341 replies to this topic

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Ingame voip would help. They even have a checkbox for it in the options menu though it doesn't seem to do anything.

Stepping back to type stuff out can help, but sometimes gets you smashed for the effort.

[Sephlock]

Honestly if you have a reasonable amount of situational awareness you can usually get yourself a "satisfying loss" at the very least. Sadly, if your teammates are bad enough, this generally boils down to moving behind a friendly mech and firing after he's drawn the fire of everyone in the vicinity, but hey, you take what you can get .

Also, if enough people on the enemy team have enough situational awareness it can appear as if they are an organized group, when in fact they are not.

http://en.wikipedia....ontaneous_order

[Erghiez06]

Erata, on 27 July 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:

That would be interesting, but I imagine it would be difficult to tune, given how much trouble the matchmaker has already when it matches up a mixed drop of mediums and lights and a couple heavies against all heavies/assaults. Kind of an issue of time of day, if it's a weekend, and the general population.

Some players have suggested increasing health on the robots (more armor, more internals with a larger bias given to internals) so that new players can survive for a longer time, and be given more time to play and more time to learn how to play as a result of the increased health instead of getting 3-shot the second they take a misstep into a firing line.

As a new player I actually don't mind being thrown into the fire. Playing against more experienced players has its benefits. I believe it would help if players were awarded a ranking system based on their number of games, or achievements in game. I know it sounds very CoD-like but for a new player it is at the very least an indicator that, "yes I might lose, but at least its to someone with experience."

Its hard to pick out the experienced players when you start a match. Typically I look for names I may have run across on the forums (Yes I actually read the forum posts) or players I may have encountered prior. This may sound odd but I screenshot the score board at the end of every match. I like odds, and graphs to depict whats used often, and how it performs on average against something else. I theory-craft, its a failing.

Getting back to the point - I think VoIP is desperately needed asap. Should it be mandatory? Absolutely not. I think it should be implemented on a squad base. 4 people to Voip channel unless the user opts to expand on his full time. In a game touted as tactical and intelligent you need to allow room for teams to make use of communicative tools.

Truth be told, in almost every PuG I am in I read in chat someone reminding everyone to stay together. Typically I check the grammar to determine credibility, but I always, always stick with my assaults. I only have two mechs at this point in time, but I figure it this way - The Assaults have more firepower - If I can draw enemy fire, he can kill faster than I can. This spells win to me, or at least in most cases.

[One Medic Army]

Erghiez06, on 27 July 2013 - 07:10 PM, said:

One Medic Army, I have to make note of your never failing informative approach to questions. It is always appreciated. And thank you for the information. If you don't mind me asking is there a resource or a PGI detailed page I can visit for more detailed information on this subject?

Unfortunately no, I am not aware of any centralized repository of this information, possibly in the Ask the Devs archives or some of the "Command Chair" forum posts.

They have been vague on the premade stuff, aside from statements that: "most matches include at least 1 premade", though this was before recent changes as far as I am aware. My earlier statement was based on what I, personally, have observes as both a team player and a solo player. If you regularly play both the difference is night and day in regards to the opponents you face.

They have stated that Elo tries to match everyone to a single score, rather than balancing high-skill players with low-skill players.
PGI has also stated that the matchmaker attempts to balance tonnage overall on both sides of the match.

As to the premade vs PUG debate, lets just say that both sides are full of people who hijack any actual discussion with insults, to the point where few people else will respond to such comments.

Edited by One Medic Army, 27 July 2013 - 07:36 PM.

[Goose]

I believe I'd heard a 4-man would have their Elos' substituted with a single, average score for the four said players: I have become suspicious of this mechanism …

[Stelar 7]

Looking at that match I suspect there was one premade team on each side. No one generated much over 250 points of damage, and from what I have seen the influx of Saras jenner has a lot of people playing lights. It is a refreshing change of pace.

Most of the time I drop in premade groups of two to four. We typically have another group of premades we get matched with, or much more common four pugs. The enemy usually operates the same.

Now, you have learned that clustering saves pug lives. Do you really think it is surprising that four lights in a lance stuck together and when they saw an assault they all shot the big scary mech? Alternately, assault mechs are candy for lights, if they are in the open. All the light pilots I know get droolie when there is a chance to hunt the big slow target mechs.

Here is the clincher though, the game can mix small groups and pugs, or it can separate them, but this is beta and the population will be reduced fir everyone if we start segregating people too much. It takes ages to get an eight man group to actually drop.

When we go live, if we get a big influx of players, the mm system can get more choosy. While there are a few people online I'd rather drop into a stomp than not drop at all.

Afterthought for the op, seriously, pugging is ok but find some people, there are a ton of folks recruiting on the davion section of the boards. I joined HHoD and am having much more fun.

Edited by Stelar 7, 27 July 2013 - 07:59 PM.

[Erghiez06]

Sephlock, on 27 July 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

Honestly if you have a reasonable amount of situational awareness you can usually get yourself a "satisfying loss" at the very least. Sadly, if your teammates are bad enough, this generally boils down to moving behind a friendly mech and firing after he's drawn the fire of everyone in the vicinity, but hey, you take what you can get .

Also, if enough people on the enemy team have enough situational awareness it can appear as if they are an organized group, when in fact they are not.

http://en.wikipedia....ontaneous_order

I've seen this. As a matter of fact I see it almost every match I start. Its especially notable in Tourmaline Desert if you start near the Sigma side of the map. You almost always see the group run in a single file line straight down and through a crevice and bundle in a small area surrounding said crevice while whatever available light follows the right side path. I am shocked when this pattern doesn't follow suit.

As for me, I am predictable. I am almost always near a heavy. The only time I wander off is if I happen to drop in as the fastest mech. Recently I have been playing my CN9-A over my CPLT-K2 and I have dropped in as the lightest mech on my team. I was unlucky one match where I dropped in with a bunch of LRM boats and I was the lightest mech. Our team won, but just barely.

But no, I completely get your point. Inadvertent order. It makes sense, but that isn't always the case, and in the case I was posting about initially, I have to stick to my assumption that this was a well oiled premade. When these Jenners were lancing it wasn't all shooting at once. It was sort of like the centipede in the Arcade game centipede. Almost single file, and one would alpha and continue running while the one behind him would follow suit and so on and so forth. It was incredibly organized and in perfect concert. It worked extremely well. As annoying and infuriating as it was, it was also very impressive.

[Roland]

Skadi, on 27 July 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

That's debatable, if you are solo dropping and your team are complete *******, the enemy team as a individuals may not be better than you, but as a team they are def better than yours.

Well, of course. In a team game, the individual can only do so much.

R Razor, on 27 July 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

Believe what you will Roland........we could easily build the same cheese and run the same tactics and do as well as they do......we choose not to.

That's fine, but if they then beat you, you can't claim that you're better than they are. You can't handicap yourself, lose, and then blame it on the self imposed handicap.

While you say that you only lose because they ran a better loadout, such a statement is pure speculation. You'd need to actually do such a thing and beat them to prove the veracity of your claim.

And ultimately, that's why the competitive players don't run garbage mechs. Not because they like running the optimized builds... trust me, most of them seem to not like it at all. But they do not want to impose handicaps on themselves.

Honestly, if you want to get PGI to fix the dominance of what you call "cheese builds", then my advice to you would be to run exactly those builds and abuse them as much as you possibly can, to force PGI to address them.

[The Strange]

The thing is, you don't really need the communication to play as a team and be effective. I am not saying that communication doesn't help, of course it does, but you can get along without it and still do well. Yes, a pre-made that is utilizing software such as TS3, for example, can call out targets to their team for focused fire. But nothing says that you can't do the same thing without the verbal cues. There are triangles above the enemy Mechs in the targeting info. If the triangle is hollow, nobody on your team is currently targeting that Mech. If the triangle is filled in red, then at least one member of your team is targeting that player. This enables you to tell what Mechs are currently being targeted by your teammates. Those are the Mechs that you should be targeting yourself.

Also, taking the initiative and staying with another team member is very helpful. Even if they are unaware that you are acting as their "wing man", you will be able to focus your fire on their targets to finish them off quicker. There are also things you can do in the beginning of a match that help. Take a quick minute during the initial lull to tell your lance mates that you will call targets for focused fire. Then in lance chat, which stands out better than team chat, just quickly enter the letter of the enemy to call targets. It doesn't take very long at all to type in one letter.

It takes a little more effort, mostly on our own parts, to play as a team without voice communication, but it isn't impossible.

[Tezcatli]

Just had a match where someone tried to lead our pug team. Essentially half of the team was content to play the stupid hide and peek sniper meta and lose at it. The other half was trying to do something else. And I tried to go where the person was indicating. But as you can guess it all went to shet.

[Cappy]

scJazz, on 27 July 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

Why yes the forum needed another PuG tearfest about 4 mans thread! There were not nearly enough of them already!

Probably because it's a legitimate problem. Obviously people running premades don't want competition, they want easy wins, so they call "tears" whenever there is a dissenting point of view. You are content to watch the population flounder beneath what is (really) undeniable, this game has terrible matchmaking, which is just mind boggling short sighted and self centred.

Why is it other "competitive team games" don't have the ridiculous turnover like Mechwarrior? It's not that it's a bad game, nor particularly difficult once you understand the controls.

Edited by Cappy, 27 July 2013 - 09:32 PM.

[Zylo]

Clearly the pre-made groups need to be marked in the post game results using a group icon with a number (similar to WoT) for no other reason than ending the whining about pre-made groups.

[R Razor]

Roland, on 27 July 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

Honestly, if you want to get PGI to fix the dominance of what you call "cheese builds", then my advice to you would be to run exactly those builds and abuse them as much as you possibly can, to force PGI to address them.

Sadly that's looking like what it is going to take. My complaint is that doing so defeats the entire purpose of my wanting to play the game. I loved playing Battletech, with a variety of mechs on the field and a need for tactics if you wanted to win. Unfortunately in this game currently, the only tactic is move close, staying behind buildings or hills as much as possible to avoid LRM's, click the button that fires your PPC/Gauss cheese.........wash rinse and repeat. Kinda of boring.

That's why I said vote with your wallet, I know I am.

[Navy Sixes]

scJazz, on 27 July 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

Why yes the forum needed another PuG tearfest about 4 mans thread! There were not nearly enough of them already!

Yeah! (Can we go back to complaining about capping and the new heat rules, now?)

edited for grammar

Edited by Tycho von Gagern, 27 July 2013 - 11:09 PM.

[Aim64C]

Skadi, on 27 July 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Teamwork OP, nerf communication.

Jestun, on 27 July 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

This is not a balance issue.

This is "The big boys are working together! It's not fair!!1!".

This is complaining about teamwork in a team-based game with objectives instead of just TDM. Of *course* teamwork is an advantage.

There is no indicator of a pre-made in MWO, it's 100% based on guesswork. You assume they are grouped, nothing more.

It's usually pretty obvious when you've got a pre-made running. Particularly if they are running the same paint schemes.

The lack of communication actually helps premades more than anything. If I run with someone I know (not even a premade - just someone I've dropped with a few times in the past and we know each others' style), it doesn't take much communication to work effectively together once we get into the fray. Basic scouting and group organizing is what suffers the most in the current PUG environment. The 'in the fray' is largely down to individual experience with teamwork.

As a light - I'm always swapping through targets to find those that have taken a few too many PPCs to one section of armor or the other (particularly side torsos on victors and highlanders) - then I go put lasers into that section and pray they can't use the AC20 or Gauss they come with very well. I know how my combat role plays most effectively - get into the enemy lines and cause confusion while capitalizing on weakened foes. If those are unavailable - flank their LRM boat and keep his end-of-match damage in the double digits.

Sometimes I'll sit back and be a spotter if our team has a strong LRM presence (though few teams really sit back and let you spot on them - the obnoxious stream of missiles tends to keep them moving to cover).

But the lack of integrated VOIP really makes for a difficult PUG experience. Even getting just a couple players to work on the same program can make a huge difference.

As a premade - you don't have to communicate in depth (unless you're up against an 8-man group); so long as you can prune off 2 or 3 players really quick, the opposing team has almost no way of recovering from the loss.

Though the capture assist module is a bit crazy when 3 mechs on a team are carrying it. You've got about ten seconds to get on site to interdict or it's game over. Clever move by that group, though. Pretty much let their PUG tag-alongs get stomped while they goofed around trying to kill the Jenner (me). Then they broke off and made a capture. Even if I'd have started making a straight dash for our base right after the last of their PUGs dropped, I'd probably not have been able to save the match.

Well played on their part - but a little... shrewd.

[Jestun]

Aim64C, on 27 July 2013 - 11:09 PM, said:

It's usually pretty obvious when you've got a pre-made running.

Yup.

Anyone who beats me is a pre-made.

Or a hacker.


:edit:

After reading your post I feel the need to remind people again, not all pre-mades are crack MechWarriors who have trained together their entire lives.


Sometimes friends just want to play a computer game together.

Edited by Jestun, 28 July 2013 - 01:25 AM.

[Riptor]

Remember people: "Competitive players"

Thats why they que up for pug matches because theyk now the chance is lower to meet other competitive players and thus get an easy win and roflstomp the other team for fun and profits.

They form a team not because they want to face other teams but because they want to face unorganized teams to slaughter them. Again much more fun then facing an oponent who uses the same min/max builds you do and actually knows how to fight back.

And fully knowing that they still tell the PuGs to organize themselves... heres the twist thought: THEY DONT REALLY WANT THAT!

The 8 man que is deserted for a reason, imagine IF all the pugs would become organized somehow and act just as the so called "competitives"... after all the same players do claim that the 8 man que is boring for that exact reason.

Teamwork? I call that cowardice because you fully well know that the chances to meet an unorganized PuG group in the PuG que is 100% higher as in the 8 man que. Dont **** in the air and tell me its raining. Calling yourselve "competitive" is only a way to make your solo player stomping sound more noble.

There should be a que for solos, 4 man groups (where the other lances are also only made from 4 man teams) and 8 mans. Sucks if you dont have 3 other friends to play with but if you cant even muster a 4 man group in an online game you should use the solo que anyways.

Edited by Riptor, 28 July 2013 - 06:31 AM.

[Roland]

That is an even worse suggestion than what we have currently, riptor. So now you would only be able to play with exactly four, or exactly eight players? Is your goal to absolutely destroy the game even more?

If you want a solo queue, that is fine, but then the other queue needs to allow groups of any size, and just put them all together.

[Erghiez06]

Jestun, on 28 July 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

[/size]

Yup.

Anyone who beats me is a pre-made.

Or a hacker.


:edit:

After reading your post I feel the need to remind people again, not all pre-mades are crack MechWarriors who have trained together their entire lives.


Sometimes friends just want to play a computer game together.

I don't think anyone is ignoring the frequency of loss, or that most premades are just a couple of friends trying to have fun. I have lost more assault matches than I have won. My K/D ratio is 0.88. I can't speak for everyone but myself - I don't mind losing. What I do mind is how bad I lose. If the group I am in is already at a sore disadvantage before the game even starts, it takes the fun out of playing.

It seems to me that alot of people supporting the premade matchmaking system are missing the issue everyone else seems to have. The matchmaking system works for the most part, and I can agree with this. My losses arent so frequent that I am bothered by it, and even if it was I would just assume its because I was a bad player and do what I can to improve. I can cope with the idea that I did my best in the event of a loss, but there is a huge scale of difference between ones level of skill and the inability to utilize that skill (or lack thereof) in a completely random environment when you're up against the ability to coordinate instantaneously.

What I think the matchmaking system needs is a better system of in-game communication, and more stringent tonnage requirements. I think that is what most everyone is arguing for. Despite my earlier comments on supporting the idea of a separate queue for premades, I have to secede to the idea that a function such as this wouldn't operate properly in the current state of the game, but at the moment there seems to be a huge gap in the ludicrous advantage 4-8 man premades do have.

[Jestun]

Erghiez06, on 28 July 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

What I think the matchmaking system needs is a better system of in-game communication, and more stringent tonnage requirements. I think that is what most everyone is arguing for.

Oh... I don't think it is.

But I would agree, VOIP and tweaked matchmaker criteria is the way forwards.

Riptor, on 28 July 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

There should be a que for solos, 4 man groups (where the other lances are also only made from 4 man teams) and 8 mans. Sucks if you dont have 3 other friends to play with but if you cant even muster a 4 man group in an online game you should use the solo que anyways.

The implication being that anyone who does anything other than solo must be a competitive player and therefore must be able to field a 4 or 8 competitive mech team at the drop of a hat and only play against competitive teams?

Edited by Jestun, 28 July 2013 - 08:13 AM.