Ranked Lobbies, It's Time.

[callentournies]

It's time for ranked lobbies. 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4. Str8 up.

Quick search is every bad word. The game inspires opposite fun. Everything that made aoe3 fun to play and keep playing for fifteen years feels gone. If I can't have fun games in qs can I have fun games in lobbies, please.

Inb4 just play unranked well guessh what when aoe4 launched without a ladder everyone shat themselves. people like ranked it's good and fun and structured and it's like playing poker for $5 it doesn't mean anything but then people don't just quit after two hands and someone gets $20.

[iNcog]

you know you won't get what you want :(

[Cleters]

Saying it for teamgames since the release. Literally everyone was against and laughing when we said it's going to end teamgames in a year. And how more modern and effiscient QS is for videogames. Here we are now. Playing more nilla than DE because I find games easier with 10 players hosting a lobby than 1000 searching in QS.

[MementoMori]

Saying it for teamgames since the release. Literally everyone was against and laughing when we said it's going to end teamgames in a year. And how more modern and effiscient QS is for videogames. Here we are now. Playing more nilla than DE because I find games easier with 10 players hosting a lobby than 1000 searching in QS.

Same here i dont get why if majority asking the possibility to make lobby ranked possible as for nila or ep with a clearer online friendlist, devs wont add it to the next patches. I am sure there are good reasons, i just dont get why going against what majority of players are asking since the release

[kevinitalien]

Saying it for teamgames since the release. Literally everyone was against and laughing when we said it's going to end teamgames in a year. And how more modern and effiscient QS is for videogames. Here we are now. Playing more nilla than DE because I find games easier with 10 players hosting a lobby than 1000 searching in QS.

Same here i dont get why if majority asking the possibility to make lobby ranked possible as for nila or ep with a clearer online friendlist, devs wont add it to the next patches. I am sure there are good reasons, i just dont get why going against what majority of players are asking since the release

because that's not what the majority is asking, you have to say to yourself that the esoc forum or the viewers you see on twitch do not represent the whole community on aoe3DE, you have the impression that's what people want because we always see the same people on twitch and esoc, but in fact the community is much larger if we brought everyone together, just watch on the official forum, people don't care about that and they want new civ, new content and nothing else

[Kanoo]

I get that qs games for the top 3% ranked players can be frustrating, but for us low elo shitters, we’ll take our ranked 1v1s, please and thank you!

[EAGLEMUT]

I'm not interested to step back into lobbies any time soon. Not interested in dumb hosts, afk hosts, meaningless wintraded ratings. If anything, devs should consider removing the meaningless "casual lobby rank" to incentivize more players into proper ranked search.

[MaxMagous]

They gave us casual ranks. Ranked lobby rating is inherently flawed (cherry-picked players/maps/civs/mus), hence casual ranks (lines, chevrons etc) don't mean much - rightfully at that

[aaryngend]

If it's time for anything, a decently designed friendslist would be it.

[Cleters]

I'm not interested to step back into lobbies any time soon. Not interested in dumb hosts, afk hosts, meaningless wintraded ratings. If anything, devs should consider removing the meaningless "casual lobby rank" to incentivize more players into proper ranked search.

We'll talk about it when the devs will abandon the game in few years, enjoy QS with cheaters with no possibility to avoid them. :)

Just imagine playing RE in QS with known spawners or maphackers playing 24/24.

[Cleters]

I get that qs games for the top 3% ranked players can be frustrating, but for us low elo shitters, we’ll take our ranked 1v1s, please and thank you!

Everytime the first 3% stop because they can't play, it's time for the other 3%, and again and again.

[Misha]

Boggling to me that there isn't agreement on ranked team lobbies at least on these forums. ELO integrity is already 6ft under with smurfing in team and abusable strats like the barbary revolt or USA FI. Finding a fun 2v2 or 3v3 at an intermediate or high level was so much easier on ESO.

[iNcog]

Yeah I'm surprised. Lobby 3v3 random used to be a community staple and now it's gone.

[Tad]

Ranked lobbies is what needs to happen, atleast we would know if there is a chance at getting a game. Not re-searching @ 7 minutes 5x in a row. I played a small stint of legacy not long ago, and had better chances of getting steady games over and over than I do in DE QS - and if that isn’t sad I don’t know what is.
Ranked lobby could hide names - have 0 chat - and just show elo and civ only. Would make everyone happy enough.
What eagle mut is saying about ppl abusing it to elevate their elo, is no different than what I see in DE QS anyway. I’ve personally ran into “top 5” team players over and over playing with a teamate on a brand new account -> resulting in the top 5 player gaining 30 elo off of a 2k elo player. It’s a joke, and honestly completely ruining a great game. Also who cares if it’s only the top 3% affected, are these not the people we want around in the community? Making content, creating competitiveness? Idk, this game sucks the way it is atm.

[Tad]

Also, I’d imagine ranked lobbies would have FAR less disconnects than the current QS. Just my 2 cents

[JKProwler]

This I'm 100% down with for team games. Also provide some PR type of rank, even if it's based on elo

[Kanoo]

We'll talk about it when the devs will abandon the game in few years, enjoy QS with cheaters with no possibility to avoid them. :)

Just imagine playing RE in QS with known spawners or maphackers playing 24/24.

RE was never a good benchmark, to begin with, so if you’re basing your argument on that, your argument is flawed, my friend. Ranked lobbies to the newcomer were the most unpleasant experience anyone could have had for reasons Eaglemut and Maxmagous have already stated. It’s also why the vast majority of the player-base still play skirmish games (vs ai).

Also, why are we blaming qs for the lack of players at the top level? How many times have we seen Kaiserklein or Hazza stream only for them to have other top players (barring Kevinitalien or Revnak) dodge them like the plague to protect their precious elo while the same players are more than happy to play lobbies or smurf to no end? Is qs going to magically summon a Kynesie if you're the only top player queueing atm?
Totally agree with Eaglemut, casual lobby stripes needs to be done away with to get more players into ranked.

DE's qs has been the single most redeemable factor for the lion's share of 1v1 online multiplayers, and is in a very healthy place. That's just the plain truth.

PS, team games are another matter, simply because the numbers that be are too poor. Ranked lobbies here make more sense.

[tabben]

Esoc Patch and LordRaphaels Spiel, name a more iconic duo

[iNcog]

1v1 35+

[helln00]

Ranked lobbies for team is ok, 1v1 pls no

[harcha]

1v1 35+

i'd say 25+ as i'm not that old yet

[Squamiger]

1v1 35+

*joins*

11
11
11
31
31

…

*5 min later*

“srry friend comin”

*kicked*


Yea sorry I won’t go back, ranked qs is so nice compared to this

[iron_turtle]

or the classic,

*joins*

lobby full
host not readying up
checks host time
8hrs+
host afk

*leave*

[JKProwler]

We'll talk about it when the devs will abandon the game in few years, enjoy QS with cheaters with no possibility to avoid them. :)

Just imagine playing RE in QS with known spawners or maphackers playing 24/24.

RE was never a good benchmark, to begin with, so if you’re basing your argument on that, your argument is flawed, my friend. Ranked lobbies to the newcomer were the most unpleasant experience anyone could have had for reasons Eaglemut and Maxmagous have already stated. It’s also why the vast majority of the player-base still play skirmish games (vs ai).

Also, why are we blaming qs for the lack of players at the top level? How many times have we seen Kaiserklein or Hazza stream only for them to have other top players (barring Kevinitalien or Revnak) dodge them like the plague to protect their precious elo while the same players are more than happy to play lobbies or smurf to no end? Is qs going to magically summon a Kynesie if you're the only top player queueing atm?
Totally agree with Eaglemut, casual lobby stripes needs to be done away with to get more players into ranked.

DE's qs has been the single most redeemable factor for the lion's share of 1v1 online multiplayers, and is in a very healthy place. That's just the plain truth.

PS, team games are another matter, simply because the numbers that be are too poor. Ranked lobbies here make more sense.

The issue you have raised with ranked lobbies can be mitigated by having a minimum elo option to join

[Squamiger]

I get that qs games for the top 3% ranked players can be frustrating, but for us low elo shitters, we’ll take our ranked 1v1s, please and thank you!

yea this is really it. sub 1600 elo ranked quicksearch works perfectly well, games in 30 seconds to 5 minutes at all times of the day, against players of the same skill as you, playing all types of civs and strats. miles better than lobbies. git bad, i guess.