166 replies to this topic

[DaddyP1G]

Curccu, on 13 January 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

Yep! Pics or that's BS

Here you go.

Edited by Kaden Kildares, 13 January 2014 - 12:18 PM.

[Axeman1]

That Charlie lance is aweful. Cicada's and locusts in general are.

[Noesis]

How do we determine it isn't a 12 man vs 12 man?

Otherwise tonnage wise that is very "out of whack" for pugs.

[wanderer]

Something I'll note is the MM seems to slap one entire force together, then proceeds to fill in the second piecemeal.

If it went back and forth- that is, filled Alpha lances, then Beta, then Charlie on both sides we might not see as whacked out a tonnage difference. But I do see plenty of cases where one side is predominately heavy/assault with a few lights vs. a mixed bag of mostly medium/lights with maybe a heavy or two. Weight imbalance at those levels tends to be "crush", especially if a premade's PUG stomping around.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

wanderer, on 13 January 2014 - 01:25 PM, said:

Something I'll note is the MM seems to slap one entire force together, then proceeds to fill in the second piecemeal.

If it went back and forth- that is, filled Alpha lances, then Beta, then Charlie on both sides we might not see as whacked out a tonnage difference. But I do see plenty of cases where one side is predominately heavy/assault with a few lights vs. a mixed bag of mostly medium/lights with maybe a heavy or two. Weight imbalance at those levels tends to be "crush", especially if a premade's PUG stomping around.

You know I was wondering about that. It seems like a really weird way to handle it.

Does it actually do it that way? I thought maybe it was just me.

[wanderer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

You know I was wondering about that. It seems like a really weird way to handle it.

Does it actually do it that way? I thought maybe it was just me.

Every match I've come in on since I came back, I've logged into a complete 12-man team on the other side while mine is being filled one at a time- I'm guessing due to my abysmal ELO from nothing but PUG play since the reset. (I can't use voice comms due to a need to keep my home quiet at the moment, but gotta have that fix!)

That is, there will be a full enemy alpha, bravo and charlie lance ready to go. Every single time. That cannot be good for force balancing at all, especially since it seems to slap my side together from whatever it can scrape out of the queue.

[DaZur]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

You know I was wondering about that. It seems like a really weird way to handle it.

Does it actually do it that way? I thought maybe it was just me.

I "think" (based on my personal antidotal experience) it's dependant upon the depth of the draw pool... I've watched it both ways..i.e one side then the other and in parallel.

It could also simply be a server timing issue... As in server fills one way and dependant upon client ping, show it another...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

DaZur, on 13 January 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

I "think" (based on my personal antidotal experience) it's dependant upon the depth of the draw pool... I've watched it both ways..i.e one side then the other and in parallel.

It could also simply be a server timing issue... As in server fills one way and dependant upon client ping, show it another...

That's why I didn't jump to say it is definitely that way, but from my experience i'd say I see somewhere in the realm of 3 out of 4 matches, one side fills first, then the other.

Just seems silly.

[DaZur]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 01:48 PM, said:

Just seems silly.

Agreed...

That said, if PGI was smart, they'd load one side than the other since the MM is "supposed" to be filtering individual Elo over the team composite Elo... it would give players the impression of "match-making"...

It's kind'a like the mind-games of handing a person six individual pieces of candy versus a "handful" (even though that handful contains the same six pieces)... the recipient "feels" like they have been given more...

[Abivard]

Ngamok, on 13 January 2014 - 07:44 AM, said:

Hard mode engaged !

But honestly, too many people in assaults in the queue and the MM has to find a spot for them.

Really? let us look at the hard facts in this one drop.

7 lights
9 mediums (2 of which are cicadia, so 9 lights, 7 mediums)
3 heavies
5 assaults

it should read, if balanced.
6 lights
6 mediums
6 heavies
6 assaults

nope, the problem was too many lights, not enough heavy or assaults.

wanderer, on 13 January 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

Every match I've come in on since I came back, I've logged into a complete 12-man team on the other side while mine is being filled one at a time- I'm guessing due to my abysmal ELO from nothing but PUG play since the reset. (I can't use voice comms due to a need to keep my home quiet at the moment, but gotta have that fix!)

That is, there will be a full enemy alpha, bravo and charlie lance ready to go. Every single time. That cannot be good for force balancing at all, especially since it seems to slap my side together from whatever it can scrape out of the queue.

YEA!
And while we are on that, How come I never get to be on the red team?

[OneEyed Jack]

Maybe instead of yet another thread about this, you should talk to the {Surat} running Light pre-mades and tell them to knock it the hell off if they aren't good enough to pull it off.

Sometimes I think the morons do it just to troll their own team and spark "MM imbalance" posts.

[dario03]

Biggest weight difference I've ever noted was 910v460. So yeah 10 tons short of being double, and that was on the small map River City so you can imagine how that went.

wanderer, on 13 January 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

Every match I've come in on since I came back, I've logged into a complete 12-man team on the other side while mine is being filled one at a time- I'm guessing due to my abysmal ELO from nothing but PUG play since the reset. (I can't use voice comms due to a need to keep my home quiet at the moment, but gotta have that fix!)

That is, there will be a full enemy alpha, bravo and charlie lance ready to go. Every single time. That cannot be good for force balancing at all, especially since it seems to slap my side together from whatever it can scrape out of the queue.

I had a thread asking about this and the theory is that the game does find all 24 players before launch it just takes longer to show you your team for some reason (possibly because it tells you what mech they are in and for some reason that makes it so they don't show up until fully loaded). This is also probably why you can see the other team be totally full even though some of them might not load in and at the end of the match you will see that it was really 12v11 or 12v10.

However I do think the game picks a entire team first and then tries to match another team against them. I think it would be better if it just grabbed 24 players and then split them up by weight and elo and groups and waiting for them all to load in or replace disconnected players. For example if it didn't affect premade groups then simply swapping the 2 Atlases for 2 lights between the teams would have made the weight difference only be ~60 tons. Not sure how the elos would of been though.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I don't even know what to think at this point.

I'm still really thrown by the mixing of solo players and groups. I understand population may not allow for it. But I still think these queue's need to be separated.

But my main thing is, you almost have to inflate a 4 man's ELO because of the assumption they are on voice.

It really hurts my head thinking about the matchmaker at this point.

Between 2-3-4 man groups, solo's, ELO, good chassis, bad chassis, weight matching, newly purchased mechs, fully mastered mech's, trial mechs...I think they've done themself a disservice not having player controlled lobbies.

[Ngamok]

Abivard, on 13 January 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

Really? let us look at the hard facts in this one drop.

7 lights
9 mediums (2 of which are cicadia, so 9 lights, 7 mediums)
3 heavies
5 assaults

it should read, if balanced.
6 lights
6 mediums
6 heavies
6 assaults

nope, the problem was too many lights, not enough heavy or assaults.

Like you said, that one drop. The game will either be lots of heavies (JM6 and CTFs) and assaults, or lots of lights. I have never seen a game where the entire drop is 6,6,6,6.

[Para B]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:

I'm still really thrown by the mixing of solo players and groups. I understand population may not allow for it. But I still think these queue's need to be separated.

PGI doesn't want to alienate its playerbase, the hardcore, organized clan players who invest a lot of time and money and who love stomping PUGs and padding their stats, no matter what they say on the forums.

[DaZur]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:

I don't even know what to think at this point.

I'm still really thrown by the mixing of solo players and groups. I understand population may not allow for it. But I still think these queue's need to be separated.

But my main thing is, you almost have to inflate a 4 man's ELO because of the assumption they are on voice.

It really hurts my head thinking about the matchmaker at this point.

Between 2-3-4 man groups, solo's, ELO, good chassis, bad chassis, weight matching, newly purchased mechs, fully mastered mech's, trial mechs...I think they've done themself a disservice not having player controlled lobbies.

Regardless of how my we like to fancy this particular genre as being the cats meow... Compared to other more mainstream genres, MW:O mights as well be "battle turds".

That aside... I think with all the other stuff going on around us, we need to remember the long-term goal is the proliferation of CW and within that context, "PUG" players are intended to be treated largely as conscripts to fill uneven pairings between houses / Clans... As such, the pairing of teams and solos makes more sense contextually.

[joedawg39s]

I have a suspicion that it got worse because people are taking a break until UI 2.0 so the pool to pull from is smaller. That or I forgot how to play which is entirely possible.
The worst game I had recently was 4 assaults vs 8 assaults. I'm also guessing none of us really keep track when we are on the heavy side of the match.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

DaZur, on 13 January 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

Regardless of how my we like to fancy this particular genre as being the cats meow... Compared to other more mainstream genres, MW:O mights as well be "battle turds".

That aside... I think with all the other stuff going on around us, we need to remember the long-term goal is the proliferation of CW and within that context, "PUG" players are intended to be treated largely as conscripts to fill uneven pairings between houses / Clans... As such, the pairing of teams and solos makes more sense contextually.

Which I'm fine with, but then wouldn't it be that the matchmaker is prioritizing 4mans?

I'm fine with 4 4 man's, a 2 man, and a 3 man with 3 lone wolves, and you end up with 2 4 man's on each side, a 3 man and a lone wolf on one and the 2 man and 2 lone wolves on the other.

But that doesn't seem to be the way it's happening. Or if it is, one of the 4 man's seems to be WAY more coordinated than the other.

I like to hope that they aren't sticking 2-3 groups on one side while putting 12 solo's on the other, but it feels that way sometimes.

And this is one of the reasons I wish we had more transparency with regards to team composition.

It would be awesome if it showed who was grouped up.

[wanderer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 13 January 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

And this is one of the reasons I wish we had more transparency with regards to team composition.

It would be awesome if it showed who was grouped up.

This. Premades should be flagged from the get-go. It's that important., considering premade = voice comms = serious force multiplier for realtime comms.

[WarZ]

Sandpit, on 13 January 2014 - 07:47 AM, said:

I'm glad someone finally got the nerve to post on this

You really are a first class derp. Your input does nothing for this long standing problem. Again your a derp.