One thing that was should have been put into more playlists, but wasn’t, was party against party. Although at lower populations some randoms snuck in here and there (Squad Slayer).
I’d like i343 to develop this further and make it a search criteria check and some additional numbers included going up to the biggest opponent party size available.
The number would represent the largest party you could get matched with and against, so if you put a “2” and you’re playing say, BTG, then the largest party in the match would be two. Of course, there could be several of them. You can’t have a smaller number than your own party either. Or “Lone Wolf”, then it’d only be “randoms”.
Then people who have it unchecked can go against people who have it checked.
I think that the other way could work as well. Another number set that would represent least party size. It’d put you and your party against only parties of atleast your desired size, so you could look for party sizes between “two” and “four”.
Then if the system takes a long time to find suitable team mates and opponents because of your criteria then it could ask if you’d like to either increase the allowed party size or uncheck the criteria alltogether.
“But Naqser, people enter MM alone at their own risk, nothing like this is needed”
Why not? If anything it’d increase the overall experience for a lot of people, and it wouldn’t be obligatory either, just what the player wants.
“Come ON Naqser, it’s rare to get matched against full parties, and if anything you won’t remember those matches a week later”
Maybe not in BTB, but other playlists with smaller team sizes have more full parties, as it’s easier to get a full party if the max party size is smaller. Thus a larger chance to get full parties, or close to full parties, which can be as, or close to, as “annoying” as a full party. Then I have a good memory and I remember plenty of matches, both good and bad.