166 replies to this topic

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 January 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

Sky I hate to say it but that fault is ours, for thinking that every match needs to fair an balanced.

No one has said that. We just think it should be 70/30, with the 70 being balanced matches. Instead it's more like 50/50 or 40/60. With crappy unbalanced matches being the larger pool.

Which means something is wrong. Which is all anyone is saying.

But getting PGI to admit too/fix problems like this is nigh impossible.

[Ngamok]

wanderer, on 18 January 2014 - 07:53 PM, said:

Last day or so? Fun watching 12-0's where one side gets 6+ assaults vs. a motley crew of a heavy or two, some mediums, and a random light or two. I'm seeing fully armored mediums go 100% -> dead before their weapons can cycle once from sheer mass of fire. Sometimes I'm on the 12-0 side, sometimes the 0-12.

What a pathetic, sad excuse for a matchmaker this has become.

http://cloud-4.steam...63E7735EDEB0AF/

[PanzerFurrry]

I guess they brought too many mediums to a fight...

Tonnage: 1050 vs 875

[Sandpit]

and yet players calling for separate queues for things like pugs don't think splitting the player base would make matches like that worse...

[Jon Gotham]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 January 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

You get ambushed by the fast mechs from behind! 4-5 run past you and eat your back armor and structure like candy.

Sky I hate to say it but that fault is ours, for thinking that every match needs to fair an balanced.

I'd agree , but for slightly different reasons than you I think:)

The playerbase is at fault too, to an extent.
A lot of people just want to roll in the biggest, baddest thing they think will allow them to pwn face-with the least chance of them dying. It's only natural, but they know co-ordinated sync drops of super heavy lances are unfair, they just don't care as long as they are the ones with the kills. You complain? You are just a whiner.

[wanderer]

Sandpit, on 19 January 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

and yet players calling for separate queues for things like pugs don't think splitting the player base would make matches like that worse...

Nope. At that point, you'd at least see people doing 3 lances of premades vs. 3 lances of premades- which means at least at the lance level, there's co-ordination.

That would be orders of magnitude more effective and coherent play than PUGs, and would promptly keep PUGs from having even so much as one lance connected by voice com.

Zero problems with PUG matches being neatly even on communication levels- that is, everyone's at "type it in". ELO just needs to work weight balance in as well at that point.

[Sandpit]

wanderer, on 19 January 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:

Nope. At that point, you'd at least see people doing 3 lances of premades vs. 3 lances of premades- which means at least at the lance level, there's co-ordination.

That would be orders of magnitude more effective and coherent play than PUGs, and would promptly keep PUGs from having even so much as one lance connected by voice com.

Zero problems with PUG matches being neatly even on communication levels- that is, everyone's at "type it in". ELO just needs to work weight balance in as well at that point.

so you think that splitting the player base would make it easier to find more balanced matches?

so if I have 500 players in a pool and I need to find them all even matches that's going to be harder than having 5 pools of 100 players each? That's not how it works. The smaller the pool the less chance you have at finding evenly matched forces.
If it's just the two of us on the game then that means you and I are facing off every game regardless of skill, weight, etc.
If there's 100 players in that pool then there's more chance you and I will play against others closer to skill and weight.

The more you split the player pools the more you're going to have uneven matches because you have less players to match up against. There's no way around that. That's a factual mathematical statement.

[wanderer]

Sandpit, on 19 January 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

so you think that splitting the player base would make it easier to find more balanced matches?

The more you split the player pools the more you're going to have uneven matches because you have less players to match up against. There's no way around that. That's a factual mathematical statement.

This implies that all players are equal- which they aren't, and shoots your "factual statement" in the foot. There are, IMHO four different grades of players AT LEAST.

First, the newbie in his Trial 'Mechs, doing his first 25 or perhaps trying out a new 'Mech he saw on the list. Odds are, he has trouble even figuring out the firing controls and has no idea how things go.

Second, the post-cadet, building his first 'Mechs, going out there into the shark tank. Still learning 'Mech operations, no idea of the power of comm-enabled teamwork.

Third, the premade- organization, focus, working with a team, selecting builds in advance to compliment each other. Lances working in tandem.

Fourth, the 12v12- fully intergrated command structures, everyone on the same page, with a full grip on the goings-on across the map.

And as it is, the current matchmaker DOES NOT TAKE WEIGHT INTO SERIOUS ACCOUNT. Look at the differences being thrown up by the matchmaker. I've played both sides of the game- the premade and the PUG. The lack of effective communication is the difference between random mobbing and a honed machine that takes 'Mechs, grinds them up, and spits them out. Information is a lethal weapon, and premades have an arsenal that no PUG has. The two are apples and oranges as a result, and yes- you'll have more balanced matches with the two segregated. PUGs are one tier, premades are the second, 12v12 is the third. Hell, I'd even make a -fourth- tier where it's trial 'Mechs only so we stop jamming newbies in the blender.

Smaller pools per tier is better than watching players get into the cycle of ream and be reamed, find massively imbalanced play unappealing, and drop out of the game entirely. There needs to be a gradual introduction- first to newbie-Mechville, then to operating your own customized, then to lance-play, and finally to full organized company. As it is, we drop newbies into something they shouldn't have to deal with for quite a while, and even if they persist through that dookie sandwich into their own 'Mech, they're exposed to the withering results of a matchmaker than neither tonnage balances nor takes into account the much more efficient premade lances vs. a PUG one. Separation must occur or we're taking one of the highest learning curves in a game like this and smashing new players into it until they look like a hockey goon, hoping they're masochistic enough to keep playing.

This is a process destined for the least efficient and highest failure rate in retaining players, as it's been great for killing MWO's momentum as it stands.

[Abivard]

To every rule their are exceptions, it is not the exceptions but the norm that one must judge things on.

'The enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.'[color=#444444]'[/color]

[Dirkdaring]

You can either wait several minutes for the matchmaker to try and balance the premade assault drop, or you can go in and fight with the best it can put together at the time.

PGI decided for #2 and I agree with them.

[Sandpit]

wanderer, on 19 January 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

This implies that all players are equal- which they aren't, and shoots your "factual statement" in the foot.

No, no it doesn't No matter how you justify it, splitting the player pool does exactly what I said it does. I guess I should have worded it better. Smaller pools = longer queues and don't establish equality. Those that do the whole pug stomp aren't going to stop. They're just going to make new accounts and alts. They'll keep their ELO low and work the system.

The idea of splitting queues just simply isn't feasible from what I've seen. Don't you think if it were feasible that PGI would have done so? If you split the queues and push wait times to several minutes then this game WILL be in trouble. You had a good chunk of the player population nerd raging or QQing because they had a 60 second timer. They're definitely not going to stick around for 5+ minutes for a match.

When you get to the higher ELOs it can already take upwards of a minute or more to find a match.

[Serpieri]

Had a few games like this - why doesn't this game take this into account cause tonnage matters, its why Battletech uses a point system to keep fights balanced.

[wanderer]

Sandpit, on 19 January 2014 - 07:40 PM, said:

No, no it doesn't No matter how you justify it, splitting the player pool does exactly what I said it does. I guess I should have worded it better. Smaller pools = longer queues and don't establish equality. Those that do the whole pug stomp aren't going to stop. They're just going to make new accounts and alts. They'll keep their ELO low and work the system.

The idea of splitting queues just simply isn't feasible from what I've seen. Don't you think if it were feasible that PGI would have done so? If you split the queues and push wait times to several minutes then this game WILL be in trouble. You had a good chunk of the player population nerd raging or QQing because they had a 60 second timer. They're definitely not going to stick around for 5+ minutes for a match.

When you get to the higher ELOs it can already take upwards of a minute or more to find a match.

Explain to me how dropping chum (that is, low ELO) players into the shark (high ELO) pool is not resulting in uneven matches.

Splitting the pool may mean fewer matches, but those matches will be more even, especially with weight balancing. Keeping the current system as-is keeps feeding new players into the pool, where they're beaten senseless repeatedly and we lose them.

Take the kiddies, put them in the kiddie pool and stop throwing them to the sharks. They'll get a chance to grow, gain some skills, and as the overall pool of players NOT shot down by MWO's brutal newbie introduction system grows, everyone's pool of players will increase. As it is, it reminds me of conscripting fresh meat on a regular basis to toss into the grinder. For every new veteran, you get a host of inactive, departed players who got sick of the leet-beatings and didn't even go past their first 25 matches. We need a newbie pool where the big guys can't chew on them, they can derp around and learn without being centerpunched in 30 seconds by the first guy they see who has a clue.

[Sandpit]

wanderer, on 19 January 2014 - 08:18 PM, said:

Explain to me how dropping chum (that is, low ELO) players into the shark (high ELO) pool is not resulting in uneven matches.

Splitting the pool may mean fewer matches, but those matches will be more even, especially with weight balancing. Keeping the current system as-is keeps feeding new players into the pool, where they're beaten senseless repeatedly and we lose them.

Take the kiddies, put them in the kiddie pool and stop throwing them to the sharks. They'll get a chance to grow, gain some skills, and as the overall pool of players NOT shot down by MWO's brutal newbie introduction system grows, everyone's pool of players will increase. As it is, it reminds me of conscripting fresh meat on a regular basis to toss into the grinder. For every new veteran, you get a host of inactive, departed players who got sick of the leet-beatings and didn't even go past their first 25 matches. We need a newbie pool where the big guys can't chew on them, they can derp around and learn without being centerpunched in 30 seconds by the first guy they see who has a clue.

I never said dropping low elo in with high elo isn't resulting in uneven matches. I said splitting the queues for PUGs wasn't feasible

I ahve suggested numerous time since CB that new players drop in their own queue with other new players as cadets. Have a few veteran players that apply and are approved to act as like drill instructors. Drop in games with the new players, give advice, answer questions, help them get info on how mechanics and such work.
That has nothing to do with a pug and premade queue though.

[DaZur]

RE: Split queues...

While I'm on side of those who cast ballots for split queues... I have to admit it's pure folly to be so naive as to believe premade teams will not venture into our sandbox and kick all our sand castles down for snickers and giggles.

[Ngamok]

Dirkdaring, on 19 January 2014 - 04:11 PM, said:

You can either wait several minutes for the matchmaker to try and balance the premade assault drop, or you can go in and fight with the best it can put together at the time.

PGI decided for #2 and I agree with them.

http://cloud-4.steam...63E7735EDEB0AF/

6 Assaults vs. 0 Assaults but we had 2 Heavies? Both teams had at least one 4 man (both Alpha Lances are WBH). If you take us out, Bravo and Charlie are still imbalanced. Funny even if you look at Alpha only, we are all Mediums vs. their Assaults and Heavy.

[Jon Gotham]

Personally, I'm fine with ELO as it is. I just want the assault/heavy balance equal on each-or as near equal as it can get.
If a lance drops with 4 DDCs....then make them wait till 4 comparable assaults are in a lance waiting.
If they don't like to wait, then stop lolstacking assaults and bring something more balanced, might prevent peeps from "gaming the system."

[Abivard]

Sandpit, on 19 January 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

I never said dropping low elo in with high elo isn't resulting in uneven matches. I said splitting the queues for PUGs wasn't feasible

I ahve suggested numerous time since CB that new players drop in their own queue with other new players as cadets. Have a few veteran players that apply and are approved to act as like drill instructors. Drop in games with the new players, give advice, answer questions, help them get info on how mechanics and such work.
That has nothing to do with a pug and premade queue though.

The utter misunderstanding and stupidity evident in this one post is reflective of much of the boards.

If it isn't evident to the reader, I feel there is no hope of me enlightening you, so I wont even try.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

PGI had to allow the MM to widen its Elo matching criteria until it had 24 players as high Elo players couldn't get games (from Russ Bullock on NGNG podcast). If it has to go so far down that it is pulling in sub median level players (trial mechs), what does that say about the size of the present player base?

[Sandpit]

Abivard, on 20 January 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

The utter misunderstanding and stupidity evident in this one post is reflective of much of the boards.

If it isn't evident to the reader, I feel there is no hope of me enlightening you, so I wont even try.

Aren't you just a ball of sunshine?
you get a hug