, and we really need an option to ask it to stop making terrible match-ups.
 
afaik it's too late in development to make any changes other than bug fixes at this point. I guess what the new player should do in this scenario is make a lobby themselves.
 
mcpeanuts said:
afaik it's too late in development to make any changes other than bug fixes at this point. I guess what the new player should do in this scenario is make a lobby themselves.

Its just a toggle for something the engine already knows how to do; whether or not the PC team is actually allowed to do that is probably another question though.
 
Yeah, no, getting a match already can take some time depending on the time of the day, lets not make it any more annoying for everyone.

Because it would make it more annoying for everyone. I know you have good intentions at heart, but I can already see half the QM players using it, then all of them complaining all over everywhere that Skullgirls is dead because they never get a match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nuuance
Skrylar said:
Its just a toggle for something the engine already knows how to do; whether or not the PC team is actually allowed to do that is probably another question though.

A lot of the time you'll find that something that sounds very simple on paper in practice can be a technical headache.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KaboomKid, scottvincent, Broken Loose and 1 other person
Slap said:
A lot of the time you'll find that something that sounds very simple on paper in practice can be a technical headache.
Especially considering that "the PC team" consists currently of 1 person trying to fix everything for the PS4 release.
 
Skrylar said:
We really need a togglable "enforce skill bracket" button for the quick match system. All it would do is turn off the fallback quick match uses when nobody equal is available.

With "enforce skill bracket": Don't "fall back" to any available person if nobody within 10-20% win chance is available, just keep waiting. Low-level player waits a while longer depending on time of day, maybe alt-tabs out for youtube, but plays more games they can learn from. Everybody wins.
A serious question gets a serious answer.
- It is too late in development to do something like this, even if it were easy.
- The implementation is not easy. Quickmatch (in every game) consists of: Look for an open room with a waiting person in it. If none match the desired parameters, then open a room, enter it, and wait. Turning on this option when searching rooms is easy, just ignore rooms outside the range. Turning on this option for when nobody is found (so you make a room and wait) involves adding a room parameter, and each person who looks at the room then querying and obeying it. That is not trivial.
- What happens in the case of A wants everyone and B wants limited range is not easy. Sure, B wants limited range, but A just wants to play ANYONE. Do we make A wait for someone else just because B is picky?
and lastly
- Doing something like this reduces the number of available matches by much more than you would think. For example, if I'm good and there are 40 low-level players around me and they are all picky, I will find zero matches even though I'm willing to play anyone, whereas the low-level players will be eliminating only one person (me) from their choices. There was some statistical hand-waving before but the upshot is that something like 15% of people adopting this would result in over 50% fewer matches for the people who don't adopt it.
^ that bit is the reason it works like it does, and why we eliminated skill buckets before, when we had them on PS3. Given the size of the SG playerbase, I would consider fighting anyone to be more entertaining than fighting nobody for 3 hours.

And who knows, if the good player and the newbie play each other, perhaps the good player adds the newbie and offers some advice afterward. (Shh! I like to think this happens sometimes!)

Skrylar said:
3-man team touch of death combos
So you're on the newbie side, then? :^P
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nuuance, Luweewu, TechPowah and 9 others
@Skrylar

Try and make a 2 slot lobby set to 'Casual Matches - Beginner' and kick anyone you think is way above your level and obviously trolling.

Just don't be too hasty to kick people because there's a lot to learn from losing.
I saw three beginner lobbies earlier when I logged on to play some sets.

Playing long sets with others is usually way more helpful than playing a 'one and done quick match pride king' anyways - You'll learn a lot more if you get to keep at it and try new things during a set.

I know it can be frustrating to never be able to hit a single button once in Quick Match because the other player is really good (I've been in the exact same place when I started) but I think it's better that Quick Match stays a place to find matches quickly with no parameters. A play again option or similar would be fantastic though.

There's also this wonderful active steam community group here for lower level to intermediate Skullgirls players to receive coaching or set up matches that you may want to check out!

~ http://steamcommunity.com/groups/BnBeez ~
 
  • Like
Reactions: Broseidon Rex, scottvincent, Shooon and 3 others
Skarmand said:
I know it can be frustrating to never be able to hit a single button once in Quick Match because the other player is really good (I've been in the exact same place when I started) but I think it's better that Quick Match stays a place to find matches quickly with no parameters. A play again option or similar would be fantastic though.

I might take an option to block a specific person over a play again, personally. Some people are just incredibly boring to fight.
 
Skrylar said:
I might take an option to block a specific person over a play again, personally. Some people are just incredibly boring to fight.
Doesn't Steam let you do that?
 
Skarmand said:
I play against people I have on my block list.

Same here on PS3. I play against this dude that plays solo Big Band and he just Giant Steps (H) and then Brass Knuckles (H). It's very annoying and boring, but I still have to fight him despite being on my block list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Dave
Now people might be able to protect their one and one quick match pride even further :^)
 
  • Like
Reactions: gllt
Um... something I'd like to point out that's probably way too late to worry about:
upload_2015-6-6_1-6-14.png
The screen upon connecting to a player in Quick Match always says "Versus: New Challenger." Perhaps if it displayed the "New Challenger's" Steam name, players could remember opponents they just fought five times in a row and cancel the match in advance? Based on the layout, I get the impression something similar was originally intended, but time and stuff probably got in the way. On the other hand, if changing that text were quickly possible, it would solve the "block players" problem pretty handily.
 
The Dave said:
Um... something I'd like to point out that's probably way too late to worry about
It intentionally doesn't tell you the steam names of other people in ranked. There is a lot of hassle in every game where this is the case for high level players to ever find any matches.

The most worrying thing about that screenshot is "GGPO Frame Delay" set to 5. And not just to 5, but 5 @82ms. What why no oh lord
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luweewu and mcpeanuts
Yeah uh, it intentionally tells you nothing about your opponent because in games that do, good (or "cheap" according to newbies) players got cancelled on for days.
Come to think of it, I think that's why we ignore your blocklist too.
 
IsaVulpes said:
It intentionally doesn't tell you the steam names of other people in ranked. There is a lot of hassle in every game where this is the case for high level players to ever find any matches.

The most worrying thing about that screenshot is "GGPO Frame Delay" set to 5. And not just to 5, but 5 @82ms. What why no oh lord

Ha! It remembered my previous setting against somebody with a much, much higher ping. I didn't notice when I took the screenshot; I'm normally pretty good about going with the suggested delay.

As for high-ranked players jumping in Quick Match... good point, I hadn't thought about that.
 
@The Dave
IsaVulpes said:
Ignore the suggested delay, go with 0
Yeah, this.

Real explanation:
The suggested delay is a number large enough that you shouldn't SEE many visual artifacts, i.e. it is as much delay as input-lag-based netcode will choose for that ping.
But that adds input lag, which means you have to adjust your play. You don't want input lag! For gameplay consistency, visual artifacts are the preferred evil.
So set it to 0 all the time, that's basically the entire point of GGPO. Feel no lag on your own characters, deal with rollbacks - as opposed to feel lag on your own characters, look at nice visuals.

tl;dr Suggested delay is for players that don't know enough to not equate smooth visuals with good game feel, basically. :^)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtmaDragoon, gllt, mcpeanuts and 1 other person
Mike_Z said:
Yeah uh, it intentionally tells you nothing about your opponent because in games that do, good (or "cheap" according to newbies) players got cancelled on for days.
Come to think of it, I think that's why we ignore your blocklist too.

Tell me about it.

I was doing great in MKX but now people can deny imperfect connection, but the game shows your win/loss record too before they decide. With my stats people keep running away and I can't get any match at all in Ranked. Didn't find a player with full bars yet.

Made me appreciate Skullgirls again on a whole new level...
 
Mike_Z said:
@The Dave

Yeah, this.

Real explanation:
The suggested delay is a number large enough that you shouldn't SEE many visual artifacts, i.e. it is as much delay as input-lag-based netcode will choose for that ping.
But that adds input lag, which means you have to adjust your play. You don't want input lag! For gameplay consistency, visual artifacts are the preferred evil.
So set it to 0 all the time, that's basically the entire point of GGPO. Feel no lag on your own characters, deal with rollbacks - as opposed to feel lag on your own characters, look at nice visuals.

tl;dr Suggested delay is for players that don't know enough to not equate smooth visuals with good game feel, basically. :^)

Will do! I always thought lag/bad timing on my part was due to sloppy input on my end/slow reaction times/controller getting older and worn out/computer overheating/poor internet connection... which are probably still relevant anyway and why I generally try not to complain about it.

Thanks!
 
Whoa, I'm not sure I've ever had it set to 0 the past year or so I've been playing the game (it might be at 1 or something).
Wish I'd known about this long ago. Can't wait to see the difference next chance I get.
 
indieanimator said:
Whoa, I'm not sure I've ever had it set to 0 the past year or so I've been playing the game (it might be at 1 or something).
Wish I'd known about this long ago. Can't wait to see the difference next chance I get.
If you had it at 1, the difference you'll get will be 1 frame. :^P The idea is "always set it to something low and just leave it alone, for best game-feel" rather than following the suggested delay.

I'd have not included the suggested delay at ALL except that there do exist people who think visuals = gameplay.
 
Mike_Z said:
If you had it at 1, the difference you'll get will be 1 frame. :^P The idea is "always set it to something low and just leave it alone, for best game-feel" rather than following the suggested delay.

I'd have not included the suggested delay at ALL except that there do exist people who think visuals = gameplay.

Yep, good point. As an animator & fighting game player I know how important every frame can be. :) It's interesting to have the choice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back