511 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

RG Notch, on 26 January 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

PIG hasn't done it because they are also the people who know how many players they have, and it seems clear there aren't enough to split the queues anymore. One can argue the player base is stable or growing, but the fact that PIg wouldn't split the queues for 3PV, or for solo only, both of which were asked for a lot show that likely isn't true. Argue your anecdotal evidence all you want, but PGI removal of the player counter and refusal to split queues argues that it's true. They even held off another game mode until another forum revolt and right after started tuning Elo because waits were too long.
So argue that your group is bustling while PGI's action say otherwise.

whatever makes you feel better.

PGI isn't releasing the information or doing what I want them to because they're secretly holding off for a spin-off first person mech warrior game that actually lets me play as a pilot on foot ALA GTA.

My statement has just as much validity as the one you jsut made. It's based on nothing more than my personal opinion on things. You can choose to believe what you want as can everyone else here. That doesn't make it reality though

[RG Notch]

Sandpit, on 26 January 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

whatever makes you feel better.

PGI isn't releasing the information or doing what I want them to because they're secretly holding off for a spin-off first person mech warrior game that actually lets me play as a pilot on foot ALA GTA.

My statement has just as much validity as the one you jsut made. It's based on nothing more than my personal opinion on things. You can choose to believe what you want as can everyone else here. That doesn't make it reality though

Yes but does your opinion have any action by PGI to back it up? PGi isn't releasing the info because it's likely not good. Most other F2Ps have a player counter, actually brag about concurrent players as opposed to forum registrations, show groups in game, etc. But you are right everyone is free to believe what they want. I just tend to believe things where I can point to tangible evidence instead of believing what people who have reasons to dissemble, have proven to "change their position" when it suits them and rely on hope.

[MadcatX]

RG Notch, on 26 January 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

Argue your anecdotal evidence all you want, but PGI removal of the player counter and refusal to split queues argues that it's true.

Challenge accepted. My anecdotal evidence vs Your anecdotal evidence.

[Sandpit]

RG Notch, on 26 January 2014 - 09:00 PM, said:

Yes but does your opinion have any action by PGI to back it up? PGi isn't releasing the info because it's likely not good. Most other F2Ps have a player counter, actually brag about concurrent players as opposed to forum registrations, show groups in game, etc. But you are right everyone is free to believe what they want. I just tend to believe things where I can point to tangible evidence instead of believing what people who have reasons to dissemble, have proven to "change their position" when it suits them and rely on hope.

And that's your opinion to which means no more than mine when we're talking about factual data. I tend to believe that a company tends to make decisions based on the entire player population and data they collect from that entire population so that they can make money.
You are here because it's a game and you're looking for entertainment. They are here because this is how they feed their families. Who do you think is going to make a more unbiased decision about what's best for the game?

You, who is here to play a game and more concerned with your personal enjoyment of that game

or....

Them, who are relying on this to make sure they have enough success to continue doing it and feeding their families?

I tend to believe that the company has more at stake when it comes to decisions on the direction of this game than you do so I tend to lean that way when it comes to "well who do you think has a better idea?"

Then you throw into the mix that they actually listen to constructive feedback and DO make adjustments based on player ideas and well yea, I'll go with them over your anecdotal "evidence"

[RG Notch]

MadcatX, on 26 January 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

Challenge accepted. My anecdotal evidence vs Your anecdotal evidence.

Again, where's your anecdotal evidence to counter PGI's actions? Explain their actions in a way that don't indicate there isn't a big enough player base to support splitting the queues and provide a logical explanation for the removal of the player counter and their lack of discussion of player numbers other than vague best ever fluff. Also contrast why other F2P don't do these things.
Again, you're free to believe what you like, but people used to believe the sun was the chariot of some god crossing the sky. Evidence proved otherwise. I know I'm not going to convert the faithful because even to this day people cling to their myths or religions if you like in spite of having no evidence and relying on people who benefit from such beliefs. I'm just stating that I need convincing that their is some old man watching my actions and judging me and that PGI isn't refusing to split queues because they don't want wait times to be 10 minutes unless they remove Elo.
So you believe what you believe and I'll believe what I believe.

[RG Notch]

Sandpit, on 26 January 2014 - 09:11 PM, said:

And that's your opinion to which means no more than mine when we're talking about factual data. I tend to believe that a company tends to make decisions based on the entire player population and data they collect from that entire population so that they can make money.
You are here because it's a game and you're looking for entertainment. They are here because this is how they feed their families. Who do you think is going to make a more unbiased decision about what's best for the game?

You, who is here to play a game and more concerned with your personal enjoyment of that game

or....

Them, who are relying on this to make sure they have enough success to continue doing it and feeding their families?

I tend to believe that the company has more at stake when it comes to decisions on the direction of this game than you do so I tend to lean that way when it comes to "well who do you think has a better idea?"

Then you throw into the mix that they actually listen to constructive feedback and DO make adjustments based on player ideas and well yea, I'll go with them over your anecdotal "evidence"

LOL really nothing more need be said. You believe the people who have as you stated reasons to hide unflattering data, I'll believe the evidence that they are hiding that data. I guess you've never played any other F2Ps because they don't operate under a hide the numbers regime, but then again the one's I've seen don't have a reason to hide them.
Seriously, there's no need to discuss further. This isn't the only game in town, but it is one of the few that hides group info, hides player numbers, never brags about concurrent player numbers (with actual numbers, not just saying the best ever).
This game doesn't operate in a vacuum, other games operating in the F2P space somehow manage to have player counters, in match group indicators, General Discussion forums, allow new players to post anywhere from the start, claim huge concurrent player numbers, have numerous game modes, lobbies, etc.
What do those other games have? Different developers and better than meh reviews from professionals. So believe what PGI tells you, because that's what your anecdotal evidence seems to be, I'll believe that other games manage these things and thrive while MWO can't seem to.

[Bagheera]

Screech, on 26 January 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Great analysis. So random queues would become interesting yet still play exactly the same. BRILLIANT! I haven't encountered so a well thought out display in mental agility since the last time I sharted myself.

I suppose it would have been easier for you to understand if you could have seen the derisive finger quotes I put around the word "interesting."

As far as mental sharting, if that's all you took from my post it may be time to clean yourself again.

[Sandpit]

RG Notch, on 26 January 2014 - 09:21 PM, said:

LOL really nothing more need be said.
I'll believe that other games manage these things and thrive while MWO can't seem to.

At least your first statement was correct

Are you one of the ones calling for the death of MWO back in CB? or OB? or Launch? Or last summer? Or this fall? Or the first of this year...?

Notice a trend here?
Notice how we're still here discussing a game that isn't dead?

[Xtrekker]

Budor, on 26 January 2014 - 04:10 AM, said:

How is Elo a valid point in keeping premades in the pug queue? I think you misunderstood my post...

You're right, I misread the post. I shouldn't be in the forum at 6 AM.

I think I was responding to the general idea in here that there aren't enough players to support splitting the queues, and my argument was that Elo was already splitting queues into supposed tiers. Splitting the queues and widening the Elo brackets I think would work in this regard.

Edited by Xtrekker, 26 January 2014 - 10:20 PM.

[Sandpit]

Xtrekker, on 26 January 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

You're right, I misread the post. I shouldn't be in the forum at 6 AM.

I think I was responding to the general idea in here that there aren't enough players to support splitting the queues, and my argument was that Elo was already splitting queues into supposed tiers. Splitting the queues and widening the Elo brackets I think would work in this regard.

The elo separates the queues but doesn't do so in a hard manner. It keeps extending until it finds players to drop against. It doesn't stop at a specific point and wait indefinitely for players that fit that elo bracket

[WhiteRabbit]

Sandpit, on 26 January 2014 - 10:32 PM, said:

The elo separates the queues but doesn't do so in a hard manner. It keeps extending until it finds players to drop against. It doesn't stop at a specific point and wait indefinitely for players that fit that elo bracket

Actually it does stop expanding at a certain point:

http://mwomercs.com/...89#entry3095789

(if it didn't there wouldn't be a threshold)

Edited by WhiteRabbit, 27 January 2014 - 03:51 AM.

[wanderer]

Sandpit, on 26 January 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

At least your first statement was correct

Are you one of the ones calling for the death of MWO back in CB? or OB? or Launch? Or last summer? Or this fall? Or the first of this year...?

Notice a trend here?
Notice how we're still here discussing a game that isn't dead?

I'm not calling MWO dead either. But it sure as heck isn't -thriving-. And compared to many, I'm a bloody optimist.

I want a thriving game. A World of Tanks/Planes kind of thriving, not a barely-scraping along F2P that only keeps itself alive on the wisps of fandom for a game universe and it's predecessor videogames. FFS, we had CW in MBT3025 by launch, and that was based off the MW1 engine with a few -100- players at any one time! We've obviously got game data being recorded, all that's needed now is queueing that places factional players together, adds lone wolves to fit, and FFS, you could actually have some level of "faction vs. faction" going on, even if at this point two-thirds of a force are lone-wolf mercs vs. House players.

But we're poisoning our own mostly dry wells right now if we keep desperately shoving green players into the main player pool to get shot up for target practice. It's not bloody tough. If a player has no 'Mechs of their own, flag and separate them from the main queue. Give them no ELO rating whatsoever when using a Trial 'Mech, positive or negative even when they DO have a 'Mech of their own, as long as they're using a Trial. Trials are "trainers", trainees are not adequate measures of real play skill other than "LOL I GOT TO SHOOT THE NOOB", in a 'Mech that isn't built to the player and designed to be a "try it", not a "you're good, this is what you chose, sink or swim".

A new player that gets shoved in the shark tank and leaves is nothing more than a wasted opportunity and a temporary bandaid on a bleeding player population. At worst, it's another negative advertisement for MWO.

[Joseph Mallan]

Iskareot, on 25 January 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

So what would happen if pugs actually could fight their equal other solo players and premades had to fight their own equal premades?

What would be so bad about that balance of play?

Obvious pros are equal or at least MORE balance then we have now based on logic....

But would the matches go longer? Would the pugs be mad that we were more or less organized?

Would the premades be mad they could not farm the pugs? OR that they would have balance forced on them?

Why is this still not in the game? NOBODY should lose any options.. make that clear.. both sides should be able to keep their fun. But shouldn't new people and current players have a choice of the way to drop to help balance the matches?

What is so wrong about this? Not enough people? (IF this Is the case we have bigger issues).

This would only hold up as long as a group had 4 man teams. As soon as there was an odd number, Solo players are needed to fill out the groups.

[Nightcrept]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 January 2014 - 06:03 AM, said:

This would only hold up as long as a group had 4 man teams. As soon as there was an odd number, Solo players are needed to fill out the groups.

@Iskareot,
This is what we ran into last time we tried it.

Pugs would be fine if left to their own because that is their nature and the elo would be much much more effective at balancing them.

However there is no way to balance pre-mades vs pre-mades with the current player population without seriously restricting the team sizes to only 4 or 12 man groups without using pugs. And that is no fun.

I'm afraid that until the game gets more popular and old players return pgi can't install modes like deathmatches or other non-pre-made modes. There just isn't enough of a player base to allow that separation.

And most players who retired are waiting for cw.



Biggest problem we have is player retention. And the main problem with that is the game modes are all basically the same with no long term MMO goals.
So no matter what the new mech or map it is still the same thing over and over with no real goal. Most people will get very very tired of that really quick.

[HeavyRain]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 January 2014 - 06:03 AM, said:

This would only hold up as long as a group had 4 man teams. As soon as there was an odd number, Solo players are needed to fill out the groups.

Aren't you always saying how you love to thrive in the face of adversity?
So you would drop 11 vs 12, or 10 vs 12, I am sure you would enjoy the challenge, would make it feel more like real combat, no?

[Joseph Mallan]

I don't complain about when it happens if that's what you mean? When it happens, I shrug it off, and get to the business of trying to win the match.

[HeavyRain]

So it won't be a problem if there are no solo players to fill the occasional hole in the team, that's what i am saying. Even now, half of the matches i am in are missing one or two people anyway.

[Joseph Mallan]

HeavyRain, on 27 January 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

So it won't be a problem if there are no solo players to fill the occasional hole in the team, that's what i am saying. Even now, half of the matches i am in are missing one or two people anyway.

Ah. now I see your angle! Well the problem is that the DEVs have already said that PUGs/Lone Wolves will fill the gaps in matches once CW is active, Which is why I do play as a PUG, cause I won't always have the Law at my back.

[Iskareot]

Sandpit, on 26 January 2014 - 09:39 PM, said:

At least your first statement was correct

Are you one of the ones calling for the death of MWO back in CB? or OB? or Launch? Or last summer? Or this fall? Or the first of this year...?

Notice a trend here?
Notice how we're still here discussing a game that isn't dead?

It's funny I just had a flashback to SWG and how that change was handled with the CU and the NGE and the fan base and player base begged and asked them NOT to change it to that mess or we warned them it would go under horridly and become a laughing stock of the MMOs.

Good thing that worked out. I mean oops... nope -fail.


In the end the debate or thought or WORRY that what would happen if they did this is somewhat odd. I was not even pinning this on population as much as give the choice see what happens. DO NOT TAKE AWAY ANYONES gameplay or way they want to drop though. If you want to group do it, if you want to drop into a solo drop do it.. But simply give the choice.

I am not sure what everyone is afraid of exactly but clearly they are.... I would think that both groups would like the balance to them both more so. At least they would be more balanced than they are now just based on the logic of the drops alone.

As far as wait times.... well, THAT is the only thing that nobody would know until we tried it due to not knowing the population.

So far, the people I have brought to the game out of 9 friends to try it- 2 stayed due to the imbalance of the premade factor when just wanting to drop solo. While sure alot of FPS games have team play most are pitted against other teams vs random pugs and teams mixed. They liked the game but the choices of drops, no lobby and no possible choice of pug play made them pass after 30 days or so.

I had a team last night... which was so messed up that clearly something went wrong. --- 1 premade lance, but the rest pugs and about 4 or 5 of the players claim it was thier 3rd time playing and they were all in trial mechs driving all over the place.

Needless to say this match was about a record time one for me, it was over in about 120 seconds. 12 -0 and the other team I had seen two matches prior.

Something is wrong with the MM system for sure but not sure if they are testing or trying things because it was not working right for sure. I just closed the game after that odd drop.

Edited by Iskareot, 27 January 2014 - 08:36 AM.

[Mr 144]

Nick Makiaveli, on 26 January 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

First let me just say I am going to squash my inner Grammar National Socialist and move on.

We have in-game VOIP. It's called TS, Mumble etc. You are referring to built-in VOIP. Why bother when there are so many free, fully functional choices out there?

"beating everyone into the same box"? Umm, that's what you want to do, ie force people to use the same product. We advocate choice.

Splitting queues could just as easily lead to empty queues and people facing long waits or failure to find matches. So it's not like split queues are without downsides.

If you think built-in VOIP is so wonderful, why don't you use TS? Encourage the use of the Comstar server etc?

I say it's because you suck at MWO and want something to blame, though how you get from VOIP and queues to you dying in the first minutes of the game from running out into the open (seen it myself and heard it from others) being the fault of the pre-mades is beyond me.

Why bother with built in VOIP?

Common scenario of a "casual" player.
Lanch and play a match...chillax, surf, check facebook, e-mail, forums, real-life in-house social interaction, bio, etc...hit launch and play again....rinse, repeat. Notice none of these things are "socially challenged".

Scenario #2.
Enjoy playing diverse games with unknown qualifiers...aka, what random groups provide.

What in-game VOIP provides is the ability of anyone to at least "hear" proposed coordination. TS/Vent/Mumble/Etc only provides communicatio tools in a fixed group. Only 12-mans can benefit from TS to it's full extent. In-game VOIP would enable every match to have the proper tools available.

There is absolutley no "social" aspect to this game. Tactical communication is not social behavior. For those that tout "anti-social PuGs" as an excuse...I suggest you re-evaluate what you are looking for in a game. There are many social outlets on the internet, this game need not be one of them...frankly it's not worth the time.

As far as the OP? No...dedicated queues would allow "good...aka, veteran" puggers to completely dominate. Personally, my stats are far better when pugging than when grouping using VOIP. If I want to farm, I avoid groups like the plague. The only four uses atm for TS/etc are..
#1: Social Interaction (aka fun if that's your gig)
#2: 12-mans
#3: coordinated builds requiring "wingmans"
#4: unskilled players who "need" the crutch to farm.

In-game VOIP is the only trueequalizer. No more excuses. No more accusations from either side.

DDO (Dungeons and Dragons On-line) has an excellent system for voice, friends lists, grouping, squelching, etc...and should be duplicated here in it's entirety.