398 replies to this topic

[Tannhauser Gate]

I agree. MWO is not a finished game. Alot of issues remain. Its annoying that weve invested all this money into a game based on hype and promises. However, Im not as angry as other people. I just assumed that MWO would take ages to become the game I wanted it to be. Im still here. Im a founder and Im cool with that. I will not be buying into their big mech sales programs until the game is more community friendly. The big packages will always be there.

[Sandpit]

Roland, on 29 October 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Honestly, I'm not even talking just about the inability to replicate any of the league play that we had in the old MW4 planetary leagues (which would be great).

The fact that we can play with 1-4 people.. and then if more folks show up, they are just screwed and can't play with us, is totally absurd. It's driving people away from the game.

And it's been in place for months now, and tons of units have hemorrhaged players as a result. And we keep telling PGI about this, and they simply do not care at all. They don't even respond or acknowledge that this is even an issue for us.

Since Phoenix came out, some folks started returning to the game.. and then we immediately had the same issue we had previously. 4 folks will be on, and then some 5th guy shows up... and, inevitably, someone will just leave to make a spot for that new player.

So then, instead of having 5 people playing, and then 6, and then 7, etc.... you have 4, and that's it.

And then we are left with all of these reasons for not implementing a better matchmaking system, or better grouping queues.. That we can't do that, because the player base is too small.

THE PLAYER BASE IS SMALL BECAUSE THE CURRENT SYSTEM DRIVES PLAYERS AWAY.

And no, I don't want to just pugstomp. Hell, I'd play in the 12 man queue undermanned with pugs filling the slots if we were able.. I'd gladdly give pugs a solo queue. I just want to be able to play with my freaking friends without jumping through hoops. Why the hell can't we do that?

I'm not disputing or defending it, just stating why I think it's being done. That's just how it seems to me. It really feels like they caved to everyone jumping on the blame premades bandwagon and started this. All of the group limits and things you see right now are a direct result of players complaining about premades being OP. This goes all the way back into CB. Many of us saw this coming and knew it wouldn't change anything. Until PGI realizes that it's not a premade vs. pug thing and more of a new player in stock mechs going against vets in customized mechs thing nothing will ever change unfortunately

[Literally]

If they wanted to fix the premade stomp problem, PGI would fix their broken ELO system and account for increased player efficacy when playing with people they often play with. Blizzard has an excellent example of this which works very well - playing with someone on a team in Starcraft creates a new ELO score for your combination. The maths of applying that to multiple combinations of friends in larger groups are trivial. The only problem would be that it would take some time to collect data for appropriate group ELO on people like Goons, who often play with many effectively interchangeable teammates when playing below the most competitive levels.
These are things that many of us just sitting at our computers could figure out. It's a mystery why PGI doesn't at least *try* dealing with the biggest issues, instead of prioritizing useless projects like ghost heat and the other ghost boondoggles.

[Tannhauser Gate]

This thread is becoming another "PGI is incompetent and MWO is failing" thread. I dont agree on either account. Yes, MWO is not on schedule. The launch was very soft, as expected, and yes many issue remain. But people need to get a grip and be patient. Its late but it will come. If you dont want to pay content then dont. If you think its not worthy of your support then dont, plain and simple. For those who think will fail, lets talk in a years time. I think MWO will be far better and closer to its planned goal. If you not, you are welcome to say "I told you so".

[Roland]

Literally, on 29 October 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

If they wanted to fix the premade stomp problem, PGI would fix their broken ELO system and account for increased player efficacy when playing with people they often play with. Blizzard has an excellent example of this which works very well - playing with someone on a team in Starcraft creates a new ELO score for your combination. The maths of applying that to multiple combinations of friends in larger groups are trivial. The only problem would be that it would take some time to collect data for appropriate group ELO on people like Goons, who often play with many effectively interchangeable teammates when playing below the most competitive levels.
These are things that many of us just sitting at our computers could figure out. It's a mystery why PGI doesn't at least *try* dealing with the biggest issues, instead of prioritizing useless projects like ghost heat and the other ghost boondoggles.

This is probably the best suggestion for improving the Elo system that I have seen so far, although I suspect that it won't really fix the matchmaking.

In Mechwarrior, the specific mech configurations are just far too different compared to what most other games incorporate. For a game like starcraft, you play a race, and that race is always the same... it's not like mechwarrior, where you have a wide variety of potential mechs, tonnage, weaponry, etc.

In a game like starcraft, the game is presumably fair, no matter who you play. Same goes for Chess. Skill will determine the winner.

But in Mechwarrior, things like how much tonnage you bring to the field is very important.

If I have a Highlander, and you have a hunchback, and we are equally skilled, you are almost guaranteed to lose. You will need to be MUCH better than me to overcome the armor and weaponry advantage I have. And Elo doesn't account for that.

LakeDaemon, on 29 October 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

For those who think will fail, lets talk in a years time. I think MWO will be far better and closer to its planned goal. If you not, you are welcome to say "I told you so".

I bet that if you looked, you could find a post made by someone from a year ago which said exactly this.

[fil5000]

LakeDaemon, on 29 October 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

This thread is becoming another "PGI is incompetent and MWO is failing" thread. I dont agree on either account. Yes, MWO is not on schedule. The launch was very soft, as expected, and yes many issue remain. But people need to get a grip and be patient. Its late but it will come. If you dont want to pay content then dont. If you think its not worthy of your support then dont, plain and simple. For those who think will fail, lets talk in a years time. I think MWO will be far better and closer to its planned goal. If you not, you are welcome to say "I told you so".

That's interesting, because it looks to me like there's as much "SHUT UP YOU IDIOTS THE SCORE IS FINE" as there is "OH GOD THE GAME IS AWFUL". As usual, there's a lot of examples of both sides of the debate trying to shut each other down with stupid ad hominem attacks and other such garbage.

MWO isn't completely broken or ruined, but it's a long way away from what PGI led everyone to believe it would be by the time it launched, and it's missing an awful lot of features of what PGI has described the full package as being. 83% seems a really high score for PC Gamer to give the game in it's current state (where the core stompy robot action is sound but everything that surrounds it is decidedly wonky), and it's nearly 20 points higher than the current metacritic review average (not the user score, that's significantly lower and has been skewed on both sides by garbage high and low scores). It's five points higher than the previously highest review score as well (Gamingtrend gave it 77%), so it's quite reasonable to look at that score with some skepticism.

Edited by fil5000, 29 October 2013 - 01:44 PM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

I think the score is high. Id give MWO a 70. Good combat sim, great re-envisioned mechs, all the content so far is on target with most of the BT dreamers out there. Its a solid combat game seed. Now its time to grow this b*tch. It could be 83, or in the 90s, if it lives up to PGI's announced plans. Crossing fingers, toes, eyes, everything that can be crossed. Yes even those.

[-Natural Selection-]

Roland, on 29 October 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Honestly, I'm not even talking just about the inability to replicate any of the league play that we had in the old MW4 planetary leagues (which would be great).

The fact that we can play with 1-4 people.. and then if more folks show up, they are just screwed and can't play with us, is totally absurd. It's driving people away from the game.

And it's been in place for months now, and tons of units have hemorrhaged players as a result. And we keep telling PGI about this, and they simply do not care at all. They don't even respond or acknowledge that this is even an issue for us.

Since Phoenix came out, some folks started returning to the game.. and then we immediately had the same issue we had previously. 4 folks will be on, and then some 5th guy shows up... and, inevitably, someone will just leave to make a spot for that new player.

So then, instead of having 5 people playing, and then 6, and then 7, etc.... you have 4, and that's it.

And then we are left with all of these reasons for not implementing a better matchmaking system, or better grouping queues.. That we can't do that, because the player base is too small.

THE PLAYER BASE IS SMALL BECAUSE THE CURRENT SYSTEM DRIVES PLAYERS AWAY.

And no, I don't want to just pugstomp. Hell, I'd play in the 12 man queue undermanned with pugs filling the slots if we were able.. I'd gladdly give pugs a solo queue. I just want to be able to play with my freaking friends without jumping through hoops. Why the hell can't we do that?

^^ this this this this and freaking this again....

Every day 2 or 3 are on playing MWO in a group and more start to log on. The group fills to 4 than then the 5th comes on. Out of kindness one will say "ehh I'll drop and play something else". THEY DONT STAY TO PLAY ALONE. Then more log on and they just drop into the game the other guy went to. Then before long we all just drop and play the game that lets us "ALL" play.

So few games limit you to 4, and funny how few people in those games ***** about it. This game SCREAMS for a single player mode with AI bots for those who cant wrap their head around having friends or playing as a team.

Edited by Dozier, 29 October 2013 - 02:21 PM.

[Deathlike]

Literally, on 29 October 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

If they wanted to fix the premade stomp problem, PGI would fix their broken ELO system and account for increased player efficacy when playing with people they often play with. Blizzard has an excellent example of this which works very well - playing with someone on a team in Starcraft creates a new ELO score for your combination. The maths of applying that to multiple combinations of friends in larger groups are trivial. The only problem would be that it would take some time to collect data for appropriate group ELO on people like Goons, who often play with many effectively interchangeable teammates when playing below the most competitive levels.
These are things that many of us just sitting at our computers could figure out. It's a mystery why PGI doesn't at least *try* dealing with the biggest issues, instead of prioritizing useless projects like ghost heat and the other ghost boondoggles.

I don't think the maths are trivial on that... only the core concept of "how more often you win with players you have played with longer".

Otherwise, mostly agreeing there.

[Roland]

Dozier, on 29 October 2013 - 02:20 PM, said:

^^ this this this this and freaking this again....

Every day 2 or 3 are on playing MWO in a group and more start to log on. The group fills to 4 than then the 5th comes on. Out of kindness one will say "ehh I'll drop and play something else". THEY DONT STAY TO PLAY ALONE. Then more log on and they just drop into the game the other guy went to. Then before long we all just drop and play the game that lets us "ALL" play.

This is, literally, exactly what happens with our server. The exact same sequence described here.

And there are a ton of other units who have described the same thing happening to them.

This is negatively impacting the community. It is hindering the growth of our player base, and that exacerbates a ton of other problems that we see with matchmaking in general.

[Miekael]

Literally, on 29 October 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

If they wanted to fix the premade stomp problem...

I still feel in game VOIP would have went a long way in to solving the "premade problem," but if you notice the thread below this one, and the date it was made, you get a clear idea on where that sits on the priority list.

[xhrit]

Schrottfrosch, on 29 October 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

I think prices are fair - just look at world of tanks - Löwe premium tank cost 51.95 $ - ok there is a garage slot inclusive...

And look at where world of tanks was at its launch; it had what? 7 maps, and 2 game modes?

[Ecto Cooler]

Woe is me, a video game didn't live up to my expectations. Maybe I'll quit and go play one I like.

But no, then I couldn't have self-pity and incessant whining, I'll stick with the one I don't like and keep griping over how it's not what I wanted it to be. That should help drive away any new players too.

[Roland]

Ecto Cooler, on 29 October 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Woe is me, a video game didn't live up to my expectations. Maybe I'll quit and go play one I like.

But no, then I couldn't have self-pity and incessant whining, I'll stick with the one I don't like and keep griping over how it's not what I wanted it to be. That should help drive away any new players too.

You showed up a month ago.
Other folks care more about this game than you do.

[Ecto Cooler]

Roland, on 29 October 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

You showed up a month ago.
Other folks care more about this game than you do.

A lot of people really show it by bashing the game non-stop and doing everything to detract people from playing. Those who care about the game and want it to do better aren't who my comments are directed at. Guilty conscience?

There are plenty of people who care more about placating to a cancer that is on these forums than improving MW:O. This thread is a perfect example of those people.

Edited by Ecto Cooler, 29 October 2013 - 05:23 PM.

[Hellcat420]

well since they probably gave the game 30-40 points for being a pc only game that score seems about right. id personally give the game a 50ish score as it stands now due to the game missing 90% of the important features.

Edited by Hellcat420, 29 October 2013 - 05:59 PM.

[fil5000]

Ecto Cooler, on 29 October 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Woe is me, a video game didn't live up to my expectations. Maybe I'll quit and go play one I like.

But no, then I couldn't have self-pity and incessant whining, I'll stick with the one I don't like and keep griping over how it's not what I wanted it to be. That should help drive away any new players too.

Do you think it's useful to call any example of criticism "whining"? Do you think that helps anything? You've said in previous posts that "the toxic community" nearly stopped you from playing, how do you see your posts instructing people to shut up and go away fit into that?

[Ecto Cooler]

fil5000, on 30 October 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

Do you think it's useful to call any example of criticism "whining"? Do you think that helps anything? You've said in previous posts that "the toxic community" nearly stopped you from playing, how do you see your posts instructing people to shut up and go away fit into that?

Constructive criticism is fine, but seems to be a rarity. The majority of opinions seems to be angsty, jaded gamers who won't move on. Plenty of examples of that in this thread and others.

[Heffay]

fil5000, on 30 October 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

how do you see your posts instructing people to shut up and go away fit into that?

Most people who decide to stop doing something just stop doing it. They don't hang around for 6 months telling everyone else that they are unhappy and that you should be too.

Normal people go to see therapists for that part of the process. We're not your therapist. We don't care where PGI touched you.

[fil5000]

Heffay, on 30 October 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

Most people who decide to stop doing something just stop doing it. They don't hang around for 6 months telling everyone else that they are unhappy and that you should be too.

Normal people go to see therapists for that part of the process. We're not your therapist. We don't care where PGI touched you.

I don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not one of the people saying the game is horrible.