192 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

personally, id say make max group size of 8, then fold 2 and 3 mans into the solo queue. i dont really care, but atm there is very little point dropping in small groups, its total hard-mode.

not a deciding issue for me either way, and its defnitely better like this than when it was max group size of 4

[CeeKay Boques]

Willard Phule, on 23 July 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:

Dude.

We're talking about a video game that is supposed to be carrying on in the tradition of other MW titles.

I learned to play with the 1-player campaigns on MW2, MW3 and MW4 before ever going live to play with other people. Those other titles also had tutorials that were easy to follow.

MW:O is NOT "new player" friendly. Not one bit.

Is any shooter? I don't think CoD, Battlefield, Counter-Strike... do any of those even have a "elo" system? I'm pretty sure you just get thrown in with the wolves and sheep, and if you get sniped 3 times going around a corner you just don't go around that corner anymore. I remember playing those games and just dying a lot until I didn't.

MW2-4 did NOT have a tutorial... oh you mean that campaign thing? Did that prepare you for organized groups rampaging around the maps? NO! I'm telling you, from playing since MW2, that nothing prepares you for teams. Nothing but a team of your own. Sure you can learn to shoot, but my kid learned to shoot when he was 7, I'm sure a 13 year old knows how to do that. But the way you move, and react, is completely different.

The one thing they did have was choice. You would go to the lobby, and you would see a list of games. Often they would say "FFP On, NR, NO NOOBS", or "FFA Bring it! Have fun!"

Y'know what also would be newbie friendly? Respawn. Sure, you died. You can learn from it... RIGHT NOW! You can also... EXTRACT REVENGE! Right now! 30 minutes. Not 3 minutes to get to the battle, 12 minutes to camera watch everyone else.

[meteorol]

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

Is any shooter? I don't think CoD, Battlefield, Counter-Strike... do any of those even have a "elo" system?

I strongly disagree with all those "MWO has a steep learning curve" claims, because in my eyes that is simply not true (guys seem to love claiming MWO is more complicated than it actually is for the sake of elitism or... whatever), but there is a different between MWO and CoD, BF, and CS.

First of all CS:GO has an elo system, and it works better than anything that MWO got together over the last year. Whenever i played a 5vs5 in GS:GO, the enemies were within the range of 1 elo bracket. (CS:GO acutally displays them at the end of the match)
The other different between BF, CoD and MWO is that the former have dedicated servers. If a noob gets crushed on a server because the guys on the enemy team are way better, he can just leave the server without any form of punishment. He can browse the server list for a "noobs only, high k/d=autokick" server.

Like you pointed out correctly, the major differnce between MWO and other shooters is that MWO forces new players to play against guys way better than them, while other games don't.

Edited by meteorol, 23 July 2014 - 05:24 AM.

[Kekrebos]

VixNix, on 23 July 2014 - 04:08 AM, said:

Someone had made a suggestion for MM, something along the lines of...

largest group size +/- 1

So if team A has a six man for their largest group then team B cant have their largest group bigger than seven nor smaller than five group, the rest would be filled with two's and singles.

I have also seen requests and/or suggestions that numbers and sizes of groups be delineated somehow.

And that group mates have a different color icon on the battle field, green perhaps, so all the people you drop with would have green, unless they are in your lance, that would make it easier to group up with the friends you dropped with.

This mysterious ELO, not sure what it is, if its supposed to control grouping somehow then it needs to be based on the mech you are dropping in. Yes separate ELO by mech and starting at average seems wrong.

I had made that suggestion shortly after I realized that their wonderful new matchmaker was dropping a team of small groups vs 12 mans. Its far better than this stupid Elo bandaid.

Elo is just bad in a group game. Elo is designed for a 1v1 environment. For a pure solo que, sure it'll work ok. Not the greatest, but given a large enough sample size of games and a robust enough formula it will work. Where it starts to break is when you add in variable groups. For your Elo to be correct you pretty much have to roll with the exact same, or very similar group every time you play.

As to small groups in the solo que... I always though that anything greater than 1/5th of a team as a group is a bad idea, unless the other team has the exact same group makeup. Personally I don't see an issue with adding 2 mans back to the solo que, however I think that there should always be an identical number on the opposite side.

However, I think the idea of just fixing the group que is much better, so that instead of our 'magic' Elo rating adjustments, we just get +/- 1 group per team(as I, and probably others have suggested before). It pretty much makes everyone happy. A 2 man (even one with a noob) can still support a 10 man and do well. You can even add the 'magic' Elo adjustment on to the 12 man so they're fighting a better 10 man than they are. The more the size of your groups diverge, the worse your matchmaking is. A decent 12 man vs 2xgood 6 mans could still be a good fight.

By the same logic that created a solo only que, larger numbers of people playing together in coordination means a better chance of stomping the enemy team.

[Willard Phule]

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

Is any shooter? I don't think CoD, Battlefield, Counter-Strike... do any of those even have a "elo" system? I'm pretty sure you just get thrown in with the wolves and sheep, and if you get sniped 3 times going around a corner you just don't go around that corner anymore. I remember playing those games and just dying a lot until I didn't.

No, and I agree with that analogy. But...there's a HUGE difference between those games and MW:O. No armor, everyone carries the same number of weapons (primary, secondary, grenades, etc). But, yeah, I get it.

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

MW2-4 did NOT have a tutorial... oh you mean that campaign thing? Did that prepare you for organized groups rampaging around the maps? NO! I'm telling you, from playing since MW2, that nothing prepares you for teams. Nothing but a team of your own. Sure you can learn to shoot, but my kid learned to shoot when he was 7, I'm sure a 13 year old knows how to do that. But the way you move, and react, is completely different.

Except, of course, the first missions of the 1-player campaign. Those were FAR closer to a "tutorial" than anything PGI has offered. Now, did it prepare me for the organized groups? Of course not BUT...I already knew how to move, twist the torso, manage the heat, lock the targets, etc. THOSE are the things that "noobs" here have the biggest problem with. That and the whole "stand still and zoom in" thing....but that's part of the learning curve. The MW4:Mercs solo campaign was probably the best teacher for online group play....at least in so far as working as a team.

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

The one thing they did have was choice. You would go to the lobby, and you would see a list of games. Often they would say "FFP On, NR, NO NOOBS", or "FFA Bring it! Have fun!"

And they had the ability to choose what map and/or parameters were being used. I remember the old "ICE/UA" matches fondly...

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

Y'know what also would be newbie friendly? Respawn. Sure, you died. You can learn from it... RIGHT NOW! You can also... EXTRACT REVENGE! Right now! 30 minutes. Not 3 minutes to get to the battle, 12 minutes to camera watch everyone else.

Eh...not so much. I mean, I get it in some kind of Campaign mode or something, but for general pugging? Nah, man. Last thing we need is a bunch of people repeatedly running into the open and getting killed.

Personally, I'd MUCH rather see some kind of level based skill separation than this joke of an Elo system we've got. I don't know how the Group queue works but in the Solo queue....the better you are, the more noobs you're expected to carry. It gets old after a while.

[ManaValkyrie]

ShinVector, on 22 July 2014 - 03:02 AM, said:

No thanks... No groups needed in SOLO queue.
Learn of carry yourself.

Newbie will be put in a more 'fair' ELO bracket in SOLO queue than he could ever in Group queue.

Unfortunately Shin, Groups can and do go into the solo que, upto a 4 man group on each side. So saying no groups is fooling yourself.

[CeeKay Boques]

ManaValkyrie, on 23 July 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:

Unfortunately Shin, Groups can and do go into the solo que, upto a 4 man group on each side. So saying no groups is fooling yourself.

You mean by sync dropping? Can't stop cheaters... can only stop hackers. Just a sucky thing about gaming.

[Mystere]

ManaValkyrie, on 23 July 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:

Unfortunately Shin, Groups can and do go into the solo que, upto a 4 man group on each side. So saying no groups is fooling yourself.

Where have you been? Groups are no longer placed on the solo queue.

Edited by Mystere, 23 July 2014 - 05:48 AM.

[Lefty Lucy]

Widowmaker1981, on 23 July 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

personally, id say make max group size of 8, then fold 2 and 3 mans into the solo queue. i dont really care, but atm there is very little point dropping in small groups, its total hard-mode.

not a deciding issue for me either way, and its defnitely better like this than when it was max group size of 4

Maybe some people like hard mode? Maybe some people can follow along with a plan by reading friendly movements on the in-game map so they can participate with the larger group even not on coms? Maybe some people use their little fingers to type to get the rudiments of communication going on? I routinely play 2-man groups and it doesn't seem any harder as long as you realize that by default you're the guys that follow rather than lead.

[Vassago Rain]

Widowmaker1981, on 23 July 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

personally, id say make max group size of 8, then fold 2 and 3 mans into the solo queue. i dont really care, but atm there is very little point dropping in small groups, its total hard-mode.

not a deciding issue for me either way, and its defnitely better like this than when it was max group size of 4

I don't agree, and I play 2 manz, 3 manz, and 4 manz a lot to this day.

[ShinVector]

ManaValkyrie, on 23 July 2014 - 05:38 AM, said:

Unfortunately Shin, Groups can and do go into the solo que, upto a 4 man group on each side. So saying no groups is fooling yourself.

Like what the other guys said... I don't blame you because PGI flip-flop on their decision and didn't really announce the changes.

[Almond Brown]

Willard Phule, on 22 July 2014 - 04:35 AM, said:

And the truth of this statement is what bothers me the most about the PUG queue.

If there were actual separation by skill/experience in the Solo queue, this wouldn't be the case. You'd be able to join the PUG with people that have about the same level of experience using the tactics they use in the Group queue . Instead, we have the "may the team with the fewest noobs win."

And Smurfs make that theory impossible. New account, 25 quick warm up Matches, into SOLO queue ranked Trainee, but the previous 5K games still ride along. Add a "friend" doing the same thing and sync's in successfully and voila, supposed Skill levels takes a vacation.

So what looks good on paper is but a ruse and the true Newbs still don't get a fair shake.

Solution? 1(one) account per Player, then set up the Skill/experience gambit. Otherwise just more wasted effort on the Dev's part. Pssst, ain't ever gonna happen...

Edited by Almond Brown, 23 July 2014 - 07:10 AM.

[Screech]

The only thing the MM is lacking at this point is an option for solo players to opt-in to the group queue. I am not sure how often it would actually be used but it would cover all bases.

Oh, also allow new players the option to go to the lowest Elo score after their Cadet games are finished.

[Jorlanne]

Hi,
I am the friend the OP was talking about. We have some experience in MWO (not very good, but not very bad either)
I think the issue is not that 2 men group is very difficult to play (I like difficult games), it is that they are not fun anymore.
Either you are stomped, or you do nothing during the game. It seems that you have no impact on the match issue.
We played together to a lot of games (cooperative and competitive), and we never experienced such a problem to have fun playing together.
I also play with my son (who is far better than I am), and we experience the same issues.

So I play solo, I play sync drops and I play Battletech TT (with my son).
Perhaps 2 men groups in solo queue is not the solution.
but I have no other simple solution in mind, and maybe 2 men groups will disappear eventually.

regards

[Mystere]

Screech, on 23 July 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

The only thing the MM is lacking at this point is an option for solo players to opt-in to the group queue. I am not sure how often it would actually be used but it would cover all bases.

I would do so almost all the time. But then again I have always been a very special snowflake.

[Jman5]

Screech, on 23 July 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

The only thing the MM is lacking at this point is an option for solo players to opt-in to the group queue. I am not sure how often it would actually be used but it would cover all bases.

Oh, also allow new players the option to go to the lowest Elo score after their Cadet games are finished.

I would like it if the MM would pull in a solo player so that we could have groups of 11.

[Davers]

NextGame, on 22 July 2014 - 11:36 PM, said:

I think its comical that you seem to think I play more than 1-3 hours per week. This game isn't that complicated.

MWO Ten commandments

1) Group your weapons appropriately.
2) Stand in the right places and move at the right times.
3) Torso twist when under fire.
4) Dont go rambo, stick with your team.
5) Play the role most suitable to the mech you have brought.
6) Take your chances, dont hesitate.
7) Cover/ECM/AMS are your friends.
8) Always engage when you have the advantage and look for support when doing so.
9) Manage your heat appropriately.
10) Everyone loses sometimes, man up.

And yet, how many complaint threads on the forum are easily answered by one (or more) of your Commandments? For some players this game is so complicated they can't work this list out for themselves.

[ManaValkyrie]

Mystere, on 23 July 2014 - 05:47 AM, said:

Where have you been? Groups are no longer placed on the solo queue.

My bad, hadn't seen that at all, last patch notes I saw mentioned no changes to the groups wouldnt drop in solo. Although to be fair I can understand why small groups are complaining. At certain times of the day, being in small groups is pretty bad as you do still end up being matched up against teams of 8-12 players, with the end result.

Technoviking, on 23 July 2014 - 05:43 AM, said:

You mean by sync dropping? Can't stop cheaters... can only stop hackers. Just a sucky thing about gaming.

Yes true, and I have been guilty of sync dropping once since the change to solo/group ques, and was done as a house wide bit of fun rather than to make PUG stomping games. However, I suspect there are people who do it for specifically that reason.

[Davers]

ManaValkyrie, on 23 July 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

My bad, hadn't seen that at all, last patch notes I saw mentioned no changes to the groups wouldnt drop in solo. Although to be fair I can understand why small groups are complaining. At certain times of the day, being in small groups is pretty bad as you do still end up being matched up against teams of 8-12 players, with the end result.

It doesn't happen as often as you think though. MM tries to keep group sizes similar. I love both queues and I think the solo queue is the best it has ever been.

[Vassago Rain]

ManaValkyrie, on 23 July 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

My bad, hadn't seen that at all, last patch notes I saw mentioned no changes to the groups wouldnt drop in solo. Although to be fair I can understand why small groups are complaining. At certain times of the day, being in small groups is pretty bad as you do still end up being matched up against teams of 8-12 players, with the end result.



Yes true, and I have been guilty of sync dropping once since the change to solo/group ques, and was done as a house wide bit of fun rather than to make PUG stomping games. However, I suspect there are people who do it for specifically that reason.

If you're in a 2 man that gets matched against a 10 man or a 12 man, you typically have your own 8+ man.

You simply got outplayed.