233 replies to this topic

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Roland, on 16 April 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

Tonnage matching makes the most sense when you have a lobby system.

However, in totally randomized matching, I understand the desire to use weight classes.

It sucks to take an awesome and know that you're gonna be matched against an atlas, but it's potentially better than ending up on a team with 8 hunchbacks, and getting matched against 2 Atlases and 6 lights.

While I agree that the best matches include a wider range of mechs participating, assuming another statement from the Devs is true, that "most players are playing in groups", then if a team of 4 brings 50-ton mechs, they're making that choice ... and the likelihood of the above matchmaking (they get 4x 50 tonners, and the other team gets 2x 100, 6x 25-35) seems very low, given a relatively wide distribution of players and mechs in the queue.

However, as I said before, I think the 0-ton-delta experiment is probably going to be a fiasco ... Elo scores should weigh more heavily than tonnage in match making, and setting anything to "no discrepancy allowed" is just asking to see "how bad can it possibly be?"

[TOGSolid]

Divine Madcat, on 16 April 2013 - 05:44 AM, said:

Agreed. Nothing like taking your favorite Stalker mech, and knowing you just gave the enemy an Atlas.
Or when you take a Commando, knowing the team probably got a Raven to counter you.

Grouping by overall tonnage is the only smart and fair way to go.

It has been confirmed that tonnage limits will be put in eventually. This weight matching fix that's coming is mostly just a band-aid to prevent some of the ******* crazy things that have been going on.

[War Steiner]

Mystere, on 12 April 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

Bah! Things seem to be heading towards a boring direction:

• Fairness is boring.
  
• Equality is boring.
  
• Elo is boring.
  
• Balance is boring.

Exactily. Sure, keep your ELO for single player drops. Drop the ELO, weight class, et al for any premade groups. If you want to bring a knife to a gun fight, so be it. RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG!

[Mystere]

War Steiner, on 17 April 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

Exactily. Sure, keep your ELO for single player drops. Drop the ELO, weight class, et al for any premade groups. If you want to bring a knife to a gun fight, so be it. RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG!

Now that's the spirit that the game needs more of!

Edited by Mystere, 17 April 2013 - 10:33 AM.

[0I0]

Zylo, on 16 April 2013 - 04:20 AM, said:

Tonnage matching has far more potential matchmaking issues when pre-made groups are considered.

Weight class matching allows matchmaker to easily match up multiple pre-made groups per team because only 4 possibilities for weight class per player must be considered rather than 12 different mech weights currently. The number of mech weights will increase over time as new mechs are added.

Tonnage matching could work for 8-man groups but the solo/small-group matches need a simple system like weight class matching to deal with the groups ranging from 2 to 4 players combined with lone-wolf players. Once Elo ratings are considered even weight class matching may be difficult during off-peak hours.

100% agreed, I'd be fine with them loosening it up a bit as is. With no randomness involved, I can look at my mechs, and now assume the exact same thing on the other team. Before it could be anything, and that was fun, because I then had to adapt my tactics.

As a counter, I get that this way is more "fair", and it allows for an even playing field for newer and novice pilots. However as I've alluded too, "fair" is also linear and boring.

Any good pilot, in theory can take on any weight class above or below him. In group play things work out differently, but in my opinion having 1 heavy vs the other teams medium does not drastically change anything. What was wrong in the prior iterations was no weight restrictions, so teams could end up with 4 lights or 4 assaults vs the other teams semi-balanced weight classes.

As was stated above, any more restrictions will cause delays in matchmaking during off-peak game times. Which ultimately is my only beef, win or loose in a match, in-game time is king for me. I understand that badly balanced teams will cause a fast match however.

In the end I think most of its moot, once 12v12 and CW drop, things will make more sense. At its current iteration, were only looking at less then 10% of the final product.

[Texas Merc]

is the 18th (today) still the target date for the matchmaker tweaks?

[TOGSolid]

Thontor, on 17 April 2013 - 04:39 AM, said:

source for the confirmation?

https://twitter.com/...564428188217344

Texas Merc, on 18 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

is the 18th (today) still the target date for the matchmaker tweaks?

I'm kinda wondering that myself. They're being awful quiet about it.

[Omid Kiarostami]

Texas Merc, on 18 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

is the 18th (today) still the target date for the matchmaker tweaks?

Yep. We're running our tests right now and crunching the numbers. We'll give you guys a proper update later.

[TOGSolid]

Soooo, any word on the update?

[Deathlike]

Sounds like this would coincide with a sale or... TOURNEY.

[Miken]

I think It already worked 12 hours ago. I was played plenty of mirroring matches. Or it's just coincidence

Edited by Miken, 18 April 2013 - 09:21 PM.

[TOGSolid]

Miken, on 18 April 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

I think It already worked 12 hours ago. I was played plenty of mirroring matches. Or it's just coincidence

There would have been a big announcement if weight matching was suddenly live.

[Devil Fox]

It wouldn't be... but god once it is in with assault weekend, I know I'm dropping in my mediums on conquest... get the best out of the game whilst assaults play assault mode. So far I'm still getting some pretty serious matchmaking weight balance and the continuous trial mech disconnect/afk's is getting old fast.

[dyndragon]

https://twitter.com/...323875405688833
Garth says not yet.