55 replies to this topic

[Jun Watarase]

Did i miss patch notes that said they were going to remove this feature? I keep seeing teams with no lights being matched up against teams with lights and then getting outcapped badly. Yesterday i was in a game with no lights vs a team with 4 lights. Instead of splitting up the 4 lights into two for each team the matchmaker put them all on one team.

[AnnoyingCat]

Indirect complains about capping I see there

[The Cheese]

Yeah, I've noticed this too.

Y'know what they should do? They should get a full 16 players ready before assigning teams. If it means I have to wait another 20 seconds for a match, so be it.

[Lefty Lucy]

Well, if your team doesn't want to bring lights, play assault instead of "any" or "conquest," though I think that's a shame because conquest is way more strategically interesting. In addition, if your team doesn't have any fast movers, that means you need to play closer to your base.

[Sephlock]

I get the feeling this may be addressed pretty soon.

[CancR]

I like heavy teams as long as my team doesn't w+m1 and die instantly, since the other team does the same thing. I do massive damage most games in my jenner f since they rely on one hit kills rather then learning to aim.

[Chavette]

They probably didn't change the MM at all, but with patch after patch the game getting less fun to play, and units taking a break from the game being reflected in my friend list...

The way these MMs work is the bigger player pool the better matchups.

[Jun Watarase]

I'm nt talking about 8 on 8 matchups but random pug games. Those are supposed to have weight class restrictions but its obviously not working...

[GodsProxy]

This is ******* me off to no end.... The last four games I have played were lost because we had no lights or mediums and the enemy team had 2-4 and were able to just cap and run, cap and run... It is not an issue on smaller maps but on Tourm and Alpline it is a ******* nightmare.

Assault is no better. If you see you have no lights it is pretty much sit their and wait for them and if you don't they will back cap your *** off. Again only an issue on the larger maps...

It is enough to make me not want to play. I had my CC out to get some MC to expedite my farming process but after the aggravation of winning by a landslide or losing by one because I get 3 atlas 3 stalker 2 Catapults is just stupid.

[John MatriX82]

Yes the matchmaker keeps wandering with quite interesting weight differences, so either the lighter team brawls to death trying to bring down a bigger foe or the slower team gets outcapped easily.

[Zerberus]

Sephlock, on 09 June 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

I get the feeling this may be addressed pretty soon.

Re the screenie: There`s no weight matching in 8 mans, because the wait times would be endless and then some.

Edited by Zerberus, 09 June 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Soy]

Gz on 1000 posts Jun!

[Sephlock]

Zerberus, on 09 June 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

Re the screenie: There`s no weight matching in 8 mans, because the wait times would be endless and then some.

Ah right, I'd forgotten about that.

[Jman5]

I find that 9 times out of 10 when people complain about weight imbalance in-game, they're mistaken once you add it up. What does screw it up occasionally is when you form a four man and drop with something like 4 Spiders in Assault only. Or 4 D-DCs in Conquest.

[The Strange]

This is like the 50th time this has come up. If a 4-man drops into a pug game, it will throw off the weight. If a premade takes all lights, then yes, they will all be on the same team, BUT, your team will most likely have a large weight advantage over them. Weight matching can't work properly if premades and pugs are mixed. Not unless they make it take longer for the premades to join a game by not letting them in unless there are mechs of equal weight in the lists to balance what they are taking. But I don't see PGI alienating players that way.

[Deathlike]

The current meta is pro-heavier mechs, so the likelihood that the tonnages add up a whole lot differently than intended.

[RisTanA]

Sephlock, on 09 June 2013 - 07:20 AM, said:

I get the feeling this may be addressed pretty soon.

ha! thats me :3

[PEEFsmash]

I would rather matches be tonnage imbalanced instead of Elo imbalanced. If it is a tradeoff, I want player skill to be as equal as possible first and foremost.

[Jun Watarase]

Then they should have all randoms in one queue and all groups in another queue.

[Sephlock]

PEEFsmash, on 09 June 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

I would rather matches be tonnage imbalanced instead of Elo imbalanced. If it is a tradeoff, I want player skill to be as equal as possible first and foremost.

Up to a point, sure. But light heavy teams tend to get roflstomped- if nothing else, the odds are stacked against them on assault.