51 replies to this topic

[MaddMaxx]

Profiteer, on 01 May 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

Personally, I'd rather wait up to 3 mins for the matchmaker to find players of close ELO and tonnage so I can have a challenging, balanced fight.

Too many one sided poundings (winning or losing) just isn't fun.

Perhaps a Poll would be in order for this. If the Dev were shown that players, in general would wait longer, to get these "better" match-ups, perhaps they would tweak the criteria. Otherwise, the QQ and whining about wait times would be overwhelming and just add to the forums already sour under-belly.

[Cham King]

So lets pretend that the matchmaker is adjusted and every match has perfect weight and ecm distribution, now what happens when under those parameters you recieve a savage beatdown like the images (with damage numbers nicely cropped btw) you posted. Don't bother saying that it will never happen because it will I just curious if you will be satisfied with that result or if you come back here complaning about bull**** matchmaker not balancing by weapons loadouts because you lost a match or 2.

[JokerVictor]

A good one from last week. Weight class matching is working as intended.

I should add, I haven't played again since this match. When and if (I'm not holding my breath) this gets fixed I'll come back.

Edited by JokerVictor, 02 May 2013 - 09:50 AM.

[Flashback37]

Couple of days ago I was in a match where my team consisted of 6 non-ecm lights, my Phract and a Dragon.
The other team had 4 ecm capable mechs. They had a Raven, 3 Atlai and all the rest were Heavy or Assault.
Matchmaker screwed the pooch on that one.

[Daneel Hazen]

Matchmaker has to deal with what it has available at the time so you don't have to wait. I do wish they would publish a functional though on how it does this specifically.

[Randalf Yorgen]

They need to switch to a BV (Battle Value) system for match making. A mech is worth so much BV based on it's build and there is a small multiplier for W/L and a minor tweek for K/D. throw in a loose tonnage balancer and you should have a better system.

I do know the pain of the OP and others here but I would like to say that if this was to be realistic then you would actually have matches like you do now. If I was going to attack a defending force on a planet and I could find out what their TO&E is I would assemble a unit that would have the best advantage possible. if the units were all heavies and assaults I would make sure I had spotters and missile boats, heavies and medium brawlers, and something with ECM. You see my point.

I agree that there are times when it's not much fun getting romplestomped 8-0 but it is somewhat realistic if you were attacking or defending a target on some planet.

[Blackadder]

ELO matchmaking is the factor that is driving me away from the game more then anything currently, even the PPC Fest is really not a huge issue for me. As someone who works non traditional hours its hard at time to find a 4 man team to play with, and pugging in this game is basically just asking for pain. ELO is rather useless, in a game where so much reliance is put on the team, not individual players. Sadly ELO has turned MWO into a game of chance, with the odds stacked against you the majority of the time and there is not all that much you can do about it.

[Sephlock]

Blackadder, on 02 May 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:

ELO matchmaking is the factor that is driving me away from the game more then anything currently, even the PPC Fest is really not a huge issue for me. As someone who works non traditional hours its hard at time to find a 4 man team to play with, and pugging in this game is basically just asking for pain. ELO is rather useless, in a game where so much reliance is put on the team, not individual players. Sadly ELO has turned MWO into a game of chance, with the odds stacked against you the majority of the time and there is not all that much you can do about it.

You have no idea.

[Screech]

Man you weren't kidding, those were actual pictures of your monitor.

Kudos.

[Capt Squishy]

I agree with the OP, I have seen this happen 40-60% of our drops and it is indeed frustrating, we even did a 8 man match where we did a complete steiner company and the other team only had 3 Assaults to our 8, We did not move from cap due to our super speed but we completely destroyed the other team, just 1 example of a very bad balance. and something needs to be fixed..

[The Strange]

Capt Squishy, on 16 May 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

I agree with the OP, I have seen this happen 40-60% of our drops and it is indeed frustrating, we even did a 8 man match where we did a complete steiner company and the other team only had 3 Assaults to our 8,  We did not move from cap due to our super speed but we completely destroyed the other team, just 1 example of a very bad balance. and something needs to be fixed..

8 vs 8 has no matchmaker restrictions.

[Caleb Lee]

To the OP, yes MM does need a lot of work. Yes, they should put in a weight matching or BV system.

In the meantime, on the 21st there are some major tweaks coming to how ECM will play out, such as BAP countering it.

Honestly, a lot of those matches came down to player skill and how your team was working or lack of together. Even against odds of 2-300 tons in the enemies favor you usually get a kill or two minimum.

Will it prevent what happened in your screenshots? No. If you aren't playing with others on a team using comms (may I suggest Comstar NA public TS), you can expect to get rolled even with weight matching and ECM changes at least 50% of the time.

[Lefty Lucy]

Match making is never going to make *every* match fair and even. All it can do is increase the frequency of even matches, which between Elo and 4-man-limit this has happened quite a bit.

If there's any problem highlighted by the match in the OP, it's not match making, it's the complete lack of balance between mech variants. When your team has certain mech variants, one of which is the Raven 2X, your team is at a significant disadvantage because that mech cannot perform the role that the weight class needs to perform to succeed.

In addition, you guys had a 0-damage player, indicating a likely DC or AFK pilot, and the other team did not. This increases the likelihood that the match is going to be a shut out as well.

[Jonathan Paine]

I would be happy to see weight class matching. Heck, I'd be willing to have imposed 2 mechs of each weight class on both sides. I could just ready one mech of each class and play what ever. Definitely want Elo. Definitely want Elo brackets to prevent rookies playing veterans.

[jeffsw6]

Some of you guys are asking for a BV system.

You want the same devs to program that, who:

• won't reveal information about ELO system or values, and months after its introduction, suddenly admit it has always been badly broken in an obvious way
  
• didn't notice LRMpocalypse until a player proved it with video
  
• haven't so much as adjusted PPC or Gauss rifles since they became totally dominant in virtually every match
  
• stated that the MG is fine, and after someone digs up 6000+ player posts about MGs needing a buff, and a month goes by, they decide to double the damage of a weapon that was previously fine
  
• the above WHILE also stating that over-all damage is too high
  
• the Q/A-troubleshooting process they went through to attempt to reproduce HUD bugs was flat-out stupid, I'm talking, the Q/A department must be run by guys who wear Velcro shoes and bicycle helmets to work (read the dev post on it)
  
• think a few icons on the map is going to help PUG players compete with 4-mans who use VOIP, even though the team and lance leaders cannot access the map any longer once their mech has perished, and there is no time to discuss a plan in team-chat before the match begins

They don't have the resources to produce a more complex match-maker. They couldn't figure out reasonable BVs if they had to. Remember, these guys don't think ECM is OP. Except now, BAP will counter ECM. What is ECM for? Oh yeah, LRMs were OP. Now LRMs need buffed because PPCs and bugs.

Here is a hint to the OP. If you want better match-making, please make sure you have updated your nvidia drivers to the latest version.

Signed, disillusioned player.

[Ph30nix]

i honestly think if they did away with ELO alot of the current QQ would evaporate except int he cases of group drops.

which could be remedied with a better tonnage comparison. Such as a 4 man group CANT drop with 4 assaults.

but reason no ELO would lessen the problem is

im a a Mid range ELO and frankly its RARE that i see a game with a ton of poptarts, i usualy dont see that except at weird hours or when i have had a lucky winning streak because i keep getting paired up with decent teams (i PUG). Even reading the forums you hear the most complaining about poptarts at the High ELO ranges.

since only a small % of the playerbase has that high of an ELO for easy math we will say 25%, you take 100 players and of those 100 players 25 were the high ELO players who mainly play the FOTM builds which is currently the Poptart.

RIght now those 25 mostly only play against eachother which since they all have the SAME mindset of lets POPTART!!! well then the High ELO ranges... SUCK.
so you will have games of 8v8 with maybe 5-6 players on each team being poptarts and just about EVERYONE in an assault.
thats not fun every single game.

but now you take those 25 players and drop them back with the other 75 add in a good tonnage restriction for group drops (they already have the teamwork advantage there is no reason they should be dropping in 4 assaults) and your going to see ALOT more unique game play going on.

Also those poptarts are going to start running into players who have builds that F over poptarts, but since the high end ELO players never use those builds since they are FOTM and its easy for a group drop of poptarts and assaults, do you see what im getting at?

get rid of ELO, put in a tonnage limit for group drops. this will turn into more diverse battlefields, with less of any one build on the field, which will get people back into the correct flow of using teamwork to take care of things.

[jeffsw6]

Ph30nix, on 16 May 2013 - 11:53 PM, said:

i honestly think if they did away with ELO alot of the current QQ would evaporate except int he cases of group drops.

I'm not sure I agree with you that a ranking/ELO-type system is unnecessary; but it would be far less necessary if the game had built-in VOIP, tonnage limits, or if there were enough players to separate 4-mans from PUGs.

They should be trying things, though; and they aren't. Not good.

[Reptilizer]

jeffsw6, on 16 May 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

Here is a hint to the OP. If you want better match-making, please make sure you have updated your nvidia drivers to the latest version.

Signed, disillusioned player.

Hilarious

On topic:
I actually think that part of the problem is the ELO. My games have changed over the course of the last 100 matches or so from a 50/50 win/loss rate to about 75% losses now. I also seem to encounter a lot more 4-man teams than before. Since i do almost exclusively PUG, this means every time i join in, only ONE other 4 man can join in on my side while 2 can be on the other.
At least in my ELO bracket this seems to be a disadvantage, since i would expect that ELO leads to a 50/50 win/loss ratio in the longer run. This, for me at least, is not the case. And i stayed in the same weight class (leveling cents and hunchies) now for quite some time.

So, Question to the OP: Do you PUG or are you part of a premade usually?

Edited by Reptilizer, 17 May 2013 - 02:19 AM.

[Ph30nix]

jeffsw6, on 17 May 2013 - 01:52 AM, said:

I'm not sure I agree with you that a ranking/ELO-type system is unnecessary; but it would be far less necessary if the game had built-in VOIP, tonnage limits, or if there were enough players to separate 4-mans from PUGs.

They should be trying things, though; and they aren't. Not good.

well honestly, think about HOW those players got that ultra high ELO. They won games by droping with groups who had Voice coms. Im not saying they arent good players but even the best player in the game CANT carry a team all the time, they might be a deciding factor in a match where someone else would have caused a loss, but in the end their ELO wouldnt be nearly as high.

and again alot of those HIGH elo players use the FOTM, you get 4 players on voice using the SAME builds then of course the top tier of the game is going to be flooded with those mechs and get stagnant and boring.

id say the most ELO type ranking id do is base i off of games played so new players dont go against someone playing since closed beta every match.

[Lefty Lucy]

Reptilizer, on 17 May 2013 - 01:52 AM, said:

At least in my ELO bracket this seems to be a disadvantage, since i would expect that ELO leads to a 50/50 win/loss ratio in the longer run. This, for me at least, is not the case. And i stayed in the same weight class (leveling cents and hunchies) now for quite some time.

So, Question to the OP: Do you PUG or are you part of a premade usually?

I think your problem is that all of the high-alpha builds make mediums a *huge* liability right now.