167 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

We really need to abolish the win/loss ratio mattering in ELOs outside of 12-man games. This is really silly that ELO figures your win/loss in so much when I can honestly say that 95% of the time it's a {Scrap} shoot.

Sure, you can help your team ; sure sometimes you even decide the outcome. But in a 12 man game you are one cog in a machine, and if you have less quality pilots than the other team, you are going to lose even on your best game.

Figuring ELO based on win/loss like that person had any chance to make or break the team (this is even more noticeable since 12 mans; in an 8 man you were 12.5% of the team so could make a reasonable dent) is just going to result in pure mud for numbers.

Since I found this out I've started to realize why ELO has degraded so badly and is so worthless right now, with elite/veteran pilots getting thrown in with newbies even if there are enough newbies on to sort them into their own games and vice versa.

So my point is.. just stop doing this. Start balancing it on damage done per drop. Points captured. Recon targets scouted. Savior kills & assists.. these things actually could help gauge a pilot. Basing it around if the team dies is just wrong.

This is among the reasons KDR doesn't mean a terrible amount either ; if your team dies, you're going to die too (provided you don't try to run & hide like some people) so deaths really mean nothing at all.

Again, this is specifically for the 4-mans. If w/l was tracked exclusively in 12 mans it might work a little better (even if still being silly with all the "10 assaults and 2 lights" teams playing) but in pugs it is literally a dice roll and tells you NOTHING valuable.

[Wispsy]

Well some of us manage to win an awful lot more then we lose...I guess that it is not really our contribution but just random matchmaking luck?

Once you start believing you cannot affect the outcome you have already lost. There is always a way to win, just have to dodge harder.

[Adiuvo]

Assuming you're not using a useless mech, you can always carry your matches. Like Wispsy, I win a lot more than I lose even when solo dropping. It requires more effort than if I was grouped, but it's still possible and I mainly play lights. Play an assault mech and the whole thing is easier.

[D04S02B04]

While it is true that good players can win most of the time, even when solo pugging... it's a bit hard to do anything if you drop at one of those times when the entire team starts camping and does {Scrap} all for damage.

1-3 players doing sub-100 damage? Sure, can still handle it. 4 - 6 players doing sub-100 damage? Stupid premades thinking they're the **** and does not support the main pug group? Can't win those games, especially when does sub-100 damage players are heavies and assaults.

The problem is further compounded by trial mechs. Trial mechs should never be allowed in matches when other player's mech are fully customised.

[MischiefSC]

I have the converse experience. I got the Overlord package and have tried to make the Phoenix Mechs perform anywhere close to where some of the better (not even top, just better) mechs in the weight class do. Result?

For my 'career' of around 5,000 drops my time spent with Phoenix mechs (BM, Tbolt, most Shadowhawks, Locusts) have dropped by win/loss from around a 1.35 or so down to a 1.21. Stretches of 10 or 16 straight losses.

Statistically impossible in a 'random' system at least in this number of drops I'm creeping past 50 more losses than wins in 100 drops, because the chassis are mostly absolute trash. My performance matters and when my performance suffers my win/loss rate suffers.

It goes both ways. Elo and a win/loss system is the best, most accurate system reasonably available for this sort of game.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Your opening post makes sense. No wonder you face the mob here.

[MadCat02]

Damage done,racon and point capture ?

You mean those things that make you win games? As in result in higher win rate? ELO which is used for balance?

If you consistenly did all of those you wouden't make this topic .

[OneEyed Jack]

So, if the Kicker did his part, but the rest of the team sucked, he should still get the ring?

Wispsy, on 08 November 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

There is always a way to win, just have to dodge harder.

Often, not always.

MischiefSC, on 08 November 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

For my 'career' of around 5,000 drops my time spent with Phoenix mechs (BM, Tbolt, most Shadowhawks, Locusts) have dropped by win/loss from around a 1.35 or so down to a 1.21. Stretches of 10 or 16 straight losses.

Statistically impossible in a 'random' system at least in this number of drops I'm creeping past 50 more losses than wins in 100 drops, because the chassis are mostly absolute trash. My performance matters and when my performance suffers my win/loss rate suffers.

Not really a big surprise. You played a whole slew of new, un-leveled mechs you were unfamiliar with in a short period of time, while a whole lot of other people did the same thing. And I'd be willing to guess you were bouncing between them, so you had no real chance to get a feel for any particular one style. Not having a lot of losses would be more surprising.

[Clit Beastwood]

Adiuvo, on 08 November 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

Assuming you're not using a useless mech, you can always carry your matches. Like Wispsy, I win a lot more than I lose even when solo dropping. It requires more effort than if I was grouped, but it's still possible and I mainly play lights. Play an assault mech and the whole thing is easier.

Adiuvo, this isn't a reply to you, per se, more referencing your post.
__
Same here. Lots of people run big slow mechs that can dish firepower, but unsupported really aren't all that useful. At least in a light you can maneuver, flank, escape, etc. I PUG less than I used to, but I can't count the number of times I've been the last man standing on my team, 4-5 assaults on the other team, and I manage to secure a win via cap. I play to win - I didn't download and install MWO so I could play GI-Joes in the sandbox, I'm here to secure victory for my team. I can't say this enough - if what you're doing isn't working, try something else. Ultimately it doesn't matter if you can kill 6 members of the enemy team if you lose. I value a win a lot more than a kill. I also value reducing an enemy's combat effectiveness or maneuverability more than killing them. When my teams getting pretty thin and I'm flying light, I just ignore the slowest enemies, try to leg the faster ones, and focus on capping.

MischiefSC, on 08 November 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

I have the converse experience. I got the Overlord package and have tried to make the Phoenix Mechs perform anywhere close to where some of the better (not even top, just better) mechs in the weight class do. Result?

For my 'career' of around 5,000 drops my time spent with Phoenix mechs (BM, Tbolt, most Shadowhawks, Locusts) have dropped by win/loss from around a 1.35 or so down to a 1.21. Stretches of 10 or 16 straight losses.

Statistically impossible in a 'random' system at least in this number of drops I'm creeping past 50 more losses than wins in 100 drops, because the chassis are mostly absolute trash. My performance matters and when my performance suffers my win/loss rate suffers.

It goes both ways. Elo and a win/loss system is the best, most accurate system reasonably available for this sort of game.

They're not trash, they're just different. It takes time to learn a new mech - for a very long time we didn't get an infusion of mech variety very often, then we get clubbed with 12 new mechs to play with. There's going to be an adjustment period.

[MischiefSC]

OneEyed Jack, on 08 November 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

So, if the Kicker did his part, but the rest of the team sucked, he should still get the ring?


Often, not always.


Not really a big surprise. You played a whole slew of new, un-leveled mechs you were unfamiliar with in a short period of time, while a whole lot of other people did the same thing. And I'd be willing to guess you were bouncing between them, so you had no real chance to get a feel for any particular one style. Not having a lot of losses would be more surprising.

All very true - here's the thing though. My loss in those mechs affected my whole teams performance.

Elo baby, Elo.

[Blurry]

Wispsy, on 08 November 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Well some of us manage to win an awful lot more then we lose...I guess that it is not really our contribution but just random matchmaking luck?

Once you start believing you cannot affect the outcome you have already lost. There is always a way to win, just have to dodge harder.

hate to tell you but yes it is just matchmaking. whichever side fate puts you on. now as I grow as a player I have gotten significantly better as a player over the last month.

my seeing things is yes it really is up to the matchmaker 99% of the time. And now I do win a lot more and survive a lot longer and my conclusion stands.

[MischiefSC]

Fierostetz, on 08 November 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

Adiuvo, this isn't a reply to you, per se, more referencing your post.
__
Same here. Lots of people run big slow mechs that can dish firepower, but unsupported really aren't all that useful. At least in a light you can maneuver, flank, escape, etc. I PUG less than I used to, but I can't count the number of times I've been the last man standing on my team, 4-5 assaults on the other team, and I manage to secure a win via cap. I play to win - I didn't download and install MWO so I could play GI-Joes in the sandbox, I'm here to secure victory for my team. I can't say this enough - if what you're doing isn't working, try something else. Ultimately it doesn't matter if you can kill 6 members of the enemy team if you lose. I value a win a lot more than a kill. I also value reducing an enemy's combat effectiveness or maneuverability more than killing them. When my teams getting pretty thin and I'm flying light, I just ignore the slowest enemies, try to leg the faster ones, and focus on capping.



They're not trash, they're just different. It takes time to learn a new mech - for a very long time we didn't get an infusion of mech variety very often, then we get clubbed with 12 new mechs to play with. There's going to be an adjustment period.

No, most the chassis like tbolt and bmaster are simply sub-par compared to comparable assault and heavy mechs. nerfed torso twist, big torso, reduced maneuverability stacked with a lack of JJs makes the Bmaster an Awesome with some ballistics on the arm of 2 chassis. Tbolt? Energy build heavy with a ~300 engine cap so it will never pack enough heatsinks to be useful with an energy only build. Flat out inferior in every way to the Cataphract and several times inferior to the Jager.

The locust isn't a light mech, it's an easy kill. it's only 20 tons so that makes sense but still, you can't say it's in any way shape or form viable compared to any other light.

The Shawk is a JJ-enabled Hunchie and that's awesome - for a medium. It's no match for heavies or assaults though.

The PP mechs are at best mediocre. If someone said they'd paid $80 for 3 Awesome chassis, 3 Dragon chassis, 3 Blackjacks and 3 Commandos you'd go 'Well... blackjacks are pretty cool. $80 though?'

It's alright. Lesson learned. I'll pass on the Saber package and maybe some future weapon rebalancing or the like will make them comparatively viable. Currently though I don't think anyone, regardless of what they've unlocked in the chassis, are saying the bmaster or tbolt or locust are anything like competitively viable.

[Blurry]

Fierostetz, on 08 November 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

Adiuvo, this isn't a reply to you, per se, more referencing your post.
__
Same here. Lots of people run big slow mechs that can dish firepower, but unsupported really aren't all that useful. At least in a light you can maneuver, flank, escape, etc. I PUG less than I used to, but I can't count the number of times I've been the last man standing on my team, 4-5 assaults on the other team, and I manage to secure a win via cap. I play to win - I didn't download and install MWO so I could play GI-Joes in the sandbox, I'm here to secure victory for my team. I can't say this enough - if what you're doing isn't working, try something else. Ultimately it doesn't matter if you can kill 6 members of the enemy team if you lose. I value a win a lot more than a kill. I also value reducing an enemy's combat effectiveness or maneuverability more than killing them. When my teams getting pretty thin and I'm flying light, I just ignore the slowest enemies, try to leg the faster ones, and focus on capping.



They're not trash, they're just different. It takes time to learn a new mech - for a very long time we didn't get an infusion of mech variety very often, then we get clubbed with 12 new mechs to play with. There's going to be an adjustment period.

and i value fun above all else.

[MischiefSC]

Blurry, on 08 November 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

hate to tell you but yes it is just matchmaking. whichever side fate puts you on. now as I grow as a player I have gotten significantly better as a player over the last month.

my seeing things is yes it really is up to the matchmaker 99% of the time. And now I do win a lot more and survive a lot longer and my conclusion stands.

So.... you perform better and thus win more, but you don't see where your performing better means you win more?

Did I get that right?

[Wispsy]

Blurry, on 08 November 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

hate to tell you but yes it is just matchmaking. whichever side fate puts you on. now as I grow as a player I have gotten significantly better as a player over the last month.

my seeing things is yes it really is up to the matchmaker 99% of the time. And now I do win a lot more and survive a lot longer and my conclusion stands.

So...I must be really lucky to go 70 wins in a row without my performance affecting the outcome. Then to do it again...the gods just love me?

[Wispsy]

OneEyed Jack, on 08 November 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Often, not always.

I do not always accomplish it, but I always believe there is a way, even when it is ridiculously unlikely and difficult. As I said...just need to dodge harder!

[Bishop Steiner]

Wispsy, on 08 November 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Well some of us manage to win an awful lot more then we lose...I guess that it is not really our contribution but just random matchmaking luck?

Once you start believing you cannot affect the outcome you have already lost. There is always a way to win, just have to dodge harder.

even when they melt your raven's face?

Wispsy, on 08 November 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

So...I must be really lucky to go 70 wins in a row without my performance affecting the outcome. Then to do it again...the gods just love me?

and are you doing it solo, those 70 or in your premades? Counting on wingmen can indeed affect the formula.

[MischiefSC]

Having watched Wispy as a few other very talented pilots run around pugging in Jenners or Highlanders I'd say it really isn't that hard to see Elo at work.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

What about adding to Elo? Maybe some sort of Matchscore addition that could further raise or decrease the gains/losses in Elo score outside of winning and losing?

And for more on Elo:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1626065

[Ghogiel]

Wispsy, on 08 November 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

So...I must be really lucky to go 70 wins in a row without my performance affecting the outcome. Then to do it again...the gods just love me?

Yeah!
Let's just go AFK, out of bounds or DC for 70 matches. It's just luck of the draw 90% of the time anyway. I mean, you've been blessed by RNGesus what can go wrong!