Ranked 2v2 & FFA

The ranked 1v1 is great, plenty of players and quick to get a match.
It would be awesome to expand this system to support other game modes.

Ranked FFA is kind of impossible.

At the moment, I'm very much in favour of not splitting the matchmaking pools.

There's a very good explanation here as to why we ought to avoid doing this until PA's numbers increase significantly.

Kind of. But not. Even a tally of win/loss gives a rank. Perhaps just not a very accurate one.
The rank in itself is not the most important part for FFA, the automatic matchmaking is.
The rank in that case is just useful for guessing who is the biggest threat.

If people want to play a different game mode, like FFA or 2v2, having a single 1v1 matchmaking pool doesn't help. When I want to play 1v1, I do.

If I don't, I have to go into the custom lobby and faff around for half an hour while people join, wait a couple of minutes, leave and join another game, return a few minutes later until critical mass builds. Then those that were waiting the whole time are often AFK, and the waiting continues.

I'd suggest when starting a ranked match you check which type of game you're willing to play (i.e. 1v1, 2v2, FFA) Then based on other waiting players and their preference, the system creates the matches.

Having a RLM tag is really good for getting big games started. People think they'll be on youtube for some reason.

I get what you're saying, but there's actually an argument for getting people to play 1v1. As you've correctly identified, it's significantly easier to play a 1v1 than anything else. So that is convincing more people to play on the 1v1 ladder.

I, for example, am not particularly keen on playing 1v1 PA because I love larger games. However (if it weren't for the fact that I've been stranded without usable internet for a few months), I'd be playing a few 1v1s just because, whereas I wouldn't normally.

The current arrangement is expanding the matchmaking pool, and as such I'd say we're best sticking with it at least for the time being.

I actually have plans to revitalise the channel for PA again, once I have the internets - so not altogether unfounded.

Technically it's possible with the current ranking system but it would be very difficult and extremely cpu intensive. It can be hacked into rating system this just going to take time.

I think it would be easier to just have a rating system then an actual ladder. That way it would be generalized, since FFAs usually have a measure of chance to them

Not really what I meant.

What I mean is that the factors that go into winning a FFA can't be counted by a simple integer number of rank.

There are literally hundreds of different factors that make FFA's impossible to balance and orchestrate properly.

You can win a FFA without actually doing anything, that's the problem.

That's a balance issue. Not an inherent property of ffas

I believe the exact opposite.

You can't balance FFA's, there is no way to account for all the stuff you can do.

That's the reason I've been playing them more recently. It's highly dependent on a kind of hidden diplomacy. If you don't harass a near neighbor, even though you could wipe them out, the temporary unspoken truce may save you from another players invading army. The unpredictability adds a lot to the game. It certainly doesn't feel 'fair' like the ranked 1v1, but it's more fun.

I'm not asking for them to be BALANCED. I'm suggesting they can be more than a bunch of people staring eachother down for ten minutes before someone blinks and the whole thing falls apart. The ranking system should reflect that.

We already have a rating system and a latter gives people an incentive to play. There's always an element of luck involved. I know people do want to hear that but it's true. Your opponent could be having a off day for example. I know people do want to hear that but it's a factor. Sorry don't hurt me. (twinges)

That's accounted for by the rating deviation, in Glicko, I believe?

You should be able to choose ranked or not. If you don't want to play ranked that's your prerogative.

You guys haventmgotten good enough at ffas yet to understand that luck can be minimized.

But that would split up the matchmaking in half, possibly doubling waiting time.

That would be a seriously complex rating system to take in all those factors. On the other hand just have the rating system. Have it award point on the basis who survives the longest.