Jump to content

- - - - -

Poll - Limit 12 V 12 Pre-Made Group Matches To 1Pv Only


904 replies to this topic

Poll: Poll - Limit 12 V 12 Pre-Made Group Matches To 1Pv Only (1092 member(s) have cast votes)

Should 12 v 12 pre-made group matches be limited to 1PV (First Person) view mode only?

  1. Yes (983 votes [91.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 91.53%

  2. No (91 votes [8.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.47%

Vote

#881 Oriius

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 160 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:04 AM

Just been looking over some of the things said by PGI recently, once again allow me to quote the September Creative Developer Update, first paragraph.

Quote

What an August! We released some really big features in 12v12 and 3PV: Both have been a great success and delivered on our goals of adding more action, tactics, and deeper gameplay (12v12), while continuing to make the game appeal to a broader audience of gamers (3PV). After releasing 3PV we saw an immediate improvement in our target demographic, with a good bump in new player retention!


The line in there that has me pondering is: "while continuing to make the game appeal to a broader audience of gamers (3PV). After releasing 3PV we saw an immediate improvement in our target demographic, with a good bump in new player retention!"

This poll suggests to me that this "target demographic" is not interested in 12v12, otherwise they would be getting the same focus (i.e keeping third person in 12v12). If this is the case and the target demographic is not interested in 12v12, will CW emphasize the current PUG style game play we have now? If so what roll exactly could 12v12 play if any?

I feel I might be rambling here, so to cut that out and get to the point, If the trend I see is correct and they keep gunning only for this new demographic, I cannot foresee a rich "end game" which I feel is going to be bad for the long term health of the game.

I am worried. This whole situation just looks like a symptom of a greater problem.

Edited by Oriius, 29 August 2013 - 08:27 AM.


#882 Aidan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 542 posts
  • LocationFlorida, USA

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:04 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 28 August 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Proposal: Limit 12 v 12 pre-made group matches to 1PV only.
Release Date: Mid to Late September

Details: 12 man pre-made group matches will have 1PV enforced as the only useable view mode. Players will not be able to switch between 1PV and 3PV when playing in 12 v 12 pre-made match play.

This gives our core audience, who represent almost exclusively the 12 man team group play, a place to enjoy a pure 1PV experience.

The public queues will remain a mix of 1PV and 3PV modes and Hardcore mode will be removed from the drop down list. Future enhancements to the matchmaker will allow stricter tonnage limits, and encourage a more fair and level playing field for all MWO matches.


Keep it up Bryan you rascally squirrel !!! You just may win my money back with this game play change !!! Question for you, in Community Warfare will there only be 12 v 12 matches?

#883 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:06 AM

I just had a stunning idea!

So we're still technically in a beta, so let's make good use of it! Put in one week, one measly half of a patch cycle worth, of a hardcore queue. The stats should quickly realize one of three scenarios (since apparently one week is long enough to gather significant data, if you work for PGI):

1) The hardcore queue gets greater participation by a significant margin. This would be a sign that 1pv is going to be the dominant mode of play for some time to come, and that 3pv is misguided. Because split queues would apparently be a disaster, remove 3pv.

2) The casual queue gets greater participation by a significant margin. This means that either most players don't care enough about the 1pv vs 3pv issue to change off of the default option, or that players prefer to play with the option of 3pv. Again, to preserve the matchmaker, make casual the only mode of play available.

3) The hardcore and casual queues have roughly equal participation. This leaves PGI in a tricky spot, as it means they can no longer ignore the people who want 1pv only, but that there are also a significant number of people who either want 3pv or don't care if it's being used. They can't, however keep both queues as apparently it would ruin the matchmaking times, which means further research into the subject is needed.

I honestly suspect that someone at PGI has already run through these options and realized that the most likely outcome is behind door number three, and have elected to just make casual the only queue because it would be too hard to find another solution. What can they do if removing either 1pv or 3pv is untenable because it will make people mad, yet splitting the queues will be disastrous? Of course, if the game launches to a massive influx of new players, splitting the queues might work, but I somehow doubt that is going to happen.

#884 Mechwarrior28611

    Rookie

  • 5 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:07 AM

Making 12v12 pre-mades into 1PV only is not enough. I will not vote in a poll that is worded in such a way as to frame support for removal of 12v12 3PV as an admission that removal of 3PV and adding 1PV only queues in all modes is unwanted.

Quote

Players will never be forced to use or play against other players using 3rd person.
Promises must be kept.

Until then, all I can do is remember what WOPR said:

Quote

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.


#885 Kunae

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,303 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:08 AM

View Postaniviron, on 29 August 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

I just had a stunning idea!

So we're still technically in a beta, so let's make good use of it! Put in one week, one measly half of a patch cycle worth, of a hardcore queue. The stats should quickly realize one of three scenarios (since apparently one week is long enough to gather significant data, if you work for PGI):

1) The hardcore queue gets greater participation by a significant margin. This would be a sign that 1pv is going to be the dominant mode of play for some time to come, and that 3pv is misguided. Because split queues would apparently be a disaster, remove 3pv.

2) The casual queue gets greater participation by a significant margin. This means that either most players don't care enough about the 1pv vs 3pv issue to change off of the default option, or that players prefer to play with the option of 3pv. Again, to preserve the matchmaker, make casual the only mode of play available.

3) The hardcore and casual queues have roughly equal participation. This leaves PGI in a tricky spot, as it means they can no longer ignore the people who want 1pv only, but that there are also a significant number of people who either want 3pv or don't care if it's being used. They can't, however keep both queues as apparently it would ruin the matchmaking times, which means further research into the subject is needed.

I honestly suspect that someone at PGI has already run through these options and realized that the most likely outcome is behind door number three, and have elected to just make casual the only queue because it would be too hard to find another solution. What can they do if removing either 1pv or 3pv is untenable because it will make people mad, yet splitting the queues will be disastrous? Of course, if the game launches to a massive influx of new players, splitting the queues might work, but I somehow doubt that is going to happen.

If they would do anything like that, they would need to not make 3pv, or the 3pv queue, the default. Otherwise their numbers would be skewed.

#886 Crazyeyes244

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 174 posts
  • LocationPlanet Helen

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:11 AM

I like the idea of just testing the separate queues for just a week or two. I don't see how that is a ridiculous thing to ask. After all, this is a beta, right? :)

Bet you the metrics gathered in that week would be QUITE revealing...

EDIT:

Had a good idea of how to do it fairly:

When you queue, there are two check boxes, one for 1pv only, 1 for 3pv enabled. You can check one, or both if desired. Then the MM matches based on your choice. If you select 1pv forced, it matches you in a game with only 1pv players, if you select 3pv enabled it matches you similarly. Now if you select both it uses you to "fill in" any remaining spots in a game of either kind. This could get around "fragmenting" the player base by using the people who don't give a damn one way or the other as filler players.

Edited by Sam Donelly, 29 August 2013 - 08:16 AM.


#887 Hobo Dan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 597 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:12 AM

I respectfully abstain.

#888 Wolfways

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 6,499 posts
  • LocationIn a shutdown overheated mech near you.

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:18 AM

View PostSam Donelly, on 29 August 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

After all, this is a beta, right? :)

Tbh i'm not sure anymore. In the other beta's i've been in we tested everything and had open dialogue with the devs.
I just don't understand this...

#889 Wolfman74

    Rookie

  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:19 AM

I cannot vote because this poll does not have the option I feel we should get. This poll is bias in my opinion. I cannot always play 12v12 but I really don't want to play against 3pv. I don't understand why we can't vote on that option? 3vp play with 3vp and 1vp play with 1vp if the queues are low in a specific bracket then maybe the player should try the otherside.

#890 Karl Split

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 727 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:19 AM

I guess I should have known, PGI give us an olive branch, and what do a pile of people do? Abstain because it's not exactly what they want...

Geeze no helping some people. PGI could tell us all to shove it, it's their game after all.

And only 900 people voting is awful, PGI may as well shrug their shoulders and say ehh no one really cares make 3vp only viewpoint and be done with it.

No doubt im going to be yelled at and trolled for what i've said, but I will point out that people not voting is the reason we get lovely people like George Dubbya Bush, Tony Bliar and all the other mouthbreathers ruling us.

#891 Chrithu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,601 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:21 AM

View PostFoust, on 29 August 2013 - 05:52 AM, said:


Based on this verbiage I must abstain from voting.

Yes implies that I am ok with public matches remaining mixed. I am not.
No implies that I want to keep 12v12 matches mixed. I do not.

Please provide view mode selection for all players regardless of group size.


After rethinking things I agree with this sentiment and thusly deleted my vote aswell.

Also:

Good explanation what exactly our problem with 3rd pv is: here.

Poll with the real questions to be asked: here.

Edited by Jason Parker, 29 August 2013 - 08:24 AM.


#892 Kunae

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,303 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:22 AM

View PostKarl Split, on 29 August 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

I guess I should have known, PGI give us an olive branch, and what do a pile of people do? Abstain because it's not exactly what they want...

Geeze no helping some people. PGI could tell us all to shove it, it's their game after all.

And only 900 people voting is awful, PGI may as well shrug their shoulders and say ehh no one really cares make 3vp only viewpoint and be done with it.

No doubt im going to be yelled at and trolled for what i've said, but I will point out that people not voting is the reason we get lovely people like George Dubbya Bush, Tony Bliar and all the other mouthbreathers ruling us.

Cute perspective. Wrong, but cute.

Please understand this: This poll is biased, with both choices being effectively the same, in that they force you to agree to the removal of 1pv only, from pug queues, forever.

The only reasonable vote, is to not vote, and post in this thread why you didn't.

#893 Crazyeyes244

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 174 posts
  • LocationPlanet Helen

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:23 AM

View PostWolfways, on 29 August 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Tbh i'm not sure anymore. In the other beta's i've been in we tested everything and had open dialogue with the devs.
I just don't understand this...



Yeah, that was said more tongue-in-cheek... haha. This is labeled a beta but it definitely doesn't feel like isn't one.

#894 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:23 AM

View PostWolfways, on 29 August 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

I see lots of players saying their playing in a high elo. How do you know? Is there any info somewhere about it, and your level?
Several ways.

I've got a year of experience and thousands of drops. I'm pretty decent in my Heavy's and Assaults. I'm not a competitive person by nature, and I'm certainly not arrogant about my own skill set. What I am quite capable of is understanding what mistakes I made in a match, and why things went badly/well. In short, I'm perfectly capable of making decent judgements of skill, and understand where I am relative to those around me; and no - I don't simply assume I'm better than everyone else, or ever start from that assumption.

Pug matches in those - my heavies and assaults - tend to be full of other experienced players, and most of my matches tend to be filled with other players I know to be quite skilled at the game. The vast majority of my PUG drops there are are characterised by good teamwork despite the lack of decent communication, and players generally have well optimized mechs - it's extremely rare to find teammates sporting objectively bad builds, except the odd "fun" troll build.

I know my Lights are in terribad Elo bands - that was by design. I didn't play lights at all for a long time, so I started a smurfing project with them - I knew I was starting at the midpoint (new data set because I had no Elo data in lights at all) and then I ran nothing but a 4MG/Flamer spider(before MG's saw any buffs) and pretty much deliberately lost for a long, long time.

My Mediums? Same thing - Started at the midpoint with no other Medium Elo ranking, and while it's rare for me to see new players with them now, I do occassionally. But I know I'm not nearly as high with them; and it's reflected in the people around me.

But my heavies and assaults? I know for a fact that my Mediums are above the midpoint, but not a lot, but I never see those players in my Heavies or Assaults. So, clearly, the heavies and assaults are sufficiently higher to pull from other player groups.

Finally, I track my matches over time using a home built spreadsheet tool, where I import my stats daily from the website and track changes by date. This both helps work on performance, as I can see my stats relative to specific time periods and exclude data that would skew results. I consistently win more than I lose in my Assaults, by a pretty significant margin. This translates directly into an ever growing ranking, and in my case it's not skewed by group play which can lead to more wins at a lower individual skill level (a 4 man team on voice comms is more effective than 4 random players, irregardless of player skill). As such, my Elo placement is going to be as accurate as it can be, given the nature of the beast.


TLDR: I'm not just full of {Scrap}, spouting "I'm so awesome because I'm part of X group." or "..But I do great with my 2xLBX-AC10 build!

Quote

As to the blinky, i've seen jenners using it quite a lot. Not in combat obviously, but for reporting enemy positions (although rarely) and poptarting. Not just jenners but they seem to use it the most in the games i'm in anyway.
When i tested 3pv i found it very useful. Watch the enemy, until he turns away (they all do eventually), hit F4 while moving out of cover, and hit him in the back. Works very well with dual gauss :)

It's situationally useful. In organized play, it does absolutely impact how the game plays, as you can scout from safety. I make no argument there at all.

My argument is that while it's used occasionally in PUG play, it absolutely does not significantly impact gameplay there. There is some "safe" scouting - which does manifest in situations where you can do as you said above - but the 3PV does not help you hit better.

It was BAD in MW4. Really, really bad. 3PV gave you a far, far greater view, and - and this is the important part - it also was the best view for combat. Jumpsniping was all about staying in 3PV because it was the most effective way to play.

Here, it's just a scouting tool, and one with distinct disadvantages(along it's obvious advantages). If I were playing against you, in that example above, I would have seen your blinky (it's pretty obvious) and there's no way in hell I'd have turned away and let you plant gauss rounds in my back. What's more, I'd have relayed your position to my teammates.

Nobody needs to use 3PV in PUGging, and if you don't use it and your opponent does, you're not at a significant disadvantage against him. In competitive 12v12 matches, without locked 1PV mode, yeah, your scouts at least largely need to use it. But in PUG matches? No, you just don't need to, and it won't hurt you.

#895 Aym

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3,041 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:24 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 28 August 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

Proposal: Limit 12 v 12 pre-made group matches to 1PV only.
Release Date: Mid to Late September

Details: 12 man pre-made group matches will have 1PV enforced as the only useable view mode. Players will not be able to switch between 1PV and 3PV when playing in 12 v 12 pre-made match play.

This gives our core audience, who represent almost exclusively the 12 man team group play, a place to enjoy a pure 1PV experience.

The public queues will remain a mix of 1PV and 3PV modes and Hardcore mode will be removed from the drop down list. Future enhancements to the matchmaker will allow stricter tonnage limits, and encourage a more fair and level playing field for all MWO matches.

The great part is, when you FIRST put 3pv in, we figured it'd be a patch or two before the hardcore drop down thing worked. Now you reveal that it's only in there so that you could pull it out later? Wow, development time well spent.

#896 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:24 AM

View PostWolfways, on 29 August 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

I see lots of players saying their playing in a high elo. How do you know? Is there any info somewhere about it, and your level?
Several ways.

I've got a year of experience and thousands of drops. I'm pretty decent in my Heavy's and Assaults. I'm not a competitive person by nature, and I'm certainly not arrogant about my own skill set. What I am quite capable of is understanding what mistakes I made in a match, and why things went badly/well. In short, I'm perfectly capable of making decent judgements of skill, and understand where I am relative to those around me; and no - I don't simply assume I'm better than everyone else, or ever start from that assumption.

Pug matches in those - my heavies and assaults - tend to be full of other experienced players, and most of my matches tend to be filled with other players I know to be quite skilled at the game. The vast majority of my PUG drops there are are characterised by good teamwork despite the lack of decent communication, and players generally have well optimized mechs - it's extremely rare to find teammates sporting objectively bad builds, except the odd "fun" troll build.

I know my Lights are in terribad Elo bands - that was by design. I didn't play lights at all for a long time, so I started a smurfing project with them - I knew I was starting at the midpoint (new data set because I had no Elo data in lights at all) and then I ran nothing but a 4MG/Flamer spider(before MG's saw any buffs) and pretty much deliberately lost for a long, long time.

My Mediums? Same thing - Started at the midpoint with no other Medium Elo ranking, and while it's rare for me to see new players with them now, I do occassionally. But I know I'm not nearly as high with them; and it's reflected in the people around me.

But my heavies and assaults? I know for a fact that my Mediums are above the midpoint, but not a lot, but I never see those players in my Heavies or Assaults. So, clearly, the heavies and assaults are sufficiently higher to pull from other player groups.

Finally, I track my matches over time using a home built spreadsheet tool, where I import my stats daily from the website and track changes by date. This both helps work on performance, as I can see my stats relative to specific time periods and exclude data that would skew results. I consistently win more than I lose in my Assaults, by a pretty significant margin. This translates directly into an ever growing ranking, and in my case it's not skewed by group play which can lead to more wins at a lower individual skill level (a 4 man team on voice comms is more effective than 4 random players, irregardless of player skill). As such, my Elo placement is going to be as accurate as it can be, given the nature of the beast.


TLDR: I'm not just full of {Scrap}, spouting "I'm so awesome because I'm part of X group." or "..But I do great with my 2xLBX-AC10 build!

Quote

As to the blinky, i've seen jenners using it quite a lot. Not in combat obviously, but for reporting enemy positions (although rarely) and poptarting. Not just jenners but they seem to use it the most in the games i'm in anyway.
When i tested 3pv i found it very useful. Watch the enemy, until he turns away (they all do eventually), hit F4 while moving out of cover, and hit him in the back. Works very well with dual gauss :)

It's situationally useful. In organized play, it does absolutely impact how the game plays, as you can scout from safety. I make no argument there at all.

My argument is that while it's used occasionally in PUG play, it absolutely does not significantly impact gameplay there. There is some "safe" scouting - which does manifest in situations where you can do as you said above - but the 3PV does not help you hit better.

It was BAD in MW4. Really, really bad. 3PV gave you a far, far greater view, and - and this is the important part - it also was the best view for combat. Jumpsniping was all about staying in 3PV because it was the most effective way to play.

Here, it's just a scouting tool, and one with distinct disadvantages(along it's obvious advantages). If I were playing against you, in that example above, I would have seen your blinky (it's pretty obvious) and there's no way in hell I'd have turned away and let you plant gauss rounds in my back. What's more, I'd have relayed your position to my teammates.

Nobody needs to use 3PV in PUGging, and if you don't use it and your opponent does, you're not at a significant disadvantage against him. In competitive 12v12 matches, without locked 1PV mode, yeah, your scouts at least largely need to use it. But in PUG matches? No, you just don't need to, and it won't hurt you.

#897 Tolkien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • Giant Helper
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:24 AM

View PostWolfman74, on 29 August 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

I cannot vote because this poll does not have the option I feel we should get. This poll is bias in my opinion. I cannot always play 12v12 but I really don't want to play against 3pv. I don't understand why we can't vote on that option? 3vp play with 3vp and 1vp play with 1vp if the queues are low in a specific bracket then maybe the player should try the otherside.


see my signature and vote in the unbiased (or less biased) version of the poll run by the community.


View PostKarl Split, on 29 August 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

I guess I should have known, PGI give us an olive branch, and what do a pile of people do? Abstain because it's not exactly what they want...

Geeze no helping some people. PGI could tell us all to shove it, it's their game after all.

And only 900 people voting is awful, PGI may as well shrug their shoulders and say ehh no one really cares make 3vp only viewpoint and be done with it.

No doubt im going to be yelled at and trolled for what i've said, but I will point out that people not voting is the reason we get lovely people like George Dubbya Bush, Tony Bliar and all the other mouthbreathers ruling us.


Karl the devs are being disingenuous by putting this up and you know it. They are asking such a loaded question while they already know the answer
Posted Image

So they are insulting the playerbase again with this sham of a poll where voting 'yes' keeps 12 man in 1pv, but mixes all the other queues, and 'no' just keeps everything mixed....

some 'fair and balanced' polling there.

#898 Myssi

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts
  • LocationFinland

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:25 AM

Unable to vote.
I don't play competitive or group up with 12 people, but I want to play 1PV only.

But as someone earlier mentioned, we're still in beta so why don't you just allow the Hardcore mode and see what happens. It really can't hurt you, can it now?

Edited by Myssi, 29 August 2013 - 08:28 AM.


#899 Buyao

    Member

  • Pip
  • The Warden
  • The Warden
  • 16 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:25 AM

Came right back when I heard a friend say PGI is going to consider 1PV que. Wasn't expecting this type of poll, and so I

withheld my vote. I have a question though. How much resource would it cost PGI to institute a separate que?


If it doesn't cost that much, and apparently there are only 5% of us of the total player population, why not make a separate que? I mean we 5000 people can play in our own que, and it won't really affect the other 95% in their 3pv/1pv mixed que right? Shouldn't this make everyone happy?

#900 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:29 AM

Rest assured everyone... the Community Warfare that PGI is promoting is right under your nose as a substitute for the real thing (until, whenever that even comes).

Hint: It's this and other related threads.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 August 2013 - 08:31 AM.






11 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 11 guests, 0 anonymous users