48 replies to this topic

[Zerberus]

darkkterror, on 08 June 2014 - 06:00 PM, said:

Well according to the Black Knights and Cryhards there`s only about 50-100 people that actually play the game, with another 2-3000 turned away daily by the NUE, so that number might be inflated

RussianWolf, on 09 June 2014 - 05:06 AM, said:

be fair

They are call Twits.

Edited by Zerberus, 09 June 2014 - 06:38 AM.

[Sprouticus]

MonkeyDCecil, on 09 June 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

You see that is the rub of it, teams are hardly ever balanced. I am tired of playing pug matches, with premades. Premades use comms and pug can not. They can focus fire and move as a unit easier. Premades have a huge advantage over pugs, because of comms. But, you say if there is a premade on one team there is one on the other. Well not always, at least from my experience. Also a two man premade does not even out a 4 man. If and when they add 5+, it will make pug play worse. A solo que only is needed.

No premade in my pugging please.

A solo only queue will never happen, so it is not worth discussing.

I agree that the MM shoud make sure that both teams get a group (and just one group). And I see your point that smaller groups are less influential than larger groups. However I think that it is not nearly as much of an influence as you think. One bad player running off on his own or one person getting unlucky and stumbling into the enemy by accident is far more impactful that the difference between a 2 man and a 4 man.

But for the sake of discussion, how about:

3-5
6-8
9-12

2 mans won't count as groups....that would not be horrible IMO. Not that my perfect pie in the sky system will be what PGI uses. My point is that there are ways to mitigate the impact of larger group and ensure one team does not have a much smaller premade than the other.

As for groups being able to focus fire, that actually does not need comms. I do a lot of solo drops, roughly 50%, due to wanting to do a quick game or two when life gives me the chance. Group fire or premades rarely carry the day. How tghe pugs react and work with the premade usually does.

It is easy to see if you have a premade (look at lance Alpha and look for the same faciton insignia...or ask!). Then follow them. When they fire on someone, you shoot the same target. Simple. If you are a light mech, scout for them or stay with them and keep enemy lights off of them. If you are an infighter and they are long range, stay low and be ready when it is time to rush or you get rushed.Again, simple.

Edited by Sprouticus, 09 June 2014 - 07:27 AM.

[Mott]

I don't understand the QQs about groups vs solos.

If you want to play a stompy robot game solo, there are dozens of other options out there. Go play them.

If you want to play MWO, a game that bills itself as a strategic, team-based game, then stop bashing teams or team play.

I've PUG'd solo for the first 5 months of my 6 months of play. I get that it's harder, and that when your random PUG faces a coordinated team you have a good chance of being rolled. But guess what? I'm a big boy and that's a decision i analyzed and made. It's not up to the world to pamper me and provide easier gaming entertainment. Me wanting easier wins shouldn't ever force a game or community to limit their potential.

On the flip side, I've also been a part of random PUGs that really come together and just "mesh" and we dominated vs premades. And the high you get from matches like that is hard to beat.

As i see such ridiculous opinions about pampering soloists posted over and over and over all i can do is shake my head and think of the old adage, "if you can't beat'em, join'em".

If groups are so OP... AND you want to maximize your enjoyment of MWO by fostering a winning environment/record... why wouldn't you just join a group?

Edited by Mott, 09 June 2014 - 08:00 AM.

[Sprouticus]

Mott, on 09 June 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

I don't understand the QQs about groups vs solos.

If you want to play a stompy robot game solo, there are dozens of other options out there. Go play them.

If you want to play MWO, a game that bills itself as a strategic, team-based game, then stop bashing teams or team play.

I've PUG'd solo for the first 5 months of my 6 months of play. I get that it's harder, and that when your random PUG faces a coordinated team you have a good chance of being rolled. But guess what? I'm a big boy and that's a decision i analyzed and made. It's not up to the world to pamper me and provide easier gaming entertainment. Me wanting easier wins shouldn't ever force a game or community to limit their potential.

On the flip side, I've also been a part of random PUGs that really come together and just "mesh" and we dominated vs premades. And the high you get from matches like that is hard to beat.

As i see such ridiculous opinions about pampering soloists posted over and over and over all i can do is shake my head and think of the old adage, "if you can't beat'em, join'em".

If groups are so OP... AND you want to maximize your enjoyment of MWO by fostering a winning environment/record... why wouldn't you just join a group?

I agree 100%, but to play devil's advocate for a sec I do think it is reasonable for PGI to try to minimize the impact of large premades.

As someone who was around in the days of 8 mans pug stomping all the time I can understand the basic concern. Even a well coordinated pug has a hard time against a 12 man on voice comms. The rate of information transfer is just a lot higher than typing. It is easy to say 'join a group', but it would be better for the community as a whole to integrate both groups because it is a far more flexible option.

There are solutions that allow for larger groups without making the game extraordinarily difficult for solo players. Hopefully PGI is able to implement just such a solution.

Priorities for MM IMO are:
3/3/3/3 (because PGI like 3/3/3/3, not because I do)
Elo average matching
Group size matching
tonnage matching (BV would be better, but whatever)

I would also love some kind of
Elo +/- based upon group size and loadout (ECM/meta weapons/group membership/etc)
Some kind of mechanic for role matching (select a role when you ready up....man that would be awesome...yes it is a fantasy, but Im allowed to dream, right?)

edit:

Oh, and a Elo system which holds info for variants. If you do not have enough drops in a particular variant (say 50) it check total drops in that chassis. If you do not have enough in the chassis, it then uses weight class.

Edited by Sprouticus, 09 June 2014 - 08:54 AM.

[Screech]

Mott, on 09 June 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

I don't understand the QQs about groups vs solos.

If you want to play a stompy robot game solo, there are dozens of other options out there. Go play them.

If you want to play MWO, a game that bills itself as a strategic, team-based game, then stop bashing teams or team play.

I've PUG'd solo for the first 5 months of my 6 months of play. I get that it's harder, and that when your random PUG faces a coordinated team you have a good chance of being rolled. But guess what? I'm a big boy and that's a decision i analyzed and made. It's not up to the world to pamper me and provide easier gaming entertainment. Me wanting easier wins shouldn't ever force a game or community to limit their potential.

On the flip side, I've also been a part of random PUGs that really come together and just "mesh" and we dominated vs premades. And the high you get from matches like that is hard to beat.

As i see such ridiculous opinions about pampering soloists posted over and over and over all i can do is shake my head and think of the old adage, "if you can't beat'em, join'em".

If groups are so OP... AND you want to maximize your enjoyment of MWO by fostering a winning environment/record... why wouldn't you just join a group?

To some it is not an issue of which side of the stomp they are on.

[Bobzilla]

Kaldor, on 09 June 2014 - 06:31 AM, said:

What majority? The solo queue? Yes, they would be the majority right now, due to the bad decision making at PGI. At one point in time, groups were the majority. Groups, and groups of the same faction, will be needed in CW. Otherwise how will you determine the winner/loser for factions?

You don't need groups for CW at all. The MM will be just like the current PUG, but with like factions on one side. You are confused about group and faction. Yes, PGI's bad decisions have brought down group numbers, but I'm guessing overall player numbers as well.

[Gerhardt Jorgensson]

I am hoping the five member groups reflect Clan Star formations in Community Warfare.

[cSand]

Mott, on 09 June 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

I don't understand the QQs about groups vs solos.

If you want to play a stompy robot game solo, there are dozens of other options out there. Go play them.

If you want to play MWO, a game that bills itself as a strategic, team-based game, then stop bashing teams or team play.

I've PUG'd solo for the first 5 months of my 6 months of play. I get that it's harder, and that when your random PUG faces a coordinated team you have a good chance of being rolled. But guess what? I'm a big boy and that's a decision i analyzed and made. It's not up to the world to pamper me and provide easier gaming entertainment. Me wanting easier wins shouldn't ever force a game or community to limit their potential.

On the flip side, I've also been a part of random PUGs that really come together and just "mesh" and we dominated vs premades. And the high you get from matches like that is hard to beat.

As i see such ridiculous opinions about pampering soloists posted over and over and over all i can do is shake my head and think of the old adage, "if you can't beat'em, join'em".

If groups are so OP... AND you want to maximize your enjoyment of MWO by fostering a winning environment/record... why wouldn't you just join a group?

I remember this one PUG match I was in, and on the other team these guys were gloating about how they sync dropped with a group of 8, and how we should get ready to pwned etc etc... on top of that, we were down by 2 (11 players with 1 disco). 10 vs 12 w/ an 8 man premade.

Our PUG team fought hard in the city part of Frozen City, and beat them down with 4 of our guys remaining. Definitely not the norm, but oh man - the celebrating and sh*t talking we did during the final moments and in the postgame screen was worth every cent I've payed on this game

[Mott]

cSand, on 09 June 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

Definitely not the norm, but oh man - the celebrating and sh*t talking we did during the final moments and in the postgame screen was worth every cent I've payed on this game

Exactly! And that's what these QQers want to rob us of! lol

There are definitely evil (see: GOOD) premades out there that'll **** your PUG team while they laugh and make you seriously consider rage-quit-uninstall.

But there are far more premades out there that are simply a few grouped players who like to joke around together while they run'n'gun. And PUGs are ROUTINELY rolling these groups.

[cSand]

Mott, on 09 June 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Exactly! And that's what these QQers want to rob us of! lol

There are definitely evil (see: GOOD) premades out there that'll **** your PUG team while they laugh and make you seriously consider rage-quit-uninstall.

But there are far more premades out there that are simply a few grouped players who like to joke around together while they run'n'gun. And PUGs are ROUTINELY rolling these groups.

I agree 100%

[Kaldor]

Bobzilla, on 09 June 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

You don't need groups for CW at all. The MM will be just like the current PUG, but with like factions on one side. You are confused about group and faction. Yes, PGI's bad decisions have brought down group numbers, but I'm guessing overall player numbers as well.

How would you not need groups? Factions, and groups such as Units, which are by nature group players, are the foundation of CW.

If CW turns into nothing but the SOS we have been running for the last 2 years, and they just look at how many faction members won for a certain time period in random drops, then the until system will be fail, and the game will fail with it.

If they even halfass implement something like MPBT where the players have some level of control, they could potentially have a huge success.

Its all in the implementation. The more they engage the community, and as an extension of that units and the group play that goes along with them, the more successful CW will be.

[Bobzilla]

Kaldor, on 09 June 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

How would you not need groups? Factions, and groups such as Units, which are by nature group players, are the foundation of CW.

If CW turns into nothing but the SOS we have been running for the last 2 years, and they just look at how many faction members won for a certain time period in random drops, then the until system will be fail, and the game will fail with it.

If they even halfass implement something like MPBT where the players have some level of control, they could potentially have a huge success.

Its all in the implementation. The more they engage the community, and as an extension of that units and the group play that goes along with them, the more successful CW will be.

Hey I completly agree, but that is what CW is going to be, a pug match that effects something other than the single match, that's it. By externalizing every single social aspect, they can't do anything signifigant regarding CW and social communities. You pick a logo, you pick the CW que, you pug with people who have the same logo. That's the depth players will be involved in CW.

Maybe they will take some suggestions to solve the problem they've gotten themselves into with lack of social design, but with the introduction of private matches, and them stating it as their great solution to cater to social communites, I highly doubt it.

[Joseph Mallan]

Bobzilla, on 09 June 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

Hey I completly agree, but that is what CW is going to be, a pug match that effects something other than the single match, that's it. By externalizing every single social aspect, they can't do anything signifigant regarding CW and social communities. You pick a logo, you pick the CW que, you pug with people who have the same logo. That's the depth players will be involved in CW.

Maybe they will take some suggestions to solve the problem they've gotten themselves into with lack of social design, but with the introduction of private matches, and them stating it as their great solution to cater to social communites, I highly doubt it.

That is a extremely sad point of view Zilla!

[WarHippy]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 June 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

That is a extremely sad point of view Zilla!

Sadly, he is probably right, but I will keep my fingers crossed that it isn't as bland as he describes.

[SirLANsalot]

Kilo 40, on 08 June 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

and by "twitter user" you mean "group of trolls"

that about sums up anything on twitter....bunch of twits really

[Mott]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 June 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

That is a extremely sad point of view Zilla!

[Silentium]

I drop solo a lot, and the prospect of this does not bother me at all; I mean, it isn't like I don't already lose all the time anyway, so no difference really

[Innocent]

Artgathan, on 09 June 2014 - 05:58 AM, said:

People seem to forget that the MM "stacks" matches for and against you - if you win a match stacked "against" you, your Elo goes up. If you lose a match stacked against you, your Elo doesn't change. The opposite happens for matches stacked "for" you.

One could then push this a step further and just realize that bumping into a large pre-made is just destiny as far as the MM is concerned - it's just that in the case of facing a pre-made it's way more obvious that this is the match the MM has decided to stack against you.

The problem is the matchmaker stacking against you repeatedly.

The current matchmaker is setup to stack one team with an advantage over the other team. This is caused by the fact that it creates 1x12 man team then tries to find 12 more to match against them. If the matchmaker can't find 12 more in the correct elo range it widens its search. If the first 12 are high elo and the search is widened that means the opposing team will be low elo. If the first team is low elo and it can't find another 12 it then fills the opposite team with high elo. This is why so few matches are close.

I am fine with 5+ groups as long as they are matched against a group +/- 1 of them. So a 7 person group would be matched against a group from 6 to 8. If they can get the 4x3 thing working or as i would prefer minimum of 2 per class with a maximum of 4 and equal weights it would be better than what we have now. Of course almost anything would be better than what we have now.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

As always implementation is the key.

But good to acknowledge it.

[Solahma]

Excerpt from NGNG #113 Russ said:

"There's also some other kinda much bigger stretch goals that, um, i'll just tease you a little bit and say they are things that people have been asking quite extensively for a while now. That we are in plans to do, we have a design we like and we're testing it and we feel pretty confident about it, but i'm going to hold off to make sure... not going to be June 17.... not outside the question it will be the one after that."

Might be 5+ groups, might be something else...