394 replies to this topic

[TKSax]

Rebas Kradd, on 23 June 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

I noticed you haven't addressed those who think it's a bad idea.

He doesn't care anymore.

[Cimarb]

Roadbeer, on 23 June 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Y'all just remember who to thank for the return of large groups...

If I returned, don't think he wouldn't take them away... sooo....

Enjoy, and you're welcome.

Me thinks ye may feel a tad too highly of yourself. It was a jab at you, but a joke nonetheless.

[Jody Von Jedi]

Pygar, on 23 June 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

And when the MM can't find a 2 man...which will be often, because who just plays a two man anyways...it's likely going to fill in with solos.

Personally, if I am playing solo I would much rather drop knowing I can play with a team as opposed to a team full of "Lone Wolf" pilots.

I play in 2 man groups more often than 3 or 4. The MM will not fill the 2 man spot in the group Que with solo players. Go back and read the OP.

[AlmightyAeng]

Roadbeer, on 23 June 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

If I returned, don't think he wouldn't take them away... sooo....

Enjoy, and you're welcome.

I has a sad.

[WarHippy]

CapperDeluxe, on 23 June 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

It sounds like it may be hard to match certain odd numbered groups of pilots. Since you can't fill in 1's, then how are you going to fit a match made with a group of 9 with a group of 2? You can't? Will they just have to wait until a group of 3 players happens to launch?

Thinking about this I can only imagine the pain people will suffer waiting for a match. In the example you have mentioned not only will that group of 9 have to wait for a group of 3 to launch, but that group of 3 will need to be in mechs that properly fill out the remaining spots for the 3x3x3x3 setup. I can't imagine this queue being very fast with all of these restriction placed on it even if the 3x3x3x3 has some flexibility added to it. A group of 3 that drops in 3 assaults is never going to fill out those last 3 spots for a 9 man if that 9 man already picked a couple assaults for their lineup.

[Captain Pabst]

Thumbs up!

[Rebas Kradd]

TKSax, on 23 June 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

He doesn't care anymore.

I would hope he does. Why should I take his opinion seriously otherwise?

[MuonNeutrino]

Ghost Badger, on 23 June 2014 - 12:35 PM, said:

There are PLENTY of solos, pair, 3-mans and 4-mans dropping "poptarts and unpleasant meta" RIGHT NOW. Just because you're thrown into games with a variety of group sizes it does NOT mean you're going to see an increase in meta.

So, if you're enjoying "playing casually" now, there's no reason you won't with the new MM.

And if you aren't enjoying it now, why the HELL are you even playing?

What I was getting at with that quote is not that meta is confined ONLY to groups, but that groups have a higher chance of being meta than solo players do. In a game where each side has a 3-man and 9 solo players, the total number of meta mechs is highly likely to be a lot lower than a game where both sides are made entirely out of 3-4-5-6-etc man groups. I do not enjoy playing in games where meta is all over the place, but right now that is not usually the case. If I am playing with my buddy and half of our games end up in the groups queue, that is not likely to remain true.

[Roadbeer]

Rebas Kradd, on 23 June 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

I noticed you haven't addressed those who think it's a bad idea.

I didn't care about them then, what makes you think that position would change?

I'm not PGI you know.

[P4riah1]

Ghost Badger, on 23 June 2014 - 12:35 PM, said:

There are PLENTY of solos, pair, 3-mans and 4-mans dropping "poptarts and unpleasant meta" RIGHT NOW. Just because you're thrown into games with a variety of group sizes it does NOT mean you're going to see an increase in meta.

So, if you're enjoying "playing casually" now, there's no reason you won't with the new MM.

And if you aren't enjoying it now, why the HELL are you even playing?

The fact that solo, 2, 3, and 4mans run meta does not mean that groups don't have disproportionate amounts of it. Both are true. The larger the groups, then more likely they are to be a organized or more serious team, and they all run meta.

There's no arguing that group games are dominated by the competitive playstyle. This expanded group queue will see the competitive 4mans that currently drop in the solo queue moving over to the group queue in 5-12 man teams constantly. And If any of us casuals want to play with even one other person, we'll be forced to drop with them. The amount of meta I will be unwillingly exposed to is guaranteed to increase, probably dramatically.

[AlmightyAeng]

MuonNeutrino, on 23 June 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

What I was getting at with that quote is not that meta is confined ONLY to groups, but that groups have a higher chance of being meta than solo players do. In a game where each side has a 3-man and 9 solo players, the total number of meta mechs is highly likely to be a lot lower than a game where both sides are made entirely out of 3-4-5-6-etc man groups. I do not enjoy playing in games where meta is all over the place, but right now that is not usually the case. If I am playing with my buddy and half of our games end up in the groups queue, that is not likely to remain true.

No, I understood you the first time. And my question is, why? Because more solos are new players and are thus "bads" that don't min/max?

Or is it because only true BT fans run sub-optimal builds, and don't do it in large groups? (Hint, yeah they do).

I understood what you're saying...I'm just saying that you have no evidence to support it and I think you're wrong.

P4riah1, on 23 June 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

The fact that solo, 2, 3, and 4mans run meta does not mean that groups don't have disproportionate amounts of it. Both are true. The larger the groups, then more likely they are to be a organized or more serious team, and they all run meta.

So all the 2-4 mans that don't run Meta now, when thrust into the big bad group queue are suddenly going to have a religious experience and convert to the almighty poptart?

I don't think we're gonna agree on this until we actually let the damned this replicate on the servers, give it a few weeks and see what it's actually like. If I'm wrong THEN, I'll capitulate.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 23 June 2014 - 12:43 PM.

[Ehjay_52]

I've read 4 pages of comments so far.

Do some of you really believe that every time you click "Launch" your going to drop against people you want to drop against???

This is war... take your losses, lick you wounds, man up.
Launch again... it's not like you will ALWAY drop against a meta 12-man group. Sheesh.

These changes are great. Can't wait for the test to see how it all hashes out.

[Felio]

Ghost Badger, on 23 June 2014 - 12:28 PM, said:

So you want penalties for heavy and assault jumpsnipers...but not jumpbrawlers?

Doesn't exactly seem fair...and I prefer brawling.

What you call jump brawling, I call piloting a light or fast medium.

The SDR-5V in particular is going to get hosed. Jumping is all it has.

If JJ become just for transportation, not for combat, we'll lose yet another element to the "thinking man's shooter", and JJ-heavy builds (like my 7 JJ Griffin) will disappear. It may not be 1 JJ, but people will settle on whatever the new minimum is.

[AlmightyAeng]

Felio, on 23 June 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:

What you call jump brawling, I call piloting a light or fast medium.

The SDR-5V in particular is going to get hosed. Jumping is all it has.

If JJ become just for transportation, not for combat, we'll lose yet another element to the "thinking man's shooter", and JJ-heavy builds (like my 7 JJ Griffin) will disappear. It may not be 1 JJ, but people will settle on whatever the new minimum is.

Did you miss the part where it's scalar? Ie...weight-based? Mediums, and ESPECIALLY lights, are going to be barely effected.

There's a reason why I wrote "heavy and assault" in the post you quoted me on.

Better yet, read the Command Post.

Quote

As the name implies this is scalar based on weight class and tonnage, so light 'mechs won’t notice much of a difference but the Heavies and of course Assault' mechs will notice a significant change.

Your little metal arthropod is gonna be fine.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 23 June 2014 - 12:47 PM.

[P4riah1]

Jman5, on 23 June 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Why do people assume that they are going to be placed against high-Elo competitive teams with their casual group? You will be sorted based on your premade's average Elo. If it's rocky at first that is likely because your Elo was artificially inflated by creaming lone wolves with your own premade. However, it will even out as you win/lose matches.

I get the sneaking suspicion when I read about people who want to match against other casuals that is code for: "I don't want to face other premades at my skill level. I want to face below average lone wolves so that I can feel like a winner." If your Elo is at casual level you will be matched against other casual premades. That is the whole point of having an Elo system in place; To match you against people around your skill.

ELO is not everything. And having skill doesn't automatically mean you have the mindset of a competitive player. Me and my brother run in a pair all the time, and we don't PUGstomp or dominate anything. A lone pair just doesn't do that. But simply because we are fairly decent at video games, our ELO has crept fairly high over thousands of games. We get matched against the comp players constantly despite not being nearly as good as they are, because the ELO pool is too small.

I dont care about ELO, kill death ratio, even winning matches. I just want to have fun. Playing contantly against the competitive players is not fun. My options for avoiding them are shrinking.

[MuonNeutrino]

Jman5, on 23 June 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Why do people assume that they are going to be placed against high-Elo competitive teams with their casual group? You will be sorted based on your premade's average Elo. If it's rocky at first that is likely because your Elo was artificially inflated by creaming lone wolves with your own premade. However, it will even out as you win/lose matches.

This will be true for some people, but not all. What about people like me and my buddy? Both of us play mostly solo or with each other (i.e. not a 'premade') and have a casual mindset rather than a competitive one, but have high elo anyway simply because we're OK at the game. Neither of us is equal to the top competitive players, but our elo is high enough that we drop into games with them all the time. What are we supposed to do, never play with each other? Because I can guarantee you that if our pair ends up in the groups queue, at our elo we're going to be matched up with a lot of top competitive players in metabuilds. We're OK, but we're not *that* good. And more to the point, neither us nor them want us there, because we're *not* competitive players. We find fun in playing weird mechs and doing silly things. The competitive players don't want our sub-optimal mechs in their games, and we don't want their meta mechs in ours. Are we simply no longer allowed to play grouped just because our elo happens to approach that of the competitive players?

Edited by MuonNeutrino, 23 June 2014 - 12:49 PM.

[Powder Puff Pew Pew]

Ive been using nothing but Balistics and lazers and I just recently started using the Computers but I havnt noticed much differance in accuracy or porformance at all. The computer details have no indications of % of how accurate the values increase using versions I-VII. What does it do? The explination for the computers should be a bit more detailed on value base for the general player. I'm still confused as to their overall role even though it states (improves balistics and energy weps) What does it improve? Damage or accuracy? I would really like to know seeing as how they take up an intire Torso space if you use the VII. Thats alot of ammo or heat sink space to take up for something I know nothing about.

[Cimarb]

P4riah1, on 23 June 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

And If any of us casuals want to play with even one other person, we'll be forced to drop with them. The amount of meta I will be unwillingly exposed to is guaranteed to increase, probably dramatically.

2-4 man groups will be put in both queues. That doesn't mean you will always play in the group queue. It will depend on the amount of people queuing in each queue close to your own Elo.

[ShadowWolf Kell]

P4riah1, on 23 June 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

I dont care about ELO, kill death ratio, even winning matches. I just want to have fun. Playing contantly against the competitive players is not fun. My options for avoiding them are shrinking.

That is how you learn from your mistakes and improve, however.

[WarHippy]

Roadbeer, on 23 June 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

Y'all just remember who to thank for the return of large groups...



If I returned, don't think he wouldn't take them away... sooo....

Enjoy, and you're welcome.

Russ's attitude really pisses me off with things like this. The fact that he and the devs have pushed players like you away is really depressing, and the way they communicate and interact with the community in such an unprofessional manner is a cancer that needs to be removed. Why he had to act in that manner when all he had to do was put forth a little effort in not alienating groups so much, and players like yourself wouldn't have been so frustrated.