402 replies to this topic

[Grendel408]

I can easily state from my experience with the new Match Maker last night, running between 10-12 players and slowly down to 7 online around 1am PST... we were having a BLAST! Win or lose, we were fighting a new style of gameplay. A lot more restraint and strategy was being used on both sides... whether we were against a 12man or multi-grouped team, the enemy teams performed as well as I would expect a full 12man group to act. VOIP would shut a lot of folks up about this "unfairness" with the new Match Maker... but it's still work in progress for the Devs. BSI has around 85 Members, not all of us active daily, but they joined my unit because this game requires teamwork, and Pugging just sucks... period. If SOLO players want to experience real fun and enjoyment in this, they need to find a group of their liking and join up to attend matches with groups of players. Until then... PUGs will continue to be angry, scared, disappointed, etc. at PGI and Units who take advantage of what the game allows, being in a group playing together. So... as others have so bluntly stated... DEAL WITH IT. Join up with a unit (PLENTY OF THEM TO GO AROUND BTW!)... or be a PUG and man-up.

[Opus]

No fault of Night scorn, good group, but if You DEVS want proof 12 mans are dropping in the wrong class you claim 4x3 selects out; we are 3 separate 4 man groups, placed against Nights Scorn.,.,., this is the 3rd time in 2 days

Come on PGI pull you head out....

the only other answer for this is > if 4x3 isn't working > your populations are way lower then we thought, forcing 4x3 to create these crude matches

Edited by Opus, 03 July 2014 - 06:32 PM.

[Leigus]

So this brings up the very good point of allowing groups of 2-4 to select preference of being in the "Solo Queue" or the "Group Queue."

While you're at it, why not allow solo players to be able to opt-in to the Group Queue (there ARE players who would do this to get shorter search times, I actually polled my server about this). That way, you could allow groups of 11 as well... Win-win

[Opus]

Leigus, on 03 July 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

So this brings up the very good point of allowing groups of 2-4 to select preference of being in the "Solo Queue" or the "Group Queue."

While you're at it, why not allow solo players to be able to opt-in to the Group Queue (there ARE players who would do this to get shorter search times, I actually polled my server about this). That way, you could allow groups of 11 as well... Win-win

great idea

if you opted in that would be great, you know what your getting into and are willing to do so

But to select to be in Solo, or the 2-4 category, and get rolled by a 12 man randomly?

[Commissar Aku]

How hard would it really be to just put in a competitive lobby and an arcade lobby, in the competitive lobby groups wanting to play serious games can play serious games and arcade for those who don't. The competitive lobby would have voice comms, map choice, game mode choice, and big group play, the arcade would have no voice comms and a max of one group per team. I know it would be hard and the competitive server might have less people on it but then no one can complain about unfair, if you drop in it you know what you are getting into. Arcade you have no choices in game mode or map. Does that not solve all issues everyone has? Without changing the game in any real way?

[Serapth]

Leigus, on 03 July 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

So this brings up the very good point of allowing groups of 2-4 to select preference of being in the "Solo Queue" or the "Group Queue."

While you're at it, why not allow solo players to be able to opt-in to the Group Queue (there ARE players who would do this to get shorter search times, I actually polled my server about this). That way, you could allow groups of 11 as well... Win-win

Yeah, thats brilliant.

You could implement it with a simple button choice:

What kind of match would you like to play?

[Id like to stomp]. [Id like to be stomped].

That would solve everything!!!


You caught the sarcasm, right?

Once again as a life time PUG player I am laughing my arse off. PUGs asked for a PUG only queue since day 1 of closed beta and of course it never happened.

Complaining about the unfairness of being stomped by the big fish in a small pond and asking to solve it by being moved to a different pond where you are the big fish, thats just stupid. I do agree about PUGs looking for a challenge being able to opt in to the premade queue, or perhaps at least PUGs of a minimum ELO threshold.

Edited by Serapth, 03 July 2014 - 08:53 PM.

[iDame]

I can see both sides have been covered fairly extensively, so I just want to make it clear I'm giving feedback to add my voice, not to argue with players.

I would class myself as casual/new & I like playing when I am in a team with a friend or two - I am also in Australia. From this perspective:

- When I am online there is usually a limited pool, and I will often run into individuals in PUGs consistently even when trying to vary drop times. This makes me believe that I could face the same 12 man team multiple times in one night. Further I see some players consistently across multiple nights just by coincidence.
- I have tried to get friends into this game, and while it is enjoyable for them, it is a lot to take in all at once (all of the controls) so if we were up against a 12 man team while they were exploring the game, I feel this might discourage them from playing in the future.
- I like playing with one or two close friends in a team, and I feel that we win and lose enough games in PUGs to make MWO fun, interesting, and challenging (it would not be enjoyable if every game was a rofl stomp, either on the winning or the losing side).

I am cautiously optimistic that the change won't be as bad as everyone worries, however, I do wonder if following it on the heels of the clan release makes it more difficult to acclimatise to than it would have been otherwise? I am sure that many of the 12 man teams have forked out for the biggest & baddest clan mechs and so have that advantage in addition.

[reaverOfCheesecake]

Right... their is definatly something wrong with the match maker... Since the patch, when i solo in, I am almost always on a losing team who gets wiped out 2-4 to 12. Before anyone suggests that i should up my game, i will state now that i am a very good pilot (nowhere near the best but i do consider myself very good due to recent survivability, kills and damage output stats), so please dont suggest that i adapt and overcome. The clan/is mech balance is fine so that isn't an issue. The problem is that i end up usually being between the 9th-12th person to die, meaning that i die due to being swamped by 5-7 enemy mechs. the rest of my team die so quickly that the match is over within 5 minutes. I can only suggest that the enemy team is so organised that they bulldose the edge of the battle line and charge right on through. By the time the rest of us solo pugs realise whats going on and group together to form a defense, it's too late. I am certain that i have been dropped into a group list.

BTW, i have been trounced approximately 18 matches to 2 so far. Although i accept that sometimes their will be people who can organise a good pug run and i will inevitably be on the receiving end of it, these stats are unacceptable.

[Redshift2k5]

Yes, you were in a group of 2. A group. In the group queue. How else is a group of 10 going to find a match?

Welcome to the new normal. Communicate with your team. (which you should have been doing all along)

Edited by Redshift2k5, 04 July 2014 - 04:33 AM.

[Star Col Nicolai Malthus]

Opus, on 03 July 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

No fault of Night scorn, good group, but if You DEVS want proof 12 mans are dropping in the wrong class you claim 4x3 selects out; we are 3 separate 4 man groups, placed against Nights Scorn.,.,., this is the 3rd time in 2 days

Come on PGI pull you head out....

the only other answer for this is > if 4x3 isn't working > your populations are way lower then we thought, forcing 4x3 to create these crude matches

there's 3 assaults, 3 Heavies, 3 mediums and 3 lights on each team. This is clearly 4x3 working. Any groups of 4 or less, are currently shuffled into both the solo AND group queue... the group Queue is 2-10 and 12's. 12's are not a seperate queue.

[warner2]

SurlyMohawk, on 04 July 2014 - 04:50 AM, said:

there's 3 assaults, 3 Heavies, 3 mediums and 3 lights on each team. This is clearly 4x3 working. Any groups of 4 or less, are currently shuffled into both the solo AND group queue... the group Queue is 2-10 and 12's. 12's are not a seperate queue.

I was confused too. The Kurita 12 man appear to have 3/3/3/3.

[Opus]

warner2, on 04 July 2014 - 04:57 AM, said:

I was confused too. The Kurita 12 man appear to have 3/3/3/3.

SurlyMohawk, on 04 July 2014 - 04:50 AM, said:

there's 3 assaults, 3 Heavies, 3 mediums and 3 lights on each team. This is clearly 4x3 working. Any groups of 4 or less, are currently shuffled into both the solo AND group queue... the group Queue is 2-10 and 12's. 12's are not a seperate queue.

My comment has nothing to do with weights leveling

from PGI ->Groups of 2 to 4: Groups of 2 to 4 will be matched up in the Solo players queue or the group queue. When they are placed in a Solo queue there will be a group of 2 to 4 on the opposing team. When matched in the Group queue they will be playing with groups of various compositions. Keeping an eye on the matchmaking queue status for each weight class will reduce wait times

So it is a gamble for 2 to 4 man groups, but according to this: you are first matched with solo pugs, then it moves you to other 2-4 man groups for matching and lastly open group profiles.

SO my statement stands on its merits either the ""4x3 system"" isn't working according to above statements, or the population is so low, 2-4 man groups are getting thrown into 12 mans regardless.....

added Edit >>>> I guess you really have to ask yourself ""Who" chooses where you are placed, group que, or solo que - from PGIs programming, it is F'king totally random

Edited by Opus, 04 July 2014 - 07:32 AM.

[Sarsaparilla Kid]

I think a bigger problem right now is that the Matchmaker is using a very wide range of Elo to pull these matches together. Isn't it odd that with even more restrictions, the Matchmaker is actually working faster than it used to? Between that and observations made while watching a high-Elo comp team getting matched against so many lower-Elo teams, I'm pretty sure Elo is not a big factor in the matchmaking process right now. They may be focusing on matching 4x3 and big/small groups first, and then may tighten up Elo later, if the population is there to support that.

[Ian Grahame]

I'm in a small guild. We have some decent players and a couple who are very good, but generally we run from 2-4 man groups. Since the patch I have often been in a two man that was dropped in with a 8 or 9 man team on the other side.

It's brutal.

Solo seems fine.. maybe a little easier due to the number of higher ELOs running in big groups in the group queue.

I think it would be very helpful to allow 2 to 4 man groups a choice of group queue or not.

As to "Communicate better with your team", that's all well and good when you're using voice coms. When you have to do so by trying to type without getting your torso shot out, it is very limiting.

[Jaren Tweek]

Was also just in a 2 man group, dropped against a 12 man premade. the wolves..... this was never supposed to happen right!?!?!? Are the developers just asleep?

[HUNTERS MOON]

Truth.

2 man groups don't provide much revenue to PGI. The large groups purchase stuff from PGI in massive numbers. So.. this is not a problem for PGI. If several 2 mans go up against a 12 man that has communication, they are going to lose. This is why there is no voice in the game.

Money is why community warfare and new maps don't show up. They don't provide income to PGI. Don't expect them to do anything that will not give them money. Its not a hobby for them.

"After all, we are not communists." Don Barzini from the godfather.

[HUNTERS MOON]

Why is it evil to point out that PGI is here to MAKE MONEY. The 12 man groups now run the show. Don't silence me PGI.

[Opus]

RENEGADEMOON, on 04 July 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

Truth.

2 man groups don't provide much revenue to PGI. The large groups purchase stuff from PGI in massive numbers. So.. this is not a problem for PGI. If several 2 mans go up against a 12 man that has communication, they are going to lose. This is why there is no voice in the game.

Money is why community warfare and new maps don't show up. They don't provide income to PGI. Don't expect them to do anything that will not give them money. Its not a hobby for them.

"After all, we are not communists." Don Barzini from the godfather.

MWO's largest player base is PUG players according to DEV stats. Put that aside for a moment > money has always been a factor in all games, many make millions only to piss it away by horrible mismanagement, and lack of community involvement

Enough said

Edited by Opus, 04 July 2014 - 01:15 PM.

[DarkonFullPower]

Kendricke, on 03 July 2014 - 05:22 PM, said:

*snip*

Everyone's counter-argument is more-or-less this.

"One time is enough to make me and others quit the game."

Personaly I think it's silly/insane, but I do know real life people, people that would pay money for this game, that would be the above statement.

I'm an about to play right now with my partner. I will report back if this ends up being true.

[Opus]

DarkonFullPower, on 04 July 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:

Everyone's counter-argument is more-or-less this.

"One time is enough to make me and others quit the game."

Personaly I think it's silly/insane, but I do know real life people, people that would pay money for this game, that would be the above statement.

I'm an about to play right now with my partner. I will report back if this ends up being true.

I dont see ""I quit QQ rage, F-off and die PGI "" comments, these are real concerns

I have kept playing for over 2+ years now since early beta, I just keep the pressure on PGI to perform to their capabilities.,., Which I think they are performing at a "C" rating right now when they could be doing so much better