87 replies to this topic

[TOGSolid]

As much as you guys like to **** talk Hawken, their skill ranking system works and works damn well. As you get better your score goes up and you get locked out of lower score matches. The only way to set foot in those matches is to be grouped up with someone whos score is still that low. Of course, then your buddy's score will go up and you'll get locked right back out of those matches again.

This averaging of player scores on a team is the real problem and should be kicked to the curb. Good players should never see day 1 new guys on their team. Full stop, do not pass go. Make the matchmaker try and match people together of equal rating and if it needs to fill in gaps then start widening the acceptable score in either direction until the spots are filled.

We don't need a casual queue, we need a matchmaker that doesn't make crappy matches for new guys, casual guys, and the hardcore play to win at all cost players.

Edited by TOGSolid, 10 July 2013 - 10:37 AM.

[Volthorne]

TOGSolid, on 10 July 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

As much as you guys like to **** talk Hawken, their skill ranking system works and works damn well. As you get better your score goes up and you get locked out of lower score matches. The only way to set foot in those matches is to be grouped up with someone who's score is still that low. Of course, then your buddy's score will go up and you'll get locked right back out of those matches again.

This averaging of players scores on a team is the real problem and should be kicked to the curb. Good players should never see day 1 new guys on their team. Full stop, do not pass go. Make the matchmaker try and match people together of equal rating and if it needs to fill in gaps then start widening the acceptable score in either direction until the spots are filled.

We don't need a casual queue, we need a matchmaker that doesn't make crappy matches for new guys, casual guys, and the hardcore play to win at all cost players.

So high-Elo players (and those in "elo-hell") should be waiting for 3-5 minutes to find a full team to play with? That's not a solution either.

I'm not against a better matchmaker, but anything that stops your players from playing isn't good.

Edited by Volthorne, 10 July 2013 - 10:39 AM.

[soarra]

PEEFsmash, on 09 July 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

"I hate boaters! I hate min/maxers! I hate capping! I hate those CHEESE BUILDS! I hate elitist pros! I hate dying to people who shoot me! And for God's sake I don't want the game balanced for competitive players!"
- Average Forumgoer

Let's make a que for you. The que can be called "Casual Players Que" or "Play for Fun, Not to Win Que." You can all gather there, and use suboptimal builds, never cap, blah blah blah.

Meanwhile, everyone else can go into the "Playing to Win Que" where our intent is to satisfy the win conditions clearly stated at the beginning of the game. We will make it our job to destroy the enemy mechs or capture the enemy base. We will utilize our mechlabs to the best of our ability, and we will enter the battlefield with those mechs that we think will satisfy the win conditions, not mechs with crap loadouts that were piloted by some fantasy character from a 30 year old book. Best part? The people in this que won't seemingly be INCREDIBLY SURPRISED after every match that a bunch of people used good builds. No, good builds will be expected, because this que is for satisfying win conditions.

I make this suggestion seriously. If you hate boaters/min maxers/competitive "elitist" worshipers of the Mighty Church of Skill, you really shouldn't be playing in the same que as players who wish to go onto the battlefield and satisfy win conditions. You must be playing by some series of rules that is unbeknownst to me and others who play to win. I must have missed the rule, "Come on don't ONLY use good weapons!" or the "Don't use your hardpoints to their MAXIMAL utility!" rule. Someone point me to what seems to be a favorite rule around here, "Don't equip weapons that are OPTIMAL for playing your role! Throw in some other stuff too!" Or this one, "Use mechs that are FUN for ME to play against!"

Players playing under these above rules and other unspoken, unwritten (aka nonexistant) rules really shouldn't be forced to play under the simple and not-restrictive-enough ruleset of "Destroy Enemy Mechs or Capture Enemy Base." People who play only to satisfy ONLY those two win conditions should be separated from people with a more clever eye for an invisible set of rules that the "elitist competitive tryhards" fail to see on the loading screen.

sub optimal as in No 4ppc 1 gauss.
Peef do us all a favor and go boat your ppcs and stay off the forums

[Acid Phase]

Cheese pilots should really stay away from these forums. They have no valid concerns whatsoever.

MWO is allowing you go full press on the



How else do you explain your super uber ELO rating? Don't tell me you guys got there by having a well balanced loadout. This thread is a joke. The author is one of many 1 trick ponies.

Edited by Acid Phase, 10 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

[PEEFsmash]

soarra, on 10 July 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:

sub optimal as in No 4ppc 1 gauss.
Peef do us all a favor and go boat your ppcs and stay off the forums

Acid Phase, on 10 July 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

How else do you explain your super uber ELO rating? Don't tell me you guys got there by having a well balanced loadout. This thread is a joke. The author is one of many 1 trick ponies.

I have played a grand total of 20 matches in a PPC boat, and 1900+ in mechs with no PPCs. I've Never played with a Gauss or an AC20. I play almost all of my games in a 5ML Jenner. Although it is impossible for you to believe, and surely nobody could possibly have a "super uber Elo rating" without being a PPC boat, some people are just good at this game, and will have "super uber Elo ratings" no matter what non-existent rules you impose on them or they impose on themselves. Some people are very good at this game and play to win, and these quoted posts prove that you refuse to believe that fact.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 10 July 2013 - 11:36 AM.

[Rasako]

Hungus, on 09 July 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

'I just play for fun' is an excuse used by low skill players who cannot admit to their inadequacy in every single online game. A good skill based match making system is all that is needed.

or, you know, some people just have fun playing the game and winning in a virtual world doesn't mean anything to them because they have more important things going for them in life? just a thought

[Gallowglas]

And how, precisely, would you keep PPC boaters from simply using the "fun" queue as a means of farming easy kills? What you're talking about is some sort of non-enforceable and easily abused distinction.

[FrDrake]

It took LoL almost a year to get ranked matches after the point they "released", while I would hope it wouldn't take so long to get a competitive queue I'm not putting my hopes on PGI accomplishing it any faster.

[soarra]

PEEFsmash, on 10 July 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

[size=4]

I have played a grand total of 20 matches in a PPC boat, and 1900+ in mechs with no PPCs. I've Never played with a Gauss or an AC20. I play almost all of my games in a 5ML Jenner. Although it is impossible for you to believe, and surely nobody could possibly have a "super uber Elo rating" without being a PPC boat, some people are just good at this game, and will have "super uber Elo ratings" no matter what non-existent rules you impose on them or they impose on themselves. Some people are very good at this game and play to win, and these quoted posts prove that you refuse to believe that fact.

actually i know you play a jenner, ive played against you

[MischiefSC]

The real problem though is that most people play to win but prefer to do so against less skilled people. Also, the vast majority of people in any game are not nearly as good a they think they are. In games like MWO the build and mech you drive is far, far more significant than your skill.

Let's take chess as an example since it's got a robust rating system and has been using it for decades.

Elo in chess (the Elo system was made for chess originally) starts you at 1400 and goes upwards of 2600. 1400-1999 means you're pretty decent. 2,000 to 2199 makes you an expert, 2200 to 2399 you're a master, 2400-2600 you're a Grandmaster, 2600+ you're Gary Kasparov, Bobby Fischer or Magnus Carlsen caliber.

There are 605 million people playing chess in the world, mostly in Russia, China and India. There are about 7.5 million people playing ranked chess in the FIDE, the largest chess organization.

Of those, 11,029 people have a ranking over 2200. That's 0.0014% of total players.
5839 had a ranking of 2200-2299
2998 ranked 2300 to 2399
1382 ranked 2400 to 2499
587 ranked 2500-2599
178 ranked 2600-2699
42 ranked 2700-2799
3 ranked 2800+


So to put that into perspective, if MWO has 10,000 active players then 14 of them are 'masters' in terms of absolute skill. All of them together can't fill one match. I'm not sure we've got 10,000 active players but I could be wrong.

Less than 1% are going to be 'experts' or better in terms of absolute skill.

So what that actually leaves us with is tons and tons of people relying on FOTM to make them look better than they are.

THAT is MWO and THAT is the problem with the current Elo system. Want Elo to work better? Include a BV aspect. The problem is that we can't, because there are not enough players. Instead what we have are people who want to feel like they're very good but in fact are relying on making smurf accounts to stomp new and inexperienced players or people who equate the advantage of dropping in a team on voice coms with actual personal game skill (hence the issue with dropping in a team, winning a lot, then dropping solo and getting hammered).

Most people really are not that good. They just want to feel like they are.

[Captain Stiffy]

Every troll creamed themselves when they read this.

Yes please make a gametype for bads. Lawls.

[Caviel]

Not a good idea for all the previously listed reasons why it would be a troll paradise. I would say making it a grouped queue vs non-grouped queue, or three separate queues for the three different types would be a much better solution.

[3rdworld]

Caviel, on 10 July 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

Not a good idea for all the previously listed reasons why it would be a troll paradise. I would say making it a grouped queue vs non-grouped queue, or three separate queues for the three different types would be a much better solution.

or just have ranked and unranked matches.

isn't that how most other games handle it?

[Araara]

but peef, dont forget we need a queue for forum warriors and non-forum warriors!

[Joseph Mallan]

PEEFsmash, on 09 July 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

"I hate boaters! I hate min/maxers! I hate capping! I hate those CHEESE BUILDS! I hate elitist pros! I hate dying to people who shoot me! And for God's sake I don't want the game balanced for competitive players!"
- Average Forumgoer

I want the game balanced so everyone can have fun. Or at least the majority of players since very few people can agree what fun is!

[Mystere]

Accursed Richards, on 09 July 2013 - 11:33 PM, said:

Have they succeeded, would you say?

Not quite, especially because there are too many people here in the forums who talk as if they really are in the high Elo brackets, especially those who are probably merely hanging on the coattails of their team mates.

What we need is a 24-way no-holds-barred winner-take-all free-for-all contest to decide once and for all. ;-)

[Caviel]

3rdworld, on 10 July 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

or just have ranked and unranked matches.

isn't that how most other games handle it?

Ranked and unranked really doesn't factor into the advantages of having teammates on comms.

My Assault Elo must be either really high, or really low, because it sucks when I'm in a non-meta "balanced" build solo dropping and get smashed by coordinated 4-pilot groups. I can put a good dent in people before I drop, but being a PUG without TS I can only do so much against an onslaught of 3-4 PPC+Gauss Highlanders before I die. I can imagine what it's like for people that this is their only current option and they don't have a "guild" to fall back on.

[deforce]

PEEFsmash, on 09 July 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

"I hate boaters! I hate min/maxers! I hate capping! I hate those CHEESE BUILDS! I hate elitist pros! I hate dying to people who shoot me! And for God's sake I don't want the game balanced for competitive players!"
- Average Forumgoer

Let's make a que for you. The que can be called "Casual Players Que" or "Play for Fun, Not to Win Que." You can all gather there, and use suboptimal builds, never cap, blah blah blah.

Meanwhile, everyone else can go into the "Playing to Win Que" where our intent is to satisfy the win conditions clearly stated at the beginning of the game. We will make it our job to destroy the enemy mechs or capture the enemy base. We will utilize our mechlabs to the best of our ability, and we will enter the battlefield with those mechs that we think will satisfy the win conditions, not mechs with crap loadouts that were piloted by some fantasy character from a 30 year old book. Best part? The people in this que won't seemingly be INCREDIBLY SURPRISED after every match that a bunch of people used good builds. No, good builds will be expected, because this que is for satisfying win conditions.

I make this suggestion seriously. If you hate boaters/min maxers/competitive "elitist" worshipers of the Mighty Church of Skill, you really shouldn't be playing in the same que as players who wish to go onto the battlefield and satisfy win conditions. You must be playing by some series of rules that is unbeknownst to me and others who play to win. I must have missed the rule, "Come on don't ONLY use good weapons!" or the "Don't use your hardpoints to their MAXIMAL utility!" rule. Someone point me to what seems to be a favorite rule around here, "Don't equip weapons that are OPTIMAL for playing your role! Throw in some other stuff too!" Or this one, "Use mechs that are FUN for ME to play against!"

Players playing under these above rules and other unspoken, unwritten (aka nonexistant) rules really shouldn't be forced to play under the simple and not-restrictive-enough ruleset of "Destroy Enemy Mechs or Capture Enemy Base." People who play only to satisfy ONLY those two win conditions should be separated from people with a more clever eye for an invisible set of rules that the "elitist competitive tryhards" fail to see on the loading screen.

only comment, if they made a que for "fun" and for "competitive"

you know a ton of elite, competitive players will swarm the "fun" que to pub stomp just because they can.

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

LOL no!

we need a team and solo que only!

stop making this harder then it needs to be, I know change is hard but you should all at least know how to cope with it by now... Oh wait.. I forget just how silly people over 30 can act.

[Mycrus]

We need to make a jenner only queue because dats the only thing that PEEF plays...