1126 replies to this topic

[BLOOD WOLF]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Yes, biased.

Given recent interactions with you, I don't feel like rehashing the topics of "launch" percentage discrepancies, impact of the group caps, and the decline group population over the last year. We've done that.

I also don't feel like pointing out to you how that entire post is dismissive and condescending.

So, at this point we're going to agree to disagree, because having a conversation with you is EXHAUSTING. You seem to think that I enjoy being mad at PGI, when the fact is, up to 2 months ago, I was one of their biggest cheerleaders.

Recent interactions? you mean how i was disagreeing with you, the same way others have. Exept for some reason you just hold the grudge against me; Maybe its because i dont have a tag?. I dont think i was being dismissive, i even said i understand what your saying. As for being Condescending, your the one that told me my words dont count because i dont have a tag; If you want me to go back even further, you first disrespected me(temper much) Yes i will go back and quote you if you deny it.

. As for the information present. It really is limitations on the matchmaker. It is interesting to note that, there is a chance for out of the norm options.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 14 April 2014 - 12:43 PM.

[Heffay]

101011, on 14 April 2014 - 12:28 PM, said:

Yeah, that is all very nice, but Clans drop in stars, not lances, PGI. Perhaps you could try to adhere to the lore on that?

Lore reboot. I'll allow it.

[Tannhauser Gate]

We dont know all the detals of exactly what precludes one option over another. Clearly though, most players are agreeing that allowing pub players to be the 12th player for a 11 man team, essentially mercing, is a viable choice.

[Wieland]

Quote

Group Queue
Allows 2-10 man groups.

I guess this should be

Group Queue
Allows 2-10 and 12 man groups

[Jon Gotham]

Wintersdark, on 14 April 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Absolutely. I get that a lot of PUG players get all bent out of shape about grouped players, but there are a whole lot of us WHO REALLY PREFER PLAYING ALONGSIDE GROUPS.

I can't really emphasize that enough. Please, allow us to join the group queue. Please.

Might be a REALLY good idea Paul to listen to chaps like this. It'd be a GREAt way for new starters and peeps who haven't found a home yet to meet new groups and get a feel for them. It'd also be a GREAT way to help existing units/clans/communities get new members.
The easier that is and the better the communities grow-the stronger your playerbase will be and the better the chance of this game living.

And contrary to what you may believe, we don't all hate you and we WANT YOU to SUCCEED!

[Tannhauser Gate]

BLOOD WOLF, on 14 April 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Recent interactions? you mean how i was disagreeing with you, the same way others have. Exept for some reason you just hold the grudge against me; Maybe its because i dont have a tag?. I dont think i was being dismissive, i even said i understand what your saying. As for being Condescending, your the one that told me my words dont count because i dont have a tag. Yes i will go back and quote you if you deny it.

Hes a hater and a troll. Dont waste your breath on him. Small minds discuss / blame people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas. (Eleanor Roosevelt) Hes all about characterizing pgi as having character flaws, incompetent dev skills, and abuse of power. Hes painted his own lack of intellect... a very small mind. No need to match wits with a ranting hater.

[BLOOD WOLF]

LakeDaemon, on 14 April 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

Hes a hater and a troll. Dont waste your breath on him. Small minds discuss / blame people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas. (Eleanor Roosevelt) Hes all about characterizing pgi as having character flaws, incompetent dev skills, and abuse of power. Hes painted his own lack of intellect... a very small mind. No need to match wits with a ranting hater.

To be fair, they did say "We have in our backburner an idea for the Group Only queue. This system will allow groups of any size match against each other. It would probably replace the current 12-man public queue."

but then they go one and the list of problem associated with this are plenty. I doubt they wish to stall work in other areas to work on something that might or might not be solvable.

[Roadbeer]

LakeDaemon, on 14 April 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

Hes a hater and a troll. Dont waste your breath on him. Small minds discuss / blame people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas. (Eleanor Roosevelt) Hes all about characterizing pgi as having character flaws, incompetent dev skills, and abuse of power. Hes painted his own lack of intellect... a very small mind. No need to match wits with a ranting hater.

LOL, and 2 months ago I was a White Knight and a shill and an apologist.

you Forumites really need to get on one page, since you're going to paint people with a broad brush

Not enough Ls and Os on the webernets to convey how hard I'm laughing.

[Artgathan]

LakeDaemon, on 14 April 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

Hes a hater and a troll. Dont waste your breath on him. Small minds discuss / blame people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas. (Eleanor Roosevelt) Hes all about characterizing pgi as having character flaws, incompetent dev skills, and abuse of power. Hes painted his own lack of intellect... a very small mind. No need to match wits with a ranting hater.

And yet here you are discussing people. Huh.

[M4NTiC0R3X]

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Thanks for the update, I always appreciate news good or bad. I am glad you addressed the issue of mid-sized groups (5-11), without further delaying the implementation for the Launch Module, which will immediately benefit the vast majority of players.

I questioned the decision to limit pre-made size to 5-10 players (instead of 5-11), you state that “Grouping interface cannot allow teams of 11 players” and that “…the Lobby is now soft locked and players will not be able to launch”. This is news to me, in fact 11 v. 12 and 10 v. 12 are so common that I thought this would be a non-issue. It should be extremely easy to identify an 11-man premade group and pad it with a “ghost seat” (pun intended), essentially to the matchmaker it would appear to the Lobby as a real disconnected player. This would only be done for pre-made 11 man teams which already have a significant advantage over teams consisting of multiple smaller premade groups due to unified voice comms.

I would also encourage you to allow Matchmaker created games in the Private queue as on option. This is mostly a quality of life request to remove the PITA process of finding another group of 5-11 to drop with. The matchmaker would primarily look at group size and secondarily at Elo. Of course this should be considered a simple stop-gap solution to implementing a functional lobby system for group-play (and community warfare *crosses fingers*)

Edited by Agent 0 Fortune, 14 April 2014 - 12:55 PM.

[Kraven Kor]

BLOOD WOLF, on 14 April 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:

To be fair, they did say "We have in our backburner an idea for the Group Only queue. This system will allow groups of any size match against each other. It would probably replace the current 12-man public queue."

but then they go one and the list of problem associated with this are plenty. I doubt they wish to stall work in other areas to work on something that might or might not be solvable.

You know... I'd bet there would be fewer problems if there were more players. Maybe if they had, I dunno, somehow kept all those players on my friends list who never show up anymore. Maybe if grouping wasn't painfully frustrating such that most of us "team players" don't bother to team up.

Just sayin'.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 14 April 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

Thanks for the update, I always appreciate news good or bad. I am glad you addressed the issue of mid-sized groups (5-11), without further delaying the implementation for the Launch Module, which will immediately benefit the vast majority of players.

I questioned the decision to limit pre-made size to 5-10 players (instead of 5-11 or 2-11), you state that “Grouping interface cannot allow teams of 11 players” and that “…the Lobby is now soft locked and players will not be able to launch”. This is news to me, in fact 11 v. 12 and 10 v. 12 are so common that I thought this would be a non-issue. It should be extremely easy to identify an 11-man premade group and pad it with a “ghost seat” (pun intended), essentially to the matchmaker it would appear to the Lobby as a real disconnected player. This would only be done for pre-made 11 man teams which already have a significant advantage over teams consisting of multiple smaller premade groups due to unified voice comms.

I would also encourage you to allow Matchmaker created games in the Private queue as on option. This is mostly a quality of life request to remove the PITA process of finding another group of 5-11 to drop with. The matchmaker would primarily look at group size and secondarily at Elo. Of course this should be considered a simple stop-gap solution to implementing a functional lobby system for group-play (and community warfare *crosses fingers*)

when you say 11v12 or 10v12 are you talking about disconnects after a match has been made, im curious?

[Spawnsalot]

If VOIP had been rolled out this "issue" wouldn't have arisen - players who want to join the group queue as filler would be able to co-ordinate with group and would most likely be willing to do so, I don't see why this is being made so difficult.

PGI keep coming out with these convoluted solutions to problems that wouldn't exist with the addition of fairly uncomplicated features, and when those solutions start failing they get blanketed by even more complicated, overbearing solutions and sooner or later it will all fall flat and everyone will get fed up and stop playing.

It's not like any of the suggestions the community has been *begging* for (for well over a year) are new or untested, nor is it that the Cryengine can't handle these things.

I know the forums can be a cacophony of shrieking and howling at the best of times but if you listen past the baying and the braying, there are some fairly clear messages to be heard. Heeding them would most likely do wonders for your player count and continued business.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Kraven Kor, on 14 April 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

You know... I'd bet there would be fewer problems if there were more players. Maybe if they had, I dunno, somehow kept all those players on my friends list who never show up anymore. Maybe if grouping wasn't painfully frustrating such that most of us "team players" don't bother to team up.

Just sayin'.

7086 views, and thats from the 11th of april, when the post was made, this game still has thousands if not more that dont even visit the forums. Point is numbers in relation to the amount of players that play aren't an issue. might double in a month

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 14 April 2014 - 01:01 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

BLOOD WOLF, on 14 April 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

when you say 11v12 or 10v12 are you talking about disconnects after a match has been made, im curious?

Yes...?
From my perspective, I play in a lot of matches were one team only has 11 players or 10 players, and the extra seats in the lobby are empty (and no mechs drop). This is a much different experience than a full lobby with 1 or 2 players listed as "disconnected". In previous example I always assumed the matchmaker decided close enough and launched. I had no idea it was programmatically impossible to drop with less than 12 per side. However, the simple fact that there are matches with only 11 mechs on one side indicates it is very possible to trick the matchmaker into thinking an 11-man team has 12 players.

[Sandpit]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

I think an obvious solution to this would be for the teams created to be of even numbers.
It's infinitely easier to find 1 more than it is to find 8 more to create the next team level. While this still has the potential for the "odd man out", I think it would be more desirous than "odd lance out" and the perpetual attempts to sync drop.
Plus even numbers would make it easier to create 12 than a smattering of odd numbers.

I had high hopes
Then I read it

Rough translation = "soon" for groups
Paul you REALLY need to read more feedback. Seriously....

You've had MANY MANY MANY solo players say they would opt into a group queue like that. You assertion that they wouldn't or it would somehow be too much for an 11+1 to overcome a 12 man or multiple groups is just........ it's wrong. I don't know how else to say it. Paul why are you so set against simply letting teams play in a team based game? Seriously, it's become apparent that some on the dev team have a seeming bias against teams.

This is becoming a case of "we know how to make the game more fun for you than you do" and it's not good. I need be I will take the time and effort to link and repost every single solo player who has stated that exact opposite of your thoughts when it comes to groups and solo players.

I don't see how anyone could really think this is "good". It's simply saying that they might at some point in the future when they have the resources look into groups or implement some of the ideas (cocktail napkin anyone?) they have kicking around and seem to completely ignore every single piece of feedback and/or idea that shows how this kind of thing could be implemented without screwing over players, roflstomp new players, etc. Instead of going to the corner market to grab a gallon of milk sometimes it seems like they'd rather drive 20 miles to the big super market, spend $400 on crap they didn't need and then realize they forgot the milk when they get home.

I didn't see anythign other than "we're not lifting group limits" we MIGHT look at other options "soon".
and I quote "Now that you see what is planned and the edge cases surrounding implementation of a group only queue, we’re still deciding when this important feature would fit into our development schedule."

In other words, it's not even on the drawing board yet and based on previous track record not something we will see for a year. Sooooo

We spend xx months with group limits, groups get fed up, groups leave for greener pastures, then when it does come time for PGI to "review options for groups" there's no longer a group population to support and people call ME a troll? lol Everyone wanting group limits lifted just got trolled by one of the top dogs at PGI

It's not rocket science and if your excuse is "resources" then it's also an easy fix. Open the 12man to all groups, make it a single queue for now, and go from there. Don't tell me there's "not enough resources" for that. This is nothing but lip service to hopefully string along players yet again as far as I'm concerned. I'm all out of "they said they were looking into it so lets be positive and hopeful in the meantime and just hand them money again"

I went that route with PP, founders, etc. It's not going to happen again.

[Sandpit]

FupDup, on 14 April 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

As someone who pugs for the vast majority of his games, I can say that I would try out going in the group queue and maybe even stay there

Wintersdark, on 14 April 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Umm, I have to say I don't understand why you wouldn't allow solo players to join the group queue?

Terciel1976, on 14 April 2014 - 09:44 AM, said:

1000 times this^.

Seriously, your reason is "you'd have a better chance in PUGs?" I'll take my chances alongside a group, thanks. At the very least, it should be a better game than the average PUG game.

zolop, on 14 April 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

Agree

Wildflame, on 14 April 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

I only drop 1/3 of the time solo. That said, I would be very interested in having a checkbox option to join the group queue when I do drop solo.

This is just the first page of this thread, I'll continue collecting this. Paul, PGI, please tell me again how "you know better" than the players do on what they want and need...

Seriously....

Do you really not understand that you're doing the exact opposite of what your players are wanting?

[Chemie]

why on earth do you think that a pug joining an 11-man team is at a disadvantage versus 12 random players? This makes no sense.

This however does make sense:
1. pug-only queue
2. open queue (team and singles). Force even numbers in teams to help MM (2,4,6,8,10).

Solved.

[Sandpit]

Chemie, on 14 April 2014 - 01:14 PM, said:

why on earth do you think that a pug joining an 11-man team is at a disadvantage versus 12 random players? This makes no sense.

This however does make sense:
1. pug-only queue
2. open queue (team and singles). Force even numbers in teams to help MM (2,4,6,8,10).

Solved.

Dude, that post pretty much sealed the deal in my view. They are either oblivious, don't care, or are just plain too stubborn to come off of "their vision" for the game to understand they aren't coming anywhere near giving players what they want because they "know better".

Paul, PGI
You aren't
My dad
My accountant
My boss
etc.

I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself what is "fun" and don't need you protecting me from myself. before anyone even says it, don't even attempt to use the "new players" as any kind of excuse. Cadets could easily not have the option to join the group queue until they've completed xx games or the cadet bonus or their Elo hits (doesn't mean maintains, just means hits at one time) a certain level.

The really sad thing is that I'm not a lead programmer or designer for a multi-million dollar gaming company and in 30 seconds I can think of several ways to prevent the exploits, problems, etc. that PGI claims are roadblocks to this. It's just lip service, nothing else