79 replies to this topic

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

This is not what I said and you did not answer my question. What I said is
1) I do not believe they are interpreting the data correctly and
2) that they did not drill down enough to get a clear data picture. I also did not say it was a hidden solo agenda. PGI has been clear that they do not like the 5 to 11 man groups because of the impact on the match.

My belief is that PGI has a bias against the 5 to 11 man groups. My belief is based on their own statements, not just my imagination.

Otherwise, I remain skeptical of their "metrics" and the conclusion they presented based on them.

I agree the limited data PGI provided is open to interpretation.

I also believe that PGI does not have an anti-premade agenda; and that the changes they are making are for the benefit of the game and community as a whole.

PGI was very clear that 5-11 man teams (sync drops) have a significant and unbalancing effect on PUG matches. And that it had an overall negative affect on Solo players. PGI felt that the best solution was to segregate Solo players from teams larger than 4 players.

My understanding is that you are arguing is that there are no metrics for 5-11 man groups since they are forced into 2-man, 3-man, or 4-man groups. But even (incorrectly) assuming that every single person involved in a 2,3,4 man group would rather be part of a 5-11 man group, it is still a minority.

At the end of the day, solo players are allowed to play in a more casual format. And 5-11 man teams get the ability form 5-11 man Premium Private matches, everyone WINS!
-----------
I am going to take this space to preempt you next argument.
Yes 5-11 Private matches should be free
Yes there should be a volunteer option for PUG players to join the 5-11 man queue.

[Supersmacky]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

I agree the limited data PGI provided is open to interpretation.

Finally something we agree on except that I would go one step further: I think they interpreted it wrong.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

I also believe that PGI does not have an anti-premade agenda; and that the changes they are making are for the benefit of the game and community as a whole.

I know they want money. What you are I believe is irrelevant. If having an anti-premade agenda fits their business plan, that will have that agenda. They are a business and businesses make poor decisions from time to time. They are not looking to the benefit of the community as a whole, but to what they see as the benefit of PGI. They are not a benevolent organization, they are a self-serving, self-interested business. No value judgement, just the way it is.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

PGI was very clear that 5-11 man teams (sync drops) have a significant and unbalancing effect on PUG matches. And that it had an overall negative affect on Solo players. PGI felt that the best solution was to segregate Solo players from teams larger than 4 players.

Which sort of runs counter to you point that they have no anti-premade agenda, don't you think? And so, they segregate the premades...hurrah! Now we have to PAY for the option to run premades....and this seems to you like it is a good idea? This is your idea of how you encourage team work and a community and not just a bunch of solo players? What???

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

My understanding is that you are arguing is that there are no metrics for 5-11 man groups since they are forced into 2-man, 3-man, or 4-man groups. But even (incorrectly) assuming that every single person involved in a 2,3,4 man group would rather be part of a 5-11 man group, it is still a minority.

No way you can support that position. You are completely ignoring units that have 5 on so 4 group and 1 tries to sync drop. Or all the people that prefer to group but since none of their friends or unit members are on they go solo. This is an error you have repeatedly made in all of your posts on the subject. Can you not understand that their are other factors that drive why someone will solo when other options are not available (but yet they prefer to group)? Give me some data that shows 1) the major of unique players are dropping solo AND 2) they are doing so because that is what they prefer. Otherwise you are just stating unfounded opinion. There metrics do not even support such a statement.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

At the end of the day, solo players are allowed to play in a more casual format. And 5-11 man teams get the ability form 5-11 man Premium Private matches, everyone WINS!

You are a solo-only preference player that only wants to run against other solo players. I get it. But just because you feel that way does not 1) make it a majority view, 2) make it a good thing, 3) make it good for the community as a whole, or 4) make it a sound business decision for PGI. You think it is OK for people that want to have 5 to 11 man matches to pay for that option is OK because you have no interest in that. Sort of narrow view, don't you think? Wouldn't what is good for the community be to do something that is good for everyone? This is not an "everyone wins!" scenario. Why can't 5 to 11 man drops be made available without having to pay for it? Why is paying for it a win for everyone? I don't see it that way and certainly don't like the idea that PGI wants to nickel and dime my unit to death just so we can play together as a unit.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

I am going to take this space to preempt you next argument.
Yes 5-11 Private matches should be free
Yes there should be a volunteer option for PUG players to join the 5-11 man queue.

Again, something we agree on. No argument to preempt. It only makes sense to do so. But the myopic view that PGI seems to have it to milk dry the players that are hear for that option. I assure you of this: if enough unit based players leave the game over this, the game will go away. So much for "the majority", eh?

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

I know they want money. What you are I believe is irrelevant. If having an anti-premade agenda fits their business plan, that will have that agenda…No value judgment, just the way it is.

Agreed. I shouldn’t presume to know the motivations of PGI, beyond turning a profit, the goal of any private enterprise in a capitalist economy (Canada is capitalist right?)

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Which sort of runs counter to you point that they have no anti-premade agenda, don't you think?

I think you are misplacing their priority on an equitable solo experience, with being anti-premade.

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

No way you can support that position. You are completely ignoring units that have 5 on so 4 group and 1 tries to sync drop. Or all the people that prefer to group but since none of their friends or unit members are on they go solo.

Unfortunately all we have on this issue is our opinions.
PGI has stated that there are more solo matches than group matches, however even if that were not the case I would support a segregation between group and solo players.

PGI has observed that sync drops have a negative impact on PUG matches and will eliminated sync dropping. As both a premade and solo player I have observed the same (one man’s opinion), and I can fully support their decision to only allow Sync dropping (5-11 man teams) in Private Premium matches.

But I will concede to, and support an initiative for free 5-11 man matches, and a voluntary queue for group PUG matches.

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

You are a solo-only preference player that only wants to run against other solo players. I get it. But just because you feel that way does not
1) make it a majority view,
2) make it a good thing,
3) make it good for the community as a whole, or 4) make it a sound business decision for PGI. You think it is OK for people that want to have 5 to 11 man matches to pay for that option is OK because you have no interest in that. Sort of narrow view, don't you think?

• I am not saying it is a majority view PGI is, kudos for me for agreeing.
  
• It is absolutely a good thing. It is never a good thing to force solo players into a team environment. If the team environment is popular enough it will support itself, no need to force players who do not want to be involved.
  
• You are actually mistaken, I play both group and solo, so I have an ulterior motive for wanting to allow 5-11 man matches for free, but because I also play solo, I do not want to be forced to join a 5 man premade team against an 11 man premade team.

Supersmacky, on 08 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Again, something we agree on. No argument to preempt. It only makes sense to do so. But the myopic view that PGI seems to have it to milk dry the players that are hear for that option. I assure you of this: if enough unit based players leave the game over this, the game will go away. So much for "the majority", eh?

I feel I have argued all I can on this subject and I am glad we agree that: YES there should be a free 5-11 man matches and that participation by solo players should be voluntary.
I will go the extra mile and say that when community warfare arrives that this group should be PREFERBABLE to strict solo drops.

[anonymous161]

most games anymore are utter stomps and no fun unless you are doing the stomping, too many times the other team has 90% assault mechs.

This is pretty much it for the franchise we will never see another story based single player game where we can create our own lance with ai, or perhaps human players in missions anymore, no more blowing up buildings, no more awesome explosions.

Sad how this series ended up with such an incompetent untalented team. Just look at their past projects I doubt any of them were very profitable or of decent quality, yet they get a huge franchise or what used to be.

And because it's online only we will never see really cool mods like the past games did.

This is as basic of a game as it gets when it comes to mp, and I doubt it will get any better from here. It's a money grab not much more.

[Sandpit]

I'l point out one thing we've discussed to those who drop in groups.

For CW you can only be paired up with other players in your faction or working for your faction (IE mercs and such) because you're obviously not going to play against other members of your faction for control of your faction's planet. So that means the player pool is small (exceptionally so for the smaller factions) which means setting up teams on a ts server and sync solo dropping will wind up putting you on the same team most times anyhow. Then just take everyone who made it in into one of your ts server channels and proceed to work as a normal premade.

So even with group limits, they aren't going to curb groups well

[Artgathan]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 08 March 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

PGI was very clear that 5-11 man teams (sync drops) have a significant and unbalancing effect on PUG matches. And that it had an overall negative affect on Solo players. PGI felt that the best solution was to segregate Solo players from teams larger than 4 players.

This is not what they said. PGI indicated that the presence of a premade of any size (of 2 -4 players) shifted the odds of winning in favour of the premade. They then extrapolated this result to mean that 5-11 man teams would also have an impact on the outcome of the game (which is reasonable to believe). However they cannot be "very clear that 5-11 man teams have a significant and unbalancing effect on PUG matches" because they don't actually have data for this. It's a matter of semantics, but it makes a difference.

[Chemie]

Artgathan, on 11 March 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

This is not what they said. PGI indicated that the presence of a premade of any size (of 2 -4 players) shifted the odds of winning in favour of the premade. They then extrapolated this result to mean that 5-11 man teams would also have an impact on the outcome of the game (which is reasonable to believe). However they cannot be "very clear that 5-11 man teams have a significant and unbalancing effect on PUG matches" because they don't actually have data for this. It's a matter of semantics, but it makes a difference.

Plus the imbalance is really just how they implemented MM. Fundamentally, there is no reason any premade should cause a high probably of a win...MM just needs to roughly match premade numbers on both sides equally. The problem with their 4-man data was that MM was terrible.

Let's not blame MM and PGI incompetence of coding to the use of teams or balance of said teams.

[PhoenixFire55]

There is no such thing as "casual" play in MWO. "Casual" means you either play solo at your own pace/skill level or only with people you know at your own pace/skill level.

When "launch module" gets implemented you'll have 2 options ... play "casually" for real money only in free-to-play game, or be stuck in same old PUG queue which has nothing to do with casual thanks to all sorts of random people you run into.

Apparently PGI wants to make a pay-to-win E-Sport out of MechWarrior title. Not sure about others but I won't be part of it in any way.

[Tigreen]

Well, all this "Single drop data" BS did for me is make me not wan't to play as much. I was playing every evening after work for a few drops, more if friends had room for me in a group. Now I might do a single drop every couple days. Everyone I game with is moving on or only want to play on rare occasions.

PGI really need to state their assumptions in respects to the data so we can understand their point of view. For me, the data just sparked questions.

• Why is the single drop rate so high?
  
• When clustering by friends list, how many single drops were there when friends were in full groups?
  
• Friend clustering by group size would also be interesting to see if 2 and 3 groups could have been combined in a significant amount of the time.
  
• Did people trend towards groups when friends were on / had the opportunity?
  
• If an incentive is added would people group more?
  
  • Some sort of quest like the free mech
    
  • A 2% cbill bonus for each person in a group ( 8% for full group )

The other question this sparked, which had nothing to do with the data directly, was how PGI came to the results they found? What was in the data that made them think we all wanted to drop single? Data describes trends not intent (though it can limit possible intentions ). PGI would be better served to ask us questions directly and use the data as a tool to assist in understanding our intent. But as that is more of a scientific method to finding answers I don't expect PGI to go that route. Not when arbitrary seems to be working so well for them.

[Phashe]

(From my phone... Sorry) After reading most of this thread, and a listener ofNGNG, I must say Novakaine's post was pretty wise and overlooked.

I was surprised at the 84% solo number, prob because i read the forum which is that 16% i guess plus some stragglers, so I began watching groups I drop in more carefully. See how they are composed. Makes sense now. I think part of that is the lack of in-game communication (Voice) and complete lack of newb help causes much of it (the right turns only).

I pug about 84% of the time *grin* because I usually only have time for a round or two any given sitting, and I feel bad joining a voice group to only bail 30min later.

I personally dread CW and private drops because I fear it will further segment & divide a small community. Longer waits, less play time, all that. Hope I am wrong.

But MWO must be a horrible experience for a new player. They get creamed every match, and it is hard for us experienced folks to help without voice chat. No wonder none of my friends played more than 3-4 games and gave up.

I love playing, even if there is no "big goal" or carrot win. For me and this point in my life, short intense battles is all the entertainment in the game I need. Now if only I could get my hero blackjack! :-). Thanks

Novakaine, on 02 March 2014 - 04:21 PM, said:

Imagine if PGI was in the road construction business.
Local Mayor: "Love the road nice and clean, but there's a small problem."
PGI Construction: Problems?
Local Mayor: Well yes all the turns are right hand turns.
PGI Construction: But looks at it so perfect and clean and our metrics on our previous constructions say that 100% drivers make only right hand turns.
Local Mayor: Say what?
PGI Construction: Yep we we're surprised at that, but the numbers don't lie.
Local Mayor: So let me get this straight you only build roads with right hand turns?
PGI Construction: Yup Mayor you got.
Local Mayor: So what if you want to make a left hand turn?
PGI Construction: The numbers don't bear that out sir, no one in this city makes a left hand turn.
PGI Construction: So you see no need to add any left hand turns Mr. Mayor.
Local Mayor: Hmmm I see, by the way you wouldn't have a couple of extra shovels on hand do you?
PGI Construction: Sure do Mr. Mayor, but why do you need shovels?
Local Mayor: Well the first shovel I'm gonna need for my staff to cover up this BS, and the second one well... you better run.
PGI Construction: Run Sir?
Local Mayor:Oooooh yes run.

Edited by Phashe, 13 March 2014 - 06:26 AM.

[Craig Steele]

So maybe I missed something so feel free to correct but

The Maximum number of split teams is the amount of 4 man drops currently, then doubled right? Because whether it's 5 or 7 people you're splitting up there's only one 4 man team yes?

Which was 4% of total drops from memory?

So ergo, assuming every single 4 man team was a split group, we are talking about 8% of the total games? Or that 92% of drops are single players or small 2 man / 3 man groups not attached to larger units.

Is the maths right? PGI are attempting to put something in place that will improve the experience (they say) for 92% of their players?

And on the pay thing, isn't that the group leader for larger groups just has to have premium time activated? There is no specific cost is there? So in a larger organised group that plays together should be pretty straight forward to just sync up the premium times so that as one falls off, another kicks in. Thats not a biggy is it? The groups are organised.

What am I missing here?

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Craig Steele, on 13 March 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

So maybe I missed something so feel free to correct but

The Maximum number of split teams is the amount of 4 man drops currently, then doubled right? Because whether it's 5 or 7 people you're splitting up there's only one 4 man team yes?

And on the pay thing, isn't that the group leader for larger groups just has to have premium time activated? There is no specific cost is there? So in a larger organised group that plays together should be pretty straight forward to just sync up the premium times so that as one falls off, another kicks in. Thats not a biggy is it? The groups are organised.

What am I missing here?

Depending on who you ask, a majority of 2-man and 3-man groups are really 5-man groups that split into 2 groups because the game does not support 5-man premades. Additionally, they would suggest that a large portion of the Solo drops are really the 5^th man on a 4-man group. Their argument is that most 2, 3, and 4 man groups, plus a significant portion of Solo players would rather be part of a larger group (but less than 12). I haven’t heard a specific number attached to these mid-sized groups but their goal is to refute PGIs metrics regarding solo vs. group play, so conservatively I would put it at 50%.

Your second statement is another point of contention. Why should 4-man, Solo, and 12-man matches be free, but 5-11 man teams cost MC/Premium. Furthermore those are Private matches, meaning invitation only. So not only does it cost premium time (MC) for both parties, but they have to coordinate the entire match (keep in mind the matchmaker does not generate the match). In the end it is far more difficult an expensive than trying to manage a 12 man team.

Personally I believe the second part is the most relevant. I think there is room in this game for smaller than 12v12 matches (in fact we started with 8v8), and I think PGI’s cost in server resources will be recouped through traditional MC purchases from those players rather than a per match basis (charging per match is a slippery slope that I think PGI should avoid even on a limited basis). Arguing against the metrics seems like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, it doesn’t accomplish anything except a distraction.

[Praslek2]

Let this company be a lighthouse upon the rocky shores of failure.

[Belorion]

Ryoken, on 28 February 2014 - 01:51 AM, said:

So first off, I am a team player! There is nothing I want more than to play in a group with my buddies! And I absolutely reject the 4 player limit because we have to turn the 5th player down or have to split our group!

Yet I do often drop alone in a short break when I find the time for 2-3 games. But because PGI brutally missinterprets their data I am afraid to do this now. Because if I do PGI will decide to further punish and reduce teamplay!

So by playing a casual game I do kill the team game aspect that I did fund and pay this game for?

PGI I beg you stop this nonsense!

Stop dropping solo...

[Craig Steele]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 13 March 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

Depending on who you ask, a majority of 2-man and 3-man groups are really 5-man groups that split into 2 groups because the game does not support 5-man premades. Additionally, they would suggest that a large portion of the Solo drops are really the 5^th man on a 4-man group. Their argument is that most 2, 3, and 4 man groups, plus a significant portion of Solo players would rather be part of a larger group (but less than 12). I haven’t heard a specific number attached to these mid-sized groups but their goal is to refute PGIs metrics regarding solo vs. group play, so conservatively I would put it at 50%.

Your second statement is another point of contention. Why should 4-man, Solo, and 12-man matches be free, but 5-11 man teams cost MC/Premium. Furthermore those are Private matches, meaning invitation only. So not only does it cost premium time (MC) for both parties, but they have to coordinate the entire match (keep in mind the matchmaker does not generate the match). In the end it is far more difficult an expensive than trying to manage a 12 man team.

Personally I believe the second part is the most relevant. I think there is room in this game for smaller than 12v12 matches (in fact we started with 8v8), and I think PGI’s cost in server resources will be recouped through traditional MC purchases from those players rather than a per match basis (charging per match is a slippery slope that I think PGI should avoid even on a limited basis). Arguing against the metrics seems like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, it doesn’t accomplish anything except a distraction.

I don't get your maths. 84% of games are solo players, 1% are 12 mans.

Ergo, 15% of games are more solo drops and less than 12 man drops.

If EVERY SINGLE ONE of those games were split groups, the absolute maximum number of non solo drops is 30%. Thats every 4 man being a 5 man thats split 4 / 1, and every 5 man+ being split 4/2, 4/3, 4/4, 3/3, 3/2. (Its actually significantly less than 30% because as you can see the 'double counting' of games, but we'll never know for sure)

So PGI are still trying to improve the experience of a much larger share of their market (closer to 70 - 75%) aren't they? I get the argument that it is unwise to exclude the other part of the market, but I don't see that is what they are doing.

And is there actually a charge? People get premium time in their packages for example. I myself have about 4 months that I not even tapped. I'm sure within a larger group there will be some who do and some who don't have premium time but thats hardly a barrier.

I agree about arguing without numbers though.

I guess I look at it like this. PGI have (rightly or wrongly) identified their preferred market is 4 man and less groups and are tailoring their product around that. They want to enhance that game experieince.

They are also providing tools for people outside of their preferred market to enjoy the game. They have a nominal cost associated with that (in the sense that its not a direct charge, they just want someone to have a stake in the game via premium time to unlock that function)

I don't see it as a bad thing that they make the game better for their preferred market and leave the door open for another market to enjoy it too.

Of course if '6 man group drops' were the majority, there strategy is a disaster.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Craig Steele, on 13 March 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't get your maths. 84% of games are solo players, 1% are 12 mans.

The point of my post was not to encourage debate about the released statistics but highlight the futility of doing so. Let's not argue about who has the bigger piece of the pie, but make sure everyone gets a piece of it.

[Craig Steele]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 13 March 2014 - 08:58 PM, said:

The point of my post was not to encourage debate about the released statistics but highlight the futility of doing so. Let's not argue about who has the bigger piece of the pie, but make sure everyone gets a piece of it.

Thats fair enough.

I guess I am just trying to highlight that if PGI perceive they can make the game better for their "preferred' market segement, and still make it available to another market segment, isn't that a good thing? Doesn't it give the game tenure because its (in theory) more succesful?

I mean wind the clock back, if the games being done the last 12 months were majority team drops, and PGI said were enhancing team drops with a / b and c and you can do solo drops with premium time (or some other mechanic for their purposes), what would the conversation on this thread be?

[AssaultPig]

I'm not sure why the 84% solo drop number surprised so many people.

The game has zero mechanisms to match you up with players who have similar skill levels or schedules. You're stuck trying to find a group via third party websites or public voicechat (*shiver*.) There's barely even a functional ingame chat client, nevermind some sort of 'outfit' interface to help you keep people organized once they 'join' you.

I have a group of 12-15 people who I play with somewhat regularly; I would describe us as 'casual' players because we don't have a strict schedule or any kind of performance requirements. We just like playing the game and sometimes hop on voicechat and play together. I imagine this is the situation lots of players are in. So on a random night there might be five of us online, and 2-3 may be doing other things that make them less than ideal candidates for organized play (letting their kid play, watching TV in the background, etc.) So we wind up dropping solo.

Nevermind the times when I'm just killing a half hour before work or something and log in to play a match or two.

[Hysminai]

Name115734, on 28 February 2014 - 03:27 AM, said:

Bravo for pointing out the large gap in their data, they forced players to PUG by their inane decisions to remove 5-7 then 5-11 man teams, then pat themselves on the back on their ability to get more people to PUG, the exact opposite to what this game was initially intended to do.

Good job PGI for proving yet again your bassakwards approach to development is truly bassakwards.

But wait there's more... Soon we will be able to PAY for the privilege of playing this game as a team, oh, PGI, how you love your community so.

We truly appreciated the thought and dedication you have show how the next developers of this title of what NOT to do, very good lessons, here.

I was about to download this game, but I can't support this evil... No, no again.. Not like warhammer.

[Sandpit]

Hysminai, on 15 March 2014 - 04:16 PM, said:

I was about to download this game, but I can't support this evil... No, no again.. Not like warhammer.

Don't let out cynicism turn you away. You might like it. At its core it's a really fun game. Good combat and stompy fun. Beyond that though.............

Many of us are just upset because PGI (after over a year of stating otherwise) now won't let us drop in groups with friends. YOU might be looking for a different experience though. I hate that fact that our anger on here turns potential new players away. It's free, give it a try, if you don't like it you're not out anything. If you do, you've found a new free game you can play