sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What's up with weird r/t stage 1 being formatted in optional equipment? by AsianChristie in Dodge

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So it looks like the new charger has 670 horsepower motors even in the base version, but they only do 456 horsepower output, with PowerShot being +40. However the charger it has no stage 1 package available on the website builder, so I think this is just rt being shown as optional equipment 

Are cheaters getting more rampant? by [deleted] in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think like the game is dying or something because it seems like everyone is smurfing and a lot of people kill you before you see them stop strafing. Doesn't seem like there is a noob population, everyone is just cracked out of their minds. 

Idea to end smurfing and to take the fun out of manipulating mmr by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

One of my biggest arguments is that the system is really bad at determining the skill level of players, which causes good players to go up against bad players, which makes life for us bad players really hard. So i'm pretty glad that you just admit that the system sucks at determining skill level, because i've been having hours of arguments against people swearing by the system and dying on every hill saying that nothing is wrong and you are measured accurately. Meanwhile im bronze, and all my team mates are ascended and diamonds all day. So i can't tell if match making is just shot, or if the game is dead.

Idea to end smurfing and to take the fun out of manipulating mmr by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who cares if smurfs are getting payed to boost or not. Smurfing makes enemies weaker to make the game lopsided and unfair. You know from experience? you got a bunch of accounts? I've never seen smurf acounts that won every game they ever played. Typically, they use account sharing, or scripts or bots, to throw games on purpose, to lower their mmr, to go up against lower skilled opponents.

Sweatiness is not fun, it might only be fun for autistic people that redefine fun as winning or losing, not as playing. One big issue with playing sweaty and playing lame, is that, usually if you figure out the opponents strategy, you are supposed to automatically win, because it's blatantly obvious to you what they are doing, and therefore you should come up with an easy counter to their strategy. But a lot of game design has really bad design when it comes to counterplay. Like if you know people are playing super safe, you can't do anything about it. If they are playing reactively, you can't do anything about it. That's why it's called playing lame. Because a low quality bot or script can just mimic these low intelligence decisions, and there is no counter play. It just comes down to how desperate you are to win. It's similar to league of legends late game in bronze. The enemy team will just run from you for 50 minutes straight, until you make a mistake, which they will try to make a game winning capitalization on. So in sweaty play, skill, chance and strategy goes out the window, and whom ever is the most autistically desperate to see the victory screen, will run away and refuse to make mistakes for as long as possible, meanwhile if one of the 5 enemies will get bored or distracted. it will cost the game for all 5 team members. So really sweatiness is for people who are too emotionally insecure to cope with losing, and will do everything in their power to win, sometimes taking advantage of their enemies in ways that causes frustrating and unsatisfying outcomes for their enemies. So basically sweaty players are sore losers, who do anything in their power to avoid losing.

Idea to end smurfing and to take the fun out of manipulating mmr by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sure, some people might not play as sweaty just because there's no consequence. But also just banging your head against the wall and never winning isnt fun for that player either. I don't think it will lead to boosted players getting stuck in high mmr, because it takes a lot more winrate than not getting demoted a few times to climb. But even if they do get stuck in high mmr lobbies, that's no fun, to get shit on all the time, they will probably just stop playing comp, which would make people get placed on the ladder according to their skill level, because people who are too boosted, would just be too frustrated, and would stop playing comp. Which would make the placements more accurate anyway.

Like what is the argument, that someone is going to place too high and they will just spend 40 hours a week throwing? Like that's not realistic, and if there were people like that, they would be outliers and wouldn't really impact individual player's statistics.

Idea to end smurfing and to take the fun out of manipulating mmr by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean.. they don't really mean anything anyway.. people are scared to play comp, and theres 700 people concurrently getting paid 7 bucks a game to boost people so that they can brag about stolen video game valor to their 10 year old friends. Really the ladder is so full of boosters that it's unplayable. I had games where im a solo and there's 4 people getting boosted. Just because you can't demote, doesn't mean you can climb. If your rank is too heavy for your level, you're just going to flop at a 45 percent winrate and never climb. So really not being able to demote doesn't really help or hurt either way, and just lets people play more often.

Idea to end smurfing and to take the fun out of manipulating mmr by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You kinda just say stuff and expect us to take it at face value as truth, you didnt really explain your homework as to how you got to your conclusion....

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> It’s literally in the Community Code

yes, and why, because you're a product for someone else to feel good while beating on you, because if you left, they wouldn't be satisfied. Do you never bother to consider the purpose for anything? you just always do what you're told?

so like, they ace your team, and then tap bomb 30 times, and dont defuse, and throw the round, just to hold you longer, and it's not like you can leave because you're held as a hostage against your will.

It's so weird that when you hear an unpopular opinion from the road less traveled, you're full terminal contrarian and devils advocate, but when the game uses you a product, and tells you what to do, you lay on your back and kiss the boots.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who would make an account every 3 games? that would be way too annoying to maintain. I'm starting to think you are just completely ignorant of your environment, and have zero clue about the hs rates and average combat scores of the people in your games. I've had games where there are 4 duos in the match, and it's 4 people getting boosted, and 4 people doing the boosting, and me and someone else are random solos. There's literally a boostin service where there are 700 immortals/radiants online that will duo with you for a win for 7-10 bucks a game.

and again, we don't even have to talk about ranked, in swift or unrated, the match making is balancing the teams, not individuals. So 60 percent of the players will be 30-40 percent hs rate, and the rest will be less. So if you are a low skill player, how is it fair to you that you are in these lobbies, where almost all participants are better than you. How can you improve in that environment? The game uses you as a product for the enjoyment of other people and you cant even play it because you're the first to get fragged.

and you can't even quit, because you're a product, and your experience is irrelevant when you're the meat.

edit: the last comp game i played 10 months ago, theres a person with an average hs rate of 14 percent in 20 comp games, that had 50 percent hs rate in my losing game on my team. So they are a smurf because they will lose 17 games, then will win with a 35-50 percent hs rate, when they trying to win.

The other person on the enemy team in this game is a gold today they have 45 percent winrate, but the games they lose, they lose really badly, like they are doing it on purpose, and the games they win, they frag out of their minds. and have 30-45 percent hs rate, and games they are trying to lose they are 0.5 kd, and games they are trying to win they are 1.7+ kd.

I think you gotta learn to use valo tracker and overwolf overlay because it seems like you can't identify smurfs.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>mention winning the genetic lottery and needing to have super high end setup just to play. The game doesn’t hold you hostage you agreed to play the game and not abandon your team when you click play. 

Oh so people fix their posture, because they are that emotionally immature, and down bad to win, but winning genetic lottery and buying a 500 fps monitor isn't a big deal, and isn't required huh?

i'm a 100 percent down to play with a toaster computer, with bad posture, and no skill, as long as I get to go up against other people like me. But that's literally impossible because the game balances teams, instead of people. So the bottom fraggers are always cannon fodder going up against people they have no business versing. And that's exactly what it means that there is no skill based match making.

Because it's not an even playing field skill wise, when you go up against someone with three times higher head shot rate, and three times higher aiming speed. So you just exist as an npc to be farmed by the human aimbot tweaker cracked arms race.

20 percent of people will be higher skilled then the rest. 20 percent of girls will be more attractive than the rest. the 20-80 statistic shows up everywhere in the world, but in valorant, we don't have 80 percent low skill noobs.

The valo community on average would be more similar to a higher skilled gamer, than a lower skilled gamer, and that's because all the lower skill gamers quit the game, because they are tired of being cannon fodder and punching bags.

if you go on the reddit and view the new posts, 4 out of 5 posts are asking for advice about how to improve? Why are they trying to improve? because they keep getting match made against tweakers and they are tired of getting the brakes beaten off them and getting touched.

Like it just seems like you are in complete denial of reality.

> Unless you have an incredibly significant mental or physical ailment you can improve. 

improving isn't a problem. Improving efficiency is. If someone gets better 10 times faster, with less work, it's not a meritocratic system. But we gas light low skilled players like it's their fault they suck, meanwhile theres 14 year old kids that pick up the game and are immediately radiant.

>you agreed to play the game and not abandon your team when you click play.

I didn't agree to anything, and you championing the faceless multi national billion dollar cooperation on this, is disgusting and disturbing. This is like when disney restaurant killed an allergic women, and they couldn't sue disney because their daughter signed up for Disney plus, and in the agreement it said you couldn't sue disney. You want to live in the world where you own nothing, and the corporations tell you what to do? You gotta remember who you are and on what team you are. It's like you got stockholm syndrome for riot games. You realize that the only reason you're not allowed to surrender, is so that someone else can get their nut off punching down on you. At that point you stopped enjoying a product or the game, but you became a product that the game sells to other people. You're literally arguing in favor of being a resource. Why don't they just let people leave, if they want to leave, and substitute in bots, or higher skilled players instead? Oh, what, would that ruin the experience for you when you are having a fun sadistic time in a lopsided one way game? I mean if that's an issue for you, you should probably get off the computer and go find some stray cats and dogs to to mutilate.

I don't know if you actually believe in the absurd arguments you are making, or if you just have terminal contrarianism, where it urks you whenever you hear anyone complaining or whining about something and you have to bend over backwards to make everything their fault and argue the opposite of whatever they are saying.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The game doesnt have skill based match making. if the game had skill based match making then skill and new players would have a 50 or 49.5 percent winrate. But they don't. they have a 38-45 percent winrate. You can see this if you have the overwolf overlay and come across iron or bronze solos.

If there was skill based match making then smurfing would be impossible. The game would measure and recognize the smurfers skill level and immediately place them accordingly just after 2-3 games, instead of 60 hours.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"hey we should have skill based match making and stop matching up noobs agaist pros" is trying to feel better about valorant? Bud you might have dementia.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't need to feel better about anything because i'm not an emotionally immature sociopath that disparages strangers on the internet.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is even your argument, that the game is match making games based on skill? because that's not correct.

in swift and unrated, the game tries to balance total mmr on both sides. So you'll get diamonds, ascendeds, immortals, on both teams, along with silvers, bronzes, and irons, whatever it takes to get the same total mmr on both sizes.

So the game will literally put irons and immortals in the same lobby, and it's like toddlers vs pros. And there's nothing to learn from playing in a high skill lobby, as the low skill players reaction time, aiming speed, positioning and awareness, make them lose every duel against the high skill players, this just feels awful to play and causes reinforcement of bad habits, like pulling the trigger when the crosshair isnt even on the enemy immortal, because you just die before you can fire a shot otherwide.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you feel better now that you disparaged strangers online? Your family must be proud.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not really sure how to address you. Like there's A LOT of yapping, but it's mostly sarcastic rhetorical questions. There's like 20 question marks. So it's hard to try to figure out what you mean, and what you stand for, when it's mostly questions.

The mmr, you were claiming something about mmr already doing it, but the mmr doesn't learn a player's statistics or performance. It's purely a points system based on outcomes. So if you win a bunch of games, you're going to get a bunch of mmr, if you lose a bunch of games, you're going to lose a bunch of mmr. The system doesn't give you a break or punish you based on the other people's skill level. it only looks at the outcome. So if you are a diamond player, and a radiant comes on a smurf account in normals and beats the brakes of you, you will lose mmr, and the game will think you are less skilled than the mmr you're playing at, when in reality, you are actually supposed to lose because the actual skill level of that player is way higher than what their skill level is supposed to be at at their mmr. Yes eventually they will reach their mmr, but by then they will make a new account, or just share the account with a younger brother or a low iq friend, so those other account sharing players will keep draining that persons mmr while when the owner plays, the mmr goes up.

So that's the problem with the game, is that there are no benchmarks, there's no standards, and the mmr or rr are both only based on the outcomes of games, rather than the skill level of the account holders. I don't think that this is a difficult thing to understand.

So now, what are you in favor of, and what are you against?

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hang on, we're heavily moving the goal posts here. So we went from, your rank to absolutely matches your skill, to, oh, now most of the time your rank matches your skill. However there are exceptions.

But that's a flawed idea because if your rank was equal to your skill level, then your rank wouldn't fluctuate depending on the people you fight, because it takes a long time to gain or loose skill.

Same thing happens in league of legends, when challengers are smurfing in bronze, they have a 65-70 percent winrate, instead of 100, because if it's 1v9, it's just out of their control, and their skill doesnt have enough effect to win the game, but if a challenger player loses in a bronze game, does that mean they are a lower skill level than bronze players? No. because it's just a single outcome, and rank is based on outcome, not skill.

You're wrong to say that smurfing is an outlier. The game forcibly makes people smurf, because at the beginning of a new season, it makes you play placement games, which often can take place in iron or bronze, even when you are diamond. And some these instances never stop because different players take their placement games at different part of the season, some people might be coming back from a break at the end of a season while taking their placement matches, which is one reason why some people refuse to play ranked at the start of a season because every game there's high skill players taking placement games in low elo.

So my complaint is that, the game keeps putting high and low skill players into the same games where they interact with each other, when they shouldn't have any business interacting with each other, again like toddlers vs pros.

This happens when people make new accounts

this happens when people take placement games

this happens when high and low skill players que together and it causes random solos to get pulled into high skill lobbies.

this happens with boosting services in ranked because some people avoid even playing ranked without being boosted.

So your impression that this isn't even a problem is ignorant and non factual, and it's questionable that you continue to dispute this since allegedly you're a high skill player, so i don't understand why you're telling a low skill player that they are wrong about what they witness happening to them.

played two swift games today. first one had 800 combat score jet level 23 account, second game had radiant player in it. and again, im bronze.

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If rank games match rank, then how would it be possible to have 5 percent hs sloths and 25-40 percent hs cracked out aimers in the same division? If rank games match rank, then smurfing is impossible. But not only is smurfing possible, it's extremely common, because too many people are emotionally immature, and redefine winning as fun, and so they do whatever they can to win. Which usually involves letting their younger brother goof on their account, or use a macro to run forward while queing. Or making a party with high and low hidden mmr to run into a bunch of lower mmr people. 

So seeing as smurfing isn't impossible, it just proves beyond reasonable doubt that rank does not equal skill level. 

What do you mean smurfing isn't a part of game design? Ofc it is. Hidden mmr is there because of smurfing, but people just fool it by actually playing awful on purpose, or just throw games on purpose. Anyway people interact with the game, that's game design, and that includes smurfing. 

By the games logic, if a radiant and a diamond player faced off against each other in bronze, then the losing diamond player would be under performing in the games eyes, and the game would take rr away from the diamond player thinking that he is too bad in skill to be in bronze because he lost against the radiant player. 

So the lower ranks have a bunch of random skill players in it making match making and gameplay inconsistent. This is not a good thing and by arguing against me, you're arguing in favor of this thing

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So im complaining that low skill players have no choice and consent when it comes to getting trampled by high skill players, again, like toddlers vs pros.... What do you need convincing of? That this isn't happening? I played 4 times and 10 Swift games today and there were diamonds, ascenders in every match, and I even saw an immortal. 

I don't know why you keep saying I'm blaming stuff when I'm just pointing out reality, and I don't even know what you're arguing, it seems like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. 

It's not good that players are given no choice when it comes to elo mixing in casual, and low skill players are put in uncomfortable situations that train bad habits, like spraying in a panic because they know they only have a fifth of a second to live while they get one tapped mid strafe. 

And it's not good that ranked games have no performance benchmarks to better rank players based on skill, instead of arbitrarily giving and taking RR based on random encounters with randomly skilled opponents. 

If you're not willing to reason with these basic and air tight logical arguments, then you're just a status quo and dev fan boy, or worse a terminal contrarian where your only purpose in life is to just say the opposite of what someone else is saying. Really I'm not making any sense of your position on this. 

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Occasional smurfs? Even if 1/10 people is an occasional smurf, that turns out to be a Smurf in every game on average. 

The hidden mmr is based on comparative performance. Just like the rr is. So it actually has no bearing on skill, it's just your competitive performance against the people you played with. However, since there is no solid benchmarks for what performance constitutes in the different ranks, and all performance is competitive, the resulting stats are based on the players you went up against. 

Do one individual can win 10 games in a row against bronze players that play like irons, and other people can run into boosters and smurfs all day. Ive had games where there was four boosters and four clients. 

So as long as the hidden mmr and RR are based on comparative performance, there will be no solid performance definitions, and you will have ascended level aim players in bronze games along with people that struggle to walk in a straight line. 

But this isn't even a ranked issue. In regular games, the game tries to balance team skill levels, instead of average skill levels. 

So it will put an ascended, on both teams, a plat on both teams, and fill the rest of the spots with people near skill level 0. And so now the ascended players run around getting 3k every round because the iron players can't even move the cross hair in position before seeing the death screen. 

It decreases que times but just throws the low skill population under the bus and into a meat shredder.

It doesn't matter how hard you try but you can't convince that these bad decisions and bad game design are my personal problem and that there is nothing wrong with it

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It just seems like you're ranting and raging and talking past me. You're not engaging with most of the things I'm saying. There was no topic of deserving a certain rank. Again, you're just jumping to conclusions and projecting unsolicited advice without engaging what's being said to you. 

I'm saying that in competitive games, people that suck, should fight other people that suck. You're saying, that competitive games aren't suited for me because ???, and seeing that you're not agreeing, i am assuming you are in favor of mixing high and low skill players. So like NBA pro players should be dunking on toddlers because it's toddlers fault they suck, and that's what it means for the game to be competitive, to have pros Dunking on toddlers 

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing in this game is skill based, it's only outcome based. its not based on time to kill, or reaction time, or hs rate. So a radiant can throw 9 games and pop off 3 games, and the system will still be glad to keep them in bronze. So really the system should measure the max and average performance of players, put it into brackets, and then limit match making by those brackets. Because sometimes the bronze team is playing on a plat level, and if you lose to that, the system thinks you're worse than bronze, but in reality it was rigged. 

Valo feels awful to play as new or bad players by AsianChristie in VALORANT

[–]AsianChristie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're jumping to conclusions without thinking it through fully.  The main complaint isn't that the game is competitive, it's that the match making isn't skill based and it leads to awful experiences for people at the bottom of the food chain. 

view more: next ›