69 replies to this topic

[Almond Brown]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 31 October 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

It is easy to tell when the the population drops, game quality goes down the tube as well.
Last night I was working on my Battlemaster's, a weight class with which I am mediocre. For several hours I played in largely well balanced and fun matches. Then at 10PM PDT (1 AM Eastern), it was like hitting a light swtich, and for the next hour my all of my matches were one sided stomps. it was particularly annoying for a couple reasons:
1. because I always ended up on the losing team (aside from not being fun I got little cbill/xp)
2. because and the matcher rushed me into those matches, no waiting for a better match-up. I mean take your time I don't mind waiting a couple minutes if it means I can have a fun match, especially during off hours.

The point being that population is time-sensative. I don't know what the overall population is doing, but it definitely ebbs and flows with the hour of the day. I suspect many PUG players probably just quit playing at those hours which exacerbates the problem. Personally I know it isn't worth my time to grind through loss after loss, especially when I am just trying to grind XPs (as opposed to playing mechs of choice for fun).

I don't know what PGIs solution is but I would love to be able to manually manipulate the matchmaker. For instance put in a matchmaker tolerance, where tell the matchmaker how long I am willing to wait for a match, and the maximum deviation of Elo and weight class.

Agreed. Sleep is overrated. Nerf Sleep.

[J0anna]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 05:22 AM, said:

I don't know Void, I consider myself a reasonable player. Am I out of touch cause I am a 34 year veteran of gaming?

Not really, I don't mind the challenge, but it does get trying having more than 1/2 your team do less than 200 damage (100 for lights). Had a drop last night, 2 assaults (2 highlanders) vs 6 (4 atlai and 2 battlemasters), started a man down, then the second assault on my team dropped. The match effectively ended there, it happens.

I'm not into weight limits, ELO should be skill based first, but it should attempt to keep classes balanced. But like you, I just try to do my best and don't let the small stuff bother me.

What I'd really like to see is a simple ELO modifier based on the number of drops. For example 0.5 if you're less than 250 drops, 0.75 if you're less than 1000, 1.0 if you're less than 5000, and 1.5 above that (whatever, tweak the numbers), I just prefer to not be explaining how to group weapons to a new player while in combat. Additionally, I feel players with many drops 'get' the game and tend to make for better matches. They're more likely to listen to simple commands and appreciate someone trying to provide direction.

And speaking about groups, I don't get the reluctance of people to speak up if they are in a 4 man group. I find it so much easier to get people to follow what you're doing once you tell them you're in a 4 man. Knowing you're with a 4 man seems to raise the level of play of the PUGs almost every time.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

Its been a while since I did this in a Centurion. I killed one Atlas fresh, an a second that was damaged... Using the stock AC10. I would never try it in a Stock Dragon, as I feel the Mech has ALWAYS been under gunned. On the other hand I have played most of my games in a D-DC and I have been killed by every other Mech in the game at least once. As I said, If I cannot overcome a heavier or lighter Mech(in my case they are all lighter) I was not the better warrior in the contest.

a 200 ton weight advantage is mere 16 tons per Mech. 200 Ton advantage is not a lot to overcome.

I seem to be one of the only players willing to own that truth!

And in a TEAM based game, a 1v1 against a weight mismatch such as the one noted should be the extreme exception, not the rule.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 01 November 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

And in a TEAM based game, a 1v1 against a weight mismatch such as the one noted should be the extreme exception, not the rule.

You really think so? I have a 65 ton advantage vs several of our Light Pilots, I have yet to beat 3 or 4 of them even once. It isn't the weapon, its the warrior that loses.

[Kunae]

Moenrg, on 01 November 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

And speaking about groups, I don't get the reluctance of people to speak up if they are in a 4 man group. I find it so much easier to get people to follow what you're doing once you tell them you're in a 4 man. Knowing you're with a 4 man seems to raise the level of play of the PUGs almost every time.

It's a response to the bigotry that you see, especially here on the forums, against the "evil premades". There have been times, in the past, where once certain people found out you were in a premade, they'd do something similar to the following:

Disconnect immediately.
Berate you for "acting superior".
Purposefully damage your mechs.
Disrupt the game by giving the enemy intel.
Suicide into the enemy.
Suicide off the map.

It became habit not to let people know, under those circumstances.

[Vodrin Thales]

Joseph Mallan, on 31 October 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

But that will take away the ability of a Command to be an Assault Company. 3-5 Assaults, 3-5 heavies 2-6 Mediums and/or Lights

This is coming anyways. PGI has stated they will be implementing drop tonnage limits after UI 2.0 is completed and active. There will be a limit on any group of 2 or more and it will be up to the players to bring mechs within the limit.

More in line with the original subject of this post, I find that my won/loss depends much more on my quality of play than anything else. In matches where I exercise good situational awareness and don't get myself in a position where I can be rolled over by the enemy team I generally do well. Will a lose a couple of matches because my team sucks independently of me? Sure. But when I have a long streak of losing it is almost always largely my fault.

Edited by Vodrin Thales, 01 November 2013 - 08:11 AM.

[Kunae]

Vodrin Thales, on 01 November 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

This is coming anyways. PGI has stated they will be implementing drop tonnage limits after UI 2.0 is completed and active. There will be a limit on any group of 2 or more and it will be up to the players to bring mechs within the limit.

So... around this time next year... maybe?

[Joseph Mallan]

Vodrin Thales, on 01 November 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

This is coming anyways. PGI has stated they will be implementing drop tonnage limits after UI 2.0 is completed and active. There will be a limit on any group of 2 or more and it will be up to the players to bring mechs within the limit.

Stupid! Unless they have variable cap limit depending on the type of unit. Even then, a Hussar or Light Horse should be allowed to lock horns with a heavier unit. You cannot say you are competitive and then say this that and the other is unfair. Competitive means you take any comer and fight to the finish. If you are out matched what have you lost? If you pull off a victory, you have more bragging rights. Either way, you have nothing to be ashamed of.

[Timslim]

Whatever the solution is it can only be a good thing... I'm so fed up with seeing almost entirely Assault and Heavy mech drops. Yes I accept in Canon there are Assault companies...but they are notable for being the exception not the rule.... I would prefer a system that makes Mediums the most common (as they are in cannon) to memory they should make up approx. 40% of all mechs. Some sort of weight matching is utterly required but I think the idea above of having a set number of each class with a small variation is best.. I suspect that some will get upset at having to wait longer for a game if they want to drive their beloved op AST DDC's but if you don't want to wait, try a different class... If not then the game will just drift slowly upwards so that everyone ends up driving assault mechs which im sure we all agree would not be good for the game. Oh and Mr Mallan I understand your point that one atlas cannot beat 4 lights... and I agree that pilot skill is important however if you have 12 assaults vs 12 lights its not going to end well for the lights. The point is its a team 'game' and games should be fair (ish) and balanced (ish) ....... now perhaps I should have a go in that atlas trial mech.....

[Joseph Mallan]

No Tim, I was not saying I cannot beat 4 lights... I I usually can't BTW, but I meant, in a 1 v 1 there are at least 3-4 Light pilots that smoke me every drop Jenner v Atlas. Those Pilots are far better utilizing the weapon they have and proven it over and over again. I have also been in a Drop where 4 YLW wiped up the floor with our 8man. It's the man, not the weapon.

[Kunae]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

It's the man, not the weapon.

Or... perhaps it's how the man uses his "weapon"...

[Magna Canus]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

No Tim, I was not saying I cannot beat 4 lights... I I usually can't BTW, but I meant, in a 1 v 1 there are at least 3-4 Light pilots that smoke me every drop Jenner v Atlas. Those Pilots are far better utilizing the weapon they have and proven it over and over again. I have also been in a Drop where 4 YLW wiped up the floor with our 8man. It's the man, not the weapon.

Could it be maybe that lights in general, Jenners in specific, are just too fast for an Atlas to track and hit most of the time? That in fact the "weapon" he is using has a specific advantage over the one you are using (e.g. size, speed, etc.)?

In the history of armed conflicts better weapons and greater numbers were always the deciding factor, not "the man".

[Joseph Mallan]

Magnakanus, on 01 November 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

Could it be maybe that lights in general, Jenners in specific, are just too fast for an Atlas to track and hit most of the time? That in fact the "weapon" he is using has a specific advantage over the one you are using (e.g. size, speed, etc.)?

In the history of armed conflicts better weapons and greater numbers were always the deciding factor, not "the man".

Maybe, but that doesn't explain why I can smash some Jenners with sadistic satisfaction and never come close to winning v Daeso. Put the weapons on the field without the man see how well they win a war. Even an Atomic bomb needs to have someone press the button for it to be effective. I do believe the Tiger tank was superior to the Sherman But I have heard we had 5 or more Shermans in the field to each Tiger. Also see force concentration. In a trench line on Okinawa my 4 man fire team "killed" all of 2nd Platoon. Words like "always" are faulty generalization.

[Magna Canus]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

Maybe, but that doesn't explain why I can smash some Jenners with sadistic satisfaction and never come close to winning v Daeso. Put the weapons on the field without the man see how well they win a war. Even an Atomic bomb needs to have someone press the button for it to be effective. I do believe the Tiger tank was superior to the Sherman But I have heard we had 5 or more Shermans in the field to each Tiger. Also see force concentration. In a trench line on Okinawa my 4 man fire team "killed" all of 2nd Platoon. Words like "always" are faulty generalization.

Ok, I agree that "always" is too general, but saying "the man is the only deciding factor" is similarly too general. In a battle between two people of similar skill luck and equipment are the deciding factors "most of the time". Even if the argument is that skill is the "real factor" then the MM needs to work better because I see too many lopsided battles like the OP. Not everybody seems to have that issue, but enough have as far as I read on the forums. No QQing on my side here, but a long streak of rolls is frustrating for new and experienced players alike and that is the spirit of the OP and he is right that that experience can dissuade new players from comming back. Some people are just stubborn though (like me) and keep on trucking, but are they enough to keep this game alive?

I saw some good suggestions here, an "experience" factor on the ELO for the number of drops might be a big help.

[Joseph Mallan]

A really good point, but may I suggest that Skill (and Luck, to a much lesser degree) are actually "the mans" factors along with skill? And as such if everything else is equal, the Assault pilot will win as often as the Light pilot on a fair playing field.

[wintersborn]

Not enough players so the PUG stomping returns.

[wintersborn]

Kunae, on 01 November 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

It's a response to the bigotry that you see, especially here on the forums, against the "evil premades". There have been times, in the past, where once certain people found out you were in a premade, they'd do something similar to the following:

Disconnect immediately.
Berate you for "acting superior".
Purposefully damage your mechs.
Disrupt the game by giving the enemy intel.
Suicide into the enemy.
Suicide off the map.

It became habit not to let people know, under those circumstances.

People did this because of what pre mades did to public PUG's, PUG stomping is a game killer. It has chased off more customers than anything else PGI has done. Pre mades ganking noobs just ****** off the noobs and they take their money with them leaving no one to fund the game and no one for teams to gank.

There should be no Pre mades in a PUG period. Teams/Clans etc. need their own games via a lobby etc.

[J0anna]

Kunae, on 01 November 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

It's a response to the bigotry that you see, especially here on the forums, against the "evil premades". There have been times, in the past, where once certain people found out you were in a premade, they'd do something similar to the following:

Disconnect immediately.
Berate you for "acting superior".
Purposefully damage your mechs.
Disrupt the game by giving the enemy intel.
Suicide into the enemy.
Suicide off the map.

It became habit not to let people know, under those circumstances.

If you've seen that, then it makes sense. I haven't seen that, but perhaps that's just the time of day I play. Also I guess I played EvE for too long, if someone shoots at me, I will return fire and I shoot to kill.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

One of the problems is that your individual Elo is based on a team win or loss. You can do 0 damage, kills etc but if your team wins then your individual Elo (in that weight class) goes up. Similarly you can do 900 damage, 6 kills but if your team loses then your Elo goes down.
Given that the MM will try and achieve a roughly equal team Elo, if sufficient "equal" players are not avai;able then you will get "outliers" from higher and lower brackets. This presumably will be skewed even further by groups with widely differing Elo's.
Unfortunately we have no idea what numbers are playing, or really what numbers are needed to make the present system work.
TBH I feel that often we would get similar results with no Elo in place.

[RetroActive]

"Team Making Balance - Is it Possible to Be?"

That is a very deep question. I will have to ponder this for awhile.