319 replies to this topic

[Ghogiel]

DV McKenna, on 23 September 2014 - 10:47 PM, said:

The fact PL brought 7-8 First Line mechs; and his team brought 2-3 would have been a deciding factor...

that's true enough.

[Deathlike]

Sorry to be late to the party, but I guess I can re-propose v3 (or v4, I don't know how many times I've repeated it) of my multi-queue idea. I think this is the best compromise for everyone, particularly small groups.

There are three groups that are in question...

1) Solo

2) Small group (2-4)

3) Large group (5-12)

The best way to structure them is with the following...

1) Normal (or newbie-ish or "casual") queue - There are two subqueues involved:
i) Solo
ii) Group - 2 to 4 mans ONLY
A player or "small group" can select this group by default. Once the group size goes ABOVE 5, the group CANNOT be part of this queue. No exceptions.

2) Competitive (non-newbie, non-casual) queue - This will be one massive queue. Groups will be constructed with a max of 2 (or more, depending on need) solo players, small groups, and large group in some large combination.
Any solo, small group can opt into the queue. Doing so will get you a 10-15% C-bill bonus since these group sizes are in demand for 8-11 man groups. If you are at 5 to 12 man group, you are part of this queue, and have no other options (outside of running your own private match).

Now, it is actually possible to have multiple smaller groups of the same unit in this queue... a special binding rule is that NO two premades/solo members can have a player from the same unit be in the same match. This is to minimize the effect of sync dropping to get the bonus... and possibly "compromise" the integrity of the queue.

The additional effect/requirement is that any Solo based tournies must be run IN THIS QUEUE for their matches to count. Pulverizing actual newbies is not a skill.

I think the only "possible abuse" of this queue is really with unaffiliated group members, as they have not declared... but for the most part, groups are usually part of a bigger unit or clan and as such will probably inevitably be publicly shamed if they are trying to take advantage of the solo/small group bonus in the competitive queue.

That's the best way to go about it, given the circumstances. This should be implemented in the drop down for the "preference" of the player... whether they want to go to the normal queue, or casual queue, or both.

Hopefully this appeals to both sides of the matter, in which I do feel bad for the small groups that are trying to learn to play the game together.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 September 2014 - 06:35 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Anything that attempts to put groups (regardless of how 'competitive' they are) in the solo queue is doomed. Riots in the streets sort of doomed.

You've given solo players a chance to play without groups, which means performance comes down to individuals and not luck of who you dropped with (or dropping only in 4mans).

You need to keep groups in the group queue.

I still say stack the MM with a preference for group sizes more than Elo.

[Kirkland Langue]

Umm, isn't this thread dead now?

[Jon Gotham]

Russ Bullock, on 22 September 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

Getting on with it, isn't possible. Any change we make is viewed as a fatal error by some and the right move by others. We need more agreement on what the best trade offs are.

A few things to keep in mind:

1) Solo queue was very upset that any groups at all were in and wiping them.
2) Putting all 2-3 man groups in with the solo queue means removing groups of 9 and 10 from the group queue.

We can make this a lot more competitive but you guys need to let me know what is acceptable. Off the top of my head if we could put groups of 2 and 3 in solo queue and restrict group queue to group sizes of 4, 8 and 12. Then make game mode selection a vote instead of a hard stop. Then make groups of 4 made up of one of each weight class, groups of 8 made of of 2 of each weight class, finally 12 mans made up of the 3,3,3,3.

The match maker would have a grand time of putting matches together.

My suggestion would be something like:
Wherever (not a concrete rule-more a guideline)POSSIBLE:
Match smaller collections of teams vs smaller collections of teams!

If you have an 8 man (with 4 man), you should face 8,9,10 or 12. (same with 6+6 or 5+7?)
9 man+3man= 8+4, 9+3, 10+2 and a 12.
10 man +2 man= 8+4, 9+3, 10+2 and a 12
12man all of the above.

That way the other team can't usually be that much bigger than your groups.It might make wait times increase, but currently it seems a lot of players are just not dropping in groups, this has potential to spiral out of control if left long enough.
I'd also have a look at arty and airstrikes as well. It's been my experience the comp large groups do love to spam them on cooldown from 1st contact to last-that is also not helping the more casual players any. One match for example, I had 240k's worth spammed purely at me, ONE mech. The group queue is starting to feel like tournament queue to be honest

[Jon Gotham]

Triordinant, on 23 September 2014 - 07:43 PM, said:

I hope PGI does so. If anyone knows who the majority is, it's PGI.

According to you, they already have
so there is really no issue eh?

[Glythe]

Any legitimate change is going to take at least 15-30 days to change. Have some patience.

They're doing some testing which can also take that much time.



It sucks but you can play solo.

Edited by Glythe, 24 September 2014 - 07:39 PM.

[Triordinant]

kamiko kross, on 24 September 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

According to you, they already have
so there is really no issue eh?

No issue on how many of each kind of player (solo, small group or big group) there are at this point, but the numbers could change over time.

[Aym]

Gas Guzzler, on 22 September 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

It was like this initially and they shut it down because solos didn't like groups of 4 in their queue

Exactly when was there a group queue with sizes more than 4 and groups of 4 or less occupying spots in a "solo queue"?

[-Natural Selection-]

Why don't you people wait till CW/territory matches start before you loose your mind? You know most of the large grops are not going to bother with random group que after that..

[Ace Selin]

2 mans to 12 mans should only ever drop in the group Q, Solo Q should be for solo drops only.

Playing group Q with kids gets me same result as I do in PUG matches, win some / lose some.

[Jon Gotham]

Triordinant, on 24 September 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

No issue on how many of each kind of player (solo, small group or big group) there are at this point, but the numbers could change over time.

I thought you'd say something like that lol.
As long as the chosen ones are happy it's ok, because they are the important people.
All hail democracy!

[Triordinant]

kamiko kross, on 25 September 2014 - 04:50 AM, said:

I thought you'd say something like that lol.
As long as the chosen ones are happy it's ok, because they are the important people.
All hail democracy!

If by "chosen ones" you mean the majority of players, then yes that's how democracy works.

[Kjudoon]

Russ Bullock, on 22 September 2014 - 12:16 PM, said:

Honestly any groups in the solo queue really screws it up. The solo Queue right now is actually pretty amazing with an average team elo difference of around 40. Exact weight class matching 95% of the time etc.

It is the group queue that is frustrating players - especially groups on the smaller side.

Please please please please please consider this solution! Aym gave me a good twist to it to make it potentially more viable and following precident set by game mode.

Solo Queue (solo player only)
Lance Queue (2-4 with opt in solos)
Company Queue (5+ with opt in 1-4mans) ... this would make groups of 11 viable expanding the Company Queue base more.

Everyone gets the gameplay style they want from Solo to casual small group to hardcore competitive. Groups of all sizes are now viable and if you didn't want to play in a group mode... it's your fault for not opting out.

Please consider this Russ. My knees are getting raw here.

Triordinant, on 25 September 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

If by "chosen ones" you mean the majority of players, then yes that's how democracy works.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

[Kjudoon]

Mickey Knoxx, on 24 September 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

Why don't you people wait till CW/territory matches start before you loose your mind? You know most of the large grops are not going to bother with random group que after that..

Oh that has the potential to be a whole new level of divine punishment right there. Will elo be enforced in CW? If not...

[-Natural Selection-]

wait a sec.. wasn't it a couple months ago they should cater to the "76%" solo players and why the groups had to be removed to their own que. And that a 12 man had to wait an hour (or 2) to find a match?

And now you are starting to see more and more groups grow and the number of larger groups increase.

So the fact that before the group que, at best would have 6 people online during our primetime. And now from the same list daily see 20-30 online is a showing a problem?

I would say things are better. People I know who have not dropped a penny in years, dumping hundreds now. I think they are catering to the right people, but I may be wrong.

[jackal40]

I would suggest two things:

1-Russ needs to either group with 1 new person and play 10 or so rounds or use God mode and spectate a 2 man group.

2-Put your statistician to work analyzing the 12-3 and worse losses in the group queue. Look at how the larger groups are usually stomping the smaller groups.

Maybe if 10+ man groups were only allowed in CW (once it's out) that could help.

[alVolVloLy]

I think the queues are fine as is. We finally have the ability to drop with any amount of teammates (except 11) and solo players can play with solo players. Wait times for groups are also pretty reasonable at this point also.

I don't think that any amount of group size restrictions are going to work for the people advocating groups of 2-4 only. Within a week there will be posts about larger units splitting into smaller units to farm the 2-4man queue and we will be back to the same place as we are now.

Maybe there is an answer within elo brackets, but we've already been down the pug/premade road regarding group size and I think most would agree that the game is finally in a good spot regarding group sizes.

[Jon Phoenix]

Akulla1980, on 23 September 2014 - 05:33 PM, said:

And again just after the first. And the have the hide to say it was a GG.



Want more evidence. Can post these all day.

Our group of casuals beat a PL 12-man:



We were only 6 strong in that match and we had I think 2 groups of 3 players with us. The most my unit has ever fielded was 10 players. The average is probably 5-6 on any given night (lance challenges excepted). We have probably a higher than 50% average against 12-man teams. Some of them are extremely good and some of them are not particularly good. Most seem to be around the same skill level as us and we do experience their advantage in coordination. When your team doesn't counter their coordination and even use it against them with deception, herding, etc., you tend to lose. We've definitely been steamrolled by excellent and competitive 12-man teams and it's not fun. It would be nice to repeat those matches with the same players and learn something about playing the game. I wish I were as good as some of you guys!

All of that said, I do sympathize with your complaints and I'd rather that 12-man teams weren't mixed into the group queue. However, my solution, and I've brought it up a few times (here, here, and here) on the forum lately, is to ditch the MM all together. Put in public lobbies so that players can see whom they're playing and players/groups can pick the match. I don't mind playing against a really good 12-man with 2-3 smaller groups, especially if we can play that 12-man team over and over again. That's how you improve: you play against better players. I can't stand the randomness of the MM and how it works towards the 50/50 win/loss ratio. The game, at least for me, becomes beating the ratio rather than enjoying the matches and fun competitiveness.

-Jon (apologizes if any of the PL guys are offended)

Edited by Jon Phoenix, 29 September 2014 - 10:24 AM.

[Jon Gotham]

Triordinant, on 25 September 2014 - 04:58 AM, said:

If by "chosen ones" you mean the majority of players, then yes that's how democracy works.

Shame this "democracy" so utterly ruins the "minority's" fun eh?
A person once said to me: "just because many think a thing-don't mean that thing's right."

Because your democracy I don't feel really understood the old queue. Anything can be excused as long as it's the masses that benefit, right? I didn't vote for a solo only queue, it got forced upon me. Having something forced upon you isn't very democratic to me. Especially considering the why it was done.
I'll admit at first the solo queue improved but it's slowly slipping into a turgid mess. the stomps are still happening just as often as they always did.
What's next? Ban good players next? Ban meta builds? As long as the "majority" want that it's ok, right?
In my experience, majorities tend to do rather crazy things and make some shocking decisions......smug and glib responses are not helping either.
Because right now small groups of friends are not having much fun at all, all because of your majority. But that does not seem to be a problem for you does it?
Wakey wakey! ALL the players are important-NOT just your type of playstyle. There is a middle ground that needs to be catered to here...or your beloved game might just suffer for it.