292 replies to this topic

[Chemie]

so this really means that the number of premades is more than 2x the number of games being formed....ie since queue times are double expected, this means that there are twice as many premades as games being spawned. Does not tell a good story about future of team play given this silly restriction?

Can we just have a pug only and "unlimited" queue (which roughly balances the number of premades on each side).

[Fang01]

Oh? Pugcentric matchmaking has failed utterly? How bout we try 2-12 groups and plug up holes with solos then? I'll bet THAT works fine.

[Dawnstealer]

Actually, that graph looks about right. I solo drop during the week and usually only drop with my group at designated times (like Thursday evening). I'll occasionally group up with a friend or two while pugging, I'm usually only on for a drop or two before doing other stuff, and it's just not worth it to wait for people to add modules, switch up mechs, chat, etc, when I just want to grind out a couple drops.

[Devil Fox]

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

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.

So once again your fixes for bugs you've identified are broken because you refuse to fix the underlaying issue of the 3/3/3/3 and admit the majority of your playing userbase tend to group up... not drop solo. Probably statistics that show there are more people in groups trying to drop then solo pubbies...

Now WHEN and IF you get a fix for the 3/3/3/3 do we expect to wait until next patch cycle? Or will you be hotfixing in a patch to get what was the major component of your launch module for the pubs up and running... afterall all I've seen is a private lobbie system with bugs that encourage 12man's to form up for a chance at pub stomping...

[Rubidiy]

i don't know what's going on, but people keep dropping off matches and teams definitely have more than 1 premade group.

[Appogee]

What a train wreck.

You guys are turning away players so rapidly now that I am concerned for the ongoing viability of the game.

[Jak Darren]

Man, if you could actually add *content* to your game with the same frequency you add monetized items, maybe people wouldn't laugh at your "patch" notes.

I've never seen you guys muck up adding something that we pay you for, yet everything else seems to get flubbed up and/or pushed weeks to months back.

Real good show you're putting on for us. Real good.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Ever since the announcement of the launch module, I've been saying that 3/3/3/3, one group per team, and Elo buckets will all change the game for the better, leading to more balanced matches and a generally better experience for everyone.

(Note: I have also advocated for increasing the group cap to something more than 2-4 ... "better" means "better than we have now", not "the best possible".)

While I have no insight into how or why the current system is not working, there are a couple of things I can think of that could help ...

Rather than "one group per team", possibly "equal number of grouped players per team" would be more appropriate?
(An equal number of groups could lead to possibilities like 4+4+4 vs 2+2+2 + 6 pugs ... I think 4+4 + 4 pugs vs 2+2+2+2 +4 pugs is probably still imbalanced in favor of the 4-mans, but less so.)

An indicator for each weight class, to indicate the average expected wait time (could be as simple as RED / YELLOW / GREEN stop light) ... let the player choose, which is more important, to drop in an Assault 'mech in 10 minutes, or in a Medium 'mech now?

Flexible Elo bucket boundaries ... rather than hard limits at 1000 and 1500 (or wherever they are), have the boundaries be flexible based on the current population online at any given time, dividing it more precisely into thirds.

[DeathlyEyes]

Greatly reduce the effect of ELO. The best should win and the worst should lose. Stop coddling bad players at the expense of good players. If you want some sorta balancing feature use something similar to battle value.

Edited by SLDF DeathlyEyes, 06 May 2014 - 03:23 PM.

[Gyrok]

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.

The funny thing is...to hear the numbers, supposedly no one plays in groups...but when you mess with the matchmaker to cut out groups in the queue...times more than doubled...

Interesting...

Maybe just cut your losses on 3/3/3/3 and leave it be...? Take out the restriction from 4 man groups entirely and just leave it as it was...

I mean, it is not like the majority of the community was all that excited about it anyway...tonnage limits would be a better implementation entirely. No one is going to take 6 locusts to get 6 Atlases...I am sure you aware how (un)popular the locust is...

[That Dawg]

Xephan, on 06 May 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

Mark ^^

The fix for that caused an issue so they disabled it. And basically we are where we where at last week.

Noooo, hater!
GOOD NEWS EVERYONE, they have new mechs and cockpit items for sale!!

Jak Darren, on 06 May 2014 - 02:57 PM, said:

Man, if you could actually add *content* to your game with the same frequency you add monetized items, maybe people wouldn't laugh at your "patch" notes.

I've never seen you guys muck up adding something that we pay you for, yet everything else seems to get flubbed up and/or pushed weeks to months back.

Real good show you're putting on for us. Real good.

Le' ouch

spot on too. I'm perilously close to giving up and just eating the loss so far, maybe checking in again in 6 months (quit last year for about 5 months)

[N0MAD]

Why are you assuming to many groups? Could it be there are not enough groups Qing up.
Surely if there are plenty of groups and a healthy population matchmaker will find games.
On the other hand if there are very few groups the matchmaker will take time if one group Qs up but another is not available.
That would make more sense if you figure their 84%/16% split,considering some groups are using Private.
This is a serious problem for the part of the community that doesnt group up in 12s and solo players.
Sync dropping pug stomping could be the order of the day.
I think its purely a lack of numbers.

[mp00]

They seem to say the 84% very carefully as % of drops not percentage of players. But at some point they will get it sorted, but private matches have taken the edge off of the annoyance of the problems.

[Iqfish]

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!

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?

[Tahribator]

Whatever you do, please don't ditch this feature. For the "pro" 4-mans it might be fun to fight against each other occasionally, but in my experience it usually results in one team stacked with meta lances which makes for a horrible solo experience. We really need this along with 3/3/3/3 to create a more balanced PUG experience.

[InRev]

SLDF DeathlyEyes, on 06 May 2014 - 03:22 PM, said:

Greatly reduce the effect of ELO. The best should win and the worst should lose. Stop coddling bad players at the expense of good players. If you want some sorta balancing feature use something similar to battle value.

Yes, because the best way to grow a healthy fanbase is to allow newbies or casuals to be farmed by metaslayers.

If "pros" were really so good, they wouldn't need to farm bads to enjoy the game. But we all know that a notch in the W column is all that really matters, ignore all the rest.

I'm no fan of the way Elo is implemented in this game (because it's horrible and doesn't really work anyway), but blatant complaining is far worse than even a failed attempt to make things fair. This is a game, not real warfare, and definitely not a job. Leave the rest at the door, please.

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 06 May 2014 - 06:42 PM.
Minor language

[Redshift2k5]

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!

We got content last week, and more content this week. Content coming out of their butts. Can't please everyone.

[DeathlyEyes]

InRev, on 06 May 2014 - 04:01 PM, said:

Yes, because the best way to grow a healthy fanbase is to allow newbies or casuals to be farmed by metaslayers.

If "pros" were really so good, they wouldn't need to farm bads to enjoy the game. But we all know that a notch in the W column is all that really matters, ignore all the rest.

I'm no fan of the way Elo is implemented in this game (because it's horrible and doesn't really work anyway), but blatant elitist bullshit is far worse than even a failed attempt to make things fair. This is a game, not real warfare, and definitely not a job. Leave the rest at the door, please.

If they had the player base to set set set things up properly then it wouldn't be an issue. They could copy league of legends. Right now I can't enjoy the the game because I am consistently stuck with a team of people who just started playing against multiple premades. The game feels like a job because if I don't carry I lose. I can't use fun builds anymore. I have to use meta builds.

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 06 May 2014 - 06:44 PM.
Cleaning up language in quote

[Blue Drache]

Look... 3/3/3/3 and 1 team per side will only continue to cause problems because PGI has done nothing but chase players and paying customers away with their constant r*tarded "balance" decisions, and their perceived inattentiveness to the userbase.

If there's not enough players queuing ... there's going to be major problems with these idiotic "fixes".

Edited by Blue Drache, 06 May 2014 - 04:10 PM.

[Rashhaverak]

Since it seems remarkably difficult to keep groups separated, how about changing matchmaking to a two queue system? One solo drop queue for those who like that sort of thing, and one 2-12 group queue with solo players filling gaps.

I have faith that you will eventually see the correctness, logic and reason in trying the two queue system, and I'll keep asking as politely as I can until then.