21 replies to this topic

[Tor6]

I'm going to start by saying I like the idea of Elo. It's a great concept that is really needed in online games. It keeps good players from getting as frustrated by not placing them with people who have no idea what they're doing, and it keeps new/more casual players from getting frustrated by placing them with players way above their skill level. In theory anyways.

Elo in this game is segregated by weight class, as it probably should be. See: pilot is good with lights but not assaults, etc. Where this causes problems though is when you bring a group of friends with very different Elos together and have them all play together.

No one wants to feel pressured to play mechs they're not as fond of or simply not very good with just because they're now playing with other people, yet I find myself playing my favorite mech so much less these days for two reasons: The dumb sniping meta, and to at least try to make matches a little more fair.

At higher elos medium mechs are... uncommon we'll say. You'll find the occasional cent or hunchback (I don't count the Cic as a medium because it plays far more like a light). However most of my friends first (and often only) mechs are mediums. This seems to play hell with matchmaking and we often find a team with 3-4 mediums (my friends) and another lance of assaults/heavies fighting a mostly poptart team, or other weird unmatched combination. I've noticed though, that when I play lights or assaults (which I rarely play) that matches tend to be far more balanced, with fewer poptarts. And those that are usually aren't a problem because they're not very good. So why not just always play <insert less used weight classes> when playing with my friends? Because I feel I shouldn't have to. I don't dislike either weight class really, but I don't want to feel like I can only play my favorite mechs solo (bleh pugging), or in a group with other players at more my skill level who may not be around most nights.

The other reason I've been.. encouraged to diversify is because my favorite mech is disadvantaged to say the least. The cat C1 is a great mech to build a balanced, mixed loadout around. It makes a poor boat but can run a loadout like a mini Timberwolf (it just tries so hard :3). BUT, when the other team is composed mostly of PPC boats and poptarting highlanders the massive one-shotable cockpit and prominent CT become such huge liabilities that I find myself driving while looking out the side window rather frequently. Is this a problem with the mech? Nah, not really. But having over half the enemy team (as well as your team) being poptarts blows. So for now I'm branching back out into mediums where I don't have to worry as much about the PPC hellscape that the higher Elos have become. Sadly, it's just more fun that way.

TL;DR: I don't like having to forsake my favorite and best chassis/weight class just to play with friends lest they die in mechs ill-suited to the current meta (mostly hunchbacks and cents) by fighting higher elo opponents who run an increasing amount of poptarts. >:C

Edited by Tor6, 08 May 2013 - 11:58 AM.

[Fire and Salt]

What happens if I have a high elo and i partner up with someone who has a low elo?

Will it put us in an average elo match? Or does it take the higher / lower value?



Will it try to find a low elo player in his weight class, and a high elo player in my weight class to place on the other team?

[Tor6]

Fire and Salt, on 08 May 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

What happens if I have a high elo and i partner up with someone who has a low elo?

Will it put us in an average elo match? Or does it take the higher / lower value?



Will it try to find a low elo player in his weight class, and a high elo player in my weight class to place on the other team?

As I understand it it just averages the Elos of your group/team when looking for an opponent to match you with. Either that or it just takes the total elo of your whole team and looks for something close for an enemy team (of similar overall weight). Same effect in the end really. It can't get too specific or else it'd take too long to actually get players into a game.

The longer it takes to find a match, the wider the parameters it will use in looking for a match. So if it finds on really quick, the elos and weights of the two teams -should- be pretty close. But if it takes ~1.5 mins to find a match you're probably about to get thrown into the deep end (or the kiddy pool) and be in for a stomp one way or the other.

[TruePoindexter]

I've run into this problem. My ELO is (probably) high and playing with people I'll end up dragging them to higher ratings that they shouldn't be in. It's bad enough that sometimes I end up preferring solo games over picking up random people from the public TS. Solo drops or with my immediate friends have a much higher W/L than randoms off the public lately.

Edited by TruePoindexter, 08 May 2013 - 01:17 PM.

[Soy]

Very simple concept -

If I am in high ELO and get a friend interested in playing the game, if he steps foot in a match with me he's instantly up against people above his skill level right off the bat.

As the Ski Instructor in South Park said, "If you pizza when you should've french fried, you're gonna have a bad time."

So in other words, any time that a new player wants to get into this game and wants to play with other people, if they aren't playing with other day1 noobs they are fighting an uphill battle from the onset. And remember this game isn't particularly informative in the beginning [beta, UI 1.0, etc.] so............... yeah. Just sayin. Kinda makes me wish that the new players had some way to group up (lobby? cadet program? noob queue?) or that they weren't so behind the 8-ball if they wanted to start off playing, you know, with other people... cuz its... a multi player.. online game...... fudge

[Tor6]

Soy, on 08 May 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

Very simple concept -

If I am in high ELO and get a friend interested in playing the game, if he steps foot in a match with me he's instantly up against people above his skill level right off the bat.

As the Ski Instructor in South Park said, "If you pizza when you should've french fried, you're gonna have a bad time."

So in other words, any time that a new player wants to get into this game and wants to play with other people, if they aren't playing with other day1 noobs they are fighting an uphill battle from the onset. And remember this game isn't particularly informative in the beginning [beta, UI 1.0, etc.] so............... yeah. Just sayin. Kinda makes me wish that the new players had some way to group up (lobby? cadet program? noob queue?) or that they weren't so behind the 8-ball if they wanted to start off playing, you know, with other people... cuz its... a multi player.. online game...... fudge

I get what you're saying and I completely agree. It's just a shame that short of making a second account and futzing about in trial mechs there's no good way to play with friends and introduce them to the game without dragging them into a match with skilled opponents. Having a weight class you pretty much -only- play with friends helps somewhat, but it's not the ideal solution.

I know it'd fragment the player base and would probably lead to the same problems as smurfing in lol, but it would be nice if there was a true 'noob queue' as you said. Where anyone of any elo could play provided there was at least one person in the group still on their cadet bonus. Where the higher elo players could -not- raise or lower their elo by playing and might get slightly reduced rewards or something. Maybe have it be trial mechs and the mechs of those still on their cadet bonus only? I dunno.

[TruePoindexter]

Tor6, on 08 May 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

I get what you're saying and I completely agree. It's just a shame that short of making a second account and futzing about in trial mechs there's no good way to play with friends and introduce them to the game without dragging them into a match with skilled opponents. Having a weight class you pretty much -only- play with friends helps somewhat, but it's not the ideal solution.

I know it'd fragment the player base and would probably lead to the same problems as smurfing in lol, but it would be nice if there was a true 'noob queue' as you said. Where anyone of any elo could play provided there was at least one person in the group still on their cadet bonus. Where the higher elo players could -not- raise or lower their elo by playing and might get slightly reduced rewards or something. Maybe have it be trial mechs and the mechs of those still on their cadet bonus only? I dunno.

Well it would help if the game had more of a weighting undervaluing higher ELOs over lower ones as opposed to a straight average. That way the odd really high ELO doesn't drag them quite as high upwards.

[Soulscour]

Fire and Salt, on 08 May 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

What happens if I have a high elo and i partner up with someone who has a low elo?

Will it put us in an average elo match? Or does it take the higher / lower value?



Will it try to find a low elo player in his weight class, and a high elo player in my weight class to place on the other team?

I'm sorry fire and salt but you're not allowed to know exactly how elo works and if its working correctly.

[Zerberus]

I`ve noticed the same issue over the past weekend, albeit in a slightly different form

When I`m politing my cats which I`m just abpouout finished "leveling", I generally get wild mismatches, generally always to my team`s disadvantage (2-3 heavy and no assaults v 4 assaults is not entirely uncommon), but both in my Commando and in my Atlases I get much more balanced matches.

This is within the same premade group with the other mechs being unchanged.

I know it may just be coincidence, but it`s happening a bittoo often for me to truly belive in that....

[Wispsy]

But you are against players that have half your Elo? Tell your friend to play safe sticking near you and walk out and crush them?

[silentD11]

Wispsy, on 09 May 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

But you are against players that have half your Elo? Tell your friend to play safe sticking near you and walk out and crush them?

That doesn't really help them. We have this problem all the time. We've got multiple teams and regulars with high ELOs. We also have people who drop in and want to play with a team, and newer players. Trying to mix newer players in with higher ELO players either means you're boned and setting up for a loss, (your team falls apart too rapidly, and this being a numbers game that's all she wrote once you're down too far), or the higher players just go on an utter rampage and you end up with one player having 5-8 kills or two players slaughtering the entire team.

Generally, it's one of the other. ELO games where people are closer tend to be much more balanced out.

[TruePoindexter]

Wispsy, on 09 May 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

But you are against players that have half your Elo? Tell your friend to play safe sticking near you and walk out and crush them?

Consider the following overly simplistic example:

Team 1 avg: 4.25
A: 10
B: 5
C: 1
D: 1

Team 2 avg: 4.25
E: 5
F: 5
G: 4
H: 3

Both teams have the same average ELO but one team is playing against people they shouldn't be (higher or lower) while the other is evenly distributed. Player A with the high ELO is effectively expected to carry the weight of the low ELO players C and D. If all mechs/roles were equal this would be fine but what if the high ELO player was in something that couldn't carry the team? Say a slow sniper on Conquest Alpine or a fast Spider in Assault Caustic Valley.

This is a larger issue if player A is friends with players C and D and wants to play with them.

Thinking about it what would help is an unranked queue. This would provide a safe haven for players who want to have fun can avoid some of the harshness of the top players and on the other hand ease the ELO matching to be more even.

[Slicer]

Its true, when u mix in a vet with a bunch of new players it gets pretty insane how much damage the vet can do. Right elo is pretty much working with me where im only winning a bit above half of my matches when i pug. I join a lance with some newbs, all of a sudden i go kai allard liao and rip off 800-1k games dominating. Newbs dont use cover properly and dont use the FOTM builds as much or dont know how to use em. ELO is a step in the right direction despite destroying my stats now.

[Wispsy]

TruePoindexter, on 09 May 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Consider the following overly simplistic example:

Team 1 avg: 4.25
A: 10
B: 5
C: 1
D: 1

Team 2 avg: 4.25
E: 5
F: 5
G: 4
H: 3

Both teams have the same average ELO but one team is playing against people they shouldn't be (higher or lower) while the other is evenly distributed. Player A with the high ELO is effectively expected to carry the weight of the low ELO players C and D. If all mechs/roles were equal this would be fine but what if the high ELO player was in something that couldn't carry the team? Say a slow sniper on Conquest Alpine or a fast Spider in Assault Caustic Valley.

This is a larger issue if player A is friends with players C and D and wants to play with them.

Thinking about it what would help is an unranked queue. This would provide a safe haven for players who want to have fun can avoid some of the harshness of the top players and on the other hand ease the ELO matching to be more even.

But if you place them against a lower Elo team then every game will be a complete roflstomp as players C and D can meaningfully contribute but player A just rolls over the enemy every single game making it very unfair for the opposing teams....at least if it is even then both teams can win. Of course the better player has to carry harder if they are playing with new people on their team.

[ConstantA]

TruePoindexter, on 09 May 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Consider the following overly simplistic example:

Team 1 avg: 4.25
A: 10
B: 5
C: 1
D: 1

Team 2 avg: 4.25
E: 5
F: 5
G: 4
H: 3

Both teams have the same average ELO but one team is playing against people they shouldn't be (higher or lower) while the other is evenly distributed. Player A with the high ELO is effectively expected to carry the weight of the low ELO players C and D. If all mechs/roles were equal this would be fine but what if the high ELO player was in something that couldn't carry the team? Say a slow sniper on Conquest Alpine or a fast Spider in Assault Caustic Valley.

This is a larger issue if player A is friends with players C and D and wants to play with them.

Thinking about it what would help is an unranked queue. This would provide a safe haven for players who want to have fun can avoid some of the harshness of the top players and on the other hand ease the ELO matching to be more even.

Are you sure that Arithmetic mean is used?

For example, using Quadratic mean will result in 5.63 and 4.33 avg ELOs, while Geometric mean results in 2.66 and 4.47...

The correct mean to use depends if a single skilled player (or a group of) can carry the low-elo team. If so, then Quadratic mean should be used.

But I think that's not the case and a average skilled team (5-5-4-3) will win over team with a couple of high-elo players (10-5-1-1).

Overall, it's hard to tell and the best way is to make !!SCIENCE!! (I mean, use an empirical method of "We'll wait and see")

Edited by ConstantA, 10 May 2013 - 11:45 PM.

[TruePoindexter]

ConstantA, on 10 May 2013 - 11:37 PM, said:

Are you sure that Arithmetic mean is used?

For example, using Quadratic mean will result in 5.63 and 4.33 avg ELOs, while Geometric mean results in 2.66 and 4.47...

The correct mean to use depends if a single skilled player (or a group of) can carry the low-elo team. If so, then Quadratic mean should be used.

But I think that's not the case and a average skilled team (5-5-4-3) will win over team with a couple of high-elo players (10-5-1-1).

Overall, it's hard to tell and the best way is to make !!SCIENCE!! (I mean, use an empirical method of "We'll wait and see")

I'm not sure and that's the problem. Depending on how the calculation is made it can push games in one direction or another.

*insert the usual rant about lies and statistics here*

[ConstantA]

TruePoindexter, on 11 May 2013 - 01:59 AM, said:

I'm not sure and that's the problem. Depending on how the calculation is made it can push games in one direction or another.

*insert the usual rant about lies and statistics here*

Well, knowing PGI communication skills, I think they constantly tweak their ranking algorithms, but don't tell us about it.
Or they sniff coke all day every day and do nothing.

[Igor Draskovic]

All of these threads complaining about ELO are hilarious.

How is ELO supposed to work as intended with the current number of active players? I play less than 10 games a day during peek hours and I actually get matched with the same players. If you have, say, about 1000 active players at a time (i'm being optimistic here) how do you expect to be matched up appropriately to your rating?

ELO is the last of our worries...

[Kanatta Jing]

You're ruining the game for yourself by over thinking it.

[Belorion]

You guys are spinning off about averages when its been stated by the devs the the elos are not averaged. They calculate an elo rating based on the scores in a premade, but it isn't a straight average.