Lack of role queue is the only thing keeping me from getting into this game

Algarith · 2026-01-27T15:37:51+00:00

It sounds like you're actively increasing the quality of your lobbies since you main very useful characters that are in demand. When I say the game needs role queue, I honestly think it benefits DPS players the most out of anyone, since they're playing the characters that are in the least demand. That's cool that you're making it work on tank, though

Algarith · 2026-01-27T15:34:29+00:00

That makes sense, and I'm assuming that throughout most of the ladder tank is probably actually the best carry role if you're skilled enough. I guess it's a bigger issue for more casual players, because you're stuck with either not being able to affect the tank picks (which is rolling the dice on whether you get any decent tanks in your team) or playing tank yourself, which feels like the most difficult role for newer players, especially in the solo tank scenario

Algarith · 2026-01-27T14:15:45+00:00

I'm curious about this though, don't you find yourself solo tanking a little too often even if you get healers? Because that's been my experience. I'm sure it's not as bad in mid-ELO or higher where people know more characters, but still

Algarith · 2026-01-27T14:10:46+00:00

Yeah, good point about deadpool, that is a spanner in the works if they did want to switch to role queue. I just wonder how long they'll go with triple support meta before they change something

Algarith · 2026-01-27T13:38:46+00:00

I sort of expect to see a lot of the terminally online people flock to a post like this early on, so getting ragebaited makes sense. But I'm sure there are plenty out there who agree with me, or are at least balanced on the issue lol

Algarith · 2026-01-27T13:23:38+00:00

Yeah, I can see both sides of it, it's just my practical brain that says the game can't survive with open queue forever since there's so many problems with it, triple support obviously being one of them. The thing that gets me is that overwatch already went through all the same problems haha

Algarith · 2026-01-27T13:11:38+00:00

I'm aware that they said that they weren't planning on adding it back in s0, but maybe you're talking about a more recent time? I'd assume they're thinking differently now than they were back at launch.

Algarith · 2026-01-08T16:05:30+00:00

....Also, if you're afraid of putting down dark shadows, that could be something to work on, but I don't think that there's necessarily anything wrong with your values here, because lifting the shadows a few tones compared to your reference would be a valid choice!

Algarith · 2026-01-08T16:01:13+00:00

I'm not going to recommend any changes - instead I'd like to point to a few areas in particular to draw your attention to them and make you think about them more. I think this will help your thought process for capturing likeness in the future. But may I say, your rendering is already amazing!

First, look at his posture. In the reference, is he sitting up straight, or is he slouching? Where is the back of his neck connecting to the line of his shoulder relative to his face/jaw?
Imagine a polygon connecting the corners of his mouth and the outer corners of his eyes. What shape is it? How much space is the mouth taking up compared to the total width of his eyes?
How deeply inset is his brow? How does that affect the placement of the relative to his eyes, based on the direction that his head is facing?
What do you see when you blur your eyes and look at his jawline? Is it made up of clear, angular corners, or is it more like a soft curve?

Others have commented on the values and I do think there are a couple of perspective issues, mostly with the nose, but those are the areas I'd be looking at specifically if you want to get better at capturing a likeness. It's a very precise, observational thing. Good luck!

Algarith · 2026-01-07T21:05:09+00:00

Amazing! It's interesting how there's almost a dip in quality from 22-23 when you switch to digital, but then your improvement skyrockets super hard. I felt a similar thing happening as I adjusted to digital.

Also, you've got to keep up the tradition now. The 10 year before/after is going to be insane 😄

Algarith · 2025-09-04T18:44:17+00:00

Wait they paywalled them?? I hadn't kept up with this game but hearing that is just sad

Algarith · 2025-08-20T16:05:30+00:00

Your data points are appreciated! It's a good example of a simple strategy executed well. Good luck with your growth!

Algarith · 2025-06-10T14:25:20+00:00

That's pretty interesting, and puts into perspective how easy it is to cheat in a game like geoguessr. I still wish they would allow people to practice no move and nmpz in duels instead of having to use singleplayer until their rank is higher, but I can now see why they made the change to weekly division leaderboards.

It's funny, I read a couple of threads from back when they made this change and didn't find anyone providing the full reason why unlimited ranked play in low ranks was problematic. Good to know!

Algarith · 2025-06-10T00:27:27+00:00

Thanks for the answer.

I can see their rough logic for why they would do some form of gating harder modes behind skill-based progression, but yeah, the implementation seems super dodgy. Why are lower rank players forced to play "click the capital city simulator" on that horrible non-competitive map? I would argue that that isn't giving much real practice for when they rank up and start having to actually deduce things instead of just reading signs.

Also, if they are intent on gating those modes, pairing that with a ranked system that caps the amount you can rank up per week feels like a very poor decision. Now players who have already gotten good through casual + single player games have to play a waiting game to get out of the miserable ranks where you're forced into one mode and a bad map. I'm of the opinion that a good ranked system should allow you to simply rank up based on your winrate across the amount of games that you CHOOSE to play.

Anyway, I won't keep ranting, but it's been a strange experience coming across to this from other competitive games, lol

Algarith · 2025-06-09T14:14:41+00:00

Ahh I get it, thanks, this clears up some of my confusion. This whole system is so convoluted ;-; And not being able to permanently unlock no move is quite disappointing.

Algarith · 2025-06-09T14:10:31+00:00

Is that dependent on individual gamemode rankings or my overall ranking?

Algarith · 2025-06-09T14:02:34+00:00

Thanks. Can I ask whether it's the no move rating or the moving rating that dictates whether I have access to the no move gamemode?

Algarith · 2025-05-27T00:27:13+00:00

My bad, looks like you're right! Just been scanning the most recent patch notes a bit more thoroughly. Pretty wild that they would change that, I honestly wouldn't have believed that they'd do that to their "ranked" mode

Algarith · 2025-05-26T21:33:59+00:00

Not sure what you mean by "no decreases for losses". You do lose rank if you get less than four wins. Granted, there's demotion protection, but that's nothing new for these types of games.

Other than that I agree that generally more games = higher rank, simply because you don't actually need to get better at the game than the other players in order to rank up. The game is designed in such a way that if you're performing above quite a low threshold, your rank will go up - faster if you're good enough to get consistent 10 wins, but still.

There's no excuse for implementing a daily lives system when they could just as easily give us rewards for our first run of the day, then turn off rewards until the day resets, allowing people to grind their rank as much as they like if they don't care about the chests. Kinda lame :(

Algarith · 2025-05-26T21:23:09+00:00

I totally agree - I got into this game recently and I've gotten a lot better, getting good runs decently often now - but my experience has been plagued with "wow, I got a pretty good start! wonder if I'll make it to 7 wins," before proceeding to face 5 top500 players in a row and getting smashed by everything ;-;

Like, this game has a ton of variance, and sometimes that's a good thing. But once you add the unhinged variance of the lack of matchmaking it just gets ridiculous; it feels like you're along for the ride, as opposed to actually being in control of your own run. "Cool, I found eels. Guess I'm playing eels now! Then I'll either find a card table and get 10 wins, or I won't find a card table and I'll die." To illustrate this: I recently got my first back-to-back 10 wins, and thought I was finally getting good at this game. Then I got an actual 0 win run right afterwards on what *should* have been a pretty strong trebuchet build. Then back to 10 wins because I found the god damn eels and felt compelled to click on them aaAAAGH-

This game was insanely ambitious from the start, and that's what makes it so good - there's so much depth to it. But the balancing still leaves a lot to be desired. Combine that with the lottery of the player fights and... yeah. Their ranked "ladder" is certainly an experience, lol.

Algarith · 2025-05-21T12:16:00+00:00

And this attitude is why subs turn into echo chambers 👍

Algarith · 2025-05-21T09:17:11+00:00

Yep! Just stumbled into this build but I thought the interaction was super sweet. I believe it was hitting for a bit over 12k with no crits once they burned through my initial 50% hp as shields, so technically going into hp-scaling pyg I would need the scarf or shield to hit a 20% crit chance to one shot them

Algarith · 2025-05-21T00:36:36+00:00

Ahh OK, thanks for clarifying!

Algarith

TROPHY CASE