972 replies to this topic

[Lindonius]

MoonUnitBeta, on 07 October 2014 - 11:14 PM, said:

But if you really want me to comment on whether I think light mechs are OP/invincible or not, then no, they're not.

You originally said (in a ranty hyperbolic post that you've since deleted) that you are against the new system because you hate lights, they are OP with their lag shields and you don't want to lose to lights capping out bases in modes you don't want to play.

So which is it?

[Impyrium]

Let it be known, however, that this is the poll. It's been posted on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit, so if you miss it it's your problem. It's going to be really sad if someone from either side says that 'the poll doesn't represent the community' afterwards.

[Greenjulius]

Ozric, on 07 October 2014 - 11:18 PM, said:

Voted yes to give change a chance. Elo does seem tighter after the patch and as yet I have not been forced to play conquest mode. The sky is not falling, but if you need to be mad about something then go for it.

I think you're right. We really need to give this a chance. It hasn't even been a day since the patch. I voted Yes, if simply to let the new voting system sink in for a week.

Edited by Greenjulius, 07 October 2014 - 11:24 PM.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Lindonius, on 07 October 2014 - 11:20 PM, said:

You originally said (in a ranty hyperbolic post that you've since deleted) that you are against the new system because you hate lights, they are OP with their lag shields and you don't want to lose to lights capping out bases in modes you don't want to play.

So which is it?

I didn't comment that I hate the system because I'm actually for the voting. Lol. It wasn't even me you were arguing to lol... Go back through your posts. The quote in your post will have a name. That's whoever you have a quarrel with lol.

Edit: I did this for you:

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 07 October 2014 - 11:25 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

ThomasMarik, on 07 October 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:

No putting out polls that second guess decisions you have already made is the sign of weak leadership.

And the history here shows that jamming straight ahead regardless of what anyone else thinks works well does it?

Sir Roland MXIII, on 07 October 2014 - 11:11 PM, said:

Turnout for those who've watched it is probably due in part to those of us going and making people aware of it. So far I'm the only one I've seen in-game talking to actual players.

And minimal viable effort on their part to bring this to the attention of ppl

With a side of CW being a bottleneck that stops then from polling the players

FrogToad, on 07 October 2014 - 11:13 PM, said:

I can't see how this vote will bring any good.
I will neither vote YES nor NO.
I am appealed by the thought that the new soft voting thing will bring better/more balanced match experience.
I am disappointed that if I chose a specific matchmode, lets say "Assault", I might be forced to play "Conquest" nonetheless.

I don't understand why it is so hard to create a matchmaker system that uses "voting" if a group or a player has selected multiple matchmodes, and that uses hard selection if a player or group has selected one specific matchmode.
Is the playerbase really that small? Or what is the problem in implementing something like that?

Or was noone playing Conquest

[corpse256]

I don't know russ I'm seeing a lot of I hate it or I like it, this hard choice for you guys at PGI I'm sure.

[Lindonius]

MoonUnitBeta, on 07 October 2014 - 11:23 PM, said:

I didn't comment that I hate the system because I'm actually for the voting. Lol. It wasn't even me you were arguing to lol... Go back through your posts. The quote in your post will have a name. That's whoever you have a quarrel with lol.

Edit: I did this for you:

You are right I got you confused with Mrmadguy. Please accept my humble apologies.

Edit: I was even wondering why your literacy had improved so much lol!

Edited by Lindonius, 07 October 2014 - 11:31 PM.

[Risen]

voted "no", since I do not like assault on 80% of the maps with the constraining turrets

still dropped 4 out of 6 group matches yesterday night on assault (the rest of my team had lots of fun about my TS fury)


I propose:
set the ability to favourize 1 gamemode (lets say skirmish) and set the ability to abolish 1 gamemode (lets say assault) and make the 3rd one (here conquest) have a chance of maybe 25% maximum to concur.

The playerbase can't be that small to create massive wait times...and when there is a game mode only a few people want to play, then they would have to wait to find matches imho...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

AUSwarrior24, on 07 October 2014 - 11:21 PM, said:

Let it be known, however, that this is the poll. It's been posted on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit, so if you miss it it's your problem. It's going to be really sad if someone from either side says that 'the poll doesn't represent the community' afterwards.

It doesnt
By Russ' own admission, the majority of ppl dont come here. Then theres the "brown sea" comments that make this place look worse than Reddit and ppl actively TRY to stay away. Which is why in game polls are needed.

Even if it delays CW

If youre going to directly change the game with the results OF the ******* poll then you should make an effort to make sure all your players SEE IT

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 07 October 2014 - 11:32 PM.

[Lupin]

Voting NO (Having been made aware of poll this time around).

Voting will make little difference to match maker, given there are other factors in team balance (Time zones, population, Sync drop, alt-accounts and trolls). Fix the source of the problem Match maker.

While voting system will help server make more of the popular modes available (Likely speeding up match times). There WAS a reason selecting game mode was important and YOU put this option in.
I do not want to be forced to play a game mode I would not enjoy, and would result in me playing less.

Skirmish (Mainly a shoot-em up)
Assault or Conquest (More options for team play and tactics).

DO NOT turn MWO into just another shoot-em up, give is the RIGHT to choose.

[wicm]

10 matches in and I have still only once played the mode that I like ...... Tighter ELO or not this stinks. If I have to play with stupid bases again I wont be happy.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Lindonius, on 07 October 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:

You are right I got you confused with Mrmadguy. Please accept my humble apologies.

No harm done, apology kindly accepted. Posting a lot on the forums between so many people, names do tend to overlap.

Edit: Hahah, thanks for the compliment.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 07 October 2014 - 11:37 PM.

[Morang]

There's no answer I'd like to vote. My answer will be "first of all, get rid of ELO matching at least in solo queue". That should give matchmaker enough breathing space to balance by weight class more accurately, perhaps even within pre-selected game mode constraints.

Edited by Morang, 08 October 2014 - 12:09 AM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Also this poll isnt representitive due to the biased way the question is asked.

If you vote no youre voting against tighter matchmaking and elo lol

[Impyrium]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 11:30 PM, said:

It doesnt
By Russ' own admission, the majority of ppl dont come here. Then theres the "brown sea" comments that make this place look worse than Reddit and ppl actively TRY to stay away. Which is why in game polls are needed.

Even if it delays CW

If youre going to directly change the game with the results OF the ******* poll then you should make an effort to make sure all your players SEE IT

However, in this case I've seen this poll been spread around pretty much everywhere. The only way you could miss it is if you never used Facebook, or Reddit, or Twitter, or this website. Or if you purposely avoid it. If people want to make a change and express their views, then they can put in the effort to come here and click the vote button. If not, then to be frank, they damn well missed out and it's their own fault.

You'd have to be pretty stuck up to avoid a developer's poll on their own forums and still expect your opinion to be used in changing the game.

I get the feeling you're irritated that the poll hasn't been the majority landslide many players thought it'd be.

Edited by AUSwarrior24, 07 October 2014 - 11:38 PM.

[Solomon Ward]

I wish you have waited a week or two till you make this poll

so there would be enough time to experience if and how this change is effecting the overall match quality

and some of the people with aversion to change would have calmed down and looked more objectively at this matter.


Communication with the playerbase is nice and all but this counterpoll came way too fast

and the one before was way too hidden and with insufficient votes.

I hope this doesn´t end in a

Monky, on 07 October 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

POLLPOCALYPSE 2014

and chaotic back and forth changes in every matter where people disagree.

Edited by Solomon Ward, 07 October 2014 - 11:53 PM.

[N0MAD]

Slyder, on 07 October 2014 - 10:33 PM, said:

And really...

Shame on you PGI....for skewing your questions to confuse people into not seeing the actual issue. I am actually offended by this.


It would appear, by the way you have phrased this poll....that there are actually TWO topics that need to be "voted" on here.

Do you like ELO being closer in matches.

Do you like being able to chose what game types you play.


You have worded this poll in a way that people literally have to vote AGAINST one of the options they may want.

I am all for ELO being closer, while at the same time wanting the freedom to chose my game types.

The audacity of you obviously trying to skew the vote into the predetermined path you want to take is wrather disapointing.

If anyhting, this poll should read as:


Yes - I want ELO to be more accurate, so there should be NO CHOICE on what game mode you get to play.

NO - While I think matches should be fair, i shouldnt lose the freedome to play the matches i want to play. Fix the system in place to work more correctly with choice still in place.

My first post in the other poll thread i mentioned just that, the Questions were leading..
Within hours we are being told the ELO matching is beter, quick info gathering surely accurate, and strangely different from what 6 hours of play has shown me. Cant say i see any diff, same percentages of close/stomp games same newbs/vets in games...
But the Question was worded as to imply that it had improved ELO matching, as to imply if you dont select this ELO matching will go to **** again...

[wicm]

11 launches still 1 in the mode I requested. The mode button now makes as little sence as the ready button. I have taken to running out of bounds to end it quickly.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

AUSwarrior24, on 07 October 2014 - 11:36 PM, said:

However, in this case I've seen this poll been spread around pretty much everywhere. The only way you could miss it is if you never used Facebook, or Reddit, or Twitter, or this website. Or if you purposely avoid it. If people want to make a change and express their views, then they can put in the effort to come here and click the vote button. If not, then to be frank, they damn well missed out and it's their own fault.

You'd have to be pretty stuck up to avoid a developer's poll on their own forums and still expect your opinion to be used in changing the game.

I get the feeling you're irritated that the poll hasn't been the majority landslide many players thought it'd be.

again... the poll is also biased but hey ignore what you dont wanna see. As usual for here

wicm, on 07 October 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:

11 launches still 1 in the mode I requested. The mode button now makes as little sence as the ready button. I have taken to running out of bounds to end it quickly.

Im curious to as whether or not this will be punished or can ppl vote like this too?

[Sir Roland MXIII]

@Wicm: Or sitting afk at base until I kill you because you're typing here?