13 replies to this topic

[Max Immelmann]

640 tons vs 380 ton REALLY?

matches always unbalanced

games are alway 8-0 7-1 stomps, does not matter who is winning or losing, just totally uneven games

ELO blows

[AnnoyingCat]

what does tonnage have to do with elo?

[Redshift2k5]

It's not the elo matcher's fault. It's the length of time they allocate to "searching for a match". The current search window is only a few minutess and if it does not find a similar elo match in those few minutes it gets less picky about what it dumps into the match.

The weight class is the same thing. It's the "getting less picky" part. The solution would be longer queue times so it has a longer window during which to look for an equal match.

LoL is much pickier about their matching and so suffers, at times, much longer queue times for a match (I've had to wait as much as 10 minutes and I'm not even close to being high elo player who has more trouble finding a match)

What would YOU do if there simply was no equal match of players in the queue at the same time?

I think more players would be happier with an Elo mismatch than with a tonnage mismatch, but that's only because they can't see the elo but they can see the tonnage. A heavier team is not always a better team, but I do think they need to work on the matcher more (and they will!) to be more picky about wight class matchup.

Edited by Redshift2k5, 13 March 2013 - 05:44 PM.

[Taemien]

Immelmann, on 13 March 2013 - 05:20 PM, said:

640 tons vs 380 ton REALLY?

matches always unbalanced

games are alway 8-0 7-1 stomps, does not matter who is winning or losing, just totally uneven games

ELO blows

You don't understand how the Matchmaker works.

It takes from the pool of players who roughly clicked Launch within a few seconds of each other. NOT who is currently online.

If you have a thousand players online, its safe to say, about 90% of the time they are ingame. Meaning 100 players are able to be queued. Now lets say half of them click launch. You have 50 players in the queue. Thats a very small metric for the match maker to take from. Effectively only three games worth of people. its spreading them out as best it can.

The alternative is to raise the timeout period for the MM to find a match. Though taking 3-5 minutes is a long time to find a match. As I said in another thread about this, you have players complaining that Alpine takes 3-5 minutes longer to complete then another map.

Imagine their outcry if it took that long to find a match for Every map.

[Serapth]

Redshift2k5, on 13 March 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

It's not the elo matcher's fault. It's the length of time they allocate to "searching for a match". The current search window is only a few minutess and if it does not find a similar elo match in those few minutes it gets less picky about what it dumps into the match.

The weight class is the same thing. It's the "getting less picky" part. The solution would be longer queue times so it has a longer window during which to look for an equal match.

LoL is much pickier about their matching and so suffers, at times, much longer queue times for a match (I've had to wait as much as 10 minutes and I'm not even close to being high elo player who has more trouble finding a match)

What would YOU do if there simply was no equal match of players in the queue at the same time?

I think more players would be happier with an Elo mismatch than with a tonnage mismatch, but that's only because they can't see the elo but they can see the tonnage. A heavier team is not always a better team, but I do think they need to work on the matcher more (and they will!) to be more picky about wight class matchup.

But the thing is, until last tuesday, elo worked extremely well and didn't take a huge wait.

Put simply, something broke, even though they don't admit to changing anything.

[Hammerfinn]

....OR your Elo shifted to a point where, with effective teamwork, a close game ends up 7-1 because of the focus firing of a good team leading to a quick surge. My games, when I keep track of what happens closely, are usually relatively close, even though the ending score is often 8-2, 8-1, etc. It's just that when a good team gets rolling, each subsequent kill makes it more likely that they get that next kill. Close game, disparate scores. The scoreboard never tells the full story.

[Davers]

Elo hasn't even had it's first tweak yet. Just relax and wait it out, or just come back at launch.

[Serapth]

Hammerfinn, on 13 March 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

....OR your Elo shifted to a point where, with effective teamwork, a close game ends up 7-1 because of the focus firing of a good team leading to a quick surge. My games, when I keep track of what happens closely, are usually relatively close, even though the ending score is often 8-2, 8-1, etc. It's just that when a good team gets rolling, each subsequent kill makes it more likely that they get that next kill. Close game, disparate scores. The scoreboard never tells the full story.

Mine were and exactly as of Tuesday, generally arent any more.

Before last patch I dont think I saw a single trial mech... see them all the time. Before last patch, I rarely ever saw a player do > 100 damage, now I see 4-6 players doing almost 0 damage on a fairly regular occasion.

[xengk]

I recall the ELO is balancing the match via team value instead of player's personal ELO score.

Possibly a team with 7 players with high ELO against a team of 8 players with average ELO, would be saddled with a low ELO 8th player to make the team value as close as possible.

Tonnage is not even part of the consideration for ELO match making.

[Aethon]

I love the way people keep defending ELO. It is like the popular misconception about lemmings, following each other off a cliff, even though none of them have any idea what they are doing, lol.

Sure, it sounds like a great idea...but so did the Patriot Act. Have you guys actually stopped to formulate YOUR OWN opinion about ELO? Have you ever read about it, and figured out exactly what it does?

[Primetimex]

ELO is clearly broken when you have 2 players with Assault mechs - who don't listen to chat directions to "STAY TOGETHER FOCUS FIRE" and wander off themselves and subsequently gets killed and wasted without doing ANY damage to the enemy mechs.

Please do not play the game if you have no intention of participating in any team-work whatsoever, you are just making the whole experience worse for the rest of us who genuinely try to participate and play the game as a TEAM.

[flying1ace]

ELO?
Whats this stand for?

[CheezPanther]

AnnoyingCat, on 13 March 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

what does tonnage have to do with elo?

it's the fact that ELO doesnt look at tonnage and mech classes of each team.. thus one team is often left with a disparaging situation facing 6 assualts with nothing but mediums and lights, YMMV..

fighting a team of 4 3L's and 2 D-dc's in a team of all meduims.. dont worry in 2 short mins you'll all be dead so u can find another horribad match to play.

So ELO has nothing to do with tonnage. And thierin lies the whole fail of the system. because SKILL cannot truly make up for a horribly unbalanced tonnage..

[Davers]

Aethon, on 13 March 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

I love the way people keep defending ELO. It is like the popular misconception about lemmings, following each other off a cliff, even though none of them have any idea what they are doing, lol.

Sure, it sounds like a great idea...but so did the Patriot Act. Have you guys actually stopped to formulate YOUR OWN opinion about ELO? Have you ever read about it, and figured out exactly what it does?

All I have really noticed is that I have had much tougher matches. Isn't that the point though?