138 replies to this topic

[Wispsy]

Yes I also find my team is significantly lighter if I group up and we all go lights too, especially if it is late (or early where I am). I would like to point out that whilst you where lighter it seems you somehow managed to pull out wins anyway! I guess it is true that they prioritize Elo over weight...and ofc there are imbalances with the massive queue times atm. I would rather drop lighter then get more "failed to find match" pop up solo.


Edit: You do realise that being a lower tonnage is not necessarily a disadvantage and just requires a different style of play right?

Edited by Wispsy, 02 June 2013 - 07:45 AM.

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

ZonbiBadger, on 02 June 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

I see highlander poptarts eat it all the time. :/

Personal observations are amusing anecdotes that have nothing to do with discussing actual game balance. No one is saying Highlanders are immortal.

^ Joke intended.

Edited by Eldragon, 02 June 2013 - 07:46 AM.

[Dexter Herbivore]

Asakara, on 01 June 2013 - 10:21 PM, said:

A team of ONLY light mechs? Does nobody look at the pictures?

Stalker + 3 Jenners
Matches: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13

Spider + 3 Jenners
Matches: 7, 8, 9

Cataphract + 3 Jenners
Match: 10

Catapult + 3 Jenners
Matches: 11, 12

Hunchback + 3 Jenners
Match: 14

Atlas + 3 Jenners
Match: 15

3 of 15 matches, or 1/5th of them had a 4 man light. Yet more than 1/5th of the matches were considered "horrendously bad" match-ups by PGI's standards.

Still horrendously light in the other matches, you have effectively 1 2/3 to 2 assaults equivalent (when the average lance would be closer to 2 1/2 assaults equivalent).

[jakucha]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 02 June 2013 - 05:13 AM, said:

Just means there aren't enough people playing.

It means weight classes aren't used in a spread out manner. It should be pretty obvious to you with the large amount of assault JJ mechs around. When it comes down to it making an unbacked claim that there aren't enough players is just as hollow as anything.

Edited by jakucha, 02 June 2013 - 08:01 AM.

[Dexter Herbivore]

Ezekeel666, on 01 June 2013 - 11:11 PM, said:

Your argument is invalid. The matchmaker exists so it should be able to gracefully handle every setup thrown at it. Why? Because that is its job. The data presented clearly show that there are cases were the matchmaker fails horrendously indicating that the algorithm used is unstable and needs improvement.

The argument is not invalid, the MM algorithm is trying to balance a number of competing priorities, and in this case the priority is "getting a bad match in a timely manner is better than no match at all".

[Roland]

Ya, if you take all light mechs in your lance, then you're unlikely to get matched against a similar group. There's only so much the MM can do with the current limited number of players.

[jakucha]

Dexter Herbivore, on 02 June 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

The argument is not invalid, the MM algorithm is trying to balance a number of competing priorities, and in this case the priority is "getting a bad match in a timely manner is better than no match at all".

I think the problem would be alleviated a lot if they could get players to follow the spread stated in lore. Can't remember what the numbers were but it was pretty logical, lights and mediums were most used because they're simply cheaper, with heavies and especially assaults being less common. Since c-bills aren't an issue at the moment they'd have to come up with something else though.

[Ordate]

I have to say that I am getting pretty tired of this. Multiple times I would be the only assault. The other team would have 5 for example. Most recent match, me (awesome) other team (1 atlas, 1 stk, 3 highlanders) Even IF there was a premade of 4 assaults, one of those assaults still should have been placed on my team. The remainder of there team was fairly balanced against someone else in ours.
And this isn't fluke behavior. I've seen it constantly last two days.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

I read the title, and thought it was about the 7% feedback and communication we get from PGI.

BOOM!

/thread

Edited by lockwoodx, 02 June 2013 - 08:15 AM.

[jakucha]

lockwoodx, on 02 June 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

I read the title, and thought it was about the 7% feedback and communication we get from PGI.

BOOM!

/thread

Bad jokes are k-town material, people are actually discussing stuff here.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

jakucha, on 02 June 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Bad jokes are k-town material, people are actually discussing stuff here.

I actively participate in these discussions quite constructively, but this thread is borderline flame bait so I decided to drop a bombshell to put things into perspective. You're welcome.

Edited by lockwoodx, 02 June 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[Asakara]

Wispsy, on 02 June 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Yes I also find my team is significantly lighter if I group up and we all go lights too, especially if it is late (or early where I am). I would like to point out that whilst you where lighter it seems you somehow managed to pull out wins anyway! I guess it is true that they prioritize Elo over weight...and ofc there are imbalances with the massive queue times atm. I would rather drop lighter then get more "failed to find match" pop up solo.


Edit: You do realise that being a lower tonnage is not necessarily a disadvantage and just requires a different style of play right?

I would like to think my 5,400+ games in a Jenner or Raven since I started in CB may have given me a slight idea on how to play one. Having played with Herms and StuffYouFear in 4 and 8 man groups 3-6 nights a week for the last 6 months seems to help a bit with being coordinated.

Then again, as you probably know, there is only so much you can do in a light sometimes... Especially when so many heavy and assault builds need just a single solid alpha to kill you.

Edited by Asakara, 02 June 2013 - 08:53 AM.

[cyberFluke]

Not to point out the blindingly obvious, but "If you're going to start coding without finishing the paper design work, you're gonna have a bad time."

At least, that's what it looks like from here...

Edited by cyberFluke, 02 June 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[Wispsy]

Asakara, on 02 June 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

I would like to think my 5,000+ games in a Jenner or Raven since I started in CB may have given me a slight idea on how to play one. Having played with Herms and StuffYouFear in 4 and 8 man groups 3-6 nights a week for the last 6 months seems to help a bit with being coordinated.

Then again, as you probably know, there is only so much you can do in a light sometimes... Especially when so many heavy and assault builds need just a single solid alpha to kill you.

Well there is always more to learn...I am at 10,000+ games in a Jenner since CB and I still learn new things all the time about people and how they play and about how I can play my mechs.
Now do not get me wrong, one mistake can equal death and everybody makes many mistakes, even me. However there is almost always a way you can make enough of a difference to win a match. You have the speed and maneuverability to avoid all of their shots as long as you predict when and where they will fire and the damage to kill them all in the given time. Little packs of lights (especially grouped and familiar with each other) can easily tear apart groups of heavies and assaults, it is by no means a full gone conclusion. Considering that there is a 20ton difference between chassis within a weight class and 8 people on a team a 100ton variance is not even large. I saw bigger differences back when matchmaking was even 1-1 weight classes. You were not at a disadvantage so what is the big problem with it? How is it unacceptable? You want it to be an even chassis for chassis with exact same Elo for both teams else it is completely unfair and broken? The matchmaker already sometimes takes so long when dropping solo that it fails all together as it is right now. There has to be a balance between queue time, Elo and weight and when it gets past a few minutes I am pretty sure weight is the most acceptable thing to compromise, especially when theoretically every variant should be just as useful so weight should not really make a difference (obviously certain balance issues are currently being worked through right now, but they change regularly and would require the MM system to be tweaked in response to every patch introduced).

[Jestun]

Wait until more divisions are added (region, 1st vs 3rd, CW vs quick match) and it has less mechs to choose from when matching you up...

[Screech]

Come up with a theory and the craft the data to support that theory. Works in a lot of other fields why not here.

[East Indy]

jakucha, on 02 June 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

I think the problem would be alleviated a lot if they could get players to follow the spread stated in lore. Can't remember what the numbers were but it was pretty logical, lights and mediums were most used because they're simply cheaper, with heavies and especially assaults being less common. Since c-bills aren't an issue at the moment they'd have to come up with something else though.

FASA's colorful explanation in the Technical Readout: 3025 was thus:

"By far the most common 'Mech, [mediums] also provide the widest variety in design. Found in all units and on most worlds, medium 'Mechs usually end up doing the real dirty work. On the battlefield, medium 'Mechs form the bulk of every unit. With light units off trying to figure out what is going on, heavy units waiting for the big assault, and assault units sometimes considered too valuable or rare to commit to battle at all, medium 'Mechs are left to slug it out."

The problem, of course, is that none of those limitations apply to MWO. Heavy and assault 'Mechs are easy to buy and affordable to maintain. More tonnage means more options and, outside of specialized low-risk play, better security: on many levels they're simply more fun to play.

I think the flaw can be found all the way back in the tabletop game, really; specifically, engine tonnage. There's no practical niche for mediums.

Light 'Mechs are perceived as scouts, yet not only are players willing to sacrifice other capabilities for mobility, but rules also facilitate engine weights for high-speed avoidance and escape. Consider that 7 of the TR: 3025's 18 medium 'Mechs are no faster than 10 of the book's 14 heavy 'Mechs (and are slower than the rest). Upgrading to bigger engines just makes bigger scouts: seriously, what's a Cicada but a certain 20-tonner, just costlier, with more internal structure?

Medium 'Mechs not intended to scout are essentially inferior heavy 'Mechs. In the universe, it works out because heavy 'Mechs aren't in great supply. Here, players can pick whatever they want. The design value of medium 'Mechs isn't necessarily invalidated, but the appeal is missing.

What does it mean? I'm not sure: after coming back after months' absence, I find the game pretty well balanced considering. The invasive change would be to alter the engine curve, perhaps by adding weight class modifiers, effectively slowing heavies and assaults. The circumspect change would be to focus 'Mech releases on ranges of 25-35, 60-100.

Edited by East Indy, 02 June 2013 - 10:08 AM.

[Hammertrial]

cyberFluke, on 02 June 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Not to point out the blindingly obvious, but "If you're going to start coding without finishing the paper design work, you're gonna have a bad time."

At least, that's what it looks like from here...

More like when 12% of players are playing lights (and that's on both teams), and you're bringing 19% on a single team off peak hours when no one is playing, you're going to have a bad time.

If there was complete weight class matching, it would require another 3 enemy lights, making the light total in the match 38%, or three times the regular population of lights. In the games with 4 on each side, you're now at 50%, and 4 times the regular population of lights, in off peak times, in your Elo range. And yet you wonder why the weights were unbalanced?

Also, seeing you went 8-6 even with the weight disparity (one image wouldn't load properly on my phone), seems like matchmaker is working pretty well.

[Chemie]

MM can't match weights if the queue is full of assaults. The fact is that 80% of mechs in the assault queue are assault and heavy.

I did notice that there are more medium/light that drop in conquest mode. Of course, taking a 4-man assault into conquest does make for a bit of "fish in the barrel" there given the above short comings with MM.

MM can't match what isn't there. Until there is a wegith drop limit, people just drop in the heaviest they can bring; armor and weapons win.

[Asakara]

Sadly, these "Horrendously Bad" match-ups are common in my experience.. Even when dropping with more of a mix or less than 4. But whatever.


Difference: +135 Tons - "Horrendously Bad"

Spoiler

Difference: +160 Tons - "Horrendously Bad"

Spoiler

Difference: +115 Tons - "Horrendously Bad"

Spoiler

Difference: +80 Tons - "Horrendously Bad"

Spoiler

Difference: +80 Tons - "Horrendously Bad"

Spoiler

Difference: +265 Tons - "Horrendously Bad" - The matchmaker was really trolling us this one. LOL

Spoiler