10 replies to this topic

[Auzen]

I've seen some posts where people complain about frequent lopsided victories/defeats when playing as a solo PUG player. I've seen these lopsided games termed as "curbstomps" or "pugstomps" or something similar. Often, the posts I've seen draw ridicule because of a lack of data, and people are just saying they "feel" like their matches are lopsided.

Anyway, I decided to just start noting the results of my matches, and I've got a couple of days of stats now, figured I'd see how things look.

48 matches on ASSAULT mode
27 wins (4 by cap)
21 losses (2 by cap)

For the 42 "combat" matches (those not resolved by cap), I determined the average score - note that the winning team's isn't exactly 12 because sometimes the score is 11-X or 10-X depending on DC or missing players.

Winning team's average victory was 11.70 to 4.85, a difference of 6.85. Rounding off, 12-5 is about average expectation for a match... less than half of the winning team dies.

So right away, this made me wonder: What do you folks consider to be a lopsided victory or defeat? Is 12-5 lopsided, a "pugstomp"? If I lose in a 12-5 score, I think it's OK, at least we took out almost half of the enemy team. 12-4 is OK too, I guess. I think when it gets to 12-3 is about where I'd start thinking, "Man, we got whupped bad." And 12-2 or 12-1, something just went horribly wrong. Fortunately, in two days of noting results, I did NOT see a game that was 12-0, so at least that's a good thing...

Close games? Of the 42 "combat" matches, the losing team had scores of:
10... one time
9... one time
8... four times

The middle:
7... three times
6... three times
5... eleven times
4... six times

Blowouts:
3... six times
2... two times
1... three times

So out of 42 matches, 6 were close games, 11 were blowouts, and the rest were at least decent.

I think the close games are the most fun, but they don't happen very often, even when I count "4 team members left alive" as a close game. It's those blowouts that drain my desire to keep pressing that Launch button... but often, I just shake off the discouragement and figure "Maybe this time it'll be better."

STREAKS: What was my longest winning or losing streak?
WINS: 6
LOSSES: 3

Hmm... well, I tell ya, there are days when the losing streaks are much longer, but I guess I've had a pretty good weekend so far.


So what was the point of this post? I'm not really sure. I guess I'm interested in hearing what others consider to be "lopsided" games. Summing up for me: 12-3 isn't much fun, and worse than that is just an embarrassment. What about for you?

Good gaming!

[Amsro]

Interesting info/insight, but the sample size is too small.

[Alistair Winter]

http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/137290-a-tale-of-90-matches-updated-3-oct/

[Sandpit]

I'm sure someone will jump up with the "You're wrong because" post sooner or later. I never really thought the game played out much different from your stats but some players are so hung up on trying to blame everything but their skills for losses that they won't accept it

[Wolf Clearwater]

I personally feel that a "stomp" is anytime where one team gets 4 kills or less and gets wiped out. Even moreso when one team has a lance that is almost entirely intact (ex, no one in lance is missing any limbs/torsos, or critically damaged). I personally feel that stomp games, win or lose, are far less fun than close matches. I DO think that ELO has done absolutely nothing to change the ratio of close matches to stomp matches. I have no hard data for that, it is just my opinion.

[NRP]

I'd say 12-6 losses are fine. Once one team loses a mech or two, their ability to project force is severely limited. This is where smart players with good skills can make a difference to even the odds, but also where dumbasses who don't regroup and support the remaining mechs with focus fire can cause the match to spiral down the drain into those 12-2 or 12-0 roflstomps.

[MerryIguana]

Sandpit, on 17 November 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

I'm sure someone will jump up with the "You're wrong because" post sooner or later. I never really thought the game played out much different from your stats but some players are so hung up on trying to blame everything but their skills for losses that they won't accept it

If only people would let things go. Right?

[Auzen]

Amsro, on 17 November 2013 - 04:17 AM, said:

Interesting info/insight, but the sample size is too small.

Yeah, I'm not claiming it is statistically significant, I only took one statistics class in school and didn't much care for it. I was more just fishing for opinions on what threshold folks think of as a match that was a waste of time, 12-3 or less like me? Yeah, I may get in, get a kill, a couple assists, do some damage, scores some CBills and XP... but was it FUN? I can still have fun when I lose, but I'd rather lose 8-12 than 2-12.

Also, keep in mind: 48 matches over 2 days seems like a lot to me, I kind of went on a binge on Friday (my day off), then again to a bit lesser degree on Saturday. Every match PUG, and just playing how I'd normally play. I finished out a couple of chassis to unlock the Master slot on them over the course of this, then just switched to some of my favorite Mechs to play after that.

Anyway, in my recent experience, 12-5 is what the average looks like for me, win or lose. I don't feel bad losing in that situation, and if I win in a 12-5 match, I don't feel bad that it was a waste of time for either team. If I lose 1-12, then I feel like it was pointless and that either the matchmaker got it wrong, or else our team just had everyone make colossal mistakes all at the same time. On a similar note, if I'm on a team that wins 12-1, I don't get much satisfaction from that match either, as it wasn't very challenging and it was just a matter of "find next target, destroy, repeat"... not much fun for anyone.

So far, from the other comments here (thanks for your replies!), it looks like someone feels 12-4 or worse is a "stomp" while another says that 12-6 is fine... which I take to mean, 12-5 or worse is "not fine"...? So for someone who feels that way, if 12-5 were to be the average result, then on average, that person may not be having much fun.

I also don't make any claim to know how to make matches more competitive all around, as I'm sure that's been talked to death already. And I'm sure my paltry 48-match sample has got nothing on the raw data the devs have available, they can see what the overall margin of victory is for every match ever played, most likely.

In short, I'm not trying to *solve* anything here, I'm just trying to gain a little perspective, because I have my own ideas about what is a "stomp" and I'm wondering how it lines up with how other people feel, depending on the scores of their games.

Good gaming!

[Sephlock]

Whenever I lose, it is other people's fault.

Whenever I win, it was because I carried the team (if not in kills or damage, then I was their spiritual guide, and masterfully altered the flow of battle).

(Note that this applies only to me, and no one else).

[Wolf Clearwater]

Well you and Alistair Winter have inspired me to keep track of some matches on my own. Just to see what they do look like on a big picture.

[SilentBang]

I think this just comes down to math. At some point in the game, one team is going to reach a tipping point where they have such a numerical advantage over their opponent that is becomes unlikely that the enemy team will affect any more kills. If team A has 10 mechs left and team B has 5 mechs left, Team A is usually going to wipe up the remainder of the enemy team with minimal additional losses. I don't think the final score always accurately reflects how close the game was. I'm sure if we had a statistician or mathematician here they could model this for us in more detail, but alas, that is not me.

Edited by SilentBang, 17 November 2013 - 12:38 PM.