57 replies to this topic

[Lincoln Kotare]

I do not have a problem in the solo Q. You just have tell them what to do, like last night I was on Alpine game mode skirmish. I had 2 lights 1 medium and myself in a heavy pushed the hill (H9) at the start of the game. We were fighting 4 vs 4 on the hill and I typed in chat push now and win or sit back and lose. My team ended up pushing and we won 12 - 2 people said good call at the end of the game. 4 man need to go into group Q and 3 man/less could go in solo Q and I would be okay with that.

[Lynx7725]

I want to correct some misconceptions. I play primarily solo PUGs. 90% of the games I have is in the solo queue. The other 10% is with some local guys. So I'm not coming from the perspective of a ex-PugStomper.

There's a couple of things I perceive about the current solo queue, after the implementations of bigger groups:

1. Previously, one problem we had when I dropped with the local guys is that there's usually an odd wheel. That odd wheel, which is usually an experienced player, usually just go solo a bit. Now, that odd wheel gets to drop in the group queue -- which means that experienced player is no longer in the solo queue, reducing the pool of experienced players.

2. In the time zone that I drop in (which I believe has more impact than my ELO, but that's my opinion), I'm seeing more people who basically did not fight in the same basic strategies as before. Since I've been fighting Skirmish pretty much from day 1 that it was introduced, the change in knowledge base was quite startlingly clear -- I recently sheparded a DW all the way to Alpine H10 hill, only to see it try to climb and unclimbable trail next to the usual draw that people use to get up the cliff. As much as I try to adapt, the vast disparity in thought and patterns meant it usually became a scattered pack (yes, even the basic ideal of "group up and stay together" is somewhat missing...)

3. Yes, you guys are right to say that someone can command. But there's also an increasing lack of willingness to listen. One Crimson match, I started with 3 Dire Wolves on my lance in my Summoner, and I immediately comms to protect the Dire Wolves (and IIRC, someone else echoed the sentiment). And then I proceed to see the rest of the team run away from the Dire Wolves, while I tried to cover them. Worse, one of the Dire Wolves decided to take a detour.. I'm seeing more and more non-team behaviour.

4. Because of these non-team behaviour, it has became more difficult for me to field team builds. LRM support builds which previously had success with PUG teams suddenly become quite useless, because I get so few locks in indirect, and moving forward I often have so little support that I could not influence the game much. Escort builds meant to go in with Assaults to protect their flanks become less effective because of the lack of other escorts plus the tendency of the Assaults to disappear. The most reliable things to bring into PUGs, in my opinion, are either brawler builds, DF long range mechs, or pop-tart meta. The question then becomes whether new players are now being indoctrinated that those are the best mechs to use in game -- and subsequently as they feed into organized team recruitment, what are the impacts.

I'm not asking for that 2-to-4 men teams be exclusively used for solo queue. That's an impossibility anyway, given the way the bigger groups work. I'm not even asking for an option for 2-to-4 men team to choose themselves whether to go into the solo or group queue, because I see the potential abuse. What I'm asking is for PGI to review the frequency that 2-to-4 men teams are assigned to the solo queue, and see if there's a need to bias it slightly, so that solo PUGs can actually experience what "organized play" can be like.

Yes, I fully concede that some of this could be my own inability to adapt to a new meta. My concern is more of how new players and solo players would experience in this new meta, the lessons they would learn, and the effects of such when feeding them as recruits into the more organized play.

[EGG]

This game could do with a way to guide people into groups, but this is totally the wrong way to go about it.

The old system was trash, lets not go back to it on the basis of bad theory-crafting.

[Willard Phule]

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

I want to correct some misconceptions. I play primarily solo PUGs. 90% of the games I have is in the solo queue. The other 10% is with some local guys. So I'm not coming from the perspective of a ex-PugStomper.

I hear you there. I'm a solo dropper myself. I see a lot of what you're saying here and several things you didn't mention. That's probably because we're in different Elo brackets......I'm obviously way down on the bottom of the Elo food chain. I can't seem to get a PUG match that doesn't contain at least 50% brand new players.

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

1. Previously, one problem we had when I dropped with the local guys is that there's usually an odd wheel. That odd wheel, which is usually an experienced player, usually just go solo a bit. Now, that odd wheel gets to drop in the group queue -- which means that experienced player is no longer in the solo queue, reducing the pool of experienced players.

That makes sense, but for it to explain what I've been seeing, that would require a LOT of "5th wheels." It might be a factor, but I suspect the problem lies with the matchmaker itself. Yes, I know, it was rewritten...happy fuzzy kittens...everyone loves it...whatever. Ask yourself this: When was the last time you saw PGI implement ANYTHING that wasn't inherently broken in one fashion or other? I think it's relatively safe to assume that the matchmaker has issues...maybe not anything on the surface but it's there. Logic dictates that it is so.

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

2. In the time zone that I drop in (which I believe has more impact than my ELO, but that's my opinion), I'm seeing more people who basically did not fight in the same basic strategies as before. Since I've been fighting Skirmish pretty much from day 1 that it was introduced, the change in knowledge base was quite startlingly clear -- I recently sheparded a DW all the way to Alpine H10 hill, only to see it try to climb and unclimbable trail next to the usual draw that people use to get up the cliff. As much as I try to adapt, the vast disparity in thought and patterns meant it usually became a scattered pack (yes, even the basic ideal of "group up and stay together" is somewhat missing...)

Absolutely. In fact, Time Zone has a lot to do with EVERYTHING in the PUG queue. This is not meant to be a stereotype, but it is what it is......in the morning here in the U.S. (8am-10am Mountain Time), the PUG queue is full up with Germans and Russians. Expect a lot of LRMs and Poptarts. Not sure why it is, but it is. Evidently, Germans and Russians love their LRMs and poptarts. It's not so bad when you go in expecting it.

Another issue is lack of a common language with which to communicate. You can say "regroup at D4" all you want, but if your team doesn't speak the same language as you....you're beat.

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

3. Yes, you guys are right to say that someone can command. But there's also an increasing lack of willingness to listen. One Crimson match, I started with 3 Dire Wolves on my lance in my Summoner, and I immediately comms to protect the Dire Wolves (and IIRC, someone else echoed the sentiment). And then I proceed to see the rest of the team run away from the Dire Wolves, while I tried to cover them. Worse, one of the Dire Wolves decided to take a detour.. I'm seeing more and more non-team behaviour.

Ok...I see this a lot, too. The other side of that coin is the "too many chiefs, not enough indians" effect. I spent WAY too much time in the military to put up with someone that wants to give orders and then not follow them himself. And I see a LOT of that in the PUG queue.

Some bozo, driving a trial mech in third person says "everyone go to D4" then wanders the opposite direction is going to completely screw up the team, y'know?

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

4. Because of these non-team behaviour, it has became more difficult for me to field team builds. LRM support builds which previously had success with PUG teams suddenly become quite useless, because I get so few locks in indirect, and moving forward I often have so little support that I could not influence the game much. Escort builds meant to go in with Assaults to protect their flanks become less effective because of the lack of other escorts plus the tendency of the Assaults to disappear. The most reliable things to bring into PUGs, in my opinion, are either brawler builds, DF long range mechs, or pop-tart meta. The question then becomes whether new players are now being indoctrinated that those are the best mechs to use in game -- and subsequently as they feed into organized team recruitment, what are the impacts.

This non-team behavior is at least, in part, due to something you missed:

5. The inability to move and shoot at the same time...complete disregard for your teammates....and vicious, VICIOUS, friendly fire.

I'll stick with the group and pitch in for the win.....right up until a bunch of morons that can't figure out how to unzoom start unloading into my back. It's not like I ran in front of them....that happens and it's my fault. But when I'm there first and you waddle your Dire Whale right up to me, then unload an Alpha Strike into my rear armor....you're on your own.

And that happens ALL THE TIME in the PUG queue. In fact, most of the time, they don't even bother to let you get out of spawn before they start shooting you in the back.

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

I'm not asking for that 2-to-4 men teams be exclusively used for solo queue. That's an impossibility anyway, given the way the bigger groups work. I'm not even asking for an option for 2-to-4 men team to choose themselves whether to go into the solo or group queue, because I see the potential abuse. What I'm asking is for PGI to review the frequency that 2-to-4 men teams are assigned to the solo queue, and see if there's a need to bias it slightly, so that solo PUGs can actually experience what "organized play" can be like.

I am. That'd be nice on multiple levels.

One - with the complete lack of any form of tutorial and training, the public queue is overwhelmed with inexperienced, incompetent pilots. The LAST thing we need is to have an organized group come pugstomp us. Good lord...most of the time, anyone with more than 25 matches is expected to carry half the team...it's kind of hard to do that when a 4 man comes over the rise and puts a foot in your face.

Two - those 4 man groups in the PUG queue have, for years, been smug and snarky about their "pure skill" wins. And, the solution as far as the consensus is concerned is to "JOIN A GROUP, DUMMY." What if I don't want to join a group? What if I want to be a casual gamer? Should the public queue suffer so PGI can placate the organized groups....moreso than they have here lately? Somehow, that just doesn't seem right to me. I've thrown away...er...spent as much money on this game as many of the organized players have...aren't I as important as any other paying customer?

Three - it's about time they got to feel the pain they inflicted on the solo droppers. Don't like getting put up against a 12 man when you're in a 4 man group? JOIN A BIGGER GROUP! Isn't that what they said to us? I would like to think that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Suck it up, buttercup. Either join a bigger group or disband and drop solo with the rest of us.

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

Yes, I fully concede that some of this could be my own inability to adapt to a new meta. My concern is more of how new players and solo players would experience in this new meta, the lessons they would learn, and the effects of such when feeding them as recruits into the more organized play.

Apparently, you're the only one that's concerned. PGI obviously doesn't care about new player experience. They designed the Elo/Matchmaker system to immediately throw them into the shark tank without any form of training or tutorial (and don't mention that "learn how to walk" one they have...it's less than worthless). But, but...you can come to the forums and read words. Reading words will make you better, we promise.

As far as PGI is concerned, what they want is for someone to install the game...spend $30-50 on MC...get frustrated at the lack of content, buggy HSR, impossible to use Mechlab, complete imbalance of experience, etc...then go the hell away. It's not like they don't get a fresh crop of Derps every month or so, depending on how their marketing people operate.

Edited by Willard Phule, 08 July 2014 - 07:22 AM.

[BoomDog]

Dear God no. I've been having a lot more fun in the chaos of PUG matches.

I think that right now the ELO is all wonky. I'm not the best player out there, but I'm not bad either, however, I've been in matches where I know I'm playing with brand new players in trial mechs.

The only way they can make solo queue better is to ban 4 mans from the matches. Give me chaos!

[Bilbo]

BoomDog, on 08 July 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

Dear God no. I've been having a lot more fun in the chaos of PUG matches.

I think that right now the ELO is all wonky. I'm not the best player out there, but I'm not bad either, however, I've been in matches where I know I'm playing with brand new players in trial mechs.

The only way they can make solo queue better is to ban 4 mans from the matches. Give me chaos!

According to Karl they have tightened Elo restrictions considerably in the Solo queue. This would suggest you are, like most players, around an average Elo level, as that is where the new players in their trial mechs are playing.

[Felio]

Large groups should be matched against other groups that are as large as possible. For example, if a 2-man finds themselves against a 12-man, they should have a 10-man on their side.

Right now it seems like there is no preference for large groups when finding opponents for a large group, so we get assorted 2- or 3-mans vs. 10 or 12.

[Kutfroat]

Lynx7725, on 07 July 2014 - 07:04 PM, said:

Suggestion: Adjust the bias for premade 2~4 groups such that they would preferentially go into the Solo PUG Queue, but also sufficient to help make up numbers within the Group Queue.

only read this far. i copy/paste my answer from another "getting stomped as four men premads is not fun, stomping pugs was way more fun and i want my easy mode and artificially inflated elo, k/d and winrate back" thread: i give you all the good advices i got whenever i said i don´t want to play against 4 man premades when pugging:

1. l2p
2. play meta or die
3. if you don´t drop in meta you deserve to lose
4. get some (more in your case) friends
5. grow some balls
6. deal with it
7. play different game

i think every group 3+ should be forced into the group queue and. 2 player groups can be put into soloqueue to fill up teams.

this is especially pathetic: "Sometimes I just want to be in a 2-4 group and I think that I should not be put against a 12 man in comms together."

i think, if i and everyone else who does, drop solo, i should not be put against a 4 man in comms together...that was´nt a valid point, suddenly if "they" are on the recieving end it is...

Edited by Kutfroat, 08 July 2014 - 07:43 AM.

[ztac]

Groups in the solo queue are a terrible idea period, no matter how small. In PUG games there seems to a lot of weapon integration from what I have seen and Narc are on the increase. Lots of LRM in games too.

The most odd thing about PUG teams is that generally you keep finding one side seems a lot more organised than the other.

So you really have to wonder about the MM and it's inner workings (like how it would actually put a team of solo players together, From what I gather the whole MM patch was more about the group queue than the solo one as it would appear to function just as before more or less , except the solo games are now a lot more one sided on a more regular basis from my experiences).

[Screech]

No thanks. Things, overall, seem to be fine in the solo queue. We do not need shepherds from our betters but thanks for your genuine concern. It is heart-touching.


The kids are alright, you need not worry.

Edited by Screech, 08 July 2014 - 08:06 AM.

[KingCobra]

How about HELLLL NOOO!!!! premades in the PUG/solo queue was a bad idea to start with and even allowing 2 man/girl premades into the pug/solo queues is still a bad idea.

What's wrong girls=2-4 man/girl premades getting a little taste of what the pugs have had to endure for 3 stinking years because PGI is dunce about the matchmaking system?

The solo/pug 12v12 free for all's are just fine without any premades in them and it is quite fun so quite your cry babying and go back to the group queue where you belong in the first place.

Edited by KingCobra, 08 July 2014 - 08:14 AM.

[Lynx7725]

I thank Phule and Screech, and any other I missed, for reading a bit more than others. I supposed it's too early to discuss this.

[Jez]

I feel sorry for you Lynx. Most of the peeps posting here are so far entrenched into the pug vs pre-made rhetoric war that they are unable to see that you are discussing about the long term health of the playing community.

A lot of the solo droppers here are enjoying the reduced competitiveness of their opponents and are unwilling to give up that advantage. Their selfishness makes them unwilling participants at developing new players and providing those players with a growth promoting environment. They are content with the poor quality of gameplay and and the shallow competitiveness depth in the solo queue. They see no reason to raise the playing level of their newer and less experienced peers. It's a selfish and shortsighted position to take.

Frankly, I think your analysis of the current situation and the health of the solo queue is spot on. I just happen to disagree with your proposed solution that would help mitigate some of the longer term issues.

[Lynx7725]

Jez, on 08 July 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

Frankly, I think your analysis of the current situation and the health of the solo queue is spot on. I just happen to disagree with your proposed solution that would help mitigate some of the longer term issues.

FWIW, I'm ok with anyone disagreeing with me -- that's what discussion is for. It's really the refusal to entertain discussion that is disappointing. Thanks for your kind words.

[KingCobra]

THIS IS SUCH BULLSHITT
( feel sorry for you Lynx. Most of the peeps posting here are so far entrenched into the pug vs pre-made rhetoric war that they are unable to see that you are discussing about the long term health of the playing community.

A lot of the solo droppers here are enjoying the reduced competitiveness of their opponents and are unwilling to give up that advantage. Their selfishness makes them unwilling participants at developing new players and providing those players with a growth promoting environment. They are content with the poor quality of gameplay and and the shallow competitiveness depth in the solo queue. They see no reason to raise the playing level of their newer and less experienced peers. It's a selfish and shortsighted position to take.

Frankly, I think your analysis of the current situation and the health of the solo queue is spot on. I just happen to disagree with your proposed solution that would help mitigate some of the longer term issues. )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have for 3 years played PUG and premade group drops and up until a month ago premades including me farmed the solo/pugs for C-bills and it was 90% of the time a ROFL STOMP every day.I and many others have told PGI for a long time pugs/solo/casuals needed there own separate matchmaking queue.

The new players and pugs need to learn the game and skills to be competitive not just blown away match after match by a bunch of premade groups just hell bent on SEAL CLUBBING and FARMING for C-bills.

All this thread is is PREMADE groups crying because they cant SEAL CLUB PUGS no more.

Edited by KingCobra, 08 July 2014 - 08:44 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 08:37 AM, said:

FWIW, I'm ok with anyone disagreeing with me -- that's what discussion is for. It's really the refusal to entertain discussion that is disappointing. Thanks for your kind words.

I've just had a very different experience, maybe it's your ELO? Maybe you don't take charge? I don't know? But it really isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

And the fact of the matter is, if you give people an option that allows their group to drop in the solo queue more often...guess what is going to happen? Most people are going to play that group level, whether it's 2, 3 or 4 mans.

And then the group queue will have issues with certain group types not having the smaller groups to fill them out.

What they have now is pretty damn solid and I'm very leary of messing with it unless the change is a full on solo queue.

[Lynx7725]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 08 July 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

I've just had a very different experience, maybe it's your ELO? Maybe you don't take charge? I don't know? But it really isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

Y'know, if I have too much time, and that if there are people interested, I'd post why I think all this talk about ELO band as fairly pointless.. but that's another topic.

As for how bad it is.. Sure, it might be better than I described. I'm not looking at a problem that exists now though, I'm looking at a problem that have a good potential to occur two or three months later, and which may prove quite problematic to fix.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 08 July 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

And the fact of the matter is, if you give people an option that allows their group to drop in the solo queue more often...guess what is going to happen? Most people are going to play that group level, whether it's 2, 3 or 4 mans.

And then the group queue will have issues with certain group types not having the smaller groups to fill them out.

What they have now is pretty damn solid and I'm very leary of messing with it unless the change is a full on solo queue.

Agreed, which is why I didn't suggest giving the option to choose, just that the backend MM adjust the frequency. But as I mentioned and as you said, it is probably too early to talk about this.

[Bilbo]

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

...
As for how bad it is.. Sure, it might be better than I described. I'm not looking at a problem that exists now though, I'm looking at a problem that have a good potential to occur two or three months later, and which may prove quite problematic to fix.
...

There was a time when there were no groups. Everyone playing at the time got along just fine. I don't see a reason that might change in the future. If anything, with the planned communication features, it will only get better.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Lynx7725, on 08 July 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

Y'know, if I have too much time, and that if there are people interested, I'd post why I think all this talk about ELO band as fairly pointless.. but that's another topic.

As for how bad it is.. Sure, it might be better than I described. I'm not looking at a problem that exists now though, I'm looking at a problem that have a good potential to occur two or three months later, and which may prove quite problematic to fix.

Agreed, which is why I didn't suggest giving the option to choose, just that the backend MM adjust the frequency. But as I mentioned and as you said, it is probably too early to talk about this.

If the problem doesn't exist, why are you trying to fix it? Are you a psychic? Why not let things go and see where it ends up, instead of making threads like this one? Couldn't your energy be put towards existing problems?

As for your "backend MM fix", players will eventually catch on if 2 mans or 3 mans end up in the solo queue more than 4 mans, and guess what? 4 mans will suddenly stop being a common occurrence as people will take the easy route (it's human nature) and switch to running 3 mans, or 2 mans.

I really just think you need to stop trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

[Willard Phule]

Bilbo, on 08 July 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

There was a time when there were no groups. Everyone playing at the time got along just fine. I don't see a reason that might change in the future. If anything, with the planned communication features, it will only get better.

Right.....but, at the time, the game was called "MW4."