238 replies to this topic

[Heeden]

Sandpit, on 10 July 2014 - 08:46 PM, said:

that's how it would seem unfortunately

PGI gives great lip service to improving the game for new players (Hey that's exactly why 3pv was implemented according to Russ) yet they've made very little in the way of attempts to actually do anything about it.

Champion Mechs are a lot better than stock loadouts as far as trial mechs go. Cadet bonus is a massive leg-up towards your first personal mech. I'd already got the hang of piloting before 3rd person mode was added but I'm sure it can't hurt.

I'm not convinced that having all the new players (presumably those still earning cadet bonuses) in a separate bucket would be such a great solution. All it's going to do is give them the impression that the game is much easier and suddenly, after 25 games, they get dropped against experienced players in optimised mechs and they're in the position new players are at now, except they may have spent real money expecting it to stay at the gentle pace, cue complaints about bait-and-switch etc.

[Sandpit]

Heeden, on 11 July 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

Champion Mechs are a lot better than stock loadouts as far as trial mechs go. Cadet bonus is a massive leg-up towards your first personal mech. I'd already got the hang of piloting before 3rd person mode was added but I'm sure it can't hurt.

I'm not convinced that having all the new players (presumably those still earning cadet bonuses) in a separate bucket would be such a great solution. All it's going to do is give them the impression that the game is much easier and suddenly, after 25 games, they get dropped against experienced players in optimised mechs and they're in the position new players are at now, except they may have spent real money expecting it to stay at the gentle pace, cue complaints about bait-and-switch etc.

So you think it's better to have a new player join, get stomped 10 times in a row in matches that are lasting 3-5 minutes, getting irritated and discouraged, and then leaving?

[Heeden]

Tyman4, on 10 July 2014 - 10:29 PM, said:

For pugging, if I get no response from chat, I usually pick and follow 1-2 mechs that I think are most likely to be game changing, usually a direwolf or DDc. This way I can try to keep a larger portions of the team's overall firepower and armor alive for as long as possible. I've even taken enemy fire for them if they dropped below ~50% hp.

any other tactics people can recommend?

Tyman

Nope, that's my best suggestion. I usually play my Centurion and like to find an assault class that looks like it knows where it's going. I peek round corners for them, shoot what they shoot and try to remember to stay out of their way. Normally it works out okay but occasionally I get one that walks straight into enemy fire and gets rapidly dismantled (I usually stop following them when that happens).

[Heeden]

Sandpit, on 11 July 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

So you think it's better to have a new player join, get stomped 10 times in a row in matches that are lasting 3-5 minutes, getting irritated and discouraged, and then leaving?

Compared to them relaxing for 25 matches, possibly spending real money or CBills on a mech that will not suit them outside the starter bucket then having the exact same thing happen anyway I think it's the lesser of two evils.

[Piney II]

Heeden, on 11 July 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

I'm not convinced that having all the new players (presumably those still earning cadet bonuses) in a separate bucket would be such a great solution. All it's going to do is give them the impression that the game is much easier and suddenly, after 25 games, they get dropped against experienced players in optimised mechs and they're in the position new players are at now, except they may have spent real money expecting it to stay at the gentle pace, cue complaints about bait-and-switch etc.

It will, however, give the new players a chance to get accustomed to the basics without getting seal clubbed in the first few minutes of the game. You can drive and shoot all day long in the testing grounds and tutorial, but that will not come even close to preparing you to drive and shoot in a match with 23 other mechs.

The current new player experience is a rude slap to the face. Give the new players a wading pool to test the waters and get at least a slight feel for the game before you throw them into the deep end with the sharks.

[Roland]

Why Run, on 11 July 2014 - 05:59 AM, said:

I don't want to be misunderstood here. My point is that without groups, the current solo que must be positively demoralizing for new players. Not only are they thrown into the middle of the jungle and told to find their way out, while good folks are raining down on them, they are very likely surrounded by teammates similarly lost.

I too am doing laughably well against the solo que. But it's BAD FOR THE GAME. My concern is not my personal performance, but that my monetary investment was not wasted. I truly enjoy MW games, and while I may disagree with some about mechanics, features, etc, I don't want them to fail and disappear. The current "solo" new guy que is not going to help that, and nor is it really "fun" for veteran players

I'm not going to rehash yet again why I'm playing solo, but the game needs better balance and a better way to assemble games to keep folks coming back for more.

I'm not sure why you think the current solo queue is any worse than it was prior to the removal of groups.. It's clearly not any worse.

Indeed, for a new player, I'd expect the experience is significantly better since they won't be put up against a whole GROUP of players who are better than them, who will focus fire on them and burn them down in a few seconds.

[Why Run]

I haven't seen more lopsided wins in stretches of games EVER. Almost every game I've played since the switch has been completely laughable. Groups spread the experienced players around, now it's just comical. Segregating the player base does not help.

[Roland]

Why Run, on 11 July 2014 - 06:34 AM, said:

I haven't seen more lopsided wins in stretches of games EVER. Almost every game I've played since the switch has been completely laughable. Groups spread the experienced players around, now it's just comical. Segregating the player base does not help.

Nothing you're saying here is really true at all.
Groups don't spread the experienced players around... indeed, groups just made sure that you'd often be getting a whole group of really good players together when they showed up, since they often played together. You might have had another group on the other side, but most of the groups were full of bads too.

Segregating the player base most certainly DID seem to help, in many ways.

Most solo players seem to be enjoying it much more, and have said as much, and the group queue now allows players of any size group to play together easily.

Honestly, the only folks who are complaining are folks in small groups who liked beating up on disorganized solo players.

[Bilbo]

Why Run, on 11 July 2014 - 06:34 AM, said:

I haven't seen more lopsided wins in stretches of games EVER. Almost every game I've played since the switch has been completely laughable. Groups spread the experienced players around, now it's just comical. Segregating the player base does not help.

I'm not seeing this at all. Comical was eight mans in the general queue way back when. Played 60 games one session and won 59. Most by a landslide. Methinks you need some perspective.

[Karamarka]

Why Run, on 11 July 2014 - 06:34 AM, said:

I haven't seen more lopsided wins in stretches of games EVER. Almost every game I've played since the switch has been completely laughable. Groups spread the experienced players around, now it's just comical. Segregating the player base does not help.

Out of my last 50 (Small quota of statistics) - it's been landslide like 40 times, 5 times were roughly last people running around and win by cap out and the last five was a close game with a few mechs left to brawl each other / out-snipe.

Every Time it was a landslide, it wasn't because one team had better tactics or strategy.

No

It was more like we had 2-3 people who had no idea what they were doing and just charged in 1 by 1. Which is ridiculous, considering I'd think im far away from "Elo hell" (noob Elo)

I think it's because the matchmaker tries to get low Elo variance, and an example of it's error would be that new players / cadets / trial users are considered "average Elo" when they start playing for their first times.

So one team would have 6 pros and 6 real noobs, while the other team would be 3 pros, 3 real noobs and 6 players deemed "average" by the system but are actually noobs - which lends credit to my anecdotal evidence - that landslides happen cause there are 3 noobs who suicide and it ends up being 9v12.

Edited by Karamarka, 11 July 2014 - 08:40 AM.

[Faith McCarron]

I hear you Karamarka. From what I've seen in the last few days, landslides are the norm in the PUG queue, far more than they were before. What I've found is that if I don't bring meta builds in the PUG queue anymore, it's almost a guaranteed loss. You HAVE TO hit hard and hit fast, and you HAVE TO give your team the numbers advantage early, or you're toast. If you dont get the landslide going in your favor, and VERY quickly, you're at the mercy of the people wandering off and derping themselves to death.

I think it's a side effect of the fact that going down by 1 or 2, if you had a reasonably competent group on your team, you could still flip the match. Now, if you go down 1 or 2, it's almost impossible to reverse it because your team dies so fast after that.

[WhiteRabbit]

mhhh...i don't think it's just people charging in like rambo (but without weapons or ammo ) another big factor now is the lack of voice-com ...shoot someone in the back and instead of 4 mechs turning around to shoot you it's usually just the guy you damaged. That way 1 player with a bit of guts can make a real difference by flanking the enemy. The slow speed/general uselessness of text chat forces players to keep an eye on the mini-map to watch for unusual behaviour in their team....e.g. mechs pointing in the wrong direction, spinning etc. --> if your team doesn't do this the match will probably end 12-1 because people that needed help didn't get it in time.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Lies, its working juuuust fine!



(To be fair, me and three other SRM packed brawlers rushed theta, and then systematically crushed everything we found trickling in)

[Karamarka]

Xeno Phalcon, on 11 July 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:

Lies, its working juuuust fine!

(To be fair, me and three other SRM packed brawlers rushed theta, and then systematically crushed everything we found trickling in)

Hey i've got a screenshot like that too! (Well actually a 22 slide album)

[Ghostwolfe]

Faith McCarron, on 11 July 2014 - 08:53 AM, said:

I hear you Karamarka. From what I've seen in the last few days, landslides are the norm in the PUG queue, far more than they were before. What I've found is that if I don't bring meta builds in the PUG queue anymore, it's almost a guaranteed loss. You HAVE TO hit hard and hit fast, and you HAVE TO give your team the numbers advantage early, or you're toast. If you dont get the landslide going in your favor, and VERY quickly, you're at the mercy of the people wandering off and derping themselves to death.

I think it's a side effect of the fact that going down by 1 or 2, if you had a reasonably competent group on your team, you could still flip the match. Now, if you go down 1 or 2, it's almost impossible to reverse it because your team dies so fast after that.

It's been a few days since I started this topic, thanks to all for the input. I played another dozen games and only one was actually close. The others were just a stomping on one side or the other.

I really would not have even started this topic if I didn't see a need. I do love the franchise and this game is "ok" but to me it's sliding from "ok" to "why bother". I don't enjoy being on a winning team that face stomps the other 12-2 and nobody likes being on the losing end of a 2-12. it becomes a waste of time and PGI when players feel the game is a waste of time guess what? They start to move on. My hope (as wishful as it is) is that PGI wake up and put effort into the issues at hand instead of making more pretty trinkets to try and sell us. If I didn't care, I wouldn't try and post. I'd just move on like many others. I personally know of 5 people ( friends/family) who have all stopped playing and I'd like to see the game turn around and continue.

Is there any place where we can see the actual player base in numbers? Get a solid idea for how many folks are playing?

[Joseph Mallan]

I played 2 PUG games today, I scored quite well damage wise, but one game was ROFLStomped and victorious in the second. I never worry about if the team wins or not as I can only do what I can do to "help" the team win. I am only 8% of the victory equation after all.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 July 2014 - 06:34 PM.

[InspectorG]

From the Urban Dictionary. PUG: Pretty Unorganized Group. See Ghetto thugs, Unorganized crime, Mob mentality, Less than crude tactics. Lack of skill. Lack of communication. Knavish. Amateur. Bush League.

A group of individuals, selected via lottery, hastily put on a team of strangers they dont trust, let alone understand. Morale is either absent or present only once the other team is at a 4 player disadvantage. Habitual centering around the middle of a map or circular areas on a map(see senescence). The first team to get to gain an early numbers advantage of 3-4 usually wins. (see chaotic event).
On occasion, a leader or small cohesive unit within a team will set the example for the rest o the team on how to play and win. Purely random event. (see Weather, Runs in Vegas, Astrology).
Should both teams exhibit an effective leader or core group, a 'good game' can occur. see Good Brawl, 11-12, Hard Fought Win. Throwdown.
Related to Winning and/or Good Brawl: see Meta, Concentrated fire, Use of Cover, Basic Military Tactics, Situational awareness.
Communication between teammates is usually tribal gruntings related to perceived self social status(see Dis-Track, E-peen, Shame), failed tactics of which were not communicated prior, Comic relief, Mourning of losses. Occasionally congratulatory references to loadouts(see Meta, non-Meta, Camo).

PUGs are usually viewed as events between to semi-equal opponents whose goal is to fail less than the other their opponent.(see Coin Flip, Hedged losses). Related: see Carry hard.

Now, with this being the true definition of a pug, how can anyone expect otherwise?????

[Heeden]

It's PuG not PUG, Pick-up Group, a random collection of individuals selected without screening to partake in some sort of activity with all the marvellous and hideous ramifications of such haphazard grouping.

[DaZur]

You know...

I really should take screenshots of all the 12-8 and 12-10 PUG games I'm involved in... You know, to prove how balanced the PUG queues are.

You guys have tunnel vision... Your so flipping bent over landslides your not being contextual.

Absolutely, I have nothing but antidotal evidence because I play the game and don't get my panties in a twist but I can state unequivocally that my "GGClose" total is equally comparable to my "Wow, that was a close game" totals...

My self-assessment of my Elo based on my play-style, my win/loss and the company I keep (players I see in matches) makes me believe I'm in the upper 3rd of the middle Elo bracket... Knowing that, I should be paired with both the day-1 noobes as well as the seasoned-but-not-quite-elite veterans like myself. Knowing this, if what you guys are inferring were true, I should be a prime candidate for nothing but landslide decisions and I should be wallowing in despair...

Guess what?... I'm not. I roll with a comfortable composite 1.12 KDR and a composite 1.32 win/loss. I win more than lose and I kill more than I get killed... I.e. I'm a product of positive outcome.

Landslides decisions are statistical norm and you guys are being dense in regards to the catalysts. It's simple and unequivocal.

Compounded firepower secondary to compound battlefield attrition = ROFLStomp.

I don't care if the queue is full of day-1 noobs or full top-tier phenoms... the potential for the end result to be a landslide is still the same. Only difference is how quickly and decisively it could potentially manifest.

Elo... balance metrics... BV... Grandpa's weather Almanac... All theses things cannot counter what amounts to a statistical outcome.

We have too many chaotic catalysts in play for anything to force parity in outcome... There is no way to avoid the possibility nor the frequency of a landslide...