40 replies to this topic

[LauLiao]

Dear Olympics,

Your competitions are completely unfair because they are dominated by basement dwelling trolls who have nothing better to do than work out and practice their sports all day. Please level the playing field so that an average joe like me has a chance to compete and win.

[Khaleessi]

Solution: Get rid of the children, problem solved!

[Sephlock]

NARCoMAN, on 31 July 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

They are fair. I am also a Dad, my son is 1 year 1 month old (Closed Beta baby). I just understand that I don't have the time requirements to participate so i do not. The kid is worth much more to me than some tournament for a video game. move on.

Put that kid to work. Precedent aside, he can't be that much worse than some of the puggers I run into...

[RussianWolf]

I agree with the OP to a point.

So lets get this straight, you get 3 days to grind and produce 10 "great" matches.

Why do you need 3 days? The best should be able to do that within 20 games right? I mean they are the awesome pilots that no one can touch, right?

Fair tournaments give the participants an even field to start from, take a sample and produce results.

So how about this. You opt in, you are placed in a queue with no pre-made teams allowed (teams in tournament space are too big a variable until we get team tournaments), preferably with only other participants. You play 10 matches. You are done. You watch the results.

Everyone has equal odds of having a good streak or bad streak. Same number of games played, same kind of scenarios.

Or better yet we bring on Solaris VII and have 16 man free-for-all tournament matches. One match, winner takes all.

[BlackDrakon]

miGHtlq, on 09 January 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

does anyone remember btu. map of the innersphere. commanders organize attacks on other worlds. ample time to schedule the battle for both sides. factions that practice together regularly. diplomacy. tourneys(campaigns) that runs a few months.

I don't remember details and rules much. Now that I have returned to gaming a bit I would like to see this kind of tournament again. I read many posts referring to MC rewards. this is not why I played back then. I played for fun and part of that was to see just how well our faction could do and how the map changes as a result of every factions advances or losses . I couldn't find anything on it on the internet. Only ran across stuff devoted to the board game. maybe someone else remembers or has better luck finding details.

Not everyone could play in every battle. btu allowed for everyone to participate regardless of how often you play. Even if it was only one match a week.

There havent been one tournament hosted by pgi that requires been in a faction, unit, clan or group of ppl that can go and attack another group of ppl. Why u ask? because if u want to fight another group, you have to sync drop, thx to the abscense of a lobby or channel to get into a predrop.

[CeeKay Boques]

Thank you for resurrecting this thread to remind me that there is zilch going on as far as making competition between fans of MWO.

[Sephlock]

FWIW they're working on the lobby thing. IIRC they should be coming with UI 2.0.

[Clit Beastwood]

Sephlock, on 12 January 2014 - 03:35 PM, said:

FWIW they're working on the lobby thing. IIRC they should be coming with UI 2.0.

Hopefully unicorn jesus brings it soon.

[King Arthur IV]

to the people who dont understand why its unfair.

the more matches you play, the more chance you have to get a higher score. the tourneys dont take an average of your scores, they just take your 10 best games and to top it off, there is no limit to the amount of games you can cram in.

this means, any player that can play alot of games has a good chance to grind out very high scores. this becomes a game of chance instead of skill.

this is kind of like saying ie. "lets find out who is the best shot in the world, we only count your 10 bets hits and your given unlimited ammo"

if they reduced the amount of matches you were allowed to play say to 50~ and only count the best 10; we would have a much better way of measuring skill.

[Ghogiel]

Sephlock, on 12 January 2014 - 03:35 PM, said:

FWIW they're working on the lobby thing. IIRC they should be coming with UI 2.0.

Not according to "The Plan".

Lobbies are called private matches "The ability for players to create custom private matches between two groups of players". These are coming in the launch component. Which is currently at 12% and looks to be quite far down the list looking at things.

Edited by Ghogiel, 14 January 2014 - 04:25 AM.

[Entail]

Kell Commander, on 16 July 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

The solo tournaments seem to favor high damage alpha builds. Allows them to kill steal while still giving a lot of damage on the battlefield.

Not sure what you're saying but I hope the high alpha builds you are talking about don't involve projectiles. It's
very inefficient to kill steal with projectiles.

[Colonel Fubar]

PappySmurf, on 18 July 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

So the tournaments are rigged hacked stacked and whatever these Tunisian's need to win I would not even consider what MWO is doing as a tournament.

LOL Pappy...Don't Mix Words...Tell us what you really think.

[Colonel Fubar]

Malsumis, on 24 July 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

It appears I struck a nerve. There is no jealousy here. I know what I can do in a mech. I did opt in in this particular tournament because I was curious on how it worked. I've mostly just read the forums regarding past tournaments and figured they are a waste of time. Which after testing this one out, I've found that they are a waste of my time. Not because of my level of "skill" but the way one has to play in a match in order to "win" the tournament is garbage. And the rewards, all $7.70 worth of MC for 1st place, are a joke.

My Codex reads Strong and my Blood heritage runs deep! I live for Mechwarrior competition at all levels. The more difficult the strategic bid the better I like it. I would claw my way out of Hell itself to hang the scalps of my contemporaries from my Battlemech's antenna. $7.70 MC is more than enough compensation for such a glorious honor. This is what separates the Mechwarriors from the Tourists, and the Freebirth from the trueborn. Seyla.

Edited by Danny Fubar Col 21C RHG, 31 January 2014 - 10:51 AM.

[Roland]

xRaNgEr, on 15 July 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

The tournaments seem unfair and are geared towards those people who don't have kids and have way too much free time.

If you have kids and not much free time, then you got bigger fish to fry than a mechwarrior tournament.
Don't worry about it dude.

[PhoenixFire55]

I laugh at how people discuss fair and unfair as in 'but the more matches you play the better the chances you get the high score'.

I got one word for you friends ... Elo.

Elo matchmaker is matching people of same skill against each other, which means that 'uber-skilled-12-hours-a-day-of-MWO' players are matched against each other just as 'Imma-casual-3-games-a-day' players are matched among themselves. Thats NOT fair by default.

Now tell me whats harder? Drop 4 elite players in Highlanders doing only 500 damage because you have to focus all your DPS into one part on their mech otherwise you are dead? Or drop 4 total noobs spraying 1200 damage over arms and legs on their Atlases in easy-mode Elo zone?

I've played against most if not all of people who won / been placed in top 10 on tourneys. They all are great players, skilled and dedicated. Tournaments are unfair for many reasons, but they are still won by people who deserve it more. End of story.

[SgtKinCaiD]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 January 2014 - 02:20 AM, said:

I got one word for you friends ... Elo.

Elo matchmaker is matching people of same skill against each other, which means that 'uber-skilled-12-hours-a-day-of-MWO' players are matched against each other just as 'Imma-casual-3-games-a-day' players are matched among themselves. Thats NOT fair by default.

Pardon me good sir but it's not working like that : the MM is picking players in order to have roughly the same ELO sum on both team. That's does not mean that players of the same skill are put against each other, quite the contrary, because the MM must average high/low elo players.

[PhoenixFire55]

SgtKinCaiD, on 28 January 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

Pardon me good sir but it's not working like that : the MM is picking players in order to have roughly the same ELO sum on both team. That's does not mean that players of the same skill are put against each other, quite the contrary, because the MM must average high/low elo players.

And yet its not what we see on tournaments. Ask anyone from top 10s what is the chance for them to be matched against 1 or more players from top 10 and you'll be surprised.

The sole purpose of the matchmaker is to give better players better quality opposition. That means better opponents 'on average' for better players and worse opponents 'on average' for worse players.

[SgtKinCaiD]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 January 2014 - 02:47 AM, said:

And yet its not what we see on tournaments. Ask anyone from top 10s what is the chance for them to be matched against 1 or more players from top 10 and you'll be surprised.

Excuse me but the last tournament was in july 2013, 12v12 came live in august 2013 and numerous tweaking to the MM and ELO matching have completly change that. I think it's one of the reason that we don't have tournaments anymore.

PhoenixFire55, on 28 January 2014 - 02:47 AM, said:

The sole purpose of the matchmaker is to give better players better quality opposition. That means better opponents 'on average' for better players and worse opponents 'on average' for worse players.

The sole purpose of the matchmaker is to create "fair and balanced match" based on the fact that the 2 team have roughly the same ELO sum up (and tonnage when it happens), nothing else. For the MM, a team composed of 12 - 1300 ELO players is equivalent to a team of 4 - 2000 ELO players and 8 - 950 ELO players. It's one of the biggest default of the current MM. The MM cruelly needs skill brackets in order to have better quality match.

Edited by SgtKinCaiD, 28 January 2014 - 06:31 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

SgtKinCaiD, on 28 January 2014 - 06:28 AM, said:

Excuse me but the last tournament was in july 2013, 12v12 came live in august 2013 and numerous tweaking to the MM and ELO matching have completly change that. I think it's one of the reason that we don't have tournaments anymore.

Doesn't have to be tournaments. MM works same tournament or not. Ask any winner how often they see people from top 10s in their 'regular' games nowadays.

SgtKinCaiD, on 28 January 2014 - 06:28 AM, said:

The sole purpose of the matchmaker is to create "fair and balanced match" based on the fact that the 2 team have roughly the same ELO sum up (and tonnage when it happens), nothing else. For the MM, a team composed of 12 - 1300 ELO players is equivalent to a team of 4 - 2000 ELO players and 8 - 950 ELO players. It's one of the biggest default of the current MM. The MM cruelly needs skill brackets in order to have better quality match.

I appreciate your effort trying to explain exactly how MM works but its irrelevant when we discuss tourneys being fair or not. Better players get better opponents in their games on average and thats a fact, which makes tourneys under current matchmaker unfair. However I don't think its the reason why we aren't haveing tourneys since july.

[BillHones]

LauLiao, on 31 July 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

Dear Olympics,

Your competitions are completely unfair because they are dominated by basement dwelling trolls who have nothing better to do than work out and practice their sports all day. Please level the playing field so that an average joe like me has a chance to compete and win.

Oh no... you bring great dishonor to the chancellor! The Olympics are about the country's the athletes represent. The best each has to offer. National pride. When you fire up your mech, remember that we fight for each other and the chancellor.