Was the game ever really the issue?

[stable cosmos]

I would like to add that currently, the situation is, solos can still play, albeit maybe not the best experience in the game. The alternative, solo/duo restriction, not only alienates a demographic, it denies a demographic from even engaging entirely. If we had the playerbase to support both solo queue and premade squads, I think I'd feel better about it, but currently we do not. If you wanted to add a solo/duo exclusive mode and still support premade Squads in a healthy manner, the way I'm seeing it, this requires a few things:

1. You would need to split up the ranked and unranked matchmaking pools. This is already not ideal with the current playercount.

2. You'd then need to divide queues further to maintain compatibility with full stacking squads. You'd need a Normals Squads queue, a Ranked Squads queue, a Solo/Duo Ranked Squads queue.. That's 2 new queues, assuming you didn't want to do the same to Duos, which would make this even worse.

I think the better solution is to make Supervive a more enjoyable solos experience itself, not entirely deny a sizeable portion of the already small playerbase to force it to be.

[cosmic gyro]

it is NOT about being able to SOLO CARRY or NOT, it is about NOT facing 4 STACKS because it puts u on a disadvantage by DEFAULT. Carry potential or individual agency are NOT a matter here. If anything, the lack of individual agency is a BIGGER concern to have soloq so the game is LESS frustrating as a SOLO player.

[cosmic gyro]

then as a solo player you will just not play, as why would you play this game when you have others that support your solo preference/situation, yeah solo players """can""" play, but at what cost

[uneven apex]

Sykii has said everything, which is hurting players retention cause there's way more solo/duo players than stacked squads statistically speaking.

If you go as 4 plat/diams player and get run down 9 games out of 10 by stacked GM//legends you also don't enjoy the game as much as it should and also leave. This 4 stack thing is only good for retention of GM/legends, which is the big minority in any game.

[stable cosmos]

There's a big difference in "don't want to play" and "cannot play". I'd argue the solution would be to make the game more enjoyable for solos at its core, not to force everyone to stop playing with their friends.

[spice bison]

I brought up "solo" carry because the post was talking about how it is hard to 1v4 in supervive and I replied to that statement by saying I don't think it is a bad game because it is a team game.

I get the frustration against playing 4 stacks or not... but genuinely with where the play base is at what would you propose? Forcing people to que a certain way (like if you couldn't que up as 4) is NOT how you solve that issue and would 100% cause more harm.

TC has stated before as well that they are more focused on making games you play with friends in general. That doesn't mean that soloq shouldn't be in supervive, but as of right now there is no way that can happen

100% the direction is going to make the solo/duo experience more enjoyable

[cosmic gyro]

there is no difference, if a solo player is playing rankeds is normally because he enjoys competition and fairness, if the game does not give that to you, you will not play. Playing with friends on a matchmaking enviroment rarely leads to fair and competitive matches, you are better off playing normal games. Playing with friends normally lead to level differences inside the party, which adulterates the ranking ladder.

You want supervive to be a party 4fun game? Go ahead but then embrace the harsh truth that solo competitive players wont play this game, which was one of the main marketing points of this game.

As of today, supervive is not a competitive game, it is a party game with points for the funsies of having points. I dont play the game since 1 week after duo rstriction was lifted and I encourage any competitive soloq player to just not play it, as its not worth it.

[uneven apex]

People playing in stack can easily play solo too, this is a bad justification.

[spice bison]

You say stastically speaking? I would love to see those statistics since you say they are there. If not, I wouldn't just throw false claims around.

When it comes to getting ran down by gm/legends as well, I have two things to say to that.
1)That is a problem because again there just isn't enough people in the pool to que against so unfortunately to even be able to game that is who you have to play against and
2)You learn A LOT playing against those people if you actually take the time to VOD/reflect. Lemur, Lord Vader, Phenomonx (sorry if I mispelt your name), and a few other's actually scare me when I go up against them but that is the fun in it. You get to try something again and see if there is a different outcome.

If they are just better, then continue playing to get better. Maybe this is more of a subjective take the second point but like... I personally get a adrenaline rush playing against those people

[dusty estuary]

[stable cosmos]

That's not what I mean by "don't want to play" and "cannot play".

"Don't want to play" is "I don't like how this game is for solo play, so I won't play it".

"Cannot play" is "I have friends online but I can't play with them if I want to play Supervive".

[cosmic gyro]

I enjoy playing vs high ranked players on any game, but to enjoy something you need to be on an equal playfield, when they have inherent advantages from the moment they are queueing vs you (stack vs solo) It stops being a learning / improvement journey

[spice bison]

You are right about "competition and fairness" but I think you are missing the point of where supervive is right now. You just WON'T get that. There aren't enough players to accruately show really anyone's ranked but top like .9% and under or whatever.

And yes maybe solo competitive players wont play the game because of where it is currently at. You mention it is the main marketing point of this game, could you show a clip/send a video or whatever it may be to back that up? Cause I know they have stated they are focusing on making a game to play with friends.

[cosmic gyro]

they paid every league streamer, that is indirectly marketing to soloq ranked ladder

[spice bison]

Highly disagree. you do NOT need to be on equal playing fields to enjoy something. I notice you have league pulled up right now and if you think soloq filled with smurfs, win trading, etc is a good comp environment I do NOT know what to say LOL

[spice bison]

? what. That is just a assumption not actual communication from company

LOL

"It means it because I said it" like?

https://tenor.com/view/armstrong-made-it-up-gif-25653819

[cosmic gyro]

So you are telling me, that marketing to the game that literally created soloq on team environment, and even if you are a casual league player you have engaged with that feeling of playing soloq, it's not marketing towards a soloq audience?

[spice bison]

They are marketing to LEAGUE players, not just SOLOQ players! All because you play soloq doesnt mean everyone who plays league is soloq.

Do you think everyone who plays league is a soloq player?

[cosmic gyro]

Ofc not everyone that plays league is a soloq player, but the most important comp queue on league is soloq by a large difference

[lethal lily]

i think there needs to be some environment where solo players can enjoy the game

doesnt need to be ranked but there needs to be something

[spice bison]

I agree with you there, that isn't the argument at the moment tho

100% with youthere kenneth

[cosmic gyro]

When any of those problems really affect your SoloQ journey you should be top 500 players on your server .

Only win trading is an issue and that only affects on high master+

[lethal lily]

ok sorry i will step out the conversation i didnt mean to interrupt

[spice bison]

No you are good!

I hope I didn't come off aggro to you

[stable cosmos]

There is absolutely a difference, as I said to @uneven apex.

And if your complaint is that "Supervive isn't competitive because people play with friends", is the solution to pigeonhole it to be one and go scorched earth to anyone else, or mold it to be a game that better facilitates that in the future?

[lethal lily]

no ur fine, i just dont want to derail the points u guys ar making lol

[uneven apex]

The thing we are mentioning is exactly the issue that Supervive his right now, we can't have the current system cause not enough players, and the current system isn't friendly for new player retention let's face it or be delusional and watch the game die because minority want only stack as 4 and ruin many players experiences : )

[spice bison]

Smurfs destroy low elo (bronze-emerald). Win trading happens low masters+.

top 500 players on server is NOT masters+.

[spice bison]

Ngl till you send me the "statistically speaking" stats, I will get to this message when I can!

[uneven apex]

there's actually something for people that want to play with friends called Arena, you see.

[cosmic gyro]

thinking you dont climb on low elo due to smurfs or on low masters due to wintrading is high amount of copium, just focus on yourself and climb, thats league 101 and its why its such a popular gamemode

[spice bison]

?!? I've sat masters in soloq and flex LOL

And I wouldn't even consider masters all that tbh

[uneven apex]

well statistivally is looking at player base and player retention on this game, if all 40k players who started in BETA were so found of 4 stack why would they leave the game? And why the player currently playing are just the last

[cosmic gyro]

flex is a meme queue, and its fine you were master in soloq, I also was, master is still low elo

[stable cosmos]

This is an insane take

[dusty estuary]

*top 1% you mean LMAO

[stable cosmos]

wdym you're low elo in masters

[dusty estuary]

Is low elo in the chat with us?

[stable cosmos]

and if you reach grandmasters you're low elo because you're not chall

and if you're chall you're low elo because didn't play on stage

[dusty estuary]

TRUE

[stable cosmos]

and if you're playing on stage it's because your team carried you

[dusty estuary]

GET GOOD KID

Low elo if not Faker

[spice bison]

Okay so what is your point then @cosmic gyro? You still haven't provided any resources as to how Theorycraft has marketed towards "soloq on team environment" specifically. All you have brought up since then is how soloq is a important part of League community which I agree with. That isn't my argument.

What I've been saying is soloq can not happen within the current situation Supervive is in.

I am not going to get into smurfs, wintrading, or stuff like taht I just do not care anymore

[cosmic gyro]

my point is just to realize that solo players will leave no matter what if they face 4stacks

[stable cosmos]

I don't know if I have a better response than this

Surely we do not think Arena is a viable alternative to people who play Supervive for the BR?

[dusty estuary]

[spice bison]

This is just such a disingenuous question man. There could be many reasons why Supervive lost that amount of players but something Pwyff has said, which is a dev btw so pretty good insight into what the devs think, is people didn't find their game worth sticking around for and if oyu think it is ALL BECAUSE there is no soloq mode... I'll wait for the hard proof to prove that!

[spice bison]

I wouldn't say "no matter what". If TC took steps forward to implement changes to make the solo experience better cause a que aint going be it I'm sure there would be more incentive to que soloq into 4 stacks. They already are trying to make steps forward with RP changes

[stable cosmos]

I would love there to be solo content in Supervive, I don't really like playing Supervive solo as-is because I don't find it to be a fun experience. I wish I didn't have to say that, but just adding solo queue, neutering premades and telling everyone else to go away just is not how you fix that healthily, and isn't a magic cure-all for this game

[cosmic gyro]

they should stop improving solo experience on current queue as its not possible to improve, only solution is to make sure solos cant face 4stacks, if thats not possible then there is no way the game will be enjoyable to a solo player.

[stable cosmos]

I think that's a very narrow-minded way to see it

[spice bison]

What is the proof that it isn't possible to improve the experience? Or are you also just talking anecdotal experience which isn't great when trying to prove something with research/facts

Like if you want to have that opinion, go for it

But you make it sound like that is a fact

when it just isn't

"my way or the high way"

[dusty estuary]

goofy ahh convo

[cosmic gyro]

Welp, as a soloq player I dont think its enjoyable to participate in a ranked ladder adulterated by 4 stacks, its just bad by design I dont care if they put 200 systems to make me feel better

[spice bison]

Okay so that is your opinion

cool bro

Not great when trying to give constructive criticism and does little in conversation

You want this ONE thing

you don't care what else they do

You LITERALLY just said it

There is no point in conversing with you then because you just want that ONE thing. You don't actually want the soloq experience to be better, you just want YOUR way

[cosmic gyro]

I never wanted soloq experience to be better I wanted a soloq queue or a system that makes it impossible to a solo player to meet 4 stacks

[spice bison]

So disingenuous, I'm good

[stable cosmos]

Maybe one day when we have more players, but: queue health

[cosmic gyro]

they can try to make a game that is so good that every group of 4 players in the world want to play it but it is a bit hard to achieve

[uneven apex]

You don't have proofs that 4 stack is big part of the problem either but still defend it with tooth and nails. However the player base and player retention is getting worse. So if 4 stacks was that good of an idea and a solution the player base and player retention wiuldbt be as low as it is. In my opinion the 4 stacks are also part of the problem cause I don't believe majority of the casual have a 4 stacks to play with on a daily/weekly basis to begin with, so once you're solo/duo against 4 stacks you're already on a big disadvantage, especially when you get paired with new players in most games that don't help you enjoy and have a good time.
Is good to have perspective and try see the game through the eyes of new players and non GM/legend eyes

[cosmic gyro]

By the way, if we can extrapolate league of legends ranked population with supervive potential ranked population, we will find that soloq on league EUW has 1.6 million players, wether FlexQ on EUW has 500k, so players that enjoy rankeds with friends are 25% of the ranked population

[stable cosmos]

I'm not arguing that the game should only be supported by 4 stacks, but you're arguing that solo queue is a 100% necessity, and that's just you

You're saying you don't want the solo queue experience to be better, you're saying "my way or the highway". It's not that black and white, solo players will play if the solo queue experience is better in general. Solo queue isn't the only way to make that work.

[stable cosmos]

And it's totally different in Supervive, where unranked and ranked are the same queue. If you want ranked to be solo queue only, then you either make them two separate queues (queue health) or you make it to where you can't play at all with friends (denial of a section of the playerbase)

[cosmic gyro]

Yes but players queueing with ranked switch off are much lower than players queueing with ranked switch ON, as I saw on a graph Just job shared some days ago.

Therefore, when marketing Towards league of legends , you are marketing to a population that by default, has a 75% preference to play solo/duo over flexQ (and it's disingenuous because a LOT of soloq players play flexQ as a for fun ranked mode, normal games with points)

[dusty estuary]

This is actually just major copium lmao

[cosmic gyro]

I am using numbers, if you don't want to see numbers you can keep just denying reality.

[uneven apex]

They could try implement the solo/duo way and still have the Arena, scrims and even add flex events on weekends for 4 stacks for example, if they don't try they will never know

[stable cosmos]

Now I'm lost, what is this supposed to mean here

I wasn't even talking about marketing or the amount of players playing ranked vs unranked

[dusty estuary]

youre denying the reality of queue health because your idea is the only correct one apparently

[spice bison]

I am not defending anything? XD

All I have said is in masters below it is pretty hard to "solo" carry, something you brought up in your msg, and that requring on a team in a team game isn't a bad thing.

You then bring up how "statistically speaking" there are more solo/duo players then stacked squads and I asked for proof which you don't have but are just saying to try and make your point better.

You are also tying stack vs non stacks as the sole reason supervive is in the spot it is in which just isn't a good argument either .There isn't a singular thing that has put it to where it is at and that has been stated by Pwyff. You can have your opinion, but im going to take a devs insight over your claims because they actually know what is oging o.

And you can believe that 4 stacks are part of the problem due to a assumption, but at the end of the day unless you are basing it on facts it is all a guess.

On topic of new players/non GM and legend eyes... I actually would say I have brought in a wide variety of different backagrounds to try this game all from friends who have gotten challenger in league to more casual gamers. Not once did either of them say it was because they were playing against stacks or soloq experience as to why they felt the way about the game.

But hey, that is justmy anecdotal experience which isn't the best either btw XD

[cosmic gyro]

I am saying that catering towards solo players could see a potential increase of 75% of the population

[stable cosmos]

Yes, catering towards solo play is good

But solo queue is not the 1 way, be-all-end-all way to do it

Maybe to you

Not to everyone

[cosmic gyro]

It is, that is why solo/duo is the main game mode on league of legends, otherwise players would play flex as it's easier

[stable cosmos]

League can facilitate solo play because of how that game works. League has significantly higher solo agency, you can solo 1v9 a game by yourself.

[dusty estuary]

Right so lets split the already 3 queues into more because not finding a game is better than playing at all

[spice bison]

"You saw on graph"" okay share.

Also although according to this "graph" people are queing more with it on then off, we don't have a grounded reason as to why. We have hypothesis/guesses but nothing concrete.

And sure there are soloq people that do it for fun, but man you couldn't be wrong about how there are people who care about flex. If they didn't, there wouldn't be a que for it. Boosters who do server transfers and cancelling que's. It similar to twisted treeline in some ways as well so you are just wrong about that angle

[spice bison]

That is assuming EVERYONE is coming from league which is just wrong to begin with. This is a battel royale after all, I think they are pulling from a wide variety of gamer backgrounds

[cosmic gyro]

But I am just exposing it, marketing was targeted to league of legends players.

As you can see on op.gg leaderboard, for each flex player there are roughly 3 soloq players.

By not giving soloq you are denying 75% of the potential playerbase .

As we saw, on Just job graph, on supervive MAJORITY of the playerbase plays with ranked switch on, so they are ranked player population, so if the players that stick with the game play ranked, it means that not having a soloq has made supervive lose 3 players of every 4 players that tried the game from league of legends, potentially.

[cosmic gyro]

I assume to where the marketing was mainly targeted, and reality is, theorycraft sponsored every league streamer they could

[stable cosmos]

Once again, solo queue is not the only way to facilitate solo play, besides for a couple people. League's solo queue mode is not popular because it's solo queue, League can innately facilitate solo play and keep it enjoyable, and has the playerbase to support that kind of thing and maintain other queues as well, so it's popular there.

[spice bison]

What about Flats who doesn't play league? Seagul? Dota players (yes a moba but you get my point it isn't just league players)

And more I didn't bring up who participated in the tourney

[cosmic gyro]

This is just a rabbit hole, me, as a solo player, could not care less about player agency, what I don't want is to not face 4 stacks which is a disadvantage by default from the point I press queue button

[spice bison]

Then supervive in it's current state just isn't for you man

[stable cosmos]

Then that's you. That's not the entire solo community.

[spice bison]

There isn't a soloq option rn

Sorry

[cosmic gyro]

I know, I don't play since december

[spice bison]

Maybe one day

Could be sick

[stable cosmos]

I promise you fighting 4-stacks is far from the only reason Supervive solo play isn't great for 99% of players

If it makes you not want to play, that's fair enough, but I disagree that "solo players aren't playing because there's no solo queue" when most players likely aren't playing solo because the game isn't fun solo for several different reasons.

[spice bison]

Then who knows when/.if you will play.

Something I will say is when it comes to the solo experience, I've enjoyed it more this patch then previously but hey if you want this ONE specific thing, all I can say is keep waiting and i'll just drop the convo cause the reality is with where Supervive is at, I don't see a soloq coming anytime soon.

They have talked about it extensively.

You can keep making feedback/discussion posts, but this convo aint going anywhere at this point.

You just want soloq option, okay cool hopefully one day it happens

[cosmic gyro]

it makes me not wanting to press queue button, actually not even to open the game. I am a soloq player and I am a stereotype of what a solo player wants on a game

[stable cosmos]

I think you're in the minority there

[cosmic gyro]

considering actual supervive playerbase vs potential, supervive´s playerbase can be considered as the minority

[stable cosmos]

yes league is popular because everyone just plays solo queue

nobody plays in parties, or arams, or normals

[dusty estuary]

screw the casual player base fr

[cosmic gyro]

its more of a society, tryhards stay because there are a lot of casuals seeing how good they play. Its like a gacha game, casuals are f2p and ranked tryhards are whales, both are needed for the game to succeed, without f2ps, whales dont want to play

but without soloq, league would not have succeeded

[stable cosmos]

People are not just playing league solo queue because "it's solo queue so I don't have to fight 5-stacks"

League can facilitate that playstyle and queue with solo agency and sheer community size

I promise you

It's not that simple

[cosmic gyro]

I can ensure you there is ppl that do not want to play flexQ on league because they dont want to face 5stacks

[spice bison]

Also all I will say about this is from a research stand point, this data isn't the best either.

A SINGLE day's data, all composed during 3 hours at a random time on all regions? Granted who know's the purpose behind the graph right but holy hell this isn't significant either from a data standpoint.

Over the course of weeks, different hours at different times, this would be more significant.

just saying 😃

[spice bison]

And I can ensure you there are people that dont want to play soloq on league because they don't want to face 5 individuals trying to play a team game

[stable cosmos]

Definitely, that's why it's a different queue, where it can be supported because League can also facilitate premade play and has the community size to keep Flex open without cannibalizing the other queues

[cosmic gyro]

but statistically they are lower than the other population

[cosmic gyro]

league tried to make flexq the main soloq queue, and it almost killed the game

[stable cosmos]

League can have all that because it has the playerbase, agency and depth to facilitate it

[cosmic gyro]

just check dynamicQ incident

they had to put badges to ppl that climbed solo

[spice bison]

Now I REALLY wanna get pwyff involved XD

[stable cosmos]

What does this have to do with what I just said

[spice bison]

Sure in league's playerbase but league didn't JUST succeed because they had a soloq mode, which is your argument.

They are one of the most well known Esports scenes in the world, which ironically enough is based on team play in a team game. 😃

There are MANY factors that played to league success

It isn't just one thing, despite what you believe

[stable cosmos]

I'm gonna step away from this because I think this chat is just gonna go nowhere, but I will leave these points:

League has a large enough playerbase that can support Flex, Solo and Norms queues, and people don't "just play Solo Queue because I don't run into 5 stacks". League solo queue is healthy because the game can do that a.) without destroying other queues, and b.) having the solo agency and depth to let people have fun playing it.

I feel Supervive can't really do that in its current state, on both fronts. If that's what you want, that's you, but I don't think you speak for the entirety of the solo playerbase, even the majority.

IMO, the way to make a better solo game is to make it a more enjoyable solo experience for the majority via gameplay, get the game to a healthier state with a healthier community, and maybe one day consider adding a solo queue when the game is more equipped to facilitate that. Not just forcing a game to be solo only when that simply may not be a good experience, and going scorched earth to all other demographics other than the solo queue player in a playerbase of 3,000 CCU.

[trim sundial]

Also, ranked isn't the be all end all go everybody. For ranked to matter the game itself needs to matter to have a player base running, but players don't stick past a few games so ranked is the least of concerns

[cosmic gyro]

this is only a world of what ifs, but until scientific approach is taken, nobody can say if soloq would increase or decrease a supposed playerbase.

Actually, when duo restriction got removed, player bleeding started to go faster

[trim sundial]

Is it causation or correlation? Because hype went down entirely and the flavor of the month aspect ended around the same time as well so you can't say for sure it's the direct cause too

[cosmic gyro]

Not gonna lie, bleeding was happening anyway but it went way faster after it. It did not cause the bleeding, but it probably made it quicker

[sick gale]

Holy y'all are still going

[trim sundial]

Just passing by, that's it

[stable cosmos]

I'd wager correlation, not causation. The addition of the duo restriction was not even a full week after launch, where the game still had a sizeable number of players, and by the time the removal happened, the player count was already decreasing. There's no spike or trend in the graph that even hints at that being why people quit

I'd argue what's more likely is people quitting because that's when Gunner was frustrating

The blue line is when the restriction was added, the red was its removal

[lethal lily]

Because they are passionate about the game. It is not something we should make fun of, instead it is something we should admire

[sick gale]

Oh I'm not making fun, sorry if it appeared that way. I was genuinely surprised to see this chat still going hours later.

[stable cosmos]

The increase in players in-between the addition and removal was the weekend, so I don't think that's anything as it immediately dipped again

[trim sundial]

The monster I made (Anic)

[uneven apex]

We are passionate and want this game to do well 🥺

[stable cosmos]

real.

@trim sundial this is since the start of open beta

[trim sundial]

You're welcome

[stable cosmos]

🫡

I'm locked in for the long haul

[trim sundial]

Fight on in my stead

[lethal lily]

I'm passionate about this topic too but I'm watching the finale episodes of Singles Inferno rn while eating Hot Cheetos

I trust u guys, fight on soldiers

[stable cosmos]

That's so baller, enjoy soldier

I got off for a bit but just checked my phone and this is the thread that was open

[lethal lily]

All I will say is with a community this passionate, SUPERVIVE will never die

W SUPERVIVE

[uneven apex]

💯

[stable cosmos]

W SUPERVIVE

[uneven apex]

Survivors

Supervivors

[atomic cypress]

It’s not the same thing though. It would be like league letting 5 challenger players queue together for ranked and getting matched with a masters and 4 gold players.

[final oriole]

they also paid streamers from Overwatch, VALORANT, and Apex, none of which have solo/duo modes for good reason

[cosmic gyro]

on valorant is practically impossible to meet a 5 stack while playing alone or duo, for a good reason, about overwatch cant talk I dont play it, but it also has suffered with population issues in the past so its decisions could've lead to lessen the matchmaking rules.

[final oriole]

is practically impossible to meet a 5 stack while playing alone or duo

because they have a high player count

and also it's a 5v5 game which makes it easier to do than a BR

[cosmic gyro]

im sure though that I can find complains and rants about overwatch/apex about stacks, It would not take me much to find em

[final oriole]

you could but that's like vox popping the entire internet

[cosmic gyro]

2 seconds

[final oriole]

entirely missed my point

[cosmic gyro]

I am embracing it

[final oriole]

and also the Reddit thread supports tighter MMR bands XD

[cosmic gyro]

stacks are also active problems on those games

[final oriole]

a vox pop is not the argument you think it is

especially when it isn't random

[cosmic gyro]

I am just taking those games and seeing they also have complains about stacking

[final oriole]

also the Apex example is funny because they deleted the solos mode first time around on the basis people felt overwhelmed being responsible for their own success among other things https://youtu.be/rvnHBVAsGn0?si=JW4OdsXzACXcFkzx

[feral walrus]

feel like this is unfair to say

the game was on a downward trend in general

so it's hard to really pinpoint is as being what made it decrease even faster

[cosmic gyro]

Nobody told certain green name person that it was unfair to say that duo restriction made lose players so I take the license to say the same but with my approach

[feral walrus]

fair enough

[cosmic gyro]

I dont want solos, I want soloq. Its the same thing why telling solo players to go FGC games is not a correct solution, the feelings you get is way different on solos vs solo on a team

[final oriole]

BTW 2 party cap was reverted on December 11th

if anything 2 party cap nuked the CCU

we can even see the bleeding stopped slightly after reverting

I believe it to be far more probable that people simply wish to play with friends

[cosmic gyro]

you are mixing dates, december 11th was winter jubilee

[final oriole]

go read those patch notes

[cosmic gyro]

Mika I was directly affected by this I know by heart when it was reverted, it was 4th of december

https://x.com/jbelliss/status/1864174572960141687

Bellissimoh (@jbelliss) on X

TLDR - Looking at a combination of game health metrics combined with player feedback we've decided to roll back the party restrictions for Master and Legend tier players.

Last week we rolled out a queue restriction for Masters and Legend players in an effort to reduce the "shark

X · Dec 4, 2024, 5:07 AM

[final oriole]

a'ight fair enough but the point then stands my bad

[cosmic gyro]

The revert didnt start nothing, if anything the restriction did not do anything with the bleeding and the game was going to bleed players anyway

[final oriole]

the goalpoast has moved in which case

[cosmic gyro]

I speak with advantage there as the restriction got added the 28th, that weekend the CCU saw a peak , then it had huge drop on monday (big drops always happen on monday) restriction dropped CCU from 31k to theoretically 20k, lifting the restriction dropped 12k players on same days as restriction dropped 11k

Ofc Im not delusional enough to thinking for real that not having soloq is the difference between 30k or 40k, but its true that nobody knows what would happen if a real soloq existed or restriction would've stayed

TC got gaslighted with that the restriction was causing CCU to drop and ran to revert it, outcome to keep the restriction its unknown

[final oriole]

we can take a pretty good guess that it's not worth the risk given other battle royales however, they do not gain tangible demographics to keep those queues alive

[cosmic gyro]

My wild guess is no BR tries to apply a soloq because it has a risk of out-shine and kill the stack modes, as queues need solo players to function, otherwise you could not have duos or trios queueuing, they need solo players to fill their parties

Its not about both queues would die, I think soloq would be the only one to prevail, considering it also admits duos in it, except on apex, on apex should be true soloq

Same for overwatch 5 or 6 stacks would take too much time to find a match if 5 stack would be enforced

Because the hard reality is for a 5 stack to take place you need 5 players sharing a schedule and playing together, somewhat similar skill level etc

So yeah basically soloq players get f'ed up on other games so full stacks can enjoy their queue to pop, and I know this is for sure is just logic

Would it be fair for stack squads/group of friends to have 20/30 minutes of queue? Well, maybe no, it probably would cause them to drop the game. Is it fair for soloq/duoq players to meet those stacks? Well its not fair as well for them, but normally this does not affect to the average andy because they dont normally realize when enemies are stacking, but its not fair, its an advantage by default, and if they participate on the same ranked ladder, the ranked ladder is adulterated

I understand why companies/TC dont enforce stacking? Well yes I do, but as a solo player it feels unfair, if I play supervive solo, I am just food for the matchmaking so 4stacks and trios can find a game faster

Mi wild bet on SUPERVIVE was that, with several ex-members of Riot games here, they would understand the value of a Solo queue but seems I was either wrong or , in the end, they were the ones who introduced dynamicQ on a first stance so, its not a surprise they ended up not going for a soloq approach on a brand new game

[final oriole]

other BRs have tried solo in squads as have Overwatch and Rocket League, high teamplay based environments have universally not been able to support those queues with LoL being an exception because the entire game has been explicitly designed to spoonfeed you responsibilities to follow at all times, such that your team does not need to agree upon them

[cosmic gyro]

But the problems on those games are always stacks not finding game/taking too long, soloq has never been a problem on any game unless the game really suffered from playerbase issues as well

I mean I remember bubo mentioning it, soloq players are needed on a flex queue enviroment so the queues can pop

I think this is not a secret or wild guess, if soloq is introduced in a game it will canibalize flex queue

4fun stacks have normal switch, tryhard stacks have scrims, what do soloq players have in supervive

[final oriole]

on the contrary Overwatch removed its party cap after trialling it because there was a sizeable playerbase who did want to 'wide group' as they call it https://youtu.be/QF9uWOFfmGU?si=nA0md4WpfVh5z3R3

[final oriole]

as early as November population splits of any kind has been perceived as a risk so this is kinda redundant to imply as conclusive of anything in particular

[cosmic gyro]

it includes attempting to put groups alike together

it also seems the restriction is about ranks

[final oriole]

attempting but not guaranteeing, much like VALORANT does

[cosmic gyro]

but they talk about elo ranges

[final oriole]

as part of the elo ranges thing they effectively deleted duo queue restriction for GMs

it just meant they were always in 'wide' group territory

[cosmic gyro]

well I did not see it on the post that video is about

But yeah at the point where you allow a grandmaster to queue with a bronze, there is no point to have number restrictions the queue and ladder is already ruined along with the competitive integrity

[final oriole]

https://www.twingalaxies.com/feed_details.php/5136/overwatch-grand-master-rank-will-be-solo-duo-restricted

it was either the wide queue patch or the ranked overhaul before it but I distinctly remember duo queue is gone now

yep was reverted a year ago just found a Reddit thread on it

[cosmic gyro]

so was reverted when ow2 launched?

Anyway, it doesnt matter I could say that the game lost players after reverting the restricion, could it be the reason or not (overwatch before marvel rivals I mean)

In the end I really dont care, I've learnt how to like league of legends again through broken by concept podcast and I am having a cool ranked journey, already gave up trying to find a replacement to league. I acknowledge that league has no real competitor yet as competitive moba and all I can do is to play it

supervive really pushed me to do it after being 2 years without main game without playing league, jumped to valorant, tryharded in wow PvE and other games, in the end, atleast for me, I cant play anything else that is not league, for now.

But Im sure that supervive with a soloq would've been a good candidate for me to not play league anymore, but it could not be

I keep checking this server and discussing about it because in the end I was more than 1 year checking this game, coming to playtests and dreaming with it being a good league of legends competitor/replacement, but I really do think soloq community is really ignored on supervive and they are not really understood on why they want a soloq queue, when soloq is mentioned they always bring "individual agency" out of nowhere or carry potential or individual impact and thats not the problem, I truly think solo experience will never better without preventing stacks playing with solos, at most, it can be less bad, which seems the same but its way different

[final oriole]

OW2 did not launch a year ago, it has been around for a while now

[spice bison]

Whenever i made that message, i was talking about the aspect of being able to 1v4/1v3 in the game, not of the specific que type.

Obviously I don't think golds should play against/team up with diamond+ players even... but with the current size of the player base imo this is the best they can do w/o making ques 30+ minutes or worse.

This is to also say, I think more solo agency in the game wouldn't be a bad idea either. But it is still a team game and having to rely on teammates imo isn't a bad thing

[hollow kraken]

This might just be what I think, but I do really feel like supervive wouldn't have dropped off after ob if the devs were more proactive in balancing and dealing with the serious issues the game had faster. Which because I think that I do really believe the game will do well they just gotta fix that shit. They're trying to add some new mechanics which if they end up making a really good one that'd be great but the game was probably never much of a problem.

[pulsar wolf]

I am lurking for a good comeback. From the people who I played with that have abandoned, the main issues have been ( this when there wasnt even Rivals out yet ) : - Bots in the game with really bad AI - Too much clutter in objects that is a bit too much at the start - Some other in-game stuff that wasnt really seen in the tutorial and got people confused. I hope the game has a good come back because I really liked in those days. I have seen some changes now I haven´t liked how they sound and I am happy with Marvel Rivals at the moment. But really looking forward for this game to get a clear vision of what they want to do and go with it

[sturdy sentinel]

Competition and fairness doesn't care about showing who the top players are. It's about the drive to improve and get better.

In order to make a 10,000 hour competitive game, you need to offer intrinsic rewards, not just extrinsic ones. Being able to see your own improvement independently of your own results is arguably the most valuable feature any competitive game can have for retaining competitive players, even more than a ranked mode.

If playing against coordinated teams prevents players from seeing their own individual improvement then those players will just quit. Then the game becomes worse for the top-ranked competitive 4-stacks because they have no one to queue against.

[spice bison]

I would agree with you in a general sense. That ideally competition/fairness is about the journey of becoming better.

But I think people just care more about the actual rank then getting better. You can get better playing norms games, especially in supervive where it is a mixed que.

I agree with you on seeing your own improvement and if you are down to expand upon intrinsic rewards, I'd love to hear wym exactly by that :D.

And i will say, due to this whole discussion about soloq I've actually been trying more solo queuing and I hate to be that guy... but I'm enjoying the game doing that as well LOL. I've played with 3 man's, bunch of randoms who only listen to pings, etc. And in my anecdotal experience, it definitely is no worse then league (if anything better cause league community is so bad.)

You will lose against coordinated play sure... but you could learn from playing against those teams as well and even maybe take some with you to try and hinder their progress (at least that has been my reaction so far. I have like 10+ solo games this patch so still very new to it)

All I'm saying is, it hasn't been as bad as I've expected it to be/people have made it out to be

[hollow kraken]

Isn't that basically what rank is meant for? And it's one of the main reasons sv's ranked system sucks rn. It's barely if at all a measure of skill. So as my rank goes up I dont feel like I'm getting any better.

[sturdy sentinel]

Caring about rank more than playing better is a toxic mindset to have. To me, obtaining a specific rank is the reward for improving and improvement is the goal, so as long as I can see how I'm improving (regardless of the results) then I'm happy.

Extrinsic rewards are the rewards the game gives you for achieving certain goals. In Supervive, this includes cosmetics and other items on the battle pass, achieving benchmarks in hunter mastery, and achieving a certain rank. Intrinsic rewards are the rewards a game provides through the satisfaction of the gameplay itself. If you're like me, you learned to play Bishop and specifically learned how to dash punch, and after I labbed it in training mode it felt really good to actually land it in a match the first few times I did it. Landing dash punch in a real match after I spent time learning it in training is an example of an intrinsic reward. Realistically, you can't design intrinsic rewards into a game outside of making it fun to play and rewarding to improve at, and emphasizing intrinsic rewards requires removing extrinsic rewards, which probably isn't a good idea.

Definitely agree with the idea of getting better in normal games. I've spent a lot of time playing Arena over the last couple weeks, and it feels like I'm learning a lot more from playing arena than ranked duos at this point because I can see what I'm doing wrong and correct it in the next round. The likelihood I learn something against a coordinated team is much, much smaller because there's a communication advantage that means I don't get to consistently try to fix my mistakes in-game because there's a chance I don't ever see that gameplay scenario again, although the communication advantage is greatly diminished in duos compared to squads.

[spice bison]

We agree in the idea of players SHOULD care more about playing better then actual rank. I just think unfortunately a lot of players don't care about that journey ;-;.

I agree with you when it comes to making sure intrinsic rewards are key, but I do disagree when you said it REQUIRES removing extrinsic rewards. I think both can co-exist.

Arena i use to work on mechanics/fights so I feel you there. I get what you are saying playing against teams which is true, the window for learning isn't as great but I was just pointing out it is there.

[sturdy sentinel]

Ranked is for fair competition, not to show who's the best. Some tournament players don't play ranked, some ranked players aren't good in tournament settings, and some ranked formats benefit players who play a lot more than those that are good.

I definitely feel you on the rank thing.

[sturdy sentinel]

The reason I mentioned the thing about extrinsic rewards needing to be removed to emphasize intrinsic rewards is because having extrinsic rewards can prevent players from seeing and/or wanting the intrinsic rewards.

There was a study done with a group of kids. One groups was told to draw a picture and were told they would get a reward, while another group were told to draw a picture with no rewards. The people doing the study then tracked the children throughout their lives to analyze their desire to pursue art, and found that the group with the reward were less likely to stick with their art than the ones who weren't rewarded because the ones who were rewarded were less intrinsically motivated to draw.

Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic rewards absolutely can coexist, but putting in too many extrinsic rewards risks drowning out the intrinsic ones.

[spice bison]

Fair point, but not everyone plays a game to get better either. Some just hop on to play with friends or simply to just past time.

I feel the rewards that supervive gives you serves as a retention tool for players of all backgrounds to continue playing their game to get that gift.

People who already want to sweat in the game will naturally put in the time/effort they want to put in to continue playing