Jump to content

- - - - -

Regarding The Launch Module And Team Sizes - Feedback


1126 replies to this topic

#561 SweetJackal

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 968 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 12:42 PM

View PostCraig Steele, on 14 April 2014 - 11:19 PM, said:

Is that what the general concensus is, CW for groups, Solo's man up or move on?

Nope, you couldn't be more wrong or confused. The Consensus is two queues:

1: Solo Queue = A Public Queue that only has Solo Players, no groups. Being a Public Queue it would affect the CW results on an equal weight per match.

2: Group Queue = A Public Queue that accepts 'Groups' of 1 to 12 players and tries to match the sides as closely as possible (Will try to match a 12 man against another 12 man or 11+1.) Being a Public Queue it would affect the CW results on an equal weight per match.

What PGI is proposing for LM and likely won't change until after CW is finished in July 2015 is:

1: "Solo Queue" = A Public Queue that accepts Solo Players and Groups up to the size of 4, 1 group per team. Being a Public Queue it affects CW results.

2: 12 Man Queue = A public queue of 12 man premades, what we have now. Public Queue that affects CW

3: Private Matches for groups of 5-11 = Improved functionality for Private Matches to cater to groups larger than 4. Private matches do not have stat tracking, rewards, or any impact on CW (and Private Matches shouldn't to prevent abuse)

The Consensus is something that allows Solo Players that choose, -CHOOSE- to drop up against groups to meet groups and play in a group environment. This allows for a small group to naturally grow in size until it reaches the 12 man cap, unlike what we currently have that prevents any groups sized 5-11 from existing and leaves a huge gap that has to be crossed to turn a 4 man into a 12 man team.

This also removes 4 man teams from the PUG environment. Meaning that PUG Players don't have the bogeyman that is 4-mans hanging over them and causing 12-0 games that are fun for no one save the 4 people pubstomping. Meaning that each PUG player has their own input matter more and can have a greater impact on the outcome of the match.

So with the exception of Pubstompers, the Consensus Proposal benefits EVERYONE more than the current system or PGI's current proposal.

View PostBLOOD WOLF, on 14 April 2014 - 11:22 PM, said:

im sure roadbeer already expressed he doesn't care for solo players. Not once has anybody who advocated for group ques ever considered anybody else, Except for those who agreed with them.


Read the above, we are rallying for two things. Expanded group functionality in Public Queues that is completely open AND restricting Solo Queue to just Solo Players to prevent 4-man teams from limiting the impact a single Solo Queue player has on the match.

This is all about providing the player the choice to play the way they want, giving choice to the player to CHOOSE to play in a Solo Queue without ANY Groups sullying their experience or enjoyment of the game or to choose to play in a group environment. Doing so expands group functionality to improve the community and helps foster larger player groups.




###



All of this is about empowering the player with choice to play in the environment they want, to allow players to choose to play solo or to play with teams and provide the structure to the game to allow this to happen, allow player groups to foster and grow (just like every other game in the world that has a lobby system.)

Allowing player choice strengthens the game, creates a better environment for Solo and PUG players, players that do just want to Lone Wolf as well as creates an environment where they are protected from large competitive groups while fostering those groups at the same time, allowing players to find a group play environment in a much easier fashion.

All of the naysaying I have seen for this has been about players trying to defend their desire to play Solo Queue or deny the desires of other players. No one wants to eliminate the Solo Only queue or turn it into something where the matches don't have a weight or matter. We had that once in the CB and it was a horrible time, 8 mans got matched against PUGs and crushed face. Was boring for everyone, no one wants to go back to that, group players (players that want to play with friends) do not want to crush the PUG environment.

All we want is our own environment where we can foster and where any player can choose at any time what queue they desire to play in and have their matches matter. Where any number of friends can group up the first time playing and get matched against like minded players of their skill level thanks to the new up and coming Match Maker using Player ELO variance or Average Group ELO Variance instead of Total Team ELO Variance, less variance in individual player ELO in a match means players are better matched in their skill bracket. Coming Features like the Command Wheel and In-game VOIP lets group minded Solo Players work together and communicate.

I! HAVE A DREAM!

Edited by SuckyJack, 15 April 2014 - 12:46 PM.


#562 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:41 PM

Feedback thread goes completely untouched by PGI

This is my shocked face :)

#563 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:46 PM

Paul's gross incompetence knows no bounds.

The idea that you would actually PREVENT solo players from playing in the group queue is absolutely nonsensical.

Why don't you just let the solo players decide on their own if they want to play in the group queue?

#564 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:47 PM

View PostRoland, on 15 April 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

Paul's gross incompetence knows no bounds.

The idea that you would actually PREVENT solo players from playing in the group queue is absolutely nonsensical.

Why don't you just let the solo players decide on their own if they want to play in the group queue?


Sorry, you mean treat the player base like adults?

HAH!

Unless of course it's in an attempt to get us to spend our money.

#565 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:50 PM

SOLO QUEUE
UNRESTRICTED QUEUE
PROBLEM SOLVED

Jesus christ Paul, stop trying to overfuckingthink every god damned problem and coming up with these imbecilic overcomplications.

What's worse is that at this point, the obvious and simple solution of having a solo queue and an unrestricted queue is NEVER going to be allowed by Paul, because he's spent so much effort explaining how it could never possibly work, and its implementation would clearly prove how totally wrong he was.

Ya know what? It doesn't even matter.This ship is going down hard.

#566 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:52 PM

View PostRoland, on 15 April 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

SOLO QUEUE
UNRESTRICTED QUEUE
PROBLEM SOLVED

Jesus christ Paul, stop trying to overfuckingthink every god damned problem and coming up with these imbecilic overcomplications.

What's worse is that at this point, the obvious and simple solution of having a solo queue and an unrestricted queue is NEVER going to be allowed by Paul, because he's spent so much effort explaining how it could never possibly work, and its implementation would clearly prove how totally wrong he was.

Ya know what? It doesn't even matter.This ship is going down hard.


lol...it's so simple it can't possibly work!

#567 Zolaz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 3,510 posts
  • LocationHouston, Tx

Posted 15 April 2014 - 01:52 PM

I am starting to wonder what Paul is smoking on that island of his.

#568 Josef Koba

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 527 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:35 PM

Are private matches available now? I haven't had a chance to play yet so I was just curious. No idea how to do it; guessing one of your friends have to be online in order to do it?

#569 Pyrrho

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 854 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:43 PM

View PostJosef Koba, on 15 April 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

Are private matches available now? I haven't had a chance to play yet so I was just curious. No idea how to do it; guessing one of your friends have to be online in order to do it?


Private matches will be available with the Launch Module, which is not yet released.

#570 LawDawg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts
  • LocationOn the ATTACK!!!

Posted 15 April 2014 - 02:55 PM

View PostFupDup, 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 (depending on how close the skill level of each team would be).

Getting away from the "steering wheel underhive" type of teammates/enemies might be refreshing (group queue players would probably on average be more experienced).


Agree with you, but then I think you would see "New / Scrub / Noobs" Joining in that Que also trying to get a free ride or Trolling. Could suck for the 11 man drop. I know 1 Man can't make alot of difference, unless hes running out giving away position or "accidentally" dropping arty or shooting his team in the back. Meh, it happens now.

#571 Josef Koba

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 527 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:00 PM

View PostPyrrho, on 15 April 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:


Private matches will be available with the Launch Module, which is not yet released.


Ah, thanks Pyrrho. I was under the misguided impression that it was going to be released today (15 April). I believe I read that in the "State of the Inner Sphere" post from December. Bummer.

#572 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:01 PM

I'm just tired of people trying to make this into some sort of slight against solo and casual players. That just needs to stop. It has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous that if you say anything about wanting 2-12mans in CW that it somehow tries to get twisted into something along the lines of "Premades are trying to attack or dismiss or prevent solo players from enjoying the game".

It's just a distraction from what's really being asked for and a nice little strawman and scapegoat

#573 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:04 PM

View PostSandpit, on 15 April 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

I'm just tired of people trying to make this into some sort of slight against solo and casual players. That just needs to stop. It has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous that if you say anything about wanting 2-12mans in CW that it somehow tries to get twisted into something along the lines of "Premades are trying to attack or dismiss or prevent solo players from enjoying the game".

It's just a distraction from what's really being asked for and a nice little strawman and scapegoat


Meh, there are some people who are {Richard Cameron} and abused solo's.

It happened.

Which is why we need a solo queue and an unrestricted queue.

Separate em out.

#574 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:04 PM

View PostJosef Koba, on 15 April 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

Ah, thanks Pyrrho. I was under the misguided impression that it was going to be released today (15 April). I believe I read that in the "State of the Inner Sphere" post from December. Bummer.


2 weeks (April 29th is another patch day).

#575 Kageru Ikazuchi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 1,190 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:08 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 15 April 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

Feedback thread goes completely untouched by PGI

This is my shocked face :)

I know I've read somewhere recently (Karg Berg's awesome discussion with us maybe?) that someone at PGI reads all the official feedback threads, and then the feedback gets sorted into major topics, discussed at a meeting, etc., etc.

It's bad reason to not have someone (Community Manager, Dev, Admin, Exec, someone) to pipe in once or twice a day and say something to calm our nerves (or at least acknowledge our passion), but it's the process they have (as I understand it).

EDIT: Corrected the second sentence ... it used to read that I might be defending this process ... I'm not, they should show us that they're listening, even if they're not ready to discuss our feedback with us.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 15 April 2014 - 04:56 PM.


#576 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:25 PM

View PostKageru Ikazuchi, on 15 April 2014 - 03:08 PM, said:

I know I've read somewhere recently (Karg Berg's awesome discussion with us maybe?) that someone at PGI reads all the official feedback threads, and then the feedback gets sorted into major topics, discussed at a meeting, etc., etc.

It's not a good reason for someone (Community Manager, Dev, Admin, Exec, someone) to pipe in once or twice a day and say something to calm our nerves (or at least acknowledge our passion), but it's the process they have (as I understand it).


Their process blows. As evidenced by all the push back they receive from the community at literally every turn.

#577 LawDawg

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 372 posts
  • LocationOn the ATTACK!!!

Posted 15 April 2014 - 03:47 PM

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 15 April 2014 - 03:25 PM, said:


Their process blows. As evidenced by all the push back they receive from the community at literally every turn.


No fan boy, I support them. I've ripped em up. But give them their dues. Since UI 2.0, The have been putting out some content and fixing some shit.

Maybe not addressing YOUR immediate needs. But there is a butt ton of stuff they are working.

Daaaamn. They even DID a little bit to SRMS which they said somewhere they would NOT touch until after CW.

Some of yall cant have everything YOU want, in ONE PATCH.

Breaking them down daily, telling them "They suck", "Incompetent", "Get another team" ...........ECT,,,,,,how does that help anything? They are building this game for us ( and for them ). But motivation only makes it better.

Bet bottom dollar...........that's why they don't respond here, or pretty much anywhere. Yall blow em up. Just hate and discontent.

#578 Craig Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,106 posts
  • LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment

Posted 15 April 2014 - 04:23 PM

View PostSandpit, on 15 April 2014 - 12:08 PM, said:



This?

This is the kind of stuff that irritates me. Show me where the proposals tossed out such as a group + solo optional queues even remotely hint at that.

This especially irritates me when you're trying to use it as an argument against groups. That exact scenario you just laid out? That's EXACTLY what PGI has planned for groups. Groups can't participate in the game fully. Solos can but groups cannot. you're trying to make these suggestions and concerns into something they're not and just diluting and distracting from the ideas and feedback by trying to turn it into "poor solo players, you want them alienated yadda yadda yadda"

So explain to me how
group queue 2-12
solo players having an option to join it
playing in CW
earning cbills and exp for matches

in any way, shape, or form, can be translated to "solo players are being (insert whatever detrimental buzz word you'd like to use here) and group players just want them left out in the cold"

show me how saying
2-12 man groups
CW
rewards

Has ANYTHING to do with how solo players are allowed to play the game. Stop trying to make this into an anti-solo player discussion. Myself and many others could give 2 sh**s about how they play the game. They've already got options to play in the above mentioned fashion. Nobody anywhere is suggesting taking that away from them. The only thing that's being suggested is allowing groups to do the same thing. How that gets done isn't important as long as it gets done. Stop trying to make it into anything other than
2-12
CW
Cbills & exp

That's the ONLY thing those of us wanting some sort of group queue are wanting. That's it. Don't try and turn that into something it's not. Stop trying to take away from those 3 points. That's the issue. Nothing else. Let me repeat it one more time just so anyone who didn't understand how simple that was the first two times
2012
CW
Cbills and exp

nothing else.



View PostSandpit, on 15 April 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

I'm just tired of people trying to make this into some sort of slight against solo and casual players. That just needs to stop. It has nothing to do with that. It's ridiculous that if you say anything about wanting 2-12mans in CW that it somehow tries to get twisted into something along the lines of "Premades are trying to attack or dismiss or prevent solo players from enjoying the game".

It's just a distraction from what's really being asked for and a nice little strawman and scapegoat


Wow, maybe you missed this? (my bold)

View PostSuckyJack, on 14 April 2014 - 08:09 PM, said:


I want a public queue that allows for groups of all sizes so Group Play can become a focus for balance and CW. I want to be able to Solo Drop with groups to make it easy for me to find a group, meet players that are focused on teamwork and help foster a productive community. But according to the development team (I will take Paul as just a messenger for this statement) "They Know How I Want To Play And What I Will Enjoy" better than I do.

So again, I will ask, where are the 5-10 man groups?


If you go back and read the posts without your pre programmed agenda and a little impartiality you'll see other hints?

Since when is asking a question or seeking feedback making a strawman argument?

I'll just leave this here for you.

View PostSandpit, on 14 April 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:


no it's just another example of
"I really have no rational reason or argument against anything they've said so I'll resort to attacking them to try and distract from their ideas and maybe even get them baited into attacking me so I can either derail the thread or get them moderated"

It's a pretty common tactic used around here

Edited by Craig Steele, 15 April 2014 - 04:31 PM.


#579 SweetJackal

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 968 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 04:30 PM

Just going to say one thing Craig Steele, Design is best when it is Inclusive, not Exclusive. The Bolded Quote means Including Groups into the focus of Balance and CW and NOT excluding Solo Players.

Right now, Group Play is completely excluded from their design and as such excludes a portion of their playerbase.

#580 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The DeathRain
  • The DeathRain
  • 4,751 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 15 April 2014 - 04:30 PM

TBH, I don't see the problem point of the 1 filler pick-up guy. If he pays attention to what's going on around, there's no reason things should go badly for him - after all, he's surrounded by organized players who (hopefully) have a plan. Does having an 11+1 amount to an advantage against an 8+4 team? Is an 8+3+1 team worse (or better) than a 3+5+4 team in any kind of quantifiable way? In any kind of mixed queue, success or failure is going to work around your group's ability to adjust and coordinate together with your randomly selected teammates more than on raw individual effort, and solo-dropping isn't really any kind of excuse to not pay attention to your teammates... unless maybe you really like ELO hell.

I think throwing a complete 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 random drop against a team completely of premade groups would be a bit unfair, but there are a lot of shades of grey that aren't likely to be statistically significant if your matchmaker can throw roughly the same number of grouped players onto each opposing team.

It might be better to just put in a team queue and fix the matchmaking in it based on empirical data than to waste a ton of time theorycrafting about fringe cases while MWO rots as an arena shooter.

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 15 April 2014 - 04:32 PM.






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users