134 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

Well, let's put it this way; it sure as hell couldn't be any worse than it is now. Elo isn't functioning properly anyway because of grouped players. My guess is that you wouldn't notice any difference.

I'd much rather see a solo-only queue with Elo enabled.

[Syllogy]

Removing elo would be great. My K/D and W/L would go back up dramatically.

The downside would be the greater influx of "Teamwork is OP and must be nerfed" threads.

[Kunae]

Syllogy, on 22 October 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

The downside would be the greater influx of "Teamwork is OP and must be nerfed" threads.

Like we still don't have an overabundance of those threads right now.

[Roland]

Ghogiel, on 22 October 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

Cool, this way I won't have to have 4 failed to find matches in a row for every match I do get with my assaults AND I will be able to roflstomp 90% of my matches while I premade with 3 other vets.

But that's the thing.. Elo isn't really working in our matches anyway.

Aside from the people you are grouped with, aren't you finding that it's a roll of the dice in terms of who gets put on your team? Cause there are obviously people who are playing in the games that you and I are in often, who seemingly have absolutely no idea how to play... like, don't even grasp the basic fundamentals of movement and {Scrap}.

If Elo was working, those folks wouldn't be in those games anyway.

But what ends up happening is that there ends up being a large skill disparity anyway.. But ALSO a large tonnage disparity. So what's the point of Elo at that point? I mean, I consistently see the same folks in our games, with folks like Wispsy and Kaffeangst and you, but there are also consistently players who are obviously totally new to the game.

And it sucks when the system gives you a match where the tonnage is totally off.. That's just way, way more unfair than a skill disparity.

If you lose because of a skill disparity, that's fine.. because that's how competitive games work. But when you are equally skilled but lose due to a tonnage disparity, it just isn't fair.

Honestly, it'd be great if we had some magical matchmaker that always matched stuff up perfectly in all regards.. but we aren't ever gonna get that. So I'd rather make sure tonnage is balanced, and leave the determining factor of who wins up to the skill of the players.

[Drasari]

I would have to agreed that some test needs to be conducted but one or two weeks is to short. I would say one month would/could allow for enough gathering of metrics to see the difference.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Don't worry, they are going to turn off Elo with CW.

At that point Elo will be voluntary. If you want the planet with the best resources, You have to be good enough to take it from whoever is there.

If you want to roll noobs all day long and pad your stats, just go for low resource planets (although at one point PGI was toying with the idea of seperate theaters for Mercs and Houses, with the theory that noobs would be house factions protected from the front line fighting done by merc corps.

Of course it will all fall apart because the economy difference between a high resource world and low resource world will be miniscule and veteran teams will get more C-Bills rolling newbies.
Or worse, the reward with be an MC discount on camo and paint.

[Mechteric]

PUGSTOMPASAURUS LOVES NOT HAVING ELO

[Bagheera]

Kunae, on 22 October 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

This isn't about ego. This is about throwing new players, in trial mechs, in with people who've played 7000 matches... on purpose. This is what the current, broken, Elo system is doing. And, as Roland pointed out, it's doing this in preference to balancing the weight-classes between sides.

At least with no Elo, you will get a much more varied and mixed distribution of players in any given match.

Yeah. They really, really need to change that setup and start matching players who are closer together. Sure, if there were actually a voice client for Randoms and the experienced players could communicate effectively with the new players, it might work - but it would really be better for people to play "in-bracket," whatever that would mean. Maybe that's not possible for <Reasons>, so basing the matchmaker for Randoms on mech rather than player might be the way to go.

Frankly, the first dividing line for the matchmaker should be "Does mech have any L2 tech installed, Y/N?" Any single instance of DHS, Endo, Ferro, Artemis, etc and the player gets bumped into the "Yes" bracket. It's a simple split that would prevent trial, stock, or otherwise not "optimal" builds getting matched against/with builds bristling with L2 tech, extra mobility/firepower/armor, likely mastered with Mr.7000 matches behind the mouse.

Edited by Bagheera, 22 October 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[Wolfways]

PGI made it clear that even in Beta they didn't want to let players test things that differed from PGI's opinion on how things should work.

[RandomLurker]

Agreed.

I think I just got into the all-sniping ELO bracket, and it's boring as hell. Granted, I don't like sniping and thus my builds tend to die horribly, but an even bigger problem is that every match plays out exactly the same.

Mixing up player skill levels might not be strictly fair, but it does result in much more dynamic games. I much preferred the old system that balanced the approximate number of ELO on each side (high-high, low-low, etc) then this one that tries to match you with as many equally rated players as possible.

[Screech]

I think they have all the data from the matches before Elo was set in place. I am sure if you asked nicely they might give you all the data and you can head down to the laboratory and do some science.

[Wispsy]

Well if you wish to unleash us I am always happy with more prey.

[FupDup]

Wispsy, on 22 October 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

Well if you wish to unleash us I am always happy with more prey.

Their lives aren't gonna claim themselves you know!

[Grym]

I agree to a degree.

Id rather see people classified as 1 of 2 elo's.

veteran and noob

Divy teams up by class of mech and vet/noob stat. Im sick of getting stuck on a team with 5 trial mechs who alpha every shot and almost always take the heaviest trial mech available.

[-Natural Selection-]

mike29tw, on 22 October 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

I predict no noticeable difference after they remove ELO matchmaking.

I am with ^^ this guy. I am still trying to figure out after a year of playing how some don't see the groups as anything but random. I see the self-proclaimed top level players to guys wandering around eating glue in drop after drop. In other games I have played where you are matched you see a before and after score based on outcome. If I get 100+ match score 9/10 games I play, does that mean I have no place to go from there?

[Captain Stiffy]

First and foremost: The only way to get better is by playing against people that are WAY better than you are.

If I could I would always have myself at the top of the elo because that is the way I am going to gain skill the fastest: by watching and emulating those strategies that the best players use. By isolating the inexperienced from the experienced you are trapping them in dungeon. I freely share knowledge and strategy with anyone in the game because I want everyone to be the best opponents and allies that they can be. I want the greatest challenge possible.

I think that the "matchmaker" is a horrible thing even in concept.

I think that isolating skill levels greatly dumbs the game down. It also allows very good players to make new free accounts and storm the newbs or bomb their elo and do the same. I simply don't understand players who complain that they were matched against opponents that are 'too good'. The moment that you are capable of making this complaint you have outgrown it!

How long is it going to be before a large percentage of the playerbase is no longer a bunch of sniveling noooooobs?

You can view the number of nubs in the game as a sliding scale... as time goes on less players are inexperienced.

Should we want to make the game for the nubs that soon won't exist in large numbers or want make the game with staying power?

TLDR: Matchmaker isolates noobs and prevents them from gaining skill quickly. I agree with the OP that the 'matchmaker' simply needs to go and also that it does not really work at all (or, help me out here devs, PLEASE!) as it is implemented it simply is not understandable by people not privy to the monthly meeting about it and the code surrounding it.

Edited by Captain Stiffy, 22 October 2013 - 09:54 PM.

[akpavker]

Captain Stiffy, on 22 October 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

I agree with the OP that the 'matchmaker' simply needs to go and also that it does not really work at all (or, help me out here devs, PLEASE!) as it is implemented it simply is not understandable by people not privy to the monthly meeting about it and the code surrounding it.

i agree the match maker doesn't work properly. if we have to be matched up with these tools that sit at the start for 5 minutes trying to work out what button will get the mech moving or run and hide on the other side of the map, ditch this {Scrap} that you feed us about elo and the match up system. i dont place myself as the top player on the server but im fare better then the garbage that i get matched with most of the time.

[Ghogiel]

Roland, on 22 October 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Aside from the people you are grouped with, aren't you finding that it's a roll of the dice in terms of who gets put on your team?

No. Well, not If I take my assaults. More than 90% of the games I play in those I will either have tough matches with 4 man try hard premades every round on both teams or I'll get failed to find matches.

Without Elo the bulk of the matches will be quite similar to if I smurf in an alt account right now. In the middle there is the vast bulk of players and that's who will compose the majority of games. With a smattering of the top/bottom 10% of the player base every half dozen game or so.

[xengk]

How does removing ELO and implementing Weight Limit prevent a new player in a trial Atlas(C ) getting match up against a veteran with a customized Atlas?

The skilled pilot will still trump the new guy, but at least the new guy feels good about losing to a same weight class mech.
But then this is a team game, a skill pilot in any weight class will still trump the new guy's trial Atlas(C ) and the sour feeling of being stack against comes in again.

The result would be similar with the current MM.

[Captain Stiffy]

Ghogiel, on 22 October 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

No. Well, not If I take my assaults. More than 90% of the games I play in those I will either have tough matches with 4 man try hard premades every round on both teams or I'll get failed to find matches.

Without Elo the bulk of the matches will be quite similar to if I smurf in an alt account right now. In the middle there is the vast bulk of players and that's who will compose the majority of games. With a smattering of the top/bottom 10% of the player base every half dozen game or so.

I'm starting to think that 8v8 was way better