No replies to this topic

[Goose]

(In that order.)

I see a lot of games that shouldn't have happened. I have a hard time regarding a game where the lossers didn't get five kills as close. I also see many games where ~70% of the damage is done by three guys on a team.

I blame the match-maker for this. While Elo is the number match-maker works with, it's match-maker doing all the math, and giving Elo it's feedback.

It seems match-maker will take a Mulligan early and often; This is the biggest problem in the game, as bad match-making obfuscates most other issues. How accurate can Elo possibly be, regardless of sample size, if most matches have 500 point underdogs? If an Elo is never given a reason to move, how can we judge if it moves fast enough?

I remember reading there are only four Elos' per player, but I sometimes hear there are more. I'd like it if there were more, but I see how easy it is to get carried away with that: Sample Size takes a beating if you have two Elos' per individual 'Mech, but might not be too bad at one per platform (all Jenners, all Highlanders, etc.) I think a good-sized chunk of the Awesomes bad reputation is about trying to level them after having success in other assaults, thus while having a high assault Elo. It probably also doesn't help to have Dragons and Cicadas are across the weight category line(s).

If Elo moved faster, and was more tightly focused on platforms, wouldn't Teh Devs more easily detect what's become a Flavor of teh Month, and why?

I forget what the Elo for a 4-man is supposed to be: It mostly seems a way to confuse the match maker, and what such games do to the players Elo(s) is anyone's guess. But you have to have 4-mans …

IIRC, 8-mans suspends Elo outright; But even if that changes, the damage has already been done: I don't know anyone personally whom is still interested in 8-mans. By extension, Community Warfare seems like a non-starter.

Discuss …