121 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Grrzoot, on 25 August 2014 - 04:45 PM, said:

I do not beleive that pgi is going to allow solo players to ever play against groups at this point. Given the sucess of the cue split. Perhaps they will allow you to "opt in" to playing in the group cue and you have to take into consideration the advantages you are giving up by doing so. But i see this as a non issue.

There is never going to be a magic button to take a group of people who don't know each other at all and put them against a group of people who play together all the time and have it balanced. Regardless of how many scenarios you come up with if you look at all the edge cases, they are too far apart to come to the middle.

The only way to balance solo players, is against other solo players. In my experience even when i randomly get a teamate or two from my unit in the solo drop, we generally perform much better as even just a two or 3 man group than normally would happen as just a solo player in the solo cue.

Voip or not. You can give everyone voip but that will not fundamentally change the structure of how solo drops work, and quite honestly, a 6 man group of the more competitive units can usually smoke a whole 12 man of pugs. That is why the cues are seperate and why they should remain that way.

Yes we are going to have cw, but it is going to be the same, group v group and solo v solo.

Anytime you make the game appear to have an element of pre-determination, i got the crappy 6 man and you got the good 6 man. It makes the game less enjoyable for the participants who are solo.

Every indication is that the player population isn't large enough to support even more splits to the queues so I don't see how they would get around it.

Kjudoon, on 25 August 2014 - 04:48 PM, said:

There is one advantage the solo queue has over the group queue: It doesn't hide elo mismatches by averaging.

If you had a scale of 1-1000, and a 50 point difference is a significant issue in balance of skill, this is what happens.

12 guys drop in group. You have 3 members at 1000 points, 5 at 100 points and the remainder at 400 points, you will get a group average of 425.

Now let's say that 12man and compare it to a group of 3 4mans who have something similar.

One group has a member at 1000, the rest at 300, giving a group average of 475
The 2nd group has 3 members at 600 and one at 100 also giving an average of 475
The 3rd group has 2 members at 350 and 2 at 600 giving an average 475

Seems nice and balanced, right? BUt now let's compare the teams as a whole.

12man ----- 3x4
(425) ----- (475)
1000 ----- 1000
1000 ----- 600
1000 ----- 600
400 ----- 600
400 ----- 600
400 ----- 600
400 ----- 350
100 ----- 350
100 ----- 100
100 ----- 100
100 ----- 100
100 ----- 100

Notice, in the group queue, with averaging... (on paper this is a nominally balanced match. It's only 50 points different and the advantage is towards the 3x4 group). Unfortunately, only half of the group is evenly matched all the 100's and one 400-350 and one 1000. Is this going to be a fair fight? Not even close unless someone on the 3x4 group gets incredibly lucky. Why?

The 12man is all on a single coordinated teamspeak. The 3x4 is on THREE different teamspeaks doing their own thing even if it is trying to help one another. This is something I hear whinged about in the solo queue by players not willing to fess up and admit to themselves they don't play well with others, and that is why they lose. As an example, I sync dropped today about 5-6 times with teammates without realizing it because I wasn't in TS. I won some, I lost some... Just the same as if I would have moved into channel with them.

Also consider in this example, three 1000 elo players should be able to eat through the other 11 players like Augustus Gloop on all things edible. The poor players sitting down at 100 are outclassed on every level and shouldn't even be in this fight, just as much as every player at 1000 shouldn't be in this fight... But the elo is "balanced" according to the group queue MM logic.

This cannot happen in the solo queue. Most of these players, if the elo spread was capped at 250, although the same rule would not have stopped this mismatch in the group queue, would never see each other and generally never should. This is what encourages players and teams to sync drop. Because even if you don't manage to get any of your teammates into your side, you are at least more evenly balanced.

Now why bring back the small queue? Because these levels of imbalance get smaller. It's why the SoloQQ crowd freaked out about Lances till PGI took that mode away without considering the consequences... or just figured it's "Working as Intended^tm" There were elo mixmatches, but nowhere near as severe. This is why you need to return a small group queue where solo players not totally terrified of the ebil premade can play with groups of 2-4 in a more casual setting with smaller mismatches. You don't have the ability to get hardcore teams dropping there en masse, and if they do, they're far more balanced.

There's your major difference and problem with Stomptown... I mean the group queue and a solution on how to fix it...

well groups also have their Elo artificially inflated as a handicap

[Deathlike]

The thing about beating 12-mans is that even if your side isn't a 12-man... "acting" like a 12-man (a thing some players cannot seem to envision, like a certain solo PUG lord) is usually the best solution.

Last night, my group faced a 12-man (well, apparently this was inside info from another premade from the same team, IIRC). Our smaller premades won.

When people refuse to work together, often times the matches play out exactly how the fearmongers (those who can't handle 12-mans) claim. That's why I have very little patience for premades that refuse to just stick with the plan (it's fine to point out what the bad plan was after the match, not during it). You know how teamwork is nerfed? Get people that don't want it. That's the most detrimental thing to happen in this game.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 August 2014 - 05:07 PM.

[Triordinant]

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 03:35 PM, said:

So how do we improve those solo players' experiences for CW? CW is coming, voip is coming, solo players will have to play alongside these groups regardless.

Actually, AFAIK none of that is set in stone. If there's a recent Dev post specifically saying that solo players will act as fillers for premades in CW I'd like to see it. The ones from years ago don't count because PGI has changed its mind on so many things they originally said. Why would they separate the queues only to merge them again later? For all we know, solos can opt out of CW -I know many will just play a different game if they're forced to be fillers for groups. Solos might also be assigned to fight border skirmishes rather than battles for key planets and therefore keep their separate solo-only queue.

[Sandpit]

Galenit, on 25 August 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

If they play in their group, their elo reflects their performance with that and in that group.
Its only inflated if they play under other conditions as they have earned their elo.

groups have their Elo artifically inflated as a handicap. That's directly from Bryan and the patch notes

Triordinant, on 25 August 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

Actually, AFAIK none of that is set in stone. If there's a recent Dev post specifically saying that solo players will act as fillers for premades in CW I'd like to see it. The ones from years ago don't count because PGI has changed its mind on so many things they originally said. Why would they separate the queues only to merge them again later? For all we know, solos can opt out of CW -I know many will just play a different game if they're forced to be fillers for groups. Solos might also be assigned to fight border skirmishes rather than battles for key planets and therefore keep their separate solo-only queue.

Recent?

So something that was stated and has no contradicting information needs recent?

[Kjudoon]

Triordinant, on 25 August 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

Actually, AFAIK none of that is set in stone. If there's a recent Dev post specifically saying that solo players will act as fillers for premades in CW I'd like to see it. The ones from years ago don't count because PGI has changed its mind on so many things they originally said. Why would they separate the queues only to merge them again later? For all we know, solos can opt out of CW -I know many will just play a different game if they're forced to be fillers for groups. Solos might also be assigned to fight border skirmishes rather than battles for key planets and therefore keep their separate solo-only queue.

Aaaaand the solo-purists will lose their minds. Forcibly shoving solo players into the group queue? It's going to be a nightmare for them if they do this very simple, unavoidable thing.

Congratulations... "Solo" is going to mean "militia" very very soon in CW.

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 05:36 PM, said:

groups have their Elo artifically inflated as a handicap. That's directly from Bryan and the patch notes


Recent?

So something that was stated and has no contradicting information needs recent?

Sand, Niko Snow confirmed this at that meeting we had 2 months ago. I don't see how they can avoid this without solo players choosing to opt out of CW completely and go all 'solaris league'.

Edited by Kjudoon, 25 August 2014 - 05:40 PM.

[Triordinant]

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 05:36 PM, said:

groups have their Elo artifically inflated as a handicap. That's directly from Bryan and the patch notes


Recent?

So something that was stated and has no contradicting information needs recent?

Of course it does -for the valid reasons already stated.

[Sandpit]

Triordinant, on 25 August 2014 - 05:40 PM, said:

Of course it does -for the valid reasons already stated.

Uhm ok...

We can only go off of what PGI has stated. Just because it's been a while since they stated it doesn't change the fact that, as far as we know, it is their intended course

[Triordinant]

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

Uhm ok...

We can only go off of what PGI has stated. Just because it's been a while since they stated it doesn't change the fact that, as far as we know, it is their intended course

That's fine, just remember their intended course was "no 3PV ever!" until they changed their mind. And again, why would they separate the queues if they really intended to have just one queue in the end? It's not like they want thermonuclear forum rage.

[Sandpit]

Triordinant, on 25 August 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

That's fine, just remember their intended course was "no 3PV ever!" until they changed their mind. And again, why would they separate the queues if they really intended to have just one queue in the end? It's not like they want thermonuclear forum rage.

I understand that, but we can't guess at what they MIGHT change.

[MischiefSC]

They absolutely will need solo players to properly populate the CW queue. I'd love to pug in the group queue we currently have - I'd choose it over the solo queue if opportunity permits.

This is critical to understand -

most groups in the group queue could be best described as 'sync-pugging'

[Sandpit]

MischiefSC, on 25 August 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

They absolutely will need solo players to properly populate the CW queue. I'd love to pug in the group queue we currently have - I'd choose it over the solo queue if opportunity permits.

This is critical to understand -

most groups in the group queue could be best described as 'sync-pugging'

most in group queue are PUGs

[Prezimonto]

Sandpit, on 24 August 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

That's what Elo is for. You play against players at your skill level.
Groups also have their Elo artificially inflated so they can't play against lower-level (Elo wise) players
It could also be handled by having groups only go "up" with the release valves. So when a group is waiting long enough to find a match for the safety valves to kick in, instead of searching in both directions, it only goes up. Meaning instead of the safety valve searching for players in lower Elo ratings, it only searches for players at higher Elo ratings.

That's not even close to how they abuse Elo. It is how it SHOULD be done, but instead they calculate a team average Elo and then make sure the averages are within some variance level. They pretend this leads to good gameplay.

What it does instead is places players where they shouldn't belong roughly 50% of matches.

Edited by Prezimonto, 25 August 2014 - 07:09 PM.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

Sandpit, on 24 August 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

So after another in a long list of "solo" vs. "groups" I had a thought.


The only difference between "solo" and "group" (I use "" because there's no such thing as "solo" in MWO, you're on a team in a team-based game regardless of whether it's 11 other random teammates or 11 teammates you formed up with prior to launching) is Voip. That's the only advantage group players have over solo players.

That's why the group queue and solo queue were separated. So what happens when Voip is implemented in game (which PGI has stated will get implemented)? If Voip is the sole advantage, what happens when that advantage is made available to all players? Do we no longer need separate queues? Does that makes separate queues "obsolete" at that point?

I'm curious as to the rest of the community's thoughts on this one.

Pre-game huddle and role selection, and no guarantee they wont have more than a lance full of Dwolves.

SoloQ is forced to be balanctod partially favoring equal weight distribution both teams as to not have one side full of lights and the other full of assaults.

[Sandpit]

Prezimonto, on 25 August 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

That's not even close to how they abuse Elo. It is how it SHOULD be done, but instead they calculate a team average Elo and then make sure the averages are within some variance level. They pretend this leads to good gameplay.

What it does instead is places players where they shouldn't belong roughly 50% of matches.

That's how Elo works. Groups have an average Elo and then it's inflated.

[Roland]

Not sure what you mean by groups have their Elo inflated.
You mean it's inflated based on group SIZE? Such that larger groups have an inherently higher Elo?

[Sandpit]

CN9 ACE PILOT, on 25 August 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

Pre-game huddle and role selection, and no guarantee they wont have more than a lance full of Dwolves.

SoloQ is forced to be balanctod partially favoring equal weight distribution both teams as to not have one side full of lights and the other full of assaults.

huh?
uhm groups follow same force composition as solos

Roland, on 25 August 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

Not sure what you mean by groups have their Elo inflated.
You mean it's inflated based on group SIZE? Such that larger groups have an inherently higher Elo?

Patch notes and Bryan stated that groups have their Elo inflated as a handicap for being in a group. That's all that has been said that I know of

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

I guess they could switch it up, have one Queue be forced to be under...say 1000 tons give or take a few(Basically something like 350 tons per lance/dropship), and another game type to be unlimited, where all is fair game, and both be able to have solo/group thrown in the mix.

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

huh?
uhm groups follow same force composition as solos

Forgive me, it's been a very long time since i last played full man 12 group drops, are there limitations to the weight of the group?

[Roland]

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

Patch notes and Bryan stated that groups have their Elo inflated as a handicap for being in a group. That's all that has been said that I know of

Well, since groups can only play against other groups, the only thing that would make sense would be an inflation based on size.

[Kjudoon]

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

huh?
uhm groups follow same force composition as solos


Patch notes and Bryan stated that groups have their Elo inflated as a handicap for being in a group. That's all that has been said that I know of

Sandpit, on 25 August 2014 - 07:15 PM, said:

That's how Elo works. Groups have an average Elo and then it's inflated.

Explains the consistency of the stomps now, doesn't it?

[Sandpit]

CN9 ACE PILOT, on 25 August 2014 - 07:20 PM, said:

I guess they could switch it up, have one Queue be forced to be under...say 1000 tons give or take a few(Basically something like 350 tons per lance/dropship), and another game type to be unlimited, where all is fair game, and both be able to have solo/group thrown in the mix.



Forgive me, it's been a very long time since i last played full man 12 group drops, are there limitations to the weight of the group?

yes groups follow the same rule of 3 as solos

Roland, on 25 August 2014 - 07:25 PM, said:

Well, since groups can only play against other groups, the only thing that would make sense would be an inflation based on size.

you shoudl have stopped at makes sense...

This is PGI, only PGI sees the wisdom in artifically inflating a group's Elo when they're only facing other groups who have their Elo inflated as well completely defeating the purpose of having the handicap in the first place