7 replies to this topic

[Sprouticus]

If it does not already do so, I would suggest the following for the Group Queue

The MM will try to match groups so that the total # of groups on each side is within 1

Example worst case scenarios:

12 man (1 group) vs 6+6 max
10+2 vs 4+4+4 max
9+3 vs 4+4+4 max
8+4 vs 4+4+4 max
8+2+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
7+3+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
6+4+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
5+4+3 vs 3+3+3+3 max
5+3+2+2 vs 3+3+2+2+2 max
etc


This would need a release valve, but if the community knew that basic group size matching occurred, or was at least attempted, all these complaints wold go away. Or at least we could shut them up faster.

[Redshift2k5]

I think this is probably too restrictive, only a single group composition for 12-mans to possibly match? Only a single composition for 10+2?

We don't have any data about how many groups are launching or what size, but I do not expect there to be many 3's at all, now enough of any specific group aggregate combination to have so many "only this aggregate vs this other aggregate"

Edited by Redshift2k5, 03 July 2014 - 07:50 AM.

[Roland]

I believe this is actually already happening. People are imagining most of the problems they are perceiving, such as imagining that they are always going up against a 12 man. Or not recognizing when they are on a team with a large group.

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 03 July 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

I believe this is actually already happening. People are imagining most of the problems they are perceiving, such as imagining that they are always going up against a 12 man. Or not recognizing when they are on a team with a large group.

What I'd like to know is what is the Elo level of the players in the small premade (2 to 4) when they are pulled to the big boy queue. There needs to be a certain level of adjustments made to those numbers... but otherwise at best the claims are kinda questionable.

[Livewyr]

I think 12 should only face 12.. that would be my only change. (I did *not* imagine going up against CW Delta Galaxy in my little 4man, with 2 other 4mans.)

[Drasari]

Sprouticus, on 03 July 2014 - 07:15 AM, said:

If it does not already do so, I would suggest the following for the Group Queue

The MM will try to match groups so that the total # of groups on each side is within 1

Example worst case scenarios:

12 man (1 group) vs 6+6 max
10+2 vs 4+4+4 max
9+3 vs 4+4+4 max
8+4 vs 4+4+4 max
8+2+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
7+3+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
6+4+2 vs 3+3+3+3 max
5+4+3 vs 3+3+3+3 max
5+3+2+2 vs 3+3+2+2+2 max
etc


This would need a release valve, but if the community knew that basic group size matching occurred, or was at least attempted, all these complaints wold go away. Or at least we could shut them up faster.

I like that idea.

Roland, on 03 July 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

I believe this is actually already happening. People are imagining most of the problems they are perceiving, such as imagining that they are always going up against a 12 man. Or not recognizing when they are on a team with a large group.

Nope. I don't think so. Being dismissive wont make the problem go away.

[Rebas Kradd]

I can pretty much guarantee you that the release valve will get used every time.

And while the troll part of me likes the idea of building an "oh, fine, here, now shut up already" game mechanic that makes people happy based on the placebo principle, the honest part of me acknowledges that they're not going to devote development time to it.

[Lykaon]

Redshift2k5, on 03 July 2014 - 07:44 AM, said:

I think this is probably too restrictive, only a single group composition for 12-mans to possibly match? Only a single composition for 10+2?

The idea is an opposing force is not to be composed of more than one group more than the total number of groups it opposes.

So 12 man team can be met with another 12 or a 6 + 6 or a 8+4 a 10+2 etc. as long as the opposing force sums to 12 and also does not exceed 2 groups.

Or a 8 man + 4 man can be opposed by no more than three groups that also sums to 12.