325 replies to this topic

[Edwyndham]

Quote

It will ruin the game for every new player, just the last days i brought 2 old CB Veterans and one new player into the game.

... You do realize you could have started up a 4-man premade with your three friends?

Why even bring friends to the game if you don't intend on playing with them?

I am seriously very confused.

[Roland]

One thing, aside from the grouping issues, that I think needs to be said....

Most of the time, when a team gets roflstomped, it's not because one team had a group and the other didn't.

Most of the time, when you look at the scoreboard afterwards, it's because you had players on the losing team who were driving freaking HUGE mechs, and did freaking NOTHING with them.

If you take an atlas, and do 20 points of damage before you die, then you are a huge reason for your team losing. You should not be driving that mech. You need to take a smaller mech, and learn to play better, before you concentrate so much power into your hands. With great power comes great responsibility and all that jazz.

If you take an assault mech every game, and aren't doing at LEAST 200 damage, then you are probably dragging your team down... because, not only are you not pulling your own weight, but you are likely taking up an assault slot which could have been filled by a better assault player. Even if you get other good players on your team, the way tonnage is divided up among players has a non-trivial impact on the game. A lot of the time when I see a losing scoreboard, you see things like heavy and assault mechs who died without even scoring their own mech's tonnage. Those folks are the reason that team lost.

[Novakaine]

You dishonor the Dragon.

[Aethon]

IamSalvation, on 23 May 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

Really PGI.. fix it.... ! Finaly!

Its just a bad joke how you keep catering a minority of players with your matchmaking that allows every veteran group of 4 to kill everyone and laugh about how easy it is.

Just make Matchmaking give each Team a premade or non at all.

Or let Groups ONLY play other groups, or max Groupsize of 2 for Random Games.

And no, its not ok.

I see 4 Man Premade groups with FOTM Builds all the time. Every 2nd game i run into them, either in my team or in the enemy team. Both is boring.

The only interesting Battles are when both have one or non.

To me 4 Man Players are nothing better then Cheaters/Exploiters, doing everything they can, how cheap it ever may be, to win at a video game.

It will ruin the game for every new player, just the last days i brought 2 old CB Veterans and one new player into the game.

All quit because of the Premade Stuff.

If they would at least take Builds that are a bit less in Power to make it fair.. no.. they all run the latest Chees/FOTM.

Another solution would be to give us 12Man Games FINALY... to compensate a bit for 4 man Teams.... but best would be 12 Players and limit groups to 2 Players... THIS would be about the right ratio for random games....

Yeah i know now all Players come in "get in a Premade yourselfe" "L2P" blabla...

I was in a Clan at start of OB, it was super boring, 90% winratio... really whats the point to rofl stomp everyone every game?
@"L2P" You can play how awesome you want, you can´t make up for 4 players that selected Mechs that work together, working together ingame and beein able to communicate 200% faster and better.... really its just easymode playing like that....

When my friends and I run 4-man groups, we do it for fun. In other words, we take the fun-but-crappy mechs we would never take in league matches. An example of a common 4-man we run is an HBK-4J, some sort of Spider, a right and proper Centurion that has real ballistics in its right arm, and a Dragon of some sort. Hardly an 'elite' selection of mechs, no matter how much we love and enjoy them.

No matter how good you are, you will not make or break the match with such a motley selection of suboptimal mechs. If we were all taking twin-AC/20 mechs, 6 ERPPC Stalkers, and 80-LRM mechs, yeah...THAT would be really lame.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

[redacted]

You know he is a community volunteer mod right? It's not his playerbase, he's no more important than you or I he is simply one of us.

Roland, on 23 May 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

Well, for my unit as an example, we have our own private comms server. We don't really want to just allow random folks onto it.

Additionally, the current inability to play with 5-7 players means that filling up the ranks is problematic.. since it's not a question of, "Hey do you want to play?" but rather, "Do you want to agree to wait around while we find 3 more players?"

Personally, I would be perfectly happy playing with a smaller group against full 8 man teams. I'd much rather that, if it meant that I could play with however many friends are online at any given time. As it stands, when a 5th guy shows up, someone else will usually just drop off and do other things to give them room to play.

True dis, you guys should just come and play with us...when the games actually worth playing 5 nights a week,

Edited by Egomane, 26 May 2013 - 02:37 AM.
Removed quote

[Dan Nashe]

If you implement a solo only queue, solos will probably queue for that.
As a result, you can no longer allow teams of 3. Because you can't get reliably with teams of è given the limited size of mwo's playerbase. You will also split the playerbase in half. More tonnage mismatch, more elo mismatch.

8s are fundamentally different from 4 man's. No weight matching.

Could the game allow only teams of 3? Sure. But 4 feels better and is canon. (Lance).
Once you exceed 4, however, the premade becomes a majority and dominates.


I drop solo a lot groups are not a problem. Barring sync dropping. Usually each team ends up with at least one group of three anyways. But guess what? Very few small groups are highly coordinated pros. Thwese aren't even high school sports level teams. These are people hanging out and having fun. Not 4 man death teams. But odds are when your losing, you aren't realizing you had a team on your side as well.

Also, elo helps. If I win a lot in 4 man's, and you play mostly solo and lose, we won't be matched against each other.

Tldr: given the reality of mwo population, 1-4. Plus full team (8 or 12) is the besst possible setup in my opinion.

Also, when I die early solo, most of the time it's by cause I did not stick with the team. Pick an atlas. Help him. Don't expect others to follow you. You are not special. I did very well in a bad raven 2 x by learning to play carefully and always always focusing on helping teammates execute their strategy, not hoping they'd follow mine.

[Prophetic]

The OP's issue is not 4 man groups. It really isn't.

The real issue is those select groups and individuals that will not get out of their FOTM builds. So you end up facing a raven 3L to your 4 machine gun spider, or a DDC to your Awesome. Your people are in new mechs, the other team is not interested in leveling or at least not in a group.

ELO also pits your 4 man vs other 4s quite consistently. Quite often you will get two four mans vs your one and some various individual fill ins.

Our group of four are consistently running new mechs or those that don't have max xp. We win our fair share.
There are times where the match maker almost gets miffed about your win streak and it feels like you are meant to lose.

I will say that the only time we resort to running an all out OP lance make up is if we see the same 4 man on the other side or known sync units who consistently run something and are really bad winners about it. So if you were a victim of one of those impending onslaughts please note that it wasn't directed at you or to make the game unbalanced but to actually balance the odds against our group in particular.

The balance with the match maker and people's human nature are really hard to manage.
I'm sure CW will help bring more players to the game and give ELO an even bigger pool of players to even things up.
That is what most are hoping for.

[Galenit]

MaddMaxx, on 23 May 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

So what your saying is that the Teams of 4 or eight should be separated because if you play as 8 Solo's or Pugs, to win Team work is not required?

Whom will you Whine to when you do get your 8 Solo play group and still get 8-0 stomped? The same crowd you Whine to now and you wonder why you get no sympathy? (Holy Smokes Batman)

You cant read and understand a simple 14 word text?
I have nothing said about teamwork is not needed.

You have quoted my answer to a being with the same handicap like you ...
But for playing the "whine card" you get no offer for an explanation with apples and peaches like him.

Its always the same with the exploiters, cheaters or the "i defend my easymode" people:
Twisting words, saying whine and being polemic, but seldom using arguments.

Edited by Galenit, 23 May 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[IamSalvation]

zwanglos, on 23 May 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

... You do realize you could have started up a 4-man premade with your three friends?

Why even bring friends to the game if you don't intend on playing with them?

I am seriously very confused.

Because they where noobs and not online at the same time.
I was playing in Groups of 2 with them, but only me and one in a trial mech... (or a build that was good in CB Times... ) won´t be a match changer at all vs. 4 Men with FOTM Builds

Roland, on 23 May 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

If you take an assault mech every game, and aren't doing at LEAST 200 damage, then you are probably dragging your team down... because, not only are you not pulling your own weight, but you are likely taking up an assault slot which could have been filled by a better assault player. Even if you get other good players on your team, the way tonnage is divided up among players has a non-trivial impact on the game. A lot of the time when I see a losing scoreboard, you see things like heavy and assault mechs who died without even scoring their own mech's tonnage. Those folks are the reason that team lost.

I do average of 250 dmg even in my Jenners and my Hunch. My WR is about 57% only PUGing.

Aethon, on 23 May 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

When my friends and I run 4-man groups, we do it for fun. In other words, we take the fun-but-crappy mechs we would never take in league matches. An example of a common 4-man we run is an HBK-4J, some sort of Spider, a right and proper Centurion that has real ballistics in its right arm, and a Dragon of some sort. Hardly an 'elite' selection of mechs, no matter how much we love and enjoy them.

No matter how good you are, you will not make or break the match with such a motley selection of suboptimal mechs. If we were all taking twin-AC/20 mechs, 6 ERPPC Stalkers, and 80-LRM mechs, yeah...THAT would be really lame.

I can totaly see this and thats acceptable to me. What i can´t see is a reason to run 4 Man Teams with RHOD League Mechs...

[Hotthedd]

Although I agree with the OP's sentiment, it is not an exploit. PGI actually DESIGNED this into the game.

[Jestun]

Another "using teamwork is exploiting" thread...

[MaddMaxx]

Galenit, on 23 May 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

You cant read and understand a simple 14 word text?
I have nothing said about teamwork is not needed.

You have quoted my answer to a being with the same handicap like you ...
But for playing the "whine card" you get no offer for an explanation with apples and peaches like him.

Its always the same with the exploiters, cheaters or the "i defend my easymode" people:
Twisting words, saying whine and being polemic, but seldom using arguments.

OK in simple terms you can comprehend. You called 4 man pre-made teams "Exploiters". I called BS on that. Get it now?

You provide no proof of point just a WHINE. Fine, be ready to get called out when you WHINE for no real reason. Thanks

[IamSalvation]

Jestun, on 23 May 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Another "using teamwork is exploiting" thread...

Using superior means of teamwork against others that don´t have this on purpose is exploiting.
Never called 8 mans exploiting, just go figth with enemys that are using teamwork on the same levle with the same options for setting the team up and communicating ingame.

[Taemien]

OP, deal with it. They are allowing up to 8 man groups once 12v12 goes in.

Where is your god now?

[IamSalvation]

Taemien, on 23 May 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

OP, deal with it. They are allowing up to 8 man groups once 12v12 goes in.

Where is your god now?

They don´t.

[Damocles69]

You seem mad... are you mad? Bro?

[Jestun]

IamSalvation, on 23 May 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

Using superior means of teamwork against others that don´t have this on purpose is exploiting.

Edited by Jestun, 23 May 2013 - 10:07 AM.

[Taemien]

IamSalvation, on 23 May 2013 - 10:05 AM, said:

They don´t.

Orly?

Bryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Metafox: Do you have any future plans to accommodate groups of 5+ players who want to play together but are unable to fill a full 12-man?
A: Yes. We’re getting close to feeling confident in the matchmaker, which is the sole reason for not allowing it currently.

Its coming. And I think its safe to say they will add LAMs before they make group only queues. This really is a dead horse topic, OP. Groups are here to stay and are a mode of play you need to get into, especially when Community Warfare hits. If you expect to be able to make a dent against the Fed-Com as a Drac, you're going to need a group.

Some of these House Davion groups have been around for 15+ years. You have some catching up to do.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Taemien, on 23 May 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Orly?



Its coming. And I think its safe to say they will add LAMs before they make group only queues. This really is a dead horse topic, OP. Groups are here to stay and are a mode of play you need to get into, especially when Community Warfare hits. If you expect to be able to make a dent against the Fed-Com as a Drac, you're going to need a group.

Some of these House Davion groups have been around for 15+ years. You have some catching up to do.

You know that post you quoted refers to the group que? right and not the solo,2-4 que.

[blinkin]

yes, i totally agree tactics and communication are absolutely an exploit!