298 replies to this topic

[Tekadept]

ELO to ensure a 50% W/L ratio is kinda like giving 4th & 5th place at kids school carnivals.. makes everybody feel special just for participating.

Edited by Tekadept, 11 November 2013 - 05:18 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tekadept, on 11 November 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:

ELO to ensure a 50% W/L ratio is kinda like giving 4th & 5th place at kids school carnivals.. makes everybody feel special just for participating.

SO how come My Elo is 60% on 2 accounts!

[Roadbeer]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 November 2013 - 05:21 PM, said:

SO how come My Elo is 60% on 2 accounts!

That's your W/L dude. Nobody knows what their Elo is, because to have that knowledge, would burn your mind.

[Tekadept]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 November 2013 - 05:21 PM, said:

SO how come My Elo is 60% on 2 accounts!

You obviously need to have a higher ELO so you can get ROFLStomped to bring your W/L back to 50% so the people you Win against can feel better. PGI says so

[MischiefSC]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 November 2013 - 05:14 PM, said:

So that sounds good to me, but she does not look Dark and Full of Terrors!!!!

I'm curious to see how CW works with the MM. Part of the idea is that the players are not the only forces present. From the presentation, here's sorta what I understand:

Late 3052 - FedCom hires the Law to take Kimbal II back from the Combine, tweaked at their capitalization on the Steel Vipers pushing the 9th FedCom RCT out prior to Tukayyid. It's currently home to a contingent of Kurita house troops and the Fire Lizards mercenary regiment, a fictitious PC group with about 20 players in it.

So the Law and the Fire Lizards are both aware of the conflict for Kimbal II. They will somehow choose when they're fighting for it - when this happens their wins and losses are compared to see who is winning the most. Whoever wins the most takes the planet.

Here's what I'm curious to know -

Will it drop Fire Lizard and Law units against one another whenever they're launching at the same time?

How will the Matchmaker treat them, will it recognize their participation in that conflict at all?

Kimbal II is defined as a watery, habitable world - will it take Frozen City, Terra Therma, Tourmaline and Caustic out of the map rotation for you?

Can Kurita and/or FedCom loyalists join in the conflict, adding their wins/losses to the mix?

Will it actually pull exclusively from FedCom/Kurita loyalists and Lone Wolves for these conflicts?

That's what I want to know. Will it just run off Elo and ignore all the other factors or will it ignore Elo and focus on a more competitive representation?

I totally get all the limitations in the current matchmaker, weight limits and the like. All for them. Wars, however, should of course reflect all bets off. I'd much rather see some form of re-arm and repair costs returned for them - logistical expenses. You want to bring all assaults? Great, it's going to be expensive. You lose and your merc company should be able to paint their unrepaired mechs in red ink before selling them to get into the black again.

I agree completely that R&R have no real place in MW:O as it is currently. They are however absolutely essential to a viable war environment in CW - it represents your ability to do more with less or cost your enemy more than it costs you. Both of these are absolutely vital in that sort of environment.

Tekadept, on 11 November 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

You obviously need to have a higher ELO so you can get ROFLStomped to bring your W/L back to 50% so the people you Win against can feel better. PGI says so

No. It's not that you need to lose half your games - it's that your games should be challenging. You shouldn't be dropped against people way better than you all the time, nor half you drop against people far less capable than yourself. You want to win and have it mean something the win needs to be in a relatively balanced environment. That's what Elo does. It keeps the game challenging for everyone.

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

Well, it's one of those things that's been buzzing around in the back of my head once they announced how Loyalists would work.

Well, I have the answer, but I don't think that Mudhutwarrior and Wintersdark aren't going to like it.

Premades. Elo doesn't seem to really apply when they're matching groups against each other. So, it's the premades who are going to shift the lines and open the door for mercs.

But, if weight matching removes the group cap, since there will be an equal weight comp on the field, what is the continued point of Elo except for the random lone wolves...

I may be wrong about this, either way, I'm extraordinarily confused about what the long term plans are.

You'd still need Elo for premades because weight or not skill varies. It just needs to be separate from pug Elo, cuz MATHS.

[Tekadept]

MischiefSC, on 11 November 2013 - 05:48 PM, said:

No. It's not that you need to lose half your games - it's that your games should be challenging. You shouldn't be dropped against people way better than you all the time, nor half you drop against people far less capable than yourself. You want to win and have it mean something the win needs to be in a relatively balanced environment. That's what Elo does. It keeps the game challenging for everyone.

Yah thats what an INDIVIDUAL ELO would do, not this team based surat of a thing. The amount of times I have seen dezgra players on my team help in no way, yet a 4man brings home a win. Yet they count as a win which effects their ELO. I feel sorry for that poor surat who keeps firing lrms under 180 getting their ELO lifted by the better players who managed to win the match for them.

Thing is I rarely get a challenge, it is either greatly imbalanced one way or the other, matchmaker ELO and balance are 2 words that don't go well together, at least when I play Last night had a challenge gimping myself by playing a stock locust.. Now that was a challenge

Edited by Tekadept, 11 November 2013 - 05:59 PM.

[Sprouticus]

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

We're going to work with some assumptions here, but this is just taken from the notes we've been given regarding CW:

Elo is designed to match you against those of equal skill +/- so, basically giving you around a 50% W/L ratio (give or take a few points)

Weight matching is designed to put a give or take equal weight comp on the field.

Combine Elo and Weight matching, lets assume that will solidify a 50% win ratio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Loyalists are fighting to shift the battle lines in their favor, opening a pathway to allow merc units the ability to attack planets behind enemy lines. This is the symbiotic relationship between Merc units and Loyalists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If ,because of Elo and Weight Matching, Loyalists units are unable to significantly shift the battle lines, the merc units are going to be sitting around for a LONG time.

Coordinated groups of faction players will be the thing that makes moves and pushing.

[Joseph Mallan]

MischiefSC, on 11 November 2013 - 05:48 PM, said:

I'm curious to see how CW works with the MM. Part of the idea is that the players are not the only forces present. From the presentation, here's sorta what I understand:

Late 3052 - FedCom hires the Law to take Kimbal II back from the Combine, tweaked at their capitalization on the Steel Vipers pushing the 9th FedCom RCT out prior to Tukayyid. It's currently home to a contingent of Kurita house troops and the Fire Lizards mercenary regiment, a fictitious PC group with about 20 players in it.

So the Law and the Fire Lizards are both aware of the conflict for Kimbal II. They will somehow choose when they're fighting for it - when this happens their wins and losses are compared to see who is winning the most. Whoever wins the most takes the planet.

Here's what I'm curious to know -

Will it drop Fire Lizard and Law units against one another whenever they're launching at the same time?

How will the Matchmaker treat them, will it recognize their participation in that conflict at all?

Kimbal II is defined as a watery, habitable world - will it take Frozen City, Terra Therma, Tourmaline and Caustic out of the map rotation for you?

Can Kurita and/or FedCom loyalists join in the conflict, adding their wins/losses to the mix?

Will it actually pull exclusively from FedCom/Kurita loyalists and Lone Wolves for these conflicts?

That's what I want to know. Will it just run off Elo and ignore all the other factors or will it ignore Elo and focus on a more competitive representation?

These are just really good questions! I am leaning towards ignoring Elo for competitive fights.

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

That's your W/L dude. Nobody knows what their Elo is, because to have that knowledge, would burn your mind.

I knew that! I did! Really.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 November 2013 - 06:09 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Tekadept, on 11 November 2013 - 05:58 PM, said:

[/size]

Yah thats what an INDIVIDUAL ELO would do, not this team based surat of a thing. The amount of times I have seen dezgra players on my team help in no way, yet a 4man brings home a win. Yet they count as a win which effects their ELO. I feel sorry for that poor surat who keeps firing lrms under 180 getting their ELO lifted by the better players who managed to win the match for them.

Thing is I rarely get a challenge, it is either greatly imbalanced one way or the other, matchmaker ELO and balance are 2 words that don't go well together, at least when I play Last night had a challenge gimping myself by playing a stock locust.. Now that was a challenge

So chart it. Keep a chart of 100 matches, count wins/losses and your own performance and then show statistically that you are in fact consistently doing tons of damage, getting kills and that it's always your teammates keeping you from dominating like you should.

When you see that you have teammates consistently carrying you while you, in turn, carrying the team is a statistical rarity you can feel better about it. Also you can see that the other team has bads just as often as your team does. Then you can post it and show everyone and we can stop debating the topic

Joseph Mallan, on 11 November 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

These are just really good questions! I am leaning towards ignoring Elo for competitive fights.


I knew that! I did! Really.

Agreed. Wars are absolutely NOT about fair fights. This isn't going to be pug matches - everyone going into it did so on purpose. If they don't have something to bring to the table they should stay home.

[Roadbeer]

MischiefSC, on 11 November 2013 - 06:44 PM, said:

So chart it. Keep a chart of 100 matches, count wins/losses and your own performance and then show statistically that you are in fact consistently doing tons of damage, getting kills and that it's always your teammates keeping you from dominating like you should.

When you see that you have teammates consistently carrying you while you, in turn, carrying the team is a statistical rarity you can feel better about it. Also you can see that the other team has bads just as often as your team does. Then you can post it and show everyone and we can stop debating the topic

It's funny that you mention that. Back in December of last year, I made a database to track CBills because at the time I was spending them like a drunken sailor, so it began it's life as a budgeting program. Around February, I expanded it to include drops with information from the EoM screen,and tracked it by build and sub-build (Say my K2 with AC/20 was K2(1) and with ERPPC was K2(2).

Since that time I have recorded over 3000 drops and here are my basic stats:

KDR: 1.79 (High of 2.4, low of .62 over 34 mechs)
W/L: 54.2%
Armor: 1.22 (The armor benchmark is the average damage done / total armor on the mech)
Firepower: 1.13 (The Firepower benchmark is the average damge done / the firepower of the mech x10)

Two months ago, I added in those I group with while inputting the data, and while I do not have enough data to be of statisitical relevance at this time, I can tell you right now that regardless of who I drop with, it's shaking out to be just over 50% with a 1.0 KDR +/- .10.

Do with that information what you will.


Oh, yeah, in case you were curious, I've gone from holding a balance of 2mil Cbills to now over 180mil Cbills, so, it's good to have a budget kids.

Edited by Roadbeer, 11 November 2013 - 07:07 PM.

[Tekadept]

MischiefSC, on 11 November 2013 - 06:44 PM, said:

So chart it. Keep a chart of 100 matches, count wins/losses and your own performance and then show statistically that you are in fact consistently doing tons of damage, getting kills and that it's always your teammates keeping you from dominating like you should.

When you see that you have teammates consistently carrying you while you, in turn, carrying the team is a statistical rarity you can feel better about it. Also you can see that the other team has bads just as often as your team does. Then you can post it and show everyone and we can stop debating the topic

Tha'ts not what I was getting at and I'm sure you know it, and charting yeh that would imply I gave a dezgra

I never said my team-mates keep me from dominating, I dominate just fine win or lose thanks
I was just trying to point out it doesn't seem fair to those poor people who get forced up in ELO when they aren't ready for it.

[Roadbeer]

Addendum to my above post.

Just under 1000 of those drops are solo, and the average numbers are 25% less when dropping solo vs dropping with a group.

Again, do with that information what you will.

[MischiefSC]

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

It's funny that you mention that. Back in December of last year, I made a database to track CBills because at the time I was spending them like a drunken sailor, so it began it's life as a budgeting program. Around February, I expanded it to include drops with information from the EoM screen,and tracked it by build and sub-build (Say my K2 with AC/20 was K2(1) and with ERPPC was K2(2).

Since that time I have recorded over 3000 drops and here are my basic stats:

KDR: 1.79 (High of 2.4, low of .62 over 34 mechs)
W/L: 54.2%
Armor: 1.22 (The armor benchmark is the average damage done / total armor on the mech)
Firepower: 1.13 (The Firepower benchmark is the average damge done / the firepower of the mech x10)

Two months ago, I added in those I group with while inputting the data, and while I do not have enough data to be of statisitical relevance at this time, I can tell you right now that regardless of who I drop with, it's shaking out to be just over 50% with a 1.0 KDR +/- .10.

Do with that information what you will.


Oh, yeah, in case you were curious, I've gone from holding a balance of 2mil Cbills to now over 180mil Cbills, so, it's good to have a budget kids.

Thank you. It goes back to what I'd pointed to elsewhere. While people may feel that the new matchmaker is 'hugely imbalanced' it's a massive step up from pre matchmaker and just weight balancing. The problem is that it's human nature to remember bad times more than good times and so we play 4 matches where our team carries us but then have 1 match where we get the high score and suddenly we're "constantly" being hamstrung by our teammates.

The caliber of people I play with and against is way, way up from where it used to be. It's good to see that's not just anecdotal. Huge props to you for actually doing the math instead of chucking an opinion out from the hip.

Tekadept, on 11 November 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

[/size]
Tha'ts not what I was getting at and I'm sure you know it, and charting yeh that would imply I gave a dezgra

I never said my team-mates keep me from dominating, I dominate just fine win or lose thanks
I was just trying to point out it doesn't seem fair to those poor people who get forced up in ELO when they aren't ready for it.

I'm very sorry. I've been having a debate in another thread with someone who aggressively refuses to accept any statistical evidence that doesn't agree with them. It's like debating religion with someone.

I don't feel that bad for those people, I learned the most spectating better players than myself, newer players need to see how experienced players do their magic.

[Roadbeer]

MischiefSC, on 11 November 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

Thank you. It goes back to what I'd pointed to elsewhere. While people may feel that the new matchmaker is 'hugely imbalanced' it's a massive step up from pre matchmaker and just weight balancing. The problem is that it's human nature to remember bad times more than good times and so we play 4 matches where our team carries us but then have 1 match where we get the high score and suddenly we're "constantly" being hamstrung by our teammates.

The caliber of people I play with and against is way, way up from where it used to be. It's good to see that's not just anecdotal. Huge props to you for actually doing the math instead of chucking an opinion out from the hip.

You're absolutely right, I run the database in a monitor separate from the one I play on, and I've had more than one occasion where someone I've grouped with say "Man, matchmaker sucks tonight, we can't get a win"

I'll look to my right, see the drops I've had with that player during that session and have actually said "Um, since you've joined the group, we're running just about a 70% win ratio, we've just lost the last 3, had 5 wins before that, a loss and 2 wins"

[MischiefSC]

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

You're absolutely right, I run the database in a monitor separate from the one I play on, and I've had more than one occasion where someone I've grouped with say "Man, matchmaker sucks tonight, we can't get a win"

I'll look to my right, see the drops I've had with that player during that session and have actually said "Um, since you've joined the group, we're running just about a 70% win ratio, we've just lost the last 3, had 5 wins before that, a loss and 2 wins"

You know, better metrics would make so much difference. Last 10, last 20 matches in specific stats. Mech, damage, win/loss, what your score rank was on the team, KDR over last 10 matches in a given mech, etc. Seeing telemetry for performance can totally change someones perspective on something, even shift how much they enjoy it. We like to see improvement.

Would be cool.

[Roadbeer]

It would be great if we could get that from PGI, it's really just a database query, not very resource dependent.

I've said in a lot of threads that the data I have at my fingertips is MUCH better than what PGI provides.. yeah, the equipment stats are cool (I haven't begun tracking that), but my data even breaks down my different loadouts, not just variant.

At any given moment, I can pull up the stats for myself or those in my group (from when they've been grouped with me) what their stats are (in general, I don't track their builds/kills/damage/etc.) based off of which loadout I'm in, variant, chassis, map, mode for lifetime/month/week/session, etc.

I've actually used this information to tell when I'm becoming 'stale' in a build, when my stats start to dip below average, and will change to a different mech, to keep the positive roll flowing.

[Lukoi Banacek]

{Scrap} I do the same kind of crazy record keeping as Roadbeer. I am truly lost lol.

[Randalf Yorgen]

As someone who has dropped with you a fair bit Roadbeer I know how good and bad the matches can be but I have to disagree with you on how well the Elo works, at least as far as the Solo Drops are concerned. The players who have experience and who have developed some skills often find themselves grouped with players who are inexperienced and/or who are unwilling to listen, usually at a ratio of 1 old timer to 2 newer/non team players. Although this is supposed to help level the playing field and should help to make everything even it can over the long haul make it so that the old timers become bitter and not interested in doing solo drops and that feeds the belief of the soloists that vets/4man players are snobs, the circle is complete.

For example I just finished a solo drop on river city where three assaults and a medium on my team hid under the collapsed bridge between upper and lower city for 5 min of the match. When the suggestion was made that they get out from under the bridge and fight the response was "You don't know me so go yadda yadda insert suggestion here) If this was a one off it wouldn't be an issue but when it happens 40-60% of the time you cannot tell me that it's fair to the old timer to have to play with those 40 year old children over and over again.

As no one knows how MM/Elo works I can only say that suggesting Elo is good across the board is a personal opinion of yours and one I strongly disagree with from my personal experience. With CW hopefully coming online in the next few months having this system in place will do far more damage than I think people realise. A better system must be investigated by PGI and hopefully adopted for the game.

[MischiefSC]

Roadbeer, on 11 November 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

It would be great if we could get that from PGI, it's really just a database query, not very resource dependent.

I've said in a lot of threads that the data I have at my fingertips is MUCH better than what PGI provides.. yeah, the equipment stats are cool (I haven't begun tracking that), but my data even breaks down my different loadouts, not just variant.

At any given moment, I can pull up the stats for myself or those in my group (from when they've been grouped with me) what their stats are (in general, I don't track their builds/kills/damage/etc.) based off of which loadout I'm in, variant, chassis, map, mode for lifetime/month/week/session, etc.

I've actually used this information to tell when I'm becoming 'stale' in a build, when my stats start to dip below average, and will change to a different mech, to keep the positive roll flowing.

I do that sort of stuff at work. I just can't make myself do it at home. More power to you though, hugely so. Maybe we can get that some day in 'U.I. 2.0'. I've heard that it cures cancer in addition to everything else and is powered by Higgs Bosons held in place by a gravity field, which U.I. 2.0 will also unravel the secrets of.

Until then it's a matter of either trust it or tracking the metrics yourself or trusting your memory and 'feeling' of how things have been, which is to say being totally wrong.

[MischiefSC]

Randalf Yorgen, on 11 November 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

As someone who has dropped with you a fair bit Roadbeer I know how good and bad the matches can be but I have to disagree with you on how well the Elo works, at least as far as the Solo Drops are concerned. The players who have experience and who have developed some skills often find themselves grouped with players who are inexperienced and/or who are unwilling to listen, usually at a ratio of 1 old timer to 2 newer/non team players. Although this is supposed to help level the playing field and should help to make everything even it can over the long haul make it so that the old timers become bitter and not interested in doing solo drops and that feeds the belief of the soloists that vets/4man players are snobs, the circle is complete.

For example I just finished a solo drop on river city where three assaults and a medium on my team hid under the collapsed bridge between upper and lower city for 5 min of the match. When the suggestion was made that they get out from under the bridge and fight the response was "You don't know me so go yadda yadda insert suggestion here) If this was a one off it wouldn't be an issue but when it happens 40-60% of the time you cannot tell me that it's fair to the old timer to have to play with those 40 year old children over and over again.

As no one knows how MM/Elo works I can only say that suggesting Elo is good across the board is a personal opinion of yours and one I strongly disagree with from my personal experience. With CW hopefully coming online in the next few months having this system in place will do far more damage than I think people realise. A better system must be investigated by PGI and hopefully adopted for the game.

So track the metrics. Track your score and the score of the people in the match, if you win or lose and how often your position in the top of the scoring on your side relates to a win/loss and how often your teammates carry then win vs how often you do.

If you can show that statistically you carry most of your wins and your losses but still only manage a 50/50 win/loss rate over 100 matches or so I'd absolutely believe the matchmaker is somehow utterly and completely flawed.

You're not going to find that though. You're going to track it and see that your teammates carry you far more often than you carry them. There's 11 of them and 1 of you, that's to be expected. You're also going to see that there are twits on the other team exactly as often as there are on your team.

You will see a correlation of ~8.33% of matches swinging either to win or loss based largely on your behavior. It may be a little higher or lower but over 100 matches pretty close to that.

You'll also see that the more you win the more skilled players end up on both sides of every game and fewer window-licking mouth-breathers. You'll see this number change if you're on a long losing streak. You'll also see that 10 or 20 matches either way isn't actually that significant to your overall performance, it's over 100, 300, 500 matches you'll see the impact of your playing measure out.