If you stopped playing, why?

[damageinc86]

Thankfully both Kazaa and Skype are absolutely dead in the water now. Tell that fat cat estonian to give up the loot on god.........fair warning. i am not above chain snatching from an ugly euro. test me.

LMAO. go for it please.

[PoLiX]

Good luck

[bike]

First and foremost, the MMR system completely ruined my enjoyment of the game. I appreciate all the dev work Spooked put into TW and every bit of effort he poured into improving the game, but I believe he should have never touched MMR. The system he introduced made matches frustrating and unenjoyable. The old MMR had a well-balanced algorithm that made matches fun every night, with top players fighting for leaderboard rankings.

The issue with the current staff is that they don’t take constructive critism well and when you voice your opinion you’re considered a whiner lol.. we are the players, we are what keeps this game alive, its already miserable we have to play with YOGI and a bunch of dooksters, why flaw the MMR system? If the majority agrees the new MMR system is bad, why not revert to what worked? Instead, they replaced a solid system with something nobody wanted. MMR was ultimately the last straw for me. In what world does it make sense to play a point spread system where you have to win the game by 92 just to get 0 points, or drop 27 kills and still lose 30 points? The system is completely broken. It punishes good performances and makes matches feel pointless. This is exactly why so many players, including myself, lost interest.

The second reason I quit was the time zone difference after moving to a new country, which made it difficult to play regularly.

I truly loved this game, but the new MMR system definitely drove me away from the game, not playing til 8am to drop 25 kills and lose 42 points, shit is dreadful..

Like I said, I’m not downplaying anything Spooked has done for the zone but he definitely plays a big part on damaging the playerbase because he is stubborn and thinks he knows what he’s doing out there.. I hope he does what’s right and listens to the people of TW or he’s gonna be logging in with YOGI and DefaultDelphin18.

Yea literally the bot spams out 5-10 lines before the game starts. Hard to read the fine print, much less to interpret it. Good practice to assume the IQ of participants is very low, so must simplify understanding as much as possible. Win the game = makes sense. Win by some obscure fraction / ratio = me confused and don't want to play no more. Me win game and still lose points? Me no happy. Me no want to play no more.

[qan]

Yea literally the bot spams out 5-10 lines before the game starts. Hard to read the fine print, much less to interpret it. Good practice to assume the IQ of participants is very low, so must simplify understanding as much as possible. Win the game = makes sense. Win by some obscure fraction / ratio = me confused and don't want to play no more. Me win game and still lose points? Me no happy. Me no want to play no more.

Hm. We spent dozens and dozens of hours hammering out the system as a community, and one fundamental that I thought we were all in agreement on was that a win must increase MMR and a loss must necessarily reduce it.

There are a few games where individual performance factors in to such an extent that can, in a few cases, result in a "reverse" rating change, such as when you're playing against a team that is significantly stronger and lose, but still manage to perform extremely well, and get a slight ratings increase. Or do so poorly against a team that is significantly weaker that it lowers it slightly after a win.

But those should generally be edge cases, coming up quite rarely, and when they occur it should be pretty obvious why it's occurred. In matches where teams are essentially even, I don't see many (any?) instances where this would need to happen.

How did we get here...? Has the community come together on this issue and determined that this is the direction we should be going? I haven't been following things as closely as I would like, as my life hasn't afforded me too much free time lately.

[LeeRomeno]

Hm. We spent dozens and dozens of hours hammering out the system as a community, and one fundamental that I thought we were all in agreement on was that a win must increase MMR and a loss must necessarily reduce it.

There are a few games where individual performance factors in to such an extent that can, in a few cases, result in a "reverse" rating change, such as when you're playing against a team that is significantly stronger and lose, but still manage to perform extremely well, and get a slight ratings increase. Or do so poorly against a team that is significantly weaker that it lowers it slightly after a win.

But those should generally be edge cases, coming up quite rarely, and when they occur it should be pretty obvious why it's occurred. In matches where teams are essentially even, I don't see many (any?) instances where this would need to happen.

How did we get here...? Has the community come together on this issue and determined that this is the direction we should be going? I haven't been following things as closely as I would like, as my life hasn't afforded me too much free time lately.

Problem is that although current mmr system is actually doing what it is designed to do (make automated league games as fair as possible - something old system did not, especially in situations where player pool levels are quite different), it is not particulary rewarding.
MR logic is that you get to some level (where you are suppose to be) and then it rarely changes, as your skill-level most probably also does not change that much. This means mmr point changes are usually very marginal and situations where you can lose a few points or win no matter if you win a game or not happen. Big changes only happen if ratings are wrong for some reason (usually with new players coming in or some ppl just raging) and there is landslide win, that bot does not predict. Problem with those games is that it does not really calculate the individual performance at all. You can have a game of your life and go 22-10, but if everyone else goes 0-10, you lose in a landslide and lose alot of points. It feels unfair and in reality also is. Same way you can go 0-10 on a freq, but if your team pulls a great win, you still gain points. Feels wrong.
So nothing new here, but the easiest solution to solve this is to keep the mmr system as matchmaking engine in backround, but in reality another point scoring system should be introduced that works as the original mmr did, where individual performances matter, so instead of rewarding points only based on bot prediction on how your freq does vs opponents, but also how you individually do vs how you were suppose to do. That point system can be used with similar logic as elim for exactly and can be reset and winners awarded without breaking the matchmaking (as current mmr rating in backround will be not).

[bike]

Me no understand strings of words or logical arguments. Me win = good, me lose = bad, me understand this. All else beyond mental ability. Please keep simple for me. Me want to win and earn cookie and not be slapped if me win. Win is win. Lose is lose. Must Einstein meddle in the caveman waters?

[rainbow]

Hm. We spent dozens and dozens of hours hammering out the system as a community, and one fundamental that I thought we were all in agreement on was that a win must increase MMR and a loss must necessarily reduce it.

There are a few games where individual performance factors in to such an extent that can, in a few cases, result in a "reverse" rating change, such as when you're playing against a team that is significantly stronger and lose, but still manage to perform extremely well, and get a slight ratings increase. Or do so poorly against a team that is significantly weaker that it lowers it slightly after a win.

But those should generally be edge cases, coming up quite rarely, and when they occur it should be pretty obvious why it's occurred. In matches where teams are essentially even, I don't see many (any?) instances where this would need to happen.

How did we get here...? Has the community come together on this issue and determined that this is the direction we should be going? I haven't been following things as closely as I would like, as my life hasn't afforded me too much free time lately.

Everyone has been giving this exact feedback to SpookedOne. Unfortunately, he says his algorithm is better and results in more even games. He does very little to address the concerns of the community. Changes have also been made in pub that the majority of pub players do not like. Many have voiced their concerns but nothing has been done.

I used to want to sign on to play a few games of MMR or just pub a little but both have been very dead lately. It is sad to see.

[LeeRomeno]

Me no understand strings of words or logical arguments. Me win = good, me lose = bad, me understand this. All else beyond mental ability. Please keep simple for me. Me want to win and earn cookie and not be slapped if me win. Win is win. Lose is lose. Must Einstein meddle in the caveman waters?

Yea thats the problem. To keep mmr player rating as true as possible for matchmaking purposes, it has to follow the current logic, so if teams are rated 50/50 to win and game is won 50-49, then ratings are not suppose to change, as logically, player ratings are correct and no change is needed. Otherwise ratings will get inflated and this will result in more lopsided games (which was the issue with last mmr model).
At the same time only thing that keeps this game going is competition and current rating changes feel wrong. Only way to fix it is forget the current mmr ratings as something people compare, run them in backround and introduce more win/individual performance model, where good games and wins are awarded and bad games and performances are punished.