53 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 24 June 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

[color=#00ffff]Please let us know what you think of the Matchmaker changes added in this test.[/color]

Please try to specify your experiences under each of the applicable contexts.

• Solo Queue (Solo)
  
• Solo Queue (2-4 person)
  
• Group Queue (2-4 person)
  
• Group Queue (5-10 person)
  
• Group Queue (12 person)

Solo Queue: First off, it's silly to call it a "Solo" queue when you allow groups in it. Second, even with only one group per team, that's enough to completely mess up the Solo queue's Elo matching. The game needs a dedicated Solo ONLY queue for players that DO NOT WANT TO PLAY WITH/OR AGAINST GROUPS. This is a long over-due feature that your casual players desperately want...and have been begging you for. Allow players to select in their preferences if they ONLY want solo matches.

Groups (2-11) + Solo Queue: Just like we have now, but no restriction on the number of groups per team. Try to balance group sizes and number of groups on a 1:1 basis (e.g. if one team has a 5-man premade, then other team will as well. If one team has three groups of 3 players then the other team will too, etc.). Any empty slots are filled in with players that have not opted to play in the Solo Only queue. Give Solo players a C-bill bonus (for "Hazard Pay") each time they launch into a match with groups.

Groups (12): Just like we have now. 12-man premades only, no solo players.

Summary
Ultimately, casual solo players need to have the best chances to get matched with equally skilled players, so that there's more granularity with matchmaking. This will keep them from rage-quitting and never coming back.

Groups make up for disparities in skill with teamwork. They have an advantage over solo players, regardless if they use that advantage or not. It's not fair to force solo players to play with or against groups of any size.

[DeathlyEyes]

One last thing. This game needs to stop using high ELO players to balance terrible players. We don't count for 8 players. It doesn't work that way and it doesn't make for a fun game. It makes it feel like work.

[Deathlike]

I had strictly played in 2-4 man premades, since there wasn't enough people on the PTS to group up with and I didn't really want to play solo.

I started playing @ 8-ish until the end of the PTS, so waiting time seemed OK. I don't know when the new MM stuff was disabled, so it's hard to tell much from the results.

I do have 3 suggestions for Karl to tackle or maybe addressing them somehow.

1) Add an opt-in option for solo players to join the big queue (default is off, for the sake of the new player). It should "hopefully" make 8-10 (possibly 11 man premades, if you're willing to add them) easier to create because it increases the pool in which you are looking from. Matching up solo players in the currently designed 2-4 small premade + rest of solo players "queue" is much easier... but placing them in much needed 8-11 mans is IMPORTANT to reducing the wait time necessary. It's a win-win for both sides that desire such a large group. Big group queue should max out @ 2-3 solo PUGs IMO.

2) Add an opt-out option for small premades that DO NOT WISH to play in the big group queue (I don't know what the default should be, but I guess it should not be enabled by default - although, there's some consideration required for the new player I suppose to have it enabled...). Sometimes you don't want those players to mess around with the bigger groups/teams that are playing much more serious, and thus ruining their experience. While this MAY restrict the big group queue a bit, I don't think the number of casual players outweigh the number of players that want to play with bigger and better teams and possibly get better. It would be good for both sides.

3) Part of the MM's basic "problem" with big groups is how the large team is constructed. If the MM rules were different for 5-10 (or 11) man teams, it would work better. For instance, would it not make sense for those players to construct a team that is 2/1/1/1 in some combination for a 5-man premade? Basically, for every 4 players (though you start @ 5), you cap the max # for each weight class to be 1. So 5 to 8 man premades have a cap of 2 of each class, and 9 to 10 (11) man premades have a cap of 3 of each class. This way the MM does not have to try to find a "perfect" 2, 3, or 4-man match as difficult to a degree... because you have "room" for various combinations because of the "options" and opted-in solos filling in the rank.

I mean, once a premade fills up 3 of a specific weight class, the MM would need to do "more work" to find players in a different weight class. With lights/mediums becoming rather scarce at times, you may want "dedicated" or "brave" solo Light players to fill the ranks...

So, I hope you seriously consider what I have to say and feel free to poke holes in the logic there.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 June 2014 - 10:53 PM.

[East Indy]

Deathlike, on 24 June 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

2) Add an opt-out option for small premades that DO NOT WISH to play in the big group queue (I don't know what the default should be, but I guess it should not be enabled by default - although, there's some consideration required for the new player I suppose to have it enabled...). Sometimes you don't want those players to mess around with the bigger groups/teams that are playing much more serious, and thus ruining their experience. While this MAY restrict the big group queue a bit, I don't think the number of casual players outweigh the number of players that want to play with bigger and better teams and possibly get better. It would be good for both sides.

With the dust settling after all these announcements so I can focus on the details, I'm growing a little concerned about this one.

Groups of 2 and 3 are much more likely to be playing with friends than consciously playing as a team — an intention that reverses sharply at 4, 5 and beyond. And, as you say, a two-man "premade" could literally be one guy and the buddy he's trying to introduce to the game.

It's not a good situation for players to tell each other, "Hey, man: I'm here for a relaxing night, so I'm sticking to the solo queue."

[Karl Marlow]

On the flip side. Allow me to opt into the group queue when playing solo. I would much rather be playing with people who know what they are doing than a bunch of randoms.

[Screech]

Deathlike, on 24 June 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

2) Add an opt-out option for small premades that DO NOT WISH to play in the big group queue (I don't know what the default should be, but I guess it should not be enabled by default - although, there's some consideration required for the new player I suppose to have it enabled...). Sometimes you don't want those players to mess around with the bigger groups/teams that are playing much more serious, and thus ruining their experience. While this MAY restrict the big group queue a bit, I don't think the number of casual players outweigh the number of players that want to play with bigger and better teams and possibly get better. It would be good for both sides.

Seems like a really bad idea. I see no reason to make any accommodations for groups that do not want to play against other groups. Worst aspect of the game, less there is of it the better. I don't want to play against people who only want to play when the cards are stacked in their favor, it is no fun no matter the results.

[Revorn]

Pugs only vs Pugs only Que.

[ImperialKnight]

SLDF DeathlyEyes, on 24 June 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

One last thing. This game needs to stop using high ELO players to balance terrible players. We don't count for 8 players. It doesn't work that way and it doesn't make for a fun game. It makes it feel like work.

^this

[Butane9000]

I didn't do any solo drops during the test.

Again 5-10 man groups had a decreasing wait time. First was 10 mins, second was 5, third was 3ish and then averaged to 1-2 minutes tops.

12 man groups took much longer. More often then note we were thrown in with cobbled twelve man teams from the group que. This usually led to stomps by us. I feel like this might bring back a relic of the past (from closed beta).

3/3/3/3 worked out pretty well from what I could tell.

Really with Karl saying the PTS had low population numbers means we'll really see the results and test on Tuesday.

[Sanctus Maleficus]

Solo queue: Wait times were 4-5 minutes even when taking the 'recommended' weight class. No 4X3 or so it seemed as there were.

2-4 queue: Wait times were 5-10 minutes. Didn't seem that 4X3 was working there either.

5-10 queue: Wasn't able to get a large enough group for this as the time window was too early for some of my regular people to get on and then it seemed the population dwindled after about 2 hrs anyways.

It's hard to tell if the matchmaker really worked because in a lot of matches people were testing other features and didn't play the way they normally would.

More details on this iteration of 4X3 might provide some context for what I saw.

[Sky Hawk]

I played just solo, but there was still more then 1 lights, so too much for me. Had both very short, and longer (3-5 min) searching times.. Ahmm... OK, I forgott the other things,... was a very long night...

[Deathlike]

Screech, on 25 June 2014 - 05:24 AM, said:

Seems like a really bad idea. I see no reason to make any accommodations for groups that do not want to play against other groups. Worst aspect of the game, less there is of it the better. I don't want to play against people who only want to play when the cards are stacked in their favor, it is no fun no matter the results.

Well, that's been suggested to me before... and I don't care for it personally. Options are good.

However, people who keep complaining about imbalances with premades never seem to understand... you still have the opportunity to BENEFIT from being the 2-man in a team that has a 10-man... even if the opfor doesn't have a 10-man due to a low # of 10-mans in the queue. People are thinking more often "I'm gonna get screwed" instead of "it can work BOTH for AND against me".

It's just strange to think the motto for this game is "teamwork is OP" and people fearing MORE teamwork.

[Almeras]

SLDF DeathlyEyes, on 24 June 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

One last thing. This game needs to stop using high ELO players to balance terrible players. We don't count for 8 players. It doesn't work that way and it doesn't make for a fun game. It makes it feel like work.

This ^^

Its very hard (read not enjoyable) to keep 8 inexperienced players alive vs a team of more averaged experience players compounded by the weight choices of the 4man go light kiss your game good bye.

The match maker should pick average ELO range for each team (everyone around Xnumber), and should weight balance the premades on both sides.

This is currently what the MM will think is fair when clearly is not

Team one
Alpha (the high elo 4man, will deal for most of the teams fighting power)
Light ELO 100
Light ELO 100
Light ELO 100
Medium ELO 100
ratio (elo:tons) 1:2.5
Bravo (the mix)
Heavy ELO75
Assault ELO50
Medium ELO80
Heavy ELO75
ratio (elo:tons) 1:1.2
Charlie (normally the newer players thrown into the sharktank)
Assault ELO20
Assault ELO50
Heavy ELO20
Medium ELO75
ratio (elo:tons) 1:0.5

Team Two
Alpha (the high elo Heavy 4man, counts for most of the teams fighting power)
Assault ELO100
Assault ELO100
Assault ELO100
Heavy ELO100
ratio (elo:tons) 1:1.2
Bravo (the mix)
Heavy ELO75
Light ELO50
Medium ELO80
Medium ELO75
ratio (elo:tons) 1:1.2
Charlie (normally the newer players thrown into the sharktank)
Medium ELO20
Light ELO50
Heavy ELO20
Medium ELO75
ratio (elo:tons) 1:0.75

Edited by Almeras, 26 June 2014 - 02:06 AM.