67 replies to this topic

[Nik Van Rhijn]

So far most of the threads have been focused on the Mechs and combat, understandably as we all have our own views and in PvP combat is important. Some of us have also tried to focus on the "shell" in which this takes place as well. One thing however has only been mentioned in passing, yet is every bit as vital. That is the matchmaking system. Now there are many people on this forum who have far more experience than I do with online PvP and I would like your ideas and experience to educate the rest of us.
As I see it we have three groups at the start. Faction members, Mercenaries and Lone Wolves. We could also, theoretically have 3 types of gameplay. Casual, Campaign and possibly Solaris VII arena matches.
How do you see the matchmaking being done, given that PGI will be creating all the "instances"? Will there need to be Regional servers, and if so how will groups made up of prople from different countries be able to fight together? At the moment North America has the most members, With the EU & Russia next.
Should matches be based on a form of BV, tonnage, or a mix of both. Does the XP level of those in the lobby determine the mix? What happens if you have a merc (or house) group with a mix of experience?
Should individual "ping" levels be taken into account?
I think that how this system is set up will be essential to the success of the game and I am sure that there are many important factors that I have not mentioned.
I would like your comments and suggestions, perhaps where there is conflict of ideas you could set up polls to determine the strength of support/opposition to these ideas?

[Kristov Kerensky]

Huh...ya know..I haven't given this subject any thought at all..I'll let it ramble around and get back to you..be interesting to see what people think.

[VixNix]

My thoughts (rusty and old as they are) are that there should be arena matches available for those who want to go there, I did enjoy that part of the MW4 game though it was i think more chaotic than the missions and of course dealing with real players instead of the AI will make it more challenging...

All "campaign" or quest related battles should be instanced, to keep "innocent" bystanders from coming to harm (or to keep them from watching and then taking out the winners. )

Matches should be set up based upon both mech and pilot ratings, might be fair to set a great player in a med mech against a new player in a not to heavy but the other way around would be a slaughter not much fun for any but the ignorant

I would really love to see the ability to have random encounters that don't HAVE to (but can) turn into combat open planets that may have several people exploring opportunities (thinking free for all with benefits)

There needs to be the ability to choose language specific servers and for the lone wolf, single mech missions and the ability to join random instances for groups missing the fourth or to form impromptu lances

/ramble

[Barantor]

First I hope that the player base isn't separated by servers based on world location. I have a ton of folks I know and play games with that live in Europe who hate when we can't play a game because it automatically logs them into the 'Euro' set of servers instead of letting them choose. One time a friend from Kent even got better connection speeds with a server based in Virginia than he did the one in mainland Europe.

With the Solaris arena, I would like there to be a system in place that puts you in a separate ranking structure based on your wins and loses, just like brackets in any other games. Perhaps have weight classes like boxing. The books all have Solaris matches as a one vs one type of game and I would like to see that as the main type, but maybe with special lance vs lance play or something too. This would give folks who want to do that options and basically almost a completely different game, but a fun one. If we as other players can watch the matches as spectators then it gives folks something to do when they want to be in game but can't play (eating my cheerios, brb while I watch Solaris!).

I think for the planetary assaults within normal house factions it should be based on whatever level your pilot has achieved as that would give them a way to rank you with folks that have been playing for a similar length of time. I don't think that access to all mechs should be based on level though but this would put folks of similar skill in matches so they can learn and advance. Lone wolfs could possibly pick a side to join (per battle) based on open contracts given out by outreach and be paid by them rather than earn LP like the faction players.

[LordKnightFandragon]

However they do the MM, it cant be any worse then World of Tanks....in fact I am hoping to the heavens above that this game is as little like WoT as is possible. I hate the grind in that game and the way they set up the Tiers and credit gen and upgrades...for the love of god I hope they make this game more like Mechwarrior 3 and 4 and not like a Mechwarrior version of WoT where you start with a stock, crap mech and have to upgrade it through a hopeless tedious grind.

Instead I hope this game is how I oringially thought I heard it: You start the game, pick whatever mech you want, regardless of weight, class any of it, and go from there. I have always hated how in games you have to grind your way to the top to get the good stuff only to have it for like 2 missions before the game ends.....I have high hopes for this game and am looking foward to it, but I hope its not much like WoT....

[Threat Doc]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 21 December 2011 - 03:10 AM, said:

How do you see the matchmaking being done, given that PGI will be creating all the "instances"?

My initial thoughts when I first read about match-making was that I don't really care for something like that in campaign mode; in that mode the forces are there, at the planet, to do the job of either defending or attacking, and I'm not understanding why a match-making system would be necessary? I need to wait for more information on this.

Quote

Will there need to be Regional servers, and if so how will groups made up of prople from different countries be able to fight together? At the moment North America has the most members, With the EU & Russia next.

If they do regional servers, I'm going to lose 4 people from my ranks that I know of, unless we're able to proliferate across regional servers.

Quote

Should matches be based on a form of BV, tonnage, or a mix of both. Does the XP level of those in the lobby determine the mix? What happens if you have a merc (or house) group with a mix of experience?

Well, if they go with Battle Value, or BV2, as from Combat Operations, a pilot's rating (Cadet, Green, Regular, Veteran, Elite) modifies BV automatically, and is the perfect system for matching out folks.

Quote

Should individual "ping" levels be taken into account?

Is there a way to do this? To determine someone's ISP speed up and down, and then mix them with other appropriately leveled individuals? If there is, then I will lose, again, some of my folks.

Quote

I think that how this system is set up will be essential to the success of the game and I am sure that there are many important factors that I have not mentioned.

If it's NOT used in campaign mode, not so much.

Quote

I would like your comments and suggestions, perhaps where there is conflict of ideas you could set up polls to determine the strength of support/opposition to these ideas?

Well, I seem to be a magnet for conflict, whether I am actively seeking it or not -normally NOT-, so let the games begin.

[HanaYuriko]

Why should there be a match maker? Grab a 'mech, join up with your unit. Drop on world and fight it out against other players that are in the same lobby.

[Barantor]

HanaYuriko, on 21 December 2011 - 06:41 AM, said:

Why should there be a match maker? Grab a 'mech, join up with your unit. Drop on world and fight it out against other players that are in the same lobby.

It might work like that too and I wouldn't mind it, but it could chase off new folks depending on how the difficulty scales etc.

[Kaemon]

MM is really only needed for pub games, conquest mode won't need it because you already have a (somewhat proficient) group that you are fighting with (hopefully).

I'm of the mindset of removing MM as well, it seems to cause alot of grief and the time spent constantly tweaking it could be used on more important things (DLC, bug testing, etc...)

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Thanks for the comments so far. It's interesting to see what people think. @Kay Wolf - I am hoping that we don't get regional servers as it woiuld mess up my plans. I thought it was something that needed to be brought up as again it's easier to put in early in the dev cycle.

[VanillaG]

I think the match making should take the following into account:

• Battle Value - a combination of mech and pilot attributes
  
• Planet Type - type of planet to battle on.
  
• Faction - You should only be grouped with people of the same faction.
  
• Personal Group - you should be able to group with friends (of the same faction) to create a lance(s) and all be dropped into the same match.

I would also like to see matches be setup with the following optional parameters:

• Max Battle Value per side - You could tailor maches to favor certain types/sizes of mechs. I would also allow unbalanced matches, in terms of numbers, where a smaller number of better mechs/pilots could take on a larger force of inferior mechs/pilots based on Battle Value.
  
• Max Battle Value per mech - You could tailor the matches to exclude certain mechs based on battle value.

Edited by VanillaG, 21 December 2011 - 10:43 AM.

[VixNix]

I want to know what the DEVS are thinking...

[zverofaust]

Looking at it purely based on Mech weight class is too limiting. There may for example be light, medium and even heavy Mechs that all perform the same battlefield role albeit with different strengths and weaknesses:

• Scouts are the fastest and most mobile Mechs, often with advanced equipment to detect enemies better or avoid detection themselves. Avoidance is their best defense.
  
• Strikers are fast, mobile Mechs that utilize speed and firepower, charging in close and hitting the enemy with heavy weapons. Could be called harassment units. They rely on speed and maneuverability for protection.
  
• Skirmishers are similar to Strikers except utilizing longer-ranged weaponry. They avoid close-range engagements, instead using their mobility to avoid destruction as they move in and out of cover taking pot-shots at the enemy before retreating and poking out from a different direction. Their role isnt necessarily to destroy the enemy, but also to lock then in an engagement.
  
• Brawlers are "Mechs of the Line" suited for medium to long range engagements and usually sporting heavy armour and generally poor mobility.
  
• Juggernauts are heavy slow-moving fortresses. Generally armed with the most destructive short-range weaponry available.
  
• Snipers naturally sit as far away from the enemy as possible and pelt them with long-range direct-fire weapons. They're usually not very fast and not well armoured.
  
• Missile Boats are like Snipers in that they usually sit at the back of the battle raining LRMs down on the enemy, most effectively with the help of scouts giving them targeting data.

All of these work in conjunction on the battlefield and perform a specific role. Scouts roam ahead spotting enemies and sending back target data; Strikers launch quick strikes against the enemy's weak points of vulnerable units; Skirmishers keep enemy units distracted and engaged so Scouts and Strikers can do their thing; Brawlers move up the lines to good firing positions and let loose their barrages; Juggernauts slowly stalk forward to get into range of the enemy's front lines; Snipers sit back and try to headshot people; and Missile boats hide behind a hill in the far corner of the map like cowards waiting for a Scout or someone to use a TAG or NARC on some targets.

This translates up and down the weight spectrum as almost every weight class has Mechs that can perform almost any role (and sometimes more than one). The Cougar, Warhammer and Dire Wolf would all make good Brawlers. The Osiris, Shadow Cat and Gargoyle are all Skirmishers.

I think the WoT approach is the only plausible one, where players go into battle and are put into a sorting queue where Mechs of similar sizes and capabilities or tiers are placed into a match, and every match mixes weight classes to a certain extent. Even the most high-tier heavy-ridden games will have light tanks for scouting in WoT.

[Xhaleon]

zverofaust, on 21 December 2011 - 01:25 PM, said:

snippy snippy

Don't forget cavalry, which are like strikers except with more mixed weapons and both armor and speed. Although, good cavalry mechs tend to need advanced tech for weight savings...

[Kristov Kerensky]

Ok..Q&A came out and we find out..12v12 combats, different types of combats possible..so..matchmaking is kinda..set by the type of combat.

Ranked matches will obviously be fighting for/against a House, and the match making for those will be based soley on if you are or aren't in the Houses involved or working for them. 12v12 combats means 3 lances per side, 1 company, so if you are with friends in a unit that's able to join the combat, I imagine there'll be a way for you to get together and either fill those 3 lances as a unit OR wait for Mercs/Lone Wolf players to join you and fill out the extras.

Levels..since we don't know how they'll work and if they'll actually affect anything directly..can't make a call on that. Same with Skills.

Tonnage..ah yes.. So many people are so used to the way the MW series have dealt with that..the Batchall of the Clans..the Bid..how many tons are you going to use. Sorry, Inner Sphere militaries don't actually DO that sillyness, they toss whatever they've got to toss at the situation and hope it's enough
Typically, in TT, you get a max tonnage per lance/star and go from there. 300 tons per lance means you can get a nice mix of Mechs, 400 means you've got a Steiner Recon Lance How this will work in MWO..not a clue. We know we get our own Mechs, but..do we get more then 1? If so, how many can we have? Will it be possible for me to have a couple of Meds, couple of Heavys and a couple of Assaults, all of various tonnages, so that I can drop/gain a few tons to make a lance tonnage limit work? Previous MW games, we'd just literally grab whatever chassis was the appropiate tonnage and go..will we HAVE that option in MWO? I don't think so, so how tonnage will work..not a clue, again.

Non-ranked combats..well..that'll probably just be up to the people who want to do them won't it? All Lights, all energy only weapons, 'hey, I just got my new CPLT-K2, jump in here with me and lets see how it works!'..we'll set the rules for these fights as we decide to do them I imagine.

[Woodstock]

It actually has been discussed rather a lot ... mostly about a month ago.

People generally seemed pro-BV

But as matches seem to have been confirmed as even numbers on each side ... either 12v12 or 8v8 ... then I'm no sure how effective BV will be.

I was hoping for a pure BV matchmaking system that would create 5 v 12 matches (but even BV on each side).

With matched numbers of players the pressure will be to field the max BV possible .... move aside scout mech ... the assaults are coming through!

Also a set 8v8/12v12 system will place more pressure on the mission type/objectives to keep smaller mech viable throughout the life of the game.

I hope the devs are ready for that.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I remember the talk about BV but no other real mechanics. Like you I would prefer BV, even tonnage would be better than fixed numbers. Unless of course it's a maximum of 24 and could be asymetric. If it's just numbers then I can't see it working with roles. Everyone will want a Steiner recon lance unless something else in the match details precludes it.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Never did like that BV system..it's ok for the TT, I guess..not really to my liking as it gives values to things I don't agree with. And in a video game..BV means nothing if that little Panther pilot is a crack shot with his gauss but that Atlas on the other side needs a TC to hit the ground when he trips. There's no personal skill involved in making your shots or avoiding incoming rounds in TT, so the BV really doesn't work in a real time player skill driven system.

And I know from experience that a Steiner Recon Lance can be fun..but it's really not the best way to get the job done..and more often then not, it WON'T get the job done. Assaults are big, slow and carry lots of fire power, great for dealing with Heavys and Assaults..not so much for dealing with Lights and Meds who can move really fast and use JJ, ECM and BAP and just harrass the hell out of you, plinking away without you being able to do much more then cuss at them. 4 Panthers vs 4 Atlas in a swamp...my money is on those Panther's every time. The combat scenerio will be a big factor in what Mechs you want to use, bigger isn't always better...remember that.

PGI has stated they want to make sure that all classes have a use and avoid the mistakes of the previous titles, where bigger was, especially in MW4, ALWAYS better. MW2 and 3..smaller Mechs weren't actually a bad thing, they moved so damn fast that getting a hit on them was often impossible..hells, I made a Firemoth that could outrun LRMs for pity's sake, I didn't get shot out of that Mech very often..I usually killed MYSELF by ramming into Assaults..which often killed them as well NOT on purpose usually I might add..it was just really hard to control that little thing at those speeds with the lag we used to have to deal with..nothing like facing an Aussie with a 3 second ping..NEVER knew where that sod was until you ran into him.

[Damocles]

Matchmaking-
I just want to see the old chatroom+join lobby

Zonestyle!

[Woodstock]

BV does not need to be a copy of the TT rule system.

It simply means a 'metric' to assign a combat value to each mech. Based on its construction and load out.