504 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

Quote

In my opinion, it should be the solo queue that is without rewards (XP,Cbills, Acheivements), because it encourages PUG farming, and people will be attempting to sync drop and pummel the unorganized soloists

Next thing you know, we'll be back to using Irish children as a handy reserve food source. Truly, a modest proposal.

The only reason sync dropping hasn't been disrupted is it's currently effort that would cause more screaming than it's worth as there's no large-group queue or way to get multiple player past 4 in a group otherwise. Randomize putting people in the drop pool by about a minute to 90 seconds and sync dropping is deader than Elvis.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sephlock, on 11 March 2014 - 07:15 AM, said:

FTFY.

Also, I am still pining for the girl in your sig pic. WHO IS SHE?! SOMEONE HAS TO KNOW!!!

Wow... I didn't realize people still pine in this day and age! Thats refreshing!

[Davers]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 March 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

Wow... I didn't realize people still pine in this day and age! Thats refreshing!

It's that special kind of love- the love between a man and an anime foxgirl.

[Joseph Mallan]

Davers, on 12 March 2014 - 05:17 AM, said:

It's that special kind of love- the love between a man and an anime foxgirl.

Ohhhhh. I understand now

[Bobzilla]

They should really try just allowing groups of any size but letting everyone know on both teams, who is grouped with who with icons on the ready screen. I think making it open would create more groups, which will increase the odds that both sides have a group. Also then we could really know how well premades perform.

I only pug, and would be willing to risk getting pugstomped for a month to find out if premades actually have that great of an affect on the game overall. Just tell everyone its only for a month trial incase people get too pissed off and feel like the game is broken.

I think if they opened premades to all sizes things would kinda ballance out, sometimes you'd be that extra to an 11 man team to stomp, sometimes there would be a 6 man on one side and 2 fours on the other. If not, at the end of the month you could make the appropiate restrictions, or work on a system that balances premades as well, or a combo of both.

[Zolaz]

PGI still hasnt figured out that people like to play on teams with people they know and like. PGI still hasnt figured out that Match Maker is horrible. PGI should either start playing the game they produce or listen to the people they have inflicted the game upon.

[Navy Sixes]

Sorry, I don't want to run a 'phract, 'lander, Victor, or Jenner. I'm not into PPCs. I'm not into ECM. There's no place for me in the team v team environment. That's how I've been made to feel by this community, anyway.

Maybe you don't realize it, but the rep team v team has is as a bunch of tryhards who spend more time complaining about their teammates' builds "dragging down the unit" than actually dropping. It has the reputation of being a place where cookie-cutter builds, tactics, and strategies are not only the norm, but rigidly enforced. Now you tell me there are plenty of teams that don't do that. Then I respond that those teams have a reputation as being nothing more than food for teams that do.

On the other hand, I drop solo in the PUG, where I perform well and get good matches most of the time. I don't have to wait long for a drop and I get to explore my own play style, both on the field and in the mechlab, which continues to evolve and grow as I continue to try new things. This is fun.

Team v team has a reputation as not fun. As a place where fun goes to die at the alter of victory. If 84% of the community doesn't find that appealing, maybe you should get past your shock, quit asking what's wrong with the community at large, and start asking what's wrong with team v team.

[Roadbeer]

Tycho von Gagern, on 12 March 2014 - 10:25 AM, said:

Maybe you don't realize it, but the rep team v team has is as a bunch of tryhards who spend more time complaining about their teammates' builds "dragging down the unit" than actually dropping....

Team v team has a reputation as not fun. As a place where fun goes to die at the alter of victory. If 84% of the community doesn't find that appealing, maybe you should get past your shock, quit asking what's wrong with the community at large, and start asking what's wrong with team v team.

Weird, the only time I've ever seen someone say "Your build sucks" is coming from a solo player, usually the first to die, or at the upper strata of the competitive scene.

What you describe, I've never witnessed in the standard, casual, groups... which is what the majority of us in this thread want.

[Navy Sixes]

Roadbeer, on 12 March 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Weird, the only time I've ever seen someone say "Your build sucks" is coming from a solo player, usually the first to die, or at the upper strata of the competitive scene.

What you describe, I've never witnessed in the standard, casual, groups... which is what the majority of us in this thread want.

Well, I'm just talking from the outside looking in. I never said any of these things are the truth. I said that was the rep team v team play has. If you want to insist that everyone thinks team v team is an awesome and fun place, and 84% are just wrong and dumb for not getting into it, even though we all know that it's the pinnacle of the MWO experience, the way the game is meant to be played, keep on going with that.
I was trying to explain why I myself don't want to bother with it, and suggest that maybe team v team play has a bit of an image problem with the rest of us "solo PUG trash."

[Pygar]

I play a little bit of both- it just depends on my mood and how much time I have. Organized teams are great for when I have more time and want the company, both for the help and for the chatter.

PUG'ing is good for when I don't have a lot of time, or for when I want to try builds that might bring my performance down...and PUGs do play with loose "teams" the majority of the time, either becasue of premades or just because PUGs still just know theres safety in numbers- it's just a different way of "teamwork" in PUGs.

[Scyther]

(Posted this in another topic, but probably fits better here:)

It's kinda funny when they "We are surprised that 84% of matches are launched solo".

PGI: "We didn't put in chat or lobbies. Our in-game voice com sucks so no one uses it. 15-20% of all matches have disconnect, crash, or fail-to-reconnect problems. We have zero community building or communication tools. GOOD GOSH why are people launching solo?"

I dunno PGI, it's a mystery to me too.

On the more serious side, 20 years of MMO's has shown me that people mostly play solo, UNLESS group-building, communication tools, and areas where players SEE and INTERACT with other players are made a focus of the game.

If you want a team oriented game, give us some decent team tools.

[Mott]

MadBadger, on 12 March 2014 - 11:41 AM, said:

If you want a team oriented game, give us some decent team tools.

You can even give us TERRIBLE team tools... we can find ways to make them work... just give us something, anything..... anything....

[Sandpit]

Roadbeer, on 12 March 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Weird, the only time I've ever seen someone say "Your build sucks" is coming from a solo player, usually the first to die, or at the upper strata of the competitive scene.

What you describe, I've never witnessed in the standard, casual, groups... which is what the majority of us in this thread want.

Yea, more often than not when I see players harping (that one was just for you Joe! ) on someone for builds or tactics, it's USUALLY just as Road described. There's a huge difference in
"Hey Joe Derp, you might try dropping one of those (insert weapons here) and dropping in another heat sink or armor, etc."
and
"Your build sucks! You are the reason we lost!" (which as Road said, usually comes from that "elite Elo" range type player and usually has (dead) in front of their name fairly early on....

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Roadbeer, on 12 March 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Weird, the only time I've ever seen someone say "Your build sucks" is coming from a solo player, usually the first to die, or at the upper strata of the competitive scene.

What you describe, I've never witnessed in the standard, casual, groups... which is what the majority of us in this thread want.

Funny, in my experience PUG players generally don't stick around long enough after being destroyed to complain much. It is generally the premade players who have to wait around after an early death that talk the loudest. And even then these comments usually arise from the opposing ggclose teams.

Edited by Agent 0 Fortune, 12 March 2014 - 12:10 PM.

[Reggimus]

Sandpit, on 12 March 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

Yea, more often than not when I see players harping (that one was just for you Joe! ) on someone for builds or tactics, it's USUALLY just as Road described. There's a huge difference in
"Hey Joe Derp, you might try dropping one of those (insert weapons here) and dropping in another heat sink or armor, etc."
and
"Your build sucks! You are the reason we lost!" (which as Road said, usually comes from that "elite Elo" range type player and usually has (dead) in front of their name fairly early on....

I find that you get the 'your mech suxors, you suxors' the most when dropping in locusts...

on topic...

With the changes they are talking about to the MM, and 3/3/3/3 I would challenge PGI to up the max group size to 8 in the standard que.

The MM then should try to find another 8 for the opposition, failing that drop down to a 7. if no 7's are found, it should try to find 2 fours, rather than a 6, so at least there are the same number of grouped players.

There also needs to be a way to show within the start screen who on your team is grouped. I would imagine that if the puggys saw a group they would be more likely to follow their lead rather than run off on their lonesome to die.

I do not believe that it would return to the good 'ole pug stomping of CB, as back during the 8's dropping with pugs there was no definition to the MM other than class, by having ELO included it should help to level the field a bit. The way ELO is calculated for teams may need a tweak to err more on the highest ELO of the group, essentially 'bumping' low ELO players up, than bring high ELO players down.

I would suggest putting it on the test server to see how it works out, but the data received from there would likely be skewed as it is generally used by the more, for lack of a better term, 'hardcore' players.

So maybe they just need to chuck on the live server for a weekend and call it an event, and throw some cockpit items out to people who get 10/15 wins in a group.

When it comes to grouping, speculation about what may happen will be rife and differing, the only way to truly know will be to test it.

And I doubt it can be worse than what we have now.


Edit - Bad spelling and grammer crits you for 9000

Edited by Reggimus, 12 March 2014 - 12:42 PM.

[Davers]

Tycho von Gagern, on 12 March 2014 - 10:25 AM, said:

Roadbeer, on 12 March 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Sandpit, on 12 March 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

Agent 0 Fortune, on 12 March 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:

Reggimus, on 12 March 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

C'mon girls. All your mech builds are pretty.

Let's not get sidetracked by all the 'This one time a premade SQUAWKED at me' or a pug said 'ggclose'.

[Davers]

And to Tycho,

Right now there is NO Elo in 12 mans since you are lucky to have 2 other groups dropping at the same time and if <insert high Elo premade of choice> is the only ones dropping thats who you fight. If group size was expanded and 12 mans were encouraged, sure those big fish would nom nom nom on some groups, but then they will ascend to that lofty plateau where the space bar is king, and the rest of us would settle to our own Elo and have fun games.

[Roadbeer]

Davers, on 12 March 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

but then they will ascend to that lofty plateau where the space bar is king, and the rest of us would settle to our own Elo and have fun games.

That's ok, I didn't want to drink that coffee anyway

[Sandpit]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 12 March 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:

Funny, in my experience PUG players generally don't stick around long enough after being destroyed to complain much. It is generally the premade players who have to wait around after an early death that talk the loudest. And even then these comments usually arise from the opposing ggclose teams.

That's what he said...

[Deathlike]

There is a symbiotic relationship between teams and their players. Although I don't want to spend the effort explaining it all, there are 3 things you really need to know...

1) Whining about terrible newbie builds/tactics happens... a lot. Frankly I keep it out of chat, because it's simply not productive. I wanted to just slap some guy whining about "how we're going to lose" when he was one of the first to die. It annoys me to no end. Look, you died, go help your teammates or just away. The simple fact is that this game does a freaking poor job facilitating any of this, so "you're on your own" is reality for those people that aren't going to invest their time on the forums or 3rd party services like Teamspeak or smurfy's mechlab. I'll leave with "let Darwin sort them out".

2) I don't like talking about "meta compliance", but it will happen, and I can't force any person to use it. I don't think any group "forces" upon their players... rather, they take them KNOWING why they are the meta or they'll die trying to prove otherwise. The only thing you can do is be the best labrat that you can be. Sharing builds is one thing (most likely every newbie's build can be improved and refined further), but going about using it is another. I cannot convince people to use or not use anything, but the reality is... your actual performance will shot on a consistent basis (at least with an Elo/"skill" based Matchmaking system), so ultimately the burden is upon you to make it work. I don't like preaching the meta, but god those arguments make me cringe a lot...

3) I get that people play however they want, and ultimately the only way to get them to "being on the same page" is to give them the tools to make the right decision. If the people want to blob towards epsilon on Canyon, well, good luck with that. You can still control your fate to a degree. The thing is... the tools aren't there. We don't have a game-replay system (the closest thing is simply watching a twitter feed, and even then, you only see one person's POV) and people don't realize their own mistakes. This game is woefully unforgiving and the basics have to be burned into you like a trial by fire... needing to be branded like cattle after being destroyed multiple times in multiple ways (or just the same way every time). The only playerbase that continues to exist are those generally having gone through such trials and tribulations. People do want to be taught. They want to be better. They don't want to die in easily preventable deaths... but the game itself hasn't evolved far enough to stop that. Every match is "technically meaningless" unless you yourself want to make it worth something.

So, I guess from this rant-like post, there's always going to be everything and anything that happens in a game. The question ultimately becomes, can you handle it? With all this fear-based premade boogieman pugstomping, I guess adversity is "just a choice"... if you're willing to take it or leave it.