161 replies to this topic

[Screech]

Since they are bringing back the 12 man, does this mean there will be no first person only mode games anymore?

And for the matchmaker, just add 25 points to each pilots Elo score for each player in a pre-made. Have a group of 5, each player in that group would have 125 added to their individual Elo score. This number can be adjusted to better fit the actual Elo curve. Would help keep some of the more lopsided games from happening and would allow people who mainly group to pug when they want without being a lodestone to their team due to some hyper-inflated Elo score they can't carry.

[Deadmeat313]

I PUG far more than I play in a group, and I like the sound of this change.

If you PUG, just do your best to stick with the main group and shoot who they shoot. ie Exactly what you should normally be doing. You'll be fine.

[mekabuser]

Roland, on 18 January 2014 - 03:12 PM, said:

Dude, how can you possibly say that? There are, routinely, threads on these forums to this day where people are complaining about premades.

It really never, ever, died down.




I've been saying this for ages... there should be two queues.. a solo queue, and EVERYONE ELSE, with no grouping restrictions at all.

This is how most other games do it, and it works. Basically, the solo queue is the kiddy pool, and the normal queue is where real folks go to play, even if solo.

agreed. pugstomp threads. idk.. to me it seems like much less. tho they could be in places i dont go much anymore. My forum participation is down lik e90 percent due to head against wall syndrome so i could be wrong.. ill go take a quick look just to see.
btw since post have had another whole round of really good skirmish games. Found myself actually in charlie lance and low beta lance for the first time in forever and the BF was brutal. in a good way.

the potential for the game really is scary.. pgi needs a win on the dev front, several in fact. i would hope they are really pushing quality now, its almost as if they dont know that mech combat, BY DEFINITION, puts them 90% ahead of any other type of title for alot of people. All they have to do is just finish the job..

[Triordinant]

With the revelations of how premades screw up the Matchmaker, there has never been a better time to create a premade-free, PUG-only queue.

[Roland]

Triordinant, on 20 January 2014 - 12:57 PM, said:

With the revelations of how premades screw up the Matchmaker, there has never been a better time to create a premade-free, PUG-only queue.

Honestly, I think very few folks really oppose such an idea... It would basically be a training ground queue for the steeringwheel underhive.

It'd likely improve the quality of play in the regular queue as well.

[ApolloKaras]

Cathy, on 16 January 2014 - 04:37 PM, said:

I think the population will crash if 12 mans are allowed to match up against a mixture of 4 mans and pugs.

Those pre-sales of clan mechs must be feeling a bit shakey now i'm guessing the population is shrinking so much 12 mans can't find teams to play.

but *shrugs* why should I worry

you mean to tell me the 12 man queue is already full of people??? .... .. Its been pretty dead in the 12 man queue recently.

[Phantomime]

12 premade vs 12 pug isnt cool unless they have some sort of elo thing to balance out the quality of players matched.. else Pug stomping will simply be the way to play MWO.

I mean, in premade you can do things that simply CANT happen in a pug - like Guarenting that your Assaults and lights are not piloted by AFK's, N00bs, or Trolls.. more to the point, TEAM COMP can be assured, you WILL have ECM somewhere.. this alone can be HUGE factor even in 12v12pug.

the lack of susinct team management controls - pings, ect - means that those on comms have yet another HUGE advantage by simply being able to tell each other where the bad is, as opposed to relying on a shoddy, ECM shrouded map that again, is only as useful as your team is at holding targets (as ANYONE who's run LRM's can tell you! - yes, we all run our own TAGs now cause expecting team locks in a pug is bloody stupid.)

as much as i want to support team vs pug, and think that it IS a good idea, even League (of Legends) admits that you have to do something to balance a Pug vs a premade and honestly MWO's matchmaker is not nearly as good as League's, nor is its player base as robust.

[Roland]

Phantomime, on 20 January 2014 - 04:53 PM, said:

12 premade vs 12 pug isnt cool unless they have some sort of elo thing to balance out the quality of players matched.. else Pug stomping will simply be the way to play MWO.

The reality is, once you open up the player cap, you are NEVER gonna get a 12 man premade and then a bunch of Solo pugs. You realize that right? That it will NEVER happen?

You'll always have mostly grouped players on both sides.

Also, you'll enable things like groups of 11.. so if you play solo, there will be a decent chance that you'll get put with a whole team of folks who actually know how to play.

[RG Notch]

Roland, on 20 January 2014 - 05:28 PM, said:

The reality is, once you open up the player cap, you are NEVER gonna get a 12 man premade and then a bunch of Solo pugs. You realize that right? That it will NEVER happen?

You'll always have mostly grouped players on both sides.

Also, you'll enable things like groups of 11.. so if you play solo, there will be a decent chance that you'll get put with a whole team of folks who actually know how to play.

Is that NEVER like you'll NEVER drop with players who use 3PV if you don't want? Never seems to mean different things when MWO is involved.

[Roland]

RG Notch, on 20 January 2014 - 07:39 PM, said:

Is that NEVER like you'll NEVER drop with players who use 3PV if you don't want? Never seems to mean different things when MWO is involved.

It means that there will be a statistically insignficant likelihood that you would have a 12 man team on one side, and zero pre-made team members on the other... especially since all grouped players would be in that single queue.

[mekabuser]

Amsro, on 17 January 2014 - 12:04 PM, said:

You must remember there was no Elo during the old PUG stomping days. New variables make the 2-12 more viable, desired even.

c hrist. . i forgot this.. !! anyone else mention this in the thread? Its actually quite relevant and makes me VERY curious as to how it would play out.

[RG Notch]

Roland, on 20 January 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

It means that there will be a statistically insignficant likelihood that you would have a 12 man team on one side, and zero pre-made team members on the other... especially since all grouped players would be in that single queue.

Just checking, because words seem to have different meanings when MWO is involved, never, exclusive, launch, all those mean entirely different things in other games.
BTW statistically insignificant is not the same as NEVER, so I guess it does mean different things when MWO is involved.

[Zerberus]

RG Notch, on 20 January 2014 - 07:56 PM, said:

Just checking, because words seem to have different meanings when MWO is involved, never, exclusive, launch, all those mean entirely different things in other games.
BTW statistically insignificant is not the same as NEVER, so I guess it does mean different things when MWO is involved.

"Statistically insignificant" in any semi-qualified context essentially means that IF it somehow ever happens to you, it`s practically guaranteed beyond any reasonable chance that it will never, ever happen to you again, in this life OR the next.

For comparison, the change of geting struck by lighting or even winning the lottery is NOT statistically insignificant.... yet how often has it happened to you so far?

Statistically insignificant is the chance that an exploding atomic bomb will open a black hole that wil suck up the earth. It denotes more of more a theoretical possibility than anythng else.

For for all intents and purposes in reference to the short span of the average human life, "never" is 99.999999999999999% synonymous

Edited by Zerberus, 20 January 2014 - 11:04 PM.

[RG Notch]

Zerberus, on 20 January 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

"Statistically insignificant" in any semi-qualified context essentially means that IF it somehow ever happens to you, it`s practically guaranteed beyond any reasonable chance that it will never, ever happen to you again, in this life OR the next.

For comparison, the change of geting struck by lighting or even winning the lottery is NOT statistically insignificant.... yet how often has it happened to you so far?

Statistically insignificant is the chance that an exploding atomic bomb will open a black hole that wil suck up the earth. It denotes more of more a theoretical possibility than anythng else.

For for all intents and purposes in reference to the short span of the average human life, "never" is 99.999999999999999% synonymous

No never means never, which means it will not happen ever. Spin it how you want, but never means never. That means not ever happening, not extremely unlikely to occur.

[WhiteRabbit]

RG Notch, on 21 January 2014 - 05:57 AM, said:

No never means never, which means it will not happen ever. Spin it how you want, but never means never. That means not ever happening, not extremely unlikely to occur.

you have no idea how hard it is to not make a justin bieber joke about that....

OT: well in a perfect world with unlimited supply of players to fill the MM pools tonnage-restrictions and matching sliced-bread with about the same amount of sliced-bread i don't see what's bad about merging the pools (maybe keep a kiddy/recruit pool)...

[Sandpit]

Quote

Match Maker
Some of you may have noticed a change made to the Match Maker. Previously, the match maker would find the Elo values of a team/player and try to find opponents in a narrow tolerance +/- of the given Elo. After waiting for 3 minutes, the Match Maker would start increasing this tolerance to a maximum of +/- 1000. This worked fine for a long period of time until the curve you've seen on graphs, settled down into the bell curve that Elo creates. But what has happened is that there are players who are at the extreme ends of the bell curve. Very high Elo rated players and very low Elo rated players were not able to match make properly because there were not enough players in their bracket.

For example, a player had an Elo rating of 2790/2800. That person was trying to match make with players with a score of 1790 or higher. The majority of players in MWO do not fit that criteria so the match maker would fail consistently. To remedy this, the max tolerance was set to 2800. This means after 3 minutes, the match maker would start widening the search tolerance around a player's Elo score to +/- 2800. Theoretically, this means a 2800 player could be matched with a 0 rated player. But that is purely theoretical.

We've seen numerous reports of players saying they're being mixed with players far outside of their Elo rating. This is odd because 1) no player knows their Elo rating and 2) metrics is proving this to be a misconception. As of yesterday (Jan 20), the average deviation between team Elo ratings was approximately 175 points. The extreme maximum was around 750. What this means is that match maker is finding people of relative skill compared to your personal Elo with a maximum tolerance of 750.

If you believe that you are being matched with very low Elo players, 250 for example, that means that your current Elo is at the MOST, 1000. This is below the average threshold and you are being properly matched. If you believe that you are a very high Elo player, 2100+ for example, the EXTREME lowest Elo rated team you're going to be going up against is 1350 which is just above the median player of the game.

Now I was inundated with screenshots and PMs concerning the issue of "very high Elo players" being matched with "very low Elo players" so I decided to look directly into the issues themselves in a direct manner. The screen shots showed complete stomps and high discrepancies between damage done on each team. I used 4 screenshots that were submitted (and keep in mind, these were complete wipes/stomps) and compiled the team Elo rating for each team involved. In screenshot 1, the Elo difference between the two teams was approximately 10. In screenshot 2, the Elo difference was 47. In screenshot 3 the difference was 101. In screenshot 4, the Elo difference was 65. What means is, that even if a game ends in a "stomp", there is a high chance that the opposing team was just outplayed via communication and on field maneuvering.

Another thing to keep in mind is that there was a tonnage difference between the teams. There is a general misconception out there that I'd like to clear up. Elo does NOT balance tonnage per team. The only relationship between Elo and a BattleMech is that the player has 4 WEIGHT CLASS Elo scores. A light score, a medium score, a heavy score and an assault score. This allows the match maker to adjust your match base you being great in a light, but not so great in a heavy. Again, this has no relation on team tonnage.

In short, the MM Elo system is kicking off matches between teams with a fault tolerance on average of approximately 175. While this is not 100% perfect (you will never get this number to 0), it is VERY effective.

http://mwomercs.com/...ate-jan-212014/

So now the whole "These high elo premades, etc." convos can stop. I found it amusing that he said he was surprised that players are facing off against "high elo" players since no one KNOWS THEIR ELO

[RG Notch]

Sandpit, on 22 January 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ate-jan-212014/

So now the whole "These high elo premades, etc." convos can stop. I found it amusing that he said he was surprised that players are facing off against "high elo" players since no one KNOWS THEIR ELO

Umm no they won't stop precisely because no one knows their Elo. I'm not advocating public or even private Elo as it can be gamed or used for foolish purposes. I'm just stating that this will not go away.

Edited by RG Notch, 22 January 2014 - 11:52 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Sandpit, on 22 January 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...ate-jan-212014/

So now the whole "These high elo premades, etc." convos can stop. I found it amusing that he said he was surprised that players are facing off against "high elo" players since no one KNOWS THEIR ELO

What I found amusing about all that is apparently those "High Elo" players don't have as high of an Elo as they thought.

[Roland]

Roadbeer, on 22 January 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

What I found amusing about all that is apparently those "High Elo" players don't have as high of an Elo as they thought.

Another explanation is that Paul's explanation didn't really make sense, and was just handwaving.

It also failed to take into account a few pretty key things, like how new players being thrown in at average level Elo screws stuff up, since they would apparently get matched against high Elo players despite the fact that their equipment and skills were nowhere close to equal. So while the Elo numbers might suggest balance, the real take-away is that the Elo numbers in those cases are garbage and not at all useful for matchmaking purposes.

[Ngamok]

Roadbeer, on 16 January 2014 - 11:32 PM, said:

The problem with that is, and is the same as the 12 player group is that it doesn't allow you to build or hold a group under the cap level. If someone logged out, or people got tired waiting to reach the cap level, you were stuck with multiple smaller groups and may not ever get the max group size.

Say you start with four, the a couple guys come on, you have six, few more come on, you work up to 12. Then someone has to leave, your group doesn't break until that 12th player comes on, you can operate with 11. Way it stands now, you have to break your group apart until you can get that 12th player again.

Trust me, it sucks ***

I understand what you mean but with 500+ active players, that's just over 41 - 12 man groups you can make spread over all hours of the day. I know you know how many people you see pugging and trust me, you think those people will stick around? Nope. They will quit because there are many more people who prefer to be on their own rather than interact with other people when playing games.