49 replies to this topic

[GalaxyBluestar]

matchups aren't all that bad but it definately needs more building up. taking more into account etc. for now i'll just manage.

[Marius Malthus]

my team.

1 jagermech
2 hunchies
2 ravens
1 spider
1 cicada
1 disconnect

their team

5 assaults (3 stalkers. 2 ddc)
2 heavies (2 dragons)
1 cicada

most matches are fine but some nights we encounter some matches like this, with a great disparity in weight. i know the Helo compares our scores and skills but it has to find a middles ground between both (skill and weight)

Edited by Marius Malthus, 31 March 2013 - 02:32 AM.

[Mighty Spike]

Aposiopesis, on 25 March 2013 - 10:41 AM, said:

Conquest, PUGs, afaik.

Team 1 (my team)

Atlas DDC
Atlas DDC
Atlas DDC
Atlas DDC
Cataphract Muromets (Me)
Hunchback P
Hunchback H
Centurion or Trebuchet (Don't remember which)

620 tons total, 77.5 tons average


Team 2


Awesome
Cataphract
Cataphract
Catapult
Jagermech
Centurion
Trebuchet
Jenner
(I think, tonnages are about right)
485 tons, ~60.5 ton average

Really, matchmaker? Really? Yea, you can imagine how that went. Sure, I like winning and all, but I also like to have a match that at least pretends to be a challenge.

Yea, there aren't any problems with the matchmaker. Seriously, how hard would it have been for the POS to shuffle those teams around a little?

You think this is Epic Fail? How about this:
Asssault,4man Team drop-4 Pug
My Team:
1 Atlas DDC
1 Awesome 9M
2 Cataphract IM+2X
2 Hunchback SP
1 Raven
1 Commando
Other Team:
3 Raven
5 Jenner(with JJ)
????????????????
One of the moments where i wish we could stomp on Light Mechs So my Team plays since CB and knows what to do but i have to say this was really a hard fight.We managed to kill the Enemys but only 2 Survived.Only the 2 Phracts survived.This was crazy,like Mosquitos they attacked from all sides....Also we had 2 matches vs 8 DDCs.So,yes the Matchmaker need some overhaul.

[aniviron]

I feel like the only person in the world who has seen significantly better game balance since Elo. Yes, every now and then there is a blowout due to tonnage imbalance, but it's quite rare. Tonnage has turned out to be a pretty bad predictor of win rate anyway- I can't tell you the number of times I've been on teams that have torn down four or five atlases. Doesn't matter if you're 100 tons if you can't use it any better than the Hunchback uses his 50.

[Lyrik]

IceCase88, on 30 March 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

Most of you are really being ridiculous with your demands for the matchmaker. Really ridiculous. Here are the following points you do not know when launching a match:

1. You do not know how many games were launched at the same time without issue.
2. You do not know the available players who are attempting to launch at the same time you are launching.
3. You do not know the available mechs in the pool launching the same time as you are launching.
4. You do not know the current skill level of all players who are launching the same time your are launching.

Your demands for the ELO are really absurd. You demand a weight for weight parity between teams. You demand all mechs have same BV. You demand each player be equally skilled. You demand absolute perfection every drop. Reference my above points of why it cannot be proven the matchmaker is a fail. The only real provable point is the matchmaker is not evening the teams out when one team has more mechs than the other (i.e. turning 6v8 into 7v7, 4v8 into 6v6, etc.). You want to throw all these different variables into the matchmaker and demanding it being done in a matter of a few seconds. Level your expectations a bit.

Yep, NO matchmaking ever will ensure 100% fair matches all the time. Not with a low playerbase like MWO. Not when your pilots can have a bad day, not when are trying a new loadout etc.....

From my personal experience: I had more fun matches than ever. Of course I also had stomps, on both sides ;-)

aniviron, on 31 March 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

I feel like the only person in the world who has seen significantly better game balance since Elo. Yes, every now and then there is a blowout due to tonnage imbalance, but it's quite rare. Tonnage has turned out to be a pretty bad predictor of win rate anyway- I can't tell you the number of times I've been on teams that have torn down four or five atlases. Doesn't matter if you're 100 tons if you can't use it any better than the Hunchback uses his 50.

You are not the only one. But you always have some people who like to ***** about everything. Or come to the forum because Matchmaking ****** up 3-4 matches in a row. Or they just played like crap because they were tired, sick etc and give ELo the fault for their shortcomings.

[GHQCommander]

I've seen no information about exactly how the matchmaker operates so I question if those post is relevant.

Does it take the players unlocks and modules into account?

The team with more armor may have 3 x brand new purchased Atlas.

Unless we know the answer to this, this is just another none topic not worth discussing. There is a lot of that going around in this forum. Rather than asking the devs for some information about the inner workings of the game.

[Horned Bull]

I already have seen a lot of unfair matchups like:

full medium/light (no ravens) team vs heavy/assault team
4 man raven premade +4 pugged heavies vs normal force (2 lights, few mediums rest heavies/assaults).

[GHQCommander]

Lyrik, on 31 March 2013 - 03:24 AM, said:

Yep, NO matchmaking ever will ensure 100% fair matches all the time. Not with a low playerbase like MWO. Not when your pilots can have a bad day, not when are trying a new loadout etc.....

From my personal experience: I had more fun matches than ever. Of course I also had stomps, on both sides ;-)



You are not the only one. But you always have some people who like to ***** about everything. Or come to the forum because Matchmaking ****** up 3-4 matches in a row. Or they just played like crap because they were tired, sick etc and give ELo the fault for their shortcomings.

I agree.

Keep in mind that it is a beta also. Star Trek Online PvP is more than 3 years old and I don't even think it has a matching system yet. They are working on it sure but 3 years! That is not including the 2 years initial development time.

I'm so happy to play PvP that does attempt to match fair.

[GHQCommander]

Wow my comment went down 3 times, there is something going wrong with Ajax. Clicking does not show to do anything but it may actually be working as I did click about three times.

Sorry

[IrrelevantFish]

Onyx Rain, on 25 March 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

So far I tend to agree...weight classes balanced the game more then elo is so far. I really hope to see weight or BV come into play again soon for better match ups. My guess is they will eventually make it a combination.

I strongly disagree. My win/loss and kill/death ratios are much closer to (but still well above) the 1.0 ideal and I've spent most of my time in 4-mans without any ECM, LRMs, Splatcats, or dedicated snipers.

Now it is absolutely true that there are far too many matches determined by frustrating equipment imbalances, and I hope they can find some mechanism to reduce their frequency, but since Elo, there have been far, far more hard-fought, nail-biting, glorious matches where I felt like all 16 players were at the same level, and the victory well-earned and entirely deserved.

And BTW, half of those matches were ones I lost.


P.S. -- Additionally and amusingly, my per-mech stats seem to indicate that my K/D and W/L is inversely proportional to cheesiness. For example, before the missile nerf, when I was in my CPLT-K2 with 4xLL, I was about 40% more effective than in a Splatcat, 30% more than in a RVN-3L, and 100% more than in an LRM-boat CPLT-C1. Not quite sure what that says about game balance, but I definitely need to spend more time shooting things that aren't beams or ballistics.

Edited by IrrelevantFish, 31 March 2013 - 04:43 AM.