150 replies to this topic

[Asakara]

Solis Obscuri, on 15 November 2013 - 04:04 AM, said:

Then why are you surrounded by so many n00bs?

http://mwomercs.com/...30#entry2633230

Matthew Craig, on 07 August 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Technically the match maker will consider it a 'good' game if both teams were matched by having 1 high elo and 1 low elo player on both teams just as much as putting 2 average players on both teams.

The match maker can only work within the ranges given to it though and currently the ranges can be too large i.e. the matchmaker can drag in a high elo player to balance out a few low elo players, when we start to reduce the range what we should see is that the match maker will wait longer to create a 'good' game i.e it will have to wait for a player with a more average elo to show up (as the high elo player will be out of range). In the extreme case the match maker will simply give up and say it couldn't find a good game, this can potentially be seen as a good thing as you didn't want to play that game anyhow.

As mentioned we'll be monitoring carefully and we suspect we can tighten the ranges without having a dramatic impact on average wait times and failed matches, we can also adjust the timeout up from 2 minutes to compensate. Hopefully that answers your question.

[Kunae]

JohnnyWayne, on 15 November 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

Well on the other hand I don't like elitist behaviour... If you think you are high elo thats fine, but you never know. Even if you drop against famous players you still can experience the balanceingalgorithmn of besaid matchmaker.

Btw, it's not "a bad day". I had a bad week last week what resulted into 5 played matches yesturday the whole week, same for a friend. So it really kind of drives people off...

It's not elitism, it's just observed facts.

If you want to talk jack-assery, then just look at the guys who are doing that "Lord ..." followed by "ggclose" at the start of matches. Those guys tend to be only useful in groups, and are not representative, at all, of the majority of folks who are in the upper Elo brackets.

The OP is merely expressing his frustration at the stupidity of PGI making the MM use low Elo folks, many still in their first 25 games, to "average out" people with high Elo and over 4000 matches. It's just dumb.

[Tombstoner]

Kunae, on 15 November 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

It's not elitism, it's just observed facts.

If you want to talk jack-assery, then just look at the guys who are doing that "Lord ..." followed by "ggclose" at the start of matches. Those guys tend to be only useful in groups, and are not representative, at all, of the majority of folks who are in the upper Elo brackets.

The OP is merely expressing his frustration at the stupidity of PGI making the MM use low Elo folks, many still in their first 25 games, to "average out" people with high Elo and over 4000 matches. It's just dumb.

yes it is dumb but i think its the best they can do with small populations. 10,000,000 players on all the time and ELO would work great. you can start making really tight matches..... meaning the ELO mode will be close to the ELO mean. when its the same then you can say your playing against people of the same skill levels.

What people refuse to admit is that its the small player base during off peek time that's causing the issue. MM tries its best and gives up after x seconds and slots in some noobs. Que times have been at a historical high for me and i have been playing since before ELO was added. player base is shrinking in my opinion.

[mekabuser]

wherever i am in elo. i wanna stay there.
I have zero cause to complain about the matches i find myself in .
Yes there are perplexing losses, but theyre rare. Sure ill find myself stranded from time to time counting on support, and then i spectate and its obvious why i died, but its no big deal.

I see plenty of good sportsmanship, plenty of good tactics, plenty of good shooting. everything.
Varied locations for battles , everything.
Hell i even ran all my med mechs yesterday . Still as viable as ever.

[Voidcrafter]

Kunae, on 15 November 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

You really need to spend time learning the difference between speculation, as you put it, and educated conclusions from observed behavior and situations.

People who are pretty high-Elo know this because of who they're seeing all the time in matches, and the performance of said folks. If you're good, you tend to have a much better idea who else is good. I realize, that you don't have this experience, swimming through the steering-wheel underhive, but when the air gets thinner, you can see better.

You mean - people, who are pretty high-Elo SPECULATE about this(or THINK they know this) and etc. ?
And where do you know from what my ELO is actually?
I kinda pretend that I know what I'm doing - you tell me -
K/D: 3,997 / 1,715
W/L: 1,869 / 1,519
K/D ratio(at some point ~PPC hell it was ~5 but I'm not sorta the cowarding guy - I prefer to die contributing for the team insted of running around ******* people off, but anyways: 2.33
Then again - I played durring the PPC hell, which kinda hurt both my mentality and feelings + had effect on the K/D ratio a lot - never whined about it though.
You tell me - do I look like some random pilot, that don't have the brains to cope with the game for more than 3k matches?
How do I not know this feeling if I may ask?
Cause I think I'm having it enough to know what's in my speculated-to-be high ELO:
poptarts. FOTM builds. Boom jaggers.
I skipped the downside of all this silence about the ELO but I won't do this again:
at some point people who get tired from bad gaming experiece(which I don't claim to be only too many defeats in a row, or too many victories with stomping over the others - bad gaming experiece in general.) they ordinary do 3 things:
1) make a new account and go over people, who don't know how to play the game properly - and thus somehow ruining their experience too.
2) quit playing the game.
3) first they go with 1) and after just a bit jump to 2).
I don't want this to be the future of this game you know?

And btw my stats are pretty much saying enough about the experience I'm having:
I drop in a game - ordinary I kill 3/4(ordinary) /5/6/7(a bit more rare) people, do about 450(ordinary) <--> 900(somewhat often) damage, with few games with hundred or a two more damage top, die and near half of the cases our team loses.

What does that say to you about my "ELO" and the matchmaker?
I can post you some mech/weapon stats if you still think I'm one of those kill-leachers and you'll probably, even disliking me, will jump to the conclusion that I SHOULD really have a way more kills, that were actually stolen from me.
To get you a bit clear I dea where I'm going:
when there's one in the team that's done that much of a harm on the enemy, and 11 other people that just got stomped uppon, somewhat only scratching their foes, 2/3 of which actually manage to do something - and when all that happens in almost all the cases, no matter if it's a victory or defeat, that's a clear sign for me that the infamous matchmaker aint working as intended.
I'm not searching for balance, equality, justice, fairness - selfish or not - I kinda feel good at the end of the games seing how much I contributed, even if we failed.
If you're having other experience aside of that - well...
I'm not the only one that's feeling what I'm describing - afterall I haven't played all those games alone - do you think the other people in the team had fun then?
Cause I'm quite certain they did not.

[DeathofSelf]

Not going to claim to know my ELO but I will say that I know my ELO should be high enough to not be in groups with new players. I am quite often on teams with players who are very new, always a bad sign when someone asks something like "How do I change weapon groups?"

[KingCobra]

This is why past MechWarrior games had lobby's and leagues. Top players could consistently play other top players in ladders the same for teams.Solo and team play was vibrant and exciting you also could train the newer players so they could compete,MWO is not MechWarrior folks it is just another clone of general MMO types which produce boredom anger and a pack your bag and find the next game mentality.

[Ghogiel]

Voidcrafter, on 15 November 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

- you tell me -

neildegrassetyson.jpg

Don't get mad when people are unimpressed with those numbers, you asked for it.

[tayhimself]

Kunae, on 15 November 2013 - 06:30 AM, said:

The OP is merely expressing his frustration at the stupidity of PGI making the MM use low Elo folks, many still in their first 25 games, to "average out" people with high Elo and over 4000 matches. It's just dumb.

I have to say that it even with a small population it shouldn't be hard to program a matchmaker that picks using a weighted modified Elo using something like this example below and loosening the tonnage thresholds to account for the small population.

Win / Loss = 50% weighted.
Kill / Death = 30% weighted.
Number of drops = 10%
Tonnage = 10%
 
Elo = (0.5 * winloss) + (0.3 * kdr) + (0.1 * drops) + 0.1(tons)

Edited by tayhimself, 15 November 2013 - 07:24 AM.

[nehebkau]

Profiteer, on 15 November 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

My team stomps the enemy 12-0, 12-1 for several games. The enemy team is basically nobodies +1-2 good players.

Then the match maker decides I have won too much so it puts me against 2 top level 4-mans while stacking my side with 1st day newbs who I could out damage by walking backwards at the enemy and shooting my weapons in the air.

Now don't get me wrong... I DO NOT WANT TO CLUB SEALS.

I have long since stop taking pleasure at destroying a bunch of nobodies.

What I'm asking for is a system that puts me up against the best players in the game WHILE PUTTING THE SAME LEVEL PLAYERS ON MY TEAM.

The current match maker/elo is so terrible I'm seeing more and more players I used to group with fade away or get frustrated like myself.

Please consider changing to a ranking system so that only players of a similar level play with each other. This would stop newbs being crushed, and higher level players getting p1ssed off with teams that haven't got a clue.

Cheers!

Its your own fault for running pre-made groups, using VOIP and consistently playing with the same people!

If you read the ELO is worthless thread you will reaize that your ELO is artificially high because of the bonus' you get from grouping with your buddies. That is to say, grouping with your buddies lets you win more than you would if you were solo artificially increasing your SOLO ELO value. When Matchmaker tries to balance out your team, it sees your 11,989 ELO score and says: "The other team has a combined ELO of 12,000 and our Uber player has an ELO of 11,989 he is so godly, we can fill his team out with 11 people who have a 1 ELO and everything will balance out!" The end result, half your team TK's themselves trying to figure out how to group their weapons and the remaining survivors stand around in a circle confused by the carnage around them.

If people are grouped, they need to have an artificially raised ELO for matchmaker to use so that it can balance the skill levels on the team and balance out ELO rewards/penalties for wins/losses.

[Voidcrafter]

Ghogiel, on 15 November 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

neildegrassetyson.jpg

Don't get mad when people are unimpressed with those numbers, you asked for it.

I'm not mad one bit - those are what they are - numbers, the menu item is LITERALLY named "STATS" - that's what I generally use for orientation.
They way I play I think I'm actually on the hang of the game - thus I don't understand how the hell is the matchmaker working - it MUST not be normal for 1/2/3 people to be heroes and the rest to be dead meat.
It's not the way the gameplay work - it's the skill I'm talking about - there would be casualties - that's certain...
But I've spectated how my teammates play and I've seen how the enemy reacts and thinks - I can't find a rational explanation aside from "ooh - you got 3 people who can hit a mountain qute well... well - let's put you with anothe 9 who can't against 9 that are quite good at hitting mountains and 3 that don't know what mountain is" - and even if it is an explanation it's not a rational one.
The algorythm sucks in my opinion - but's it's just that - an opinion about something I have no idea how is working - and nobody can help with improvements since there's no light what it actually do.
Speculations - as I said - and if you're going to abuse my "numbers" - I prefer you personally do it with yours or/and 10 cases in which you have annihilated me on the battlefield in a game I didn't do anything impressive.
I rarely take screenshots and remember names - I don't care who I drop against - would it be a 3 or 2 premades some random folk or Chuck Norris himself - I don't think I should play weaker or more stupid on the base what the oponent is.
But I was thinking about starting making screenshots of every game I've had - just to keep a track how bad actually the matchmaker is - I'm kinda regreting I haven't done that already so both of us to not just waste words you know
Actually I can even try write some simple application for that or find something similar on the net - if someone knows something that takes application focused screenshots and name them with timestamp(for example) that you can bind on a key - I would be happy if you share it.

[CeeKay Boques]

Every 4th match is a good one, sometimes two in a row.

GAME 1 : "OH GAWD THEY'RE COMING OVER THE RIDGE!! GUYS...guys? OH NOOOO!!!"
GAME 2: "OH GAWD THEY'RE COMING OVER THE RIDGE!! I guess its just me and you... NOoooo!!"
GAMD 3: "They...are just sitting there... this is like fish in a barrel... Pew! Pew!"
GAME 4: "GG... epic battle gents..."
GAME 5: "OH GAWD THEY'RE COMING OVER THE RIDGE!! GUYS...guys? OH NOOOO!!!"

[SgtKinCaiD]

As already said multiples times, the problem is just here :

Matthew Craig, on 07 August 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Technically the match maker will consider it a 'good' game if both teams were matched by having 1 high elo and 1 low elo player on both teams just as much as putting 2 average players on both teams.

And again : IT IS NOT WORKING !

[Trey Mendus]

PGI has stated how Elo works. Initially the match maker tries to match up similarly ranked players on both teams. If players are not found in a timely manner, match maker beings to loosen its tolerances for Elo rank and tonnage. The MM struggles to match full assault 4mans and high Elo players with low tonnage mechs. These conditions often lead to mismatched tonnage and/or skill games. Despite its problems match maker creates matches that are much more competitive than w/o Elo. Test it for yourself. Play in a 4 man with low Elo players, then play with high Elo players. It is almost like you are playing two separate games. Low Elo consists of varied(usually less efficient builds) where most players just rush each other with barely any torso twisting or use of cover. In high Elo you see lots and lots JJs that come fitted with 30-40 pinpoint alphas.

Unfortunately there is not a separate Elo rank for solo vs 4man. In a 4man you can quickly share intel and focus down targets, which will enable you to climb higher in the Elo ranking than you would have solo. If you go from playing a bunch of 4mans to playing solo you can expect to lose more games than normal.

[Green Mamba]

PGI doesn't Publish ELO rankings so how would you know? Kind of Like a Player counter like they used to have

[Kunae]

Trey Mendus, on 15 November 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

PGI has stated how Elo works. Initially the match maker tries to match up similarly ranked players on both teams. If players are not found in a timely manner, match maker beings to loosen its tolerances for Elo rank and tonnage. The MM struggles to match full assault 4mans and high Elo players with low tonnage mechs. These conditions often lead to mismatched tonnage and/or skill games. Despite its problems match maker creates matches that are much more competitive than w/o Elo. Test it for yourself. Play in a 4 man with low Elo players, then play with high Elo players. It is almost like you are playing two separate games. Low Elo consists of varied(usually less efficient builds) where most players just rush each other with barely any torso twisting or use of cover. In high Elo you see lots and lots JJs that come fitted with 30-40 pinpoint alphas.

Unfortunately there is not a separate Elo rank for solo vs 4man. In a 4man you can quickly share intel and focus down targets, which will enable you to climb higher in the Elo ranking than you would have solo. If you go from playing a bunch of 4mans to playing solo you can expect to lose more games than normal.

No.

As Asakara pointed out earlier in this thread, that is not the problem. This is:

Matthew Craig, on 07 August 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Technically the match maker will consider it a 'good' game if both teams were matched by having 1 high elo and 1 low elo player on both teams just as much as putting 2 average players on both teams.

The match maker can only work within the ranges given to it though and currently the ranges can be too large i.e. the matchmaker can drag in a high elo player to balance out a few low elo players, when we start to reduce the range what we should see is that the match maker will wait longer to create a 'good' game i.e it will have to wait for a player with a more average elo to show up (as the high elo player will be out of range). In the extreme case the match maker will simply give up and say it couldn't find a good game, this can potentially be seen as a good thing as you didn't want to play that game anyhow.

As mentioned we'll be monitoring carefully and we suspect we can tighten the ranges without having a dramatic impact on average wait times and failed matches, we can also adjust the timeout up from 2 minutes to compensate. Hopefully that answers your question.

[FerretGR]

Kunae, on 15 November 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

No.

As Asakara pointed out earlier in this thread, that is not the problem.* This is:

*with the caveat that Matthew Craig said something that seems to contradict this at an earlier date, and so it's unclear that the MM is behaving the way you describe.

My interpretation of the MM's behavior as described is that it sets a range and then pulls in players within that range. Once the players are in the game, they're distributed to the teams so as to average the Elo rating. Nothing too objectionable about that IMHO. You've got these 24 players, they need to be grouped in two approximately equal 12-man groups, making the average Elo equal among that group of 24 is probably the fairest way to form the teams. The caveat here is that it's unclear that this is how it's working either.

And so another thread swirls down the drain as the regular crowd comes out and says the same things they always say. For me, these Elo threads have just become noise... someone loses a game, blames their team and the matchmaker, posts a thread about Elo matchmaking being worthless, the folks who agree post their thoughts, the folks who disagree post their thoughts, neither camp gets any closer to the other or gets any closer to a better understanding of how things are working. Rinse repeat on a daily basis.

Edited by FerretGR, 15 November 2013 - 08:31 AM.

[Kunae]

FerretGR, on 15 November 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

*with the caveat that Matthew Craig said something that seems to contradict this at an earlier date, and so it's unclear that the

Latest info is most correct info. The "earlier date" info was just their position, at that time.

They also said that 3pv would never be put in the game, now it's in. (And I could go on and on, but will just use this one, for brevity.)

Oh, and the range has been HUGE since August. We're talking ~750pts, at least.

[Sug]

Another Elo thread? it's pretty much an accepted fact that the Elo system in MWO does not work.


Explain to me how I, a player from CB, should ever be placed on a team with someone asking how to target enemy mechs, use their jjets, or how to group weapons?

Edited by Sug, 15 November 2013 - 09:01 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

OP: I concur.

Unfortunately, according to the devs, if they were to tighten our ELO in matchmaking that much (and they can... realtime), it would take an insanely long time for some of us to get a match--as in multiple drop attempts.

So, they can do this already... it just has consequences.


Perhaps if they fixed things like weapons balance they'd retain enough of the pro players so high-ELO matchmaking would go faster.