292 replies to this topic

[Zolaz]

Those stats that PGI throws around sure dont seem to be helping them figure anything out. Too many groups in the queue to find matches? *shakes his head* PGI and their war on groups and friends playing together.

[Asmosis]

Jman5, on 06 May 2014 - 01:40 PM, said:

Something I would love to see is the breakdown of solo players vs grouped players as a function of Elo. I get the feeling that there is a disproportionate amount of solo players in lower Elo and that number decreases as you go up. I also wonder if they were treating 2,3, and 4 man groups as a single unit giving a 2-man premade the same weight as a 1-man solo player.

If your playing in a group your ELO will be artificially higher than if you had played solo, simply because people perform better as a group as opposed to solo.

Bront, on 06 May 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

It's likely that's number of launches clicked. If you expand that out to people, groups make up more than a third

84+16+12+16=128 people in the above chart (abstracted)

(16+12+16)/128 = 34.375%

Its based on player drops in X category. 8% two-man teams means 8% of players starting matches are in two man teams. It doesn't mean 8% of the time launch is clicked, its by the leader of a two man team.

tdlr; 84% of MWO players at any given time are dropping solo.

Edited by Asmosis, 07 May 2014 - 12:15 AM.

[ebea51]

Rats, I was looking forwards to 3-3-3-3 in the 06-MAY patch.

If match times are doubling, would it be easier to have a 'solo only' queue for games and a '2 or more group' queue which populates with groups first and fills the blanks with solo pilots?

With the lobby system in play, I assume that a lot of groups are going there to play seriously and just grouping in the public matches to make XP and Cbills?

Anyways,
Looking forwards to when its all debugged and released...

Edited by ebea51, 07 May 2014 - 12:58 AM.

[Helmar Valasek]

I like the old system better. Pugs made up of solos and any number of groups and 12mans stuck in a 12 man only que. Without a much larger player base I don't think any of these balance systems are realistic. As we can see they clearly aren't working. For every restriction you put on Pug drops you make the situation many times more complicated for the match maker because individual players are still going to que in whatever mech they feel like dropping in at the time.

If you keep anything restrict the 2-3 man groups to no more than 3 of any weight class. This will put at least some restriction on their power.

One thing I have noticed is that a 2-4 man group is not as much as an advantage as solo players thinks. Being on voice chat makes the unit communication awesome but also isolates that unit from the rest of the company. A lot of small units completely ignore the company chat and while they may out preform early in the match they often face overwhelming numbers late in the match because they fail to support the rest of the company.

12 mans vs mixed pugs however are horribly over powered. I ran with a 12 man last weekend and we never lost. The worst we did was loose 6 mechs and we usually lost no more than 2 if any. That is very over powered.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 May 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

... I ask if you be more specific about what particular kind of content you would personally like to see more of. Thanks!

I think the only way to silence some of the anger would be to:

• stop production on anything that costs ,
  
• fix the core game play (match maker and SRM hit registration are good starts ... which you've stated are your top priorities), and
  
• roll out community warfare (which you've stated is the next priority, once clan 'mechs are released).

Add to that list a wide variety of maps (there can never be enough), dozens game modes, and (of course) a total refund for all Founder and Phoenix buyers. (OK, I was kidding about the last one, and we all know #1 is a pipe dream .... you're in business to make a game that makes money.)


Sarcasm aside, I would like just a little more clarity on what to expect for community warfare and what design is trying to accomplish with the match maker changes.

In the meantime, if your artists want to do a little 3d doodling to break the monotony of building 'mechs, maps, etc. and model a punching bag, a mead horn, etc., I really don't have a problem with it. I imagine it took them about the same amount of time to do any one of those items as it does to model a plant for the upcoming jungle map.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 07 May 2014 - 01:12 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

Goose, on 06 May 2014 - 12:52 PM, said:

There just is no good news, today, is there?

Quickdraw hero is out. Can pack a nice ballistic wallop IMHO.

[ShinVector]

The way I see it...
PGI needs to drop ELO matchmaking for things to work.
Or make so, that the ELO requirements are dynamically dropped drastically to allow faster match making...

And maybe rewards should be dynamically adjusted as well relative to ELO levels...

[Cabal668]

I habe something Queso na for the Devs AT first:
1. Which other Options did you consider about how to modify the Matchmaker and why were they abandoned?
2. Why are no new Maps being made on a constant base for example one Map per Month?
3. Why are no new Gamemodes put in regularly?
4. If your staff is too small doing all that parallel in time why you don't try to evaluade the most wanted part from the community?
5. Why are you not trying to use your customers as a helper for your Game by making map - Contests, Mech-building - Contests and such stuff?

You asked about content we want:
1. Maybe a Universe with planets where the players can choose to land and fight. This don't have to be clanwars stuff but just that you can choose where to fight.
2. Make weight-limit based matches. Maybe 400, 500, 600, 800 and 1000tons Limit. First you choose This and then you choose your Mech.
3. We need way more Maps to play. This should be high priority for you. At first i think 20 to 50 new Maps are a MINIMUM.
4. New ways to move your Mech, going prone, kick enemy Mechs and that stuff.
5. New Mechs. I mean new Mechs not Variants of existing ones.

So these are something Points i think that are importent.

[PhoenixFire55]

ShinVector, on 07 May 2014 - 01:48 AM, said:

And maybe rewards should be dynamically adjusted as well relative to ELO levels...

As much as I'd like to see this happen it never will. Its bad for the game, and also you'll be able to find out your Elo score looking at rewards you get and your buddies get etc. For whatever stupid reason PGI keeps Elo hidden you bet they'll keep hiding it.

[Featherwood]

Iqfish, on 06 May 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:

QFT.

People jump on the "I want more content" bandwagon really quick, but how do they define new content?

New Maps? New weapons? New Game Modes? All of those?

Stop playing casuist. Need an example of happy community of F2P project which doesn't bother to define what a 'real' content is after reading every next patchnotes? Viola - Path of Exile. It came out of nihil but from the devotion and dedication of competent devs.

edit: grammar

P.S. Aye, forgot to mention that PoE is financially successful project, and it became the title in less time than PGI developed UI2.0.

Edited by Featherwood, 07 May 2014 - 02:42 AM.

[anonymous161]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 May 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

I appreciate this suggestion. However, it's important to note that every player's definition of content is different.
For a great many players, and indeed for ourselves as developers, new Mechs do count as content just as much any other feature in the game we have added to, whether it's whole new facets like Private Lobbies or smaller additions like cockpit items inspired by the Community. With that in mind, I ask if you be more specific about what particular kind of content you would personally like to see more of. Thanks!

Oh cmon you know full well what he means, mechs are nothing new, what we want are more game modes, more maps, more features, how about adding destructive items like trees at the very least, knock downs, core explosions, more weapons to utilize, add tanks and choppers like the other games have. Cmon man yes mechs are content but we want game play content, more options. Right now adding another mech isn't going to make the game better will be more of the same.

For a while I have been having fun but after reading that response I'm rather ticked off, I've spent hundreds of dollars on this game because I figure well it will help improve the game as a whole not just fund another F'ing mech! Seriously I'm close to just asking for a damn refund on the masakari clan collection and just shutting this damn thing off for good, if you guys are going to play stupid with us then you dont deserve the privilege of being paid to make a video game with a history as rich as mechwarrior's. You guys gonna continue to play dumb give us the middle finger then really you dont deserve to be in business.

Other companies or business's have been fired or shut down with the kind of failure rate and lack of progress your company has shown, and you really cant go with the "but we are a small group QQ" Enough bs you dont make promises multiple of them without being able to back them up, it would serve you all right if you were all fired and ordered to hand over the ip to someone that will make it happen. Sorry to be harsh but you guys have repeatedly shown you are not really cut out for this. Thanks for trying though but so far I've spend a ton of money on this one free to play game because I care about it, for it to be for nothing.

I'm gonna take a break and go back to mechwarrior 4 for a while. I'll come back when the clans are here more than likely.

Edited by Darth Bane001, 07 May 2014 - 03:23 AM.

[Triordinant]

I have one question: when will the 1 premade per side rule be implemented? This Friday (May 9)? Next Tuesday (May 13)?

[ShinVector]

Triordinant, on 07 May 2014 - 03:09 AM, said:

I have one question: when will the 1 premade per side rule be implemented? This Friday (May 9)? Next Tuesday (May 13)?

I think the fact that they have failed for the second time means... They found a Huge Monkey with a Huge Wrench. (Probably has something to do with ELO, groups and too many assault/heavies..)

[Joseph Mallan]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 06 May 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors,

As per the Command Chair Update on Friday:
"A problem with the single group per team feature of the matchmaker was identified and fixed and will be in the May 6th patch. This feature of the matchmaker will be re-enabled; however, it will be monitored closely. In case problems with the matchmaker arise again, we may be forced to disable it."

Our monitoring of the matchmaker immediately following the patch has revealed that wait times had more than doubled as a result of this fix being added without further changes to the matchmaker already in the pipeline. As these wait times far exceeded our tolerances for players to be left idling; We are temporarily disabling this feature.

The following bug fix is redacted from today's patch notes:
-Fixed an issue where multiple 2-4 player groups can enter into a public match on the same team
All other bug fixes introduced remain intact.

Similar to 3/3/3/3 1 group per side uses similar queuing functionality that requires some re-factoring before these features can be supported correctly. As with 3/3/3/3, we look forward to getting you these features as soon as we can and will keep you updated on their progress.

Technically its a single team per group. A random group of players is not the same as a team.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Joseph Mallan, on 07 May 2014 - 03:51 AM, said:

Technically its a single team per group. A random group of players is not the same as a team.

Anybody on one side is a team, the game has 2 teams. There is the blue team, and the red team; Does not matter who is grouped or not.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 07 May 2014 - 04:20 AM.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

Nikolai,

I still don't understand why we can't just have:

1. A queue for solo players only

2. A queue for groups and volunteer solo players

Much of the player frustration in MWO comes from pick-ups feeling (rightly or wrongly) that they are repeatedly getting flattened by teams on comms. Having two queues would take care of that at a stroke.

[M4NTiC0R3X]

Solo only queue, will it happen? Hell no.

[BlackDeathLegion]

N0MAD, on 06 May 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

You have PGI telling people to use 3rd party software to find people to play with instead of adding it them selfs (how about a game chat lobby) and now youre telling people to use 3rd party sites to get content.
HELL WHY NOT JUST GET 3RD PARTY PEOPLE TO DEVELOP THE GAME?

+10000

Edited by BlackDeathLegion, 07 May 2014 - 04:24 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

RocketDog, on 07 May 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

Nikolai,

I still don't understand why we can't just have:

1. A queue for solo players only

2. A queue for groups and volunteer solo players

Much of the player frustration in MWO comes from pick-ups feeling (rightly or wrongly) that they are repeatedly getting flattened by teams on comms. Having two queues would take care of that at a stroke.

they said it was possible, but they need to get done with the building of CW first. Best to do some research and reading.

They are putting their manpower into getting the Core features done.(clans next month)

http://mwomercs.com/...and-team-sizes/

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 07 May 2014 - 04:26 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

BLOOD WOLF, on 07 May 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

Anybody on one side is a team, the game has 2 teams. There is the blue team, and the red team; Does not matter who is grouped or not.

I beg to differ Wolf. A team works together, a group does whatever. I see the difference everyday. I see 12 man groups get rolled by 6 man Teams cause the team is a cohesive unit and works together.