Ladders in 1.0

Having a ladder and matchmaking is important. Whether or not that is important enough to delay the release of the game is mostly a business decision and only you guys at Uber can really make that call. One advantage to automatic matchmaking is that it can help to hide low player counts. I've seen a lot of complaints that there aren't a lot of players in the game. It's not something worth complaining about because you can easily get a game if you create a lobby, but undeserved bad PR is still bad PR.

Really great news, I believe if 1.0 doesn't have ladder, number of multiplayer players will be drasticly smaller than if it gets implemented. And more multiplayer players is a win for everyone, both developers (more sells in longer run [it snowballs, I show the game to my friends, then they to their friends etc]) and players (more competitive environment, higher chances for tourneys and sponsors and esport in general).
Ladder motivates many people to play "I want to be higher in ladder", without it, many people feel like they are sandboxing. I really believe it's absolutely critical to have ladder at the release of game.

K

Thanks for Communicating this and listening to us. It is all much appreciated.

This is fantastic news! For me, the matchmaking will make the game much better - the alternative is playing the AI or some random person who'll probably destroy me! ><

It isn't so much the ladder itself that is needed but the integral part of such a system which is direly needed, the match-making system. The match-making system should theoretically pit players of similar skill and experience together in order that they can get the best experience possible playing online.

There is a very simple reason a majority of people only play AI, losing is sh**! Losing utterly before you've even begun is even more awful especially if it happens consistently and repeatedly, there's just no room to learn and grow like that! And as good as the AI is, it's no substitute for practising against another player. To that end, playing versus a player of around your own skill level is a much more rewarding experience because even when you lose, you can more easily identify where you may have gone wrong than if an improbably huge army steamrollers you just after you build your second factory.

Conversely it's equally terrible to play as a vet and stepping on the noobs too hard. You really kinda feel bad for them after you've accidentally scouted them half to death and they quit as a result, makes for a terrible experience all around. Vets get complacent and bored, poor new players become meek and fearful and only play the AI from then on.

Yes, polish is needed badly the way elements of the game and UI mesh together are less than stellar and frankly terrible... but forgivable, given the context of creating a workable game. After all close enough is close enough but I recognise that's not enough for a 1.0 release. However, even though I'm repeating others here, it's equally unacceptable in this day and age to ship without matchmaking.

I only say this because I love the game, I love what you have done and want to bring others in to the fold and see what I see. I want it to grow! I want the pool of players to be large and diverse enough for everyone, even if some of them are filthy milk drinking casuals I want the game to encourage people to actually play each other and have fun, rather than playing a game or two and running a mile from from the online scene because omgwtfbbq!

In short Uber, be nice to the noobs and vets alike, a skill/experience matchmaking function would be icing on the cake.

While I don't need these features myself, I do believe you're making a wise business decision here. I think this feature is quite important for player retention.

I agree with this.

This thread is good news. At least a basic 1v1 ladder is vital to the development of any sort of competitive scene. And it needs to be there at 1.0, because 1.0 is supposed to be a big push in sales and players and those players will quickly leave and never come back if there isn't even a ladder.

I've been saying I think we need a ladder too, but I've been using the wrong verbiage I've realized. I think skill based matchmaking is essential. Which tends to go hand in hand with a ladder, but you can easily make a ladder without skill based matchmaking, which at that point doesn't resolve the root problem, which is noobs being pitted against veterans.

Either way IMO the #1 focus should be the skill based matchmaking followed by a ladder with 1v1 at the very least, it would be nice to see 2v2 and 3v3, perhaps up to 4v4 before cutting it off. But those bring up new questions of whether they should be shared armies or not. Which not would be my preference, mainly coming from SC2s 2v2.

OH. MY. LORD.

I feel like hopping on the hype train again!

I won't but just so you know, I'm right there with everyone else. ...and with you. not too close though so it doesn't get awkward but.... well you know what I mean!

Guys, keep in mind I said we were CONSIDERING it. Which we are.

I think a large portion of people here are into competitive and assume that's everyone else's mindset as well. This is a bad assumption. In fact by being so noisy about it you could actually be hurting the game by pulling our attention away from other areas that may be more important to the average player. Just food for thought.

That is a good point. However, there is also the fact that a lot of new players don't know what they are getting into, if they are going up against veteran players, or other new players. And if it's the former, and they lose really badly, it might turn them off of the game.

I'm still not sure what a ladder in PA would actually entail.

More ease on newer players.
Which now that I think about it a bit more... which top players even play against randoms?
I've seen posidian once and that's about it.

See StarCraft 2. Leagues or levels containing ranks. Beat enough people, get to the top of your league, get to where you should move up a league/level. Work your way up from the bottom to the top. This way you are pitted against like skilled players (assuming skill based matchmaking, which IMO is the important part aside from the ladder itself) and improve over time moving you up to fight against better players as you improve.

Yes. As long as you see both sides of the ladder thing, you'll do what's best for the game. I don't really care to get to competitive, but I also get to play with similarly experienced players since I have access to a clan. I think matchmaking could help, but I don't know how required it would be, as so many are making it out to be.

Perhaps there is a middle ground to all this?

I think the main issue people can see is that there is currently no way to easily tell vets from beginners. Spring has a very simple system of displaying a rank next to each players name that simply denotes their total in game time. It's by no means perfect, however it does at a glance indicate "ok this guy is new, he's experienced..."

With that little tidbit of information players can quite easily (and usually willingly) organise themselves.

Hosting a 4 v 4, you have a mix of new and experience players- no problem, just make sure the players are mixed evenly between the teams

I don't know if PA records in game time, but if it does this could be a quick (?) addition and I'd suggest counts as polish rather than a larger 'competitive play' update?

The reason we feel the skill based matchmaking is required is to avoid people quitting the game because they get stomped.

When I play in random matches I tend to stomp most players in less than 10 minutes. If I go play against the veterans of 1v1 I tend to get stomped, but at the very least I held on for a while and feel I need improvement, but the top top players would roll me also. I would prefer playing people where there is a nice back and forth for 15-25 minutes instead of 8 minute games to win/lose.

Usually I express the exact same point, but consider this:

A healthy, enjoyable multiplayer community is essential to player retention.

If there's some sort of a matchmaking system where new players won't be pitted against just random people, including quite possibly way more advanced players, they won't be discouraged by being stomped all the time. So they'll actually have the patience and retain the excitement towards playing again and just one more game.

Do you really have that low an opinion of most game players? I think most people will start playing against the AI or with a friend and not with randoms