292 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Shar Wolf, on 18 June 2014 - 08:29 PM, said:

Leave it at the idea that ceasing to whine removes any reason for me to mock you?

Just as readily as those you used to mock in K-Town.
Or is that too complicated of a concept now that you are on the other side of it?

Let me make it simple for ya - I am making fun of you for the same reasons you used to make fun of them.

Not necessarily what you are saying.
But the how and where you are choosing to broadcast to the world your butthurt.

The closest you have come to constructive was when you declared (the first time) that you did not like how PGI did things.
After that it was the exact same butthurt whining you used to mock people for.


Thank you for phrasing that in a more mature manor than I have managed.

Give it up shar. Nothing you say at this point changes the fact that YOU derailed the entire topic with personal attacks.
You
Not me
As a matter of fact I STILL haven't done so. You're acting like an immature child and you can revel in your attempts to "show me up", makes no difference to me. You're the main one who has done nothing but act like a petulant child throwing a fit and screaming at the top of your lungs about how someone was doing something you didn't like. If and when you feel like you can hold an adult conversation using your indoor voice then we'll talk. This will be my last response to your trolling though

As for everyone else...

This wasn't about me being "unhappy"
This was about finally having enough of russ' condescending attitude to say something about it. Now you can spin it any way you like but that's the truth of the matter.

I've noticed something over the past few days. Most of the "go away" "you're just a troll" etc. Etc. Type responses are coming from "newish" players. Peruse the forums. Those players simply do not understand where others are coming from.

They have played for a few months and don't understand why hearing things like "cw is right around the corner"
And
When talking about groups it's not JUST geoups that had led to a lot of the animosity
collisions
cw
Groups
3pv
Ghost heat
Ui2.0 (that hasn't been updated because clans apparently became the new priority)
Voip
mm (not even getting into the botched rule of 3)
No maps in 6 or so months

EVERYTHING in this game except minetized items is half-assed and half-finished. Every time they announce a new mech pack THAT becomes the priority.

Then you have the president of the company publicly telling customers that their money and support over the past 2 years was inconsequential? No sir, I'm at the point where I'll happily spend my time pointing these things out. It's not because I "hate" russ, pgi, or mwo. It's because I feel they should be held accountable for these things. They don't want a disgruntled customer like me and for tje reasons I gave?

Then THEY can change their business practices and actually follow through with what they said they'd give me in exchange for my money. It's that simple really

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sandpit, on 19 June 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

Give it up shar. Nothing you say at this point changes the fact that YOU derailed the entire topic with personal attacks.
You
Not me

Just keep telling yourself that

Because all I have heard from you since you got back is:

Sandpit, on 19 June 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

YOU ALL SUCK!
PGI SUCKS
THE PLAYERS SUCK!
YOU.
ALL.
SUCK.
But I still like playing
I have been having WAY more fun over at all these other games!
They are 10000x better than this one and allways will be
But I still like playing
So why are you saying I am acting like a whiny troll?!
GOD you are all so whiny!

Which I suppose could be considered not making any personal attacks.
After all - Victor Morson justified it.

[Alaskan Nobody]

But then - since when have trolls had to justify anything?

[Roland]

It's weird that you'd actually go to the trouble to write up a whole fictitious post to quote, Shar Wolf.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Roland, on 19 June 2014 - 08:47 PM, said:

It's weird that you'd actually go to the trouble to write up a whole fictitious post to quote, Shar Wolf.

It's weirder that all these people keep coming back to tell us repeatedly how horribly we/the game/the developers/anything is.

Edit: but then - if you haven't figured out yet that I am and always have been somewhat weird....

Edited by Shar Wolf, 19 June 2014 - 08:52 PM.

[Sandpit]

Roland, on 19 June 2014 - 08:47 PM, said:

It's weird that you'd actually go to the trouble to write up a whole fictitious post to quote, Shar Wolf.

as I stated earlier, when he can converse like an adult I'll respond to him, until then I'm not going to worry about him. If he keeps on I'll just start hitting the report button. He's already done nothing but attack and derail the thread

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sandpit, on 19 June 2014 - 08:58 PM, said:

He's already done nothing but attack and derail the thread

You REALLY need to stop talking about yourself man

For what it is worth - if for some reason you think you are talking about me - might want to consider who had been teaching me......

Edited by Shar Wolf, 19 June 2014 - 09:03 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

As much "fun" as this is ...

Karl Berg was asked here (at about 2:45):

• How will the code prioritize MatchMaking, and how soon will the new system be implemented?

His answer:

• Currently it looks like group size, elo, weight class and age (time waited in queue). Additionally we're going to try to get faction and tonnage matching into there as well. Right now, 4x3 is working in testing. Additionally just to guarantee it works, we have what are called release valves built into the system. Those release valves essentially look at the incoming player counts, determine whether or not 4x3 is going to continue to be viable, and we'll relax those constraints over time just to guarantee we continue taking matches no matter what happens.
  
• Currently we have an external process which can simulate actual production matchmaking data. That includes game filter selections, game modes, the Mech selections, several other factors as well and replays those at various rates, including group sizes. So I can actually play with those input values quite a bit, to simulate specific edge cases and degenerate cases, including up to taking out weight classes completely from the system just to verify that under all situations the matchmaker continues to function correctly.
  
• They're currently nearly complete, I'm working on the stretch goals right now. Hopefully I should be done by the end of this week in fact, so by the time you see this video. Well if I hit my stretch goals and finish by the end of this week I'll hand it off to our QA department Ricky Cheung and hopefully sometime after that we'll be able to see something on Public Test or something we'll discuss for sure.
  
• Realistically we'd be looking at July 1st at the earliest. That would involve a mandatory 2 week QA time to go through Stable and Stage. So that's really the earliest you'd see it on Production.

I wonder what "stretch goals" he might be referring to ...

I also wonder what Russ wouldn't tell us about here (at about 13:10, in the middle of a 5-minute discussion about Karl's work on the Match Maker) ...

• ... some other kind of much bigger stretch goals that I'll just tease you a little bit and say that they're things people have been asking about quite extensively for a while now, that we are in plans to do. We have a design we like. We're testing it and we're feeling pretty confident about ... but I'm going to hold off to make sure before I announce that part ...

[sabujo]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 19 June 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

I also wonder what Russ wouldn't tell us about here (at about 13:10, in the middle of a 5-minute discussion about Karl's work on the Match Maker) ...

Probably lances Vs stars or true weight-based matchmaking.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

sabujo, on 20 June 2014 - 02:40 AM, said:

Probably lances Vs stars or true weight-based matchmaking.

I'm hoping (cautiously optimistic) that it might be allowing groups larger than 4.

[RedDragon]

Hmm I get the feeling that I really miss some gold comedy here by having Shar on ignore...

On topic: Russ said on Twitter that they are working on groups larger than 4... but if that means that they are really working on it, who knows? I just hope that we will get a "Starter queue" for all the new players so the aren't mixed in with the pros from the start. That alone would help solve a lot of problems.

[Cimarb]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 19 June 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

As much "fun" as this is ...

Karl Berg was asked here (at about 2:45):

• How will the code prioritize MatchMaking, and how soon will the new system be implemented?

His answer:

• Currently it looks like group size, elo, weight class and age (time waited in queue). Additionally we're going to try to get faction and tonnage matching into there as well. Right now, 4x3 is working in testing. Additionally just to guarantee it works, we have what are called release valves built into the system. Those release valves essentially look at the incoming player counts, determine whether or not 4x3 is going to continue to be viable, and we'll relax those constraints over time just to guarantee we continue taking matches no matter what happens.
  
• Currently we have an external process which can simulate actual production matchmaking data. That includes game filter selections, game modes, the Mech selections, several other factors as well and replays those at various rates, including group sizes. So I can actually play with those input values quite a bit, to simulate specific edge cases and degenerate cases, including up to taking out weight classes completely from the system just to verify that under all situations the matchmaker continues to function correctly.
  
• They're currently nearly complete, I'm working on the stretch goals right now. Hopefully I should be done by the end of this week in fact, so by the time you see this video. Well if I hit my stretch goals and finish by the end of this week I'll hand it off to our QA department Ricky Cheung and hopefully sometime after that we'll be able to see something on Public Test or something we'll discuss for sure.
  
• Realistically we'd be looking at July 1st at the earliest. That would involve a mandatory 2 week QA time to go through Stable and Stage. So that's really the earliest you'd see it on Production.

I wonder what "stretch goals" he might be referring to ...

I also wonder what Russ wouldn't tell us about here (at about 13:10, in the middle of a 5-minute discussion about Karl's work on the Match Maker) ...

• ... some other kind of much bigger stretch goals that I'll just tease you a little bit and say that they're things people have been asking about quite extensively for a while now, that we are in plans to do. We have a design we like. We're testing it and we're feeling pretty confident about ... but I'm going to hold off to make sure before I announce that part ...

Weight matching is a good guess, though we haven't even had a successful 3x4 implementation yet, so that is still a bit of a "stretch" for a stretch goal. 4x4 would be a much better start, as it would allow slight variances to compensate.

RedDragon, on 20 June 2014 - 03:14 AM, said:

On topic: Russ said on Twitter that they are working on groups larger than 4... but if that means that they are really working on it, who knows? I just hope that we will get a "Starter queue" for all the new players so the aren't mixed in with the pros from the start. That alone would help solve a lot of problems.

I sure hope the "larger than 4" is what happens - that would be great. If that happens, I won't be upset about 3x4 or the horrible "1-group rule".

There are supposed to be starter buckets currently, as well as Elo buckets. I don't know for sure whether they removed those completely or if the current matchmaker is just having fits with all the changes and not working correctly, but I can't wait for the new one to come out and hopefully fix it.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Cimarb, on 20 June 2014 - 06:05 AM, said:

Weight matching is a good guess, though we haven't even had a successful 3x4 implementation yet, so that is still a bit of a "stretch" for a stretch goal. 4x4 would be a much better start, as it would allow slight variances to compensate.

I think 4x4 (and more, as required) are some of the "release valves" he is talking about. At least I hope so.

Quote

I sure hope the "larger than 4" is what happens - that would be great. If that happens, I won't be upset about 3x4 or the horrible "1-group rule".

I'm uncertain about what would be horrible about the original "one group per side" rule ... I'd be interested to know why you think it would be "horrible".

Quote

There are supposed to be starter buckets currently, as well as Elo buckets. I don't know for sure whether they removed those completely or if the current matchmaker is just having fits with all the changes and not working correctly, but I can't wait for the new one to come out and hopefully fix it.

I would very much like some assurance that I'm not dropping with a team full of guys who just started playing.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 20 June 2014 - 07:25 AM.

[Sandpit]

RedDragon, on 20 June 2014 - 03:14 AM, said:

Hmm I get the feeling that I really miss some gold comedy here by having Shar on ignore...

On topic: Russ said on Twitter that they are working on groups larger than 4... but if that means that they are really working on it, who knows? I just hope that we will get a "Starter queue" for all the new players so the aren't mixed in with the pros from the start. That alone would help solve a lot of problems.

many people suggested many times since cb.
pull new players into their own cadet queue. Instead of that though it's easier to blame groups for roflstomps instead of looking at the core reasons that create roflstomp situations

[Macksheen]

That oft-used chart ignores the fact that many people who are in active "units" may not want to break up a 4 man team and will continue to drop solo until more people come online.

If group size were 2-12 instead of 2-4, I wonder how much that chart would change.

[Sandpit]

Macksheen, on 20 June 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

That oft-used chart ignores the fact that many people who are in active "units" may not want to break up a 4 man team and will continue to drop solo until more people come online.

If group size were 2-12 instead of 2-4, I wonder how much that chart would change.

exactly

PGI claims group numbers dwindled. they refuse to acknowledge that they dwindled BECAUSE PGI limited group sizes. It's not rocket science but it does appear to be beyond their data collection skills

[Cimarb]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 20 June 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

I'm uncertain about what would be horrible about the original "one group per side" rule ... I'd be interested to know why you think it would be "horrible".

I would very much like some assurance that I'm not dropping with a team full of guys who just started playing.

Before I joined my current unit, roughly two months ago, I played exclusively as a solo dropper. I still drop on 3-4 nights of the week solo, in fact. When I do drop solo, I still much prefer there to be as many groups in the match as possible because it tends to be a more challenging, "better" match.

Sure, it may still be a stomp, but I would prefer to be stomped by an organized team than a disorganized mob any day.

I regularly have matches where there are 2-3 premades on each side. Those are far better matches, regardless of who wins, than matches where everyone is on their own (and acts like it).

Likewise, PGI decided to do the 1-group rule because of falsely read analytics saying that 84% of the population drops solo. I still primarily drop solo, and I WANT multiple groups. When I drop with my unit, I still WANT to drop with our other lances or even with other unit's lances, as they are going to be much more apt to listen and coordinate with us.

Sandpit, on 20 June 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

many people suggested many times since cb.
pull new players into their own cadet queue. Instead of that though it's easier to blame groups for roflstomps instead of looking at the core reasons that create roflstomp situations

I believe there is a cadet queue currently, but it is only for 25 or so matches, which I don't think is enough, by far. I'm not sure if the Elo buckets are currently in place, but it sure doesn't feel like it.

Sandpit, on 20 June 2014 - 08:13 AM, said:

exactly

PGI claims group numbers dwindled. they refuse to acknowledge that they dwindled BECAUSE PGI limited group sizes. It's not rocket science but it does appear to be beyond their data MINING skills

FTFY, but otherwise that's what I just posted too.

[Roland]

Roland, on 13 May 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

Niko, could you please clarify these numbers that were provided by Paul?

In the reference, it mentions "number of drops". Was this just a master of confusing phrasing?

Specifically, in that data set, did a group of 4 players in a premade team who launched count as a single drop, or four drops?

Clarification of this point should be easily made, and would help us understand the composition of the player base.

Thanks.

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 13 May 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

Good question. I'll try to get an answer for you on this one by the end of week or early next week.

Hey Niko, it's been over a month since you said you'd answer this question.

[Sandpit]

Cimarb, on 20 June 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

Before I joined my current unit, roughly two months ago, I played exclusively as a solo dropper. I still drop on 3-4 nights of the week solo, in fact. When I do drop solo, I still much prefer there to be as many groups in the match as possible because it tends to be a more challenging, "better" match.

Sure, it may still be a stomp, but I would prefer to be stomped by an organized team than a disorganized mob any day.

I regularly have matches where there are 2-3 premades on each side. Those are far better matches, regardless of who wins, than matches where everyone is on their own (and acts like it).

Likewise, PGI decided to do the 1-group rule because of falsely read analytics saying that 84% of the population drops solo. I still primarily drop solo, and I WANT multiple groups. When I drop with my unit, I still WANT to drop with our other lances or even with other unit's lances, as they are going to be much more apt to listen and coordinate with us.


I believe there is a cadet queue currently, but it is only for 25 or so matches, which I don't think is enough, by far. I'm not sure if the Elo buckets are currently in place, but it sure doesn't feel like it.


FTFY, but otherwise that's what I just posted too.

^ this

and until PGI acknowledges that they were wrong it will never get fixed. You'll have 12-0 roflstomps regularly until they acknowledge that their data MINING (happy cim? lol) skills are unreliable and their data review is flawed. This another in a looooooooooooooooooong list of stuff.

Tutorials? Nah, don't need them. We gave them 3pv, that's good enough. Things like this are exactly why they didn't get a clan pack out of me.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Well now there was a twitter from Russ (If I remember right) stating that they were working on 5-11 man groups.
I remember that because he specifically mentioned Roadbeer.

On the other hand - I have yet to contribute anything constructive to the conversation - despite having attempted 5 times now to inform you of that Sand.

So I guess I must be the troll harassing people after all.