1126 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

Splitting up the public queue doesn't help the game.

The queues are being split anyway; it just a minor adjustment to allow a solo only queue and groups+solo queue.

Bhael Fire, on 14 April 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

Just so this stays fresh for those too lazy to go through the thread I'm reposting the gist of the current queue structure proposal:

SOLO ONLY queue

• Solo players only
  
• No groups

GROUPS (2-12) + SOLO Queue

• Allows groups with 2-12 players
  
• Allows solo players with groups enabled in launch preferences (+10,000 C-Bill "Hazard Pay" bonus)
  
• Matches large groups first, then small groups, then solo players (so 12-mans are likely to face other 12-mans)
  
• Matches groups on a 1:1 basis (or as close as possible)
  
• Never more than 1 solo player per team (to minimize PUG stompage in the group queue)
  
• Never more than 3 groups per team (i.e. no teams made up entirely of 2-mans or 3-mans)
  
• Drawback: Wait times longer than solo only queue

[Heffay]

Bhael Fire, on 14 April 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

The queues are being split anyway; it just a minor adjustment to allow a solo only queue and groups+solo queue.

What's wrong with the proposed split from PGI? Same thing. Public queue, group queue. Accomplishes the same thing: 5-10 man groups now can play together, no problems.

[Roadbeer]

Ngamok, on 14 April 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

[Asmudius Heng]

Roadbeer, on 14 April 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

God i with they put that much emphasis on us Aussies!

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

What's wrong with the proposed split from PGI? Same thing. Public queue, group queue. Accomplishes the same thing: 5-10 man groups now can play together, no problems.

Totally agree, I'm 100% behind it.
But IMO, CW is going to suck w/o large group support, and it should be on a higher level of urgency than "Oh, we'll just put it on the back burner because, well... we really don't want to do it"

[Amsro]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

Splitting up the public queue doesn't help the game.

Ok, so right now we have 2 que's.

After Pauls idea we'll have 3. If instead we had a solo and a any team size que, we would be back to 2.

So again,

Why is having 2 simple modes so hard to imagine being good?

[Heffay]

Asmudius Heng, on 14 April 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

God i with they put that much emphasis on us Aussies!

Well, when you can fill up your continent with more people than a decent modern city, maybe they'll start treating Australia as something more than "The place that will kill you if you close your eyes for more than 5 seconds." ;-)

[TygerLily]

Amsro, on 14 April 2014 - 07:00 PM, said:

Yeah because there wasn't a solo only que as well, so you had non team players in a team match. That doesn't mix well.

You're right. When you ftfy with the strike through on Paul's post you put that the 2-12 should be in the public queue not it's own group queue. I see what you mean now though. And I think after reading a bit, dropping 2-4 mans from solo queue and having just a dedicated group queue and a dedicated solo queue would be a great idea...which I think is similar to you sentiments.

[Sandpit]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

What's wrong with the proposed split from PGI? Same thing. Public queue, group queue. Accomplishes the same thing: 5-10 man groups now can play together, no problems.

what's wrong with letting solo players that WANT to drop with groups?

[Heffay]

Amsro, on 14 April 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

Ok, so right now we have 2 que's.

After Pauls idea we'll have 3. If instead we had a solo and a any team size que, we would be back to 2.

So again,

Why is having 2 simple modes so hard to imagine being good?

He proposed 2 simple modes. Public queue, group queue. And private matches for people who want to run tournaments, all nicely monetized.

[Roadbeer]

Amsro, on 14 April 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

Ok, so right now we have 2 que's.

After Pauls idea we'll have 3. If instead we had a solo and a any team size que, we would be back to 2.

So again,

Why is having 2 simple modes so hard to imagine being good?

Actually, as of the 29th, we're going to have 4 "queues", so what's the big whoop of another? or... wait for it... make the 12 player queue (which everyone acknowledges is going to be a ghost town once private matches come it) the group queue, then you're still at 4

[Craig Steele]

Bhael Fire, on 14 April 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

Here's the latest proposal and summary:

Won't this penalise small groups of 2 and 3 man teams (10% of activity according to PGI) as the majority of them will have no where to play?

[Sandpit]

Amsro, on 14 April 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

Ok, so right now we have 2 que's.

After Pauls idea we'll have 3. If instead we had a solo and a any team size que, we would be back to 2.

So again,

Why is having 2 simple modes so hard to imagine being good?

because it doesn't fall in line with PGI's idea

[Heffay]

Sandpit, on 14 April 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

what's wrong with letting solo players that WANT to drop with groups?

Nothing. But you're being given what you want (5-10 man groups) and are still whining. Why?

[Dan Nashe]

Is there a reason why this wouldn't work:

Group Enters Queue. Say size 1-8.
[Maybe before they enter: "Warning, groups of size greater than 4 may have difficulty finding a match."]
Group must obey the 3/3/3/3 rule.
Lobby is created.
Matchmaker looks for an opposing team in the right ELO of between size Group X +/-2 (Max = 8).
Until a sufficient opposing group is found, no one else is put in the lobby.
If after (3-5 minutes), no opposing group is found, a simple pop up says "failed to find group of sufficient size, keep searching? Y/N?"

If it does find a sufficient opposing group of size +/-2, fill in the rest with PuG members.

The only people inconvenienced are the people waiting in the groups who have chosen to run groups of larger size than is recommended.


Set up:
Question: what is the problem in having a group of 6-11 sit in a lobby by themselves after they've been warned they may not find a group, for 3-5 minutes, and then dropping them after "failed to find a match because insufficient opposing groups of sufficient size."

Question:
Is 4 + 6 PuGs v. 6 + 4 PuGs really that unfair?
Is a 8 man + 4 PuG versus 6 + 6 PuGs that unfair?
Is a 10 man + 2 PuGs versus 8 + 4 really that unfair?

As a player who often queues solo, I would LOVE to be dropped in with groups of 8-11. It's way easier to play as a team when you know most of the team is following a plan (even as a solo player). Especially if these are rare. e.g., if I drop 200 games, that might happen to me once. I personally would have a lot more fun being one of 3 pugs on a 12 man than being one of 12 pugs.

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

Nothing. But you're being given what you want (5-10 man groups) and are still whining. Why?

OFFS, because we're not being "given" them, they're being discussed, in a "meh, we really don't want to do it" kinda way.

[Amsro]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

He proposed 2 simple modes. Public queue, group queue. And private matches for people who want to run tournaments, all nicely monetized.

Your forgetting about the 12-man que. That will still be there.

Solo will be solo

Group will be 2-10

12-man will be 12 man

3 by my count. Paul is just making things complicated using the data he invented due to changes he made. Endless chasing of his own tail.

Kind of funny to watch some of the people chase his tail with him to be honest.

[Artgathan]

What I'm really curious about is why 4 - 11 is not possible, but 4 - 10 works. Does needing 1 extra person really cause that much chaos to the MM? If so, why? It seems like a very arbitrary cutoff.

[Asmudius Heng]

Heffay, on 14 April 2014 - 07:20 PM, said:

Well, when you can fill up your continent with more people than a decent modern city, maybe they'll start treating Australia as something more than "The place that will kill you if you close your eyes for more than 5 seconds." ;-)

Thats is WHY we don't have enough people!

The weak get killed early

[Ngamok]

FupDup, on 14 April 2014 - 07:13 PM, said:

Me watching you guys argue:

Yea, the next 20 some pages will be the Sandpit, Roadbeer, Heffay, Craig Steele, with a dash of Deathlike show.