481 replies to this topic

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

I did make a big realization about Stomptown: Most groups do not use TS to coordinate a gameplan. They use it to socialize and pug together in an enjoyable form of gameplay. Unfortunately, this is a losing strategy nearly every time unless very lucky. The teams that use it to coordinate, battle call, balance meta beforehand, execute practiced battle plans are the ones that win. As long as 4 people do it, they generally will win, and the larger force that does this if both sides are doing it, is the side that wins generally.

This means that there is little to no victory possible among the social gamer who doesn't spend their time doing map analysis, coordinated coms where only 1-2 people are talking and everyone else is only calling targets in a battle strategy with minmaxed drop decks.

I quit 12man play because that style of play sucks IMNSHO. I do not enjoy it, and can't stand playing with people that consider it the only way to play the game. Conversely, going to the Pug Queue eliminates the other reason for me to play: social contact and shared enjoyment. With the recent freakout over sync drops by a bunch of vocal minorities on players managing to get into matches together on purpose or accident and playing socially, there is no reason to play there either because of the teamkilling and legging going on when it happens.

Your entire argument falls well short when even your basic premise is wrong.

You're basically implying that because I enjoy competitive play, I despise the people I drop with, and only drop with them because they're good and play the meta, and I gain no social aspect out of it. Which I'm sure you know is patently untrue and ridiculous.

And also, 'people who spend more time and effort are better' comes as a surprise?

Are you really saying 'I want to do what I want, and I don't like that other people who have put in more effort can beat me'?

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

The special interests are being served, but the majority is not. We need a return to social gaming where the small group is king and those who enjoy playing a few games with friends is the goal and coordination is minimal at best. Not this competition style play is everything, or collective rambotardia playing Chinese fire drill.

Another nonsense point. You have as much knowledge of the actual player numbers and makeup as we do. You are in no position to claim you're the majority and someone else is the minority. Doing so once again invalidates most of your arguments.

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

To use another game to illustrate, this is the equivalent of a Magic: The Gathering tuned competition deck going against an open box booster deck just put together. The comp deck wins nearly every time. I don't know if PGI realizes they're setting this up with their game design, but they should really look at what Wizards on the Coast did to deal with competition types versus casual play. You could only have 4 of any card save land (back at the height of this game's craze), and special cards were limited to 1. PGI started that with 3/3/3/3 and that's helped, but it's not there yet because specific equipment (ECM) still unbalances the game. Then they've brought in mechs that are deliberately overpowered, but have no real restrictions (10v12 and no mixing must be implemented) or these problems will continue and destroy the gameplay for everyone not interested in playing that game. I suppose you could say "L2P", but really what will happen is "L2P some other game".

You can have a straight forward competition or an 'open box/booster pack' competition where everyone has the same footing to start with... but you can't mix both.

PGI has already made an effort here. If you want to play casual, go solo drop, where all that matters is your skill, everyone is on even footing.

Once you start to play with more cohesion and teamwork, there no longer is a middle ground.

Using your Magic the Gathering example, what youre doing is basically opening a few boosters and starters, learning the basic concepts, making a noob deck, entering a tournament, losing horribly and then complaining that others are 'playing the meta'.

As several of us have pointed out repeatedly, this claim that people continuously run into organised 10-12 man groups and lose because of that is false, and a made up claim shored up with nonsense anecdotal evidence.

You're more likely to come up against another mix bag team than you are against 12 man teams, unless you're terribly unlucky, or you play intentionally during times when units happen to be holding training sessions.

Edited by Valore, 23 September 2014 - 09:58 PM.

[Iskareot]

VixNix, on 23 September 2014 - 08:40 AM, said:

Agree 100%

And good luck, because now all the play harder comments and other crap comes flying in from the try hards

The best part about this is now people and yourself SEE WHAT solo players vs mini groups felt like when a team of 4 vs 1 in the game felt like.

SOOOO tell ya what... make a que for all premade 4 mans... and you can have your game. ---- But do not think we need to go back to the 4 man premade vs a solo player ever works because it was unfair before and it is unfair now.

At least now.. you see the difference.

[Johnny Reb]

Astrocanis, on 23 September 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

Just as true is "so many have NOT complained about lack of content or no objective." Just because a few very vocal proponents did does not mean that others simply didn't care.

And now, they get to pay. "The goal is in sight". Whose goal?



No?



LOL. So you drop in 10-12 mans and because you only fight semi-pugs you refute? Irony. Truly.

As for majority - I'm not claiming majority. I am claiming that dropping as a two with my son is anti-fun. Argue that with me. Tell me to get into a larger group. In other words, you were miserable because you and 119 of your closest friends couldn't play together so now it's fair that I and my son can, but we're not having fun.

In your world, losing us is better than losing yours. I get it. You have made your point. Sort of. I'm just not sure it's a point you'd like to make.

Um.... tonight we started as a 4 man for the first hr, second hour got to 5-8, third hour we got a full 12 man. I dont want to lose that, again!

edit: however 12 man should be v 12 man regarless of wait. Currently its 12 man teams (I think would get owned by comp 12 mans) just rush in brawlers since they know they have the advantage in comms and what everyone has. Happened 4 times tonight we won once but at that time we had a 10. Other three time we were 6 or less.

Edited by Johnny Reb, 23 September 2014 - 10:02 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Quote

Your entire argument falls well short when even your basic premise is wrong.

This is nothing more than "I got mine so the rest of you can shut up" mentality. As you can see, that mentality offends me.

Your opinion is just as valid as mine.

Quote

You're basically implying that because I enjoy competitive play, I despise the people I drop with, and only drop with them because they're good and play the meta, and I gain no social aspect out of it. Which I'm sure you know is patently untrue and ridiculous.

No. I did not say that. You're assuming I'm saying that. I'm saying that I'm not thrilled at being forced to play with guys trying to make the Yankees when all me and my friends want is to play some casual 'church league softball'. PGI took away that option and left me to playing alone in the solo queue or farm league wanna-be acting like the next match will be their shot at the big time.

Quote

And also, 'people who spend more time and effort are better' comes as a surprise?

If they are that much better than me, elo should stop me from matching against them, shouldn't it? But it doesn't in the group queue, because of group elo hides them for starters.

Quote

Using your Magic the Gathering example, what youre doing is basically opening a few boosters and starters, learning the basic concepts, making a noob deck, entering a tournament, losing horribly and then complaining that others are 'playing the meta'.

No. I'm being forced to play an open starter/booster deck against those playing the meta or play solitare, no casual play a few games with friends to try things out and enjoy each other's company. My choices are this:

1. Quit playing and find a game more suited to my humor.
2. Play in a manner I do not enjoy and win while making the game a chore rather than a pleasure defeating the reason of playing
3. Play a gamestyle that I enjoy and lose while still have the game be a chore rather than a pleasure again ruining the reason for playing.
4. Campaign for a play mode that fits my playstyle and I can enjoy win or lose.

Quote

Another nonsense point. You have as much knowledge of the actual player numbers and makeup as we do.

Call it an educated guess then. That is not nonsense and based on past statements by PGI.

Quote

You are in no position to claim you're the majority and someone else is the minority.

No more than you are to claim I am not right.

Quote

As several of us have pointed out repeatedly, this claim that people continuously run into organised 10-12 man groups and lose because of that is false, and a made up claim shored up with nonsense anecdotal evidence.

You got the stats on that? Again, my claim is just as valid as yours without numbers from PGI to back them up if you want to make that the bar of truth and authority you must provide them as well. Right now, this is an issue of opinions till such time as PGI brings numbers or does something.

Quote

You're more likely to come up against another mix bag team than you are against 12 man teams, unless you're terribly unlucky, or you play intentionally during times when units happen to be holding training sessions.

Must be a run of bad luck then by this reckoning... one that's lasted for weeks. Most of the large groups I drop with are PUG12s from my unit. They usually break up quick because nobody's interested in battle calling, everyone brings what they want and they're more interested in socializing than strategizing or running game plans let alone a meta drop deck.

Those training units should be back in their own queue and not allowed to mix with the rest of us who just want to enjoy the game, not win some championship.

Again, PGI needs to bring back the 2-4man queue and this issue vanishes the same way players who hated capture victories disappeared when they got skirmish mode, and solo-only players got their own queue and didn't have to worry about groups of any size. Throw in the option for solo players to join in if they were never bothered by small groups and for full lances to opt in with 12mans if they feel they are hardcore enough.

If this is too much to accept others don't want to play like you do, that's fine... just don't stand in the way sick of being forced to play the way they don't enjoy. You got yours. Let us get ours.

Edited by Kjudoon, 23 September 2014 - 10:34 PM.

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 10:28 PM, said:

No. I did not say that. You're assuming I'm saying that. I'm saying that I'm not thrilled at being forced to play with guys trying to make the Yankees when all me and my friends want is to play some casual 'church league softball'. PGI took away that option and left me to playing alone in the solo queue or farm league wanna-be acting like the next match will be their shot at the big time.

Your words:

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

I quit 12man play because that style of play sucks IMNSHO. I do not enjoy it, and can't stand playing with people that consider it the only way to play the game. Conversely, going to the Pug Queue eliminates the other reason for me to play: social contact and shared enjoyment.

You basically claim there are 2 options: play casual, loose and socially, or play full on competition standard. You neglect the fact that many of us play socially, and still play competitively.

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 10:28 PM, said:

If they are that much better than me, elo should stop me from matching against them, shouldn't it? But it doesn't in the group queue, because of group elo hides them for starters.

Then you want ELO fixed, not group drops. There's a big difference.

[Kjudoon]

Quote

You basically claim there are 2 options: play casual, loose and socially, or play full on competition standard. You neglect the fact that many of us play socially, and still play competitively.

So you're telling me you succeed in a competitive style of play without:

playing meta loadouts
drop calling
don't focus fire
run gameplans
drop decks
or just chatter away throughout the entire match occasionally calling targets?

Wow, then your elo should be so high and your skills so great, I never see you there because when I'm in groups that do this, we lose the majority of the time.

So no, I don't see a successful 'casual competitive' play that doesn't do that list I mentioned.

Quote

Then you want ELO fixed, not group drops. There's a big difference.

Yep. I do want it fixed, the problem is, unless you find a way to deal with high skill and low skill players grouping together by forcibly segregating them, you can't fix the problem. Players who should not be facing one another mixing where they ought not because they grouped up.

Edited by Kjudoon, 23 September 2014 - 11:02 PM.

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

So you're telling me you succeed in a competitive style of play without:

playing meta loadouts
drop calling
don't focus fire
run gameplans
drop decks
or just chatter away throughout the entire match occasionally calling targets?

Wow, then your elo should be so high and your skills so great, I never see you there because when I'm in groups that do this, we lose the majority of the time.

So no, I don't see a successful 'casual competitive' play that doesn't do that list I mentioned.

You were talking about being 'social'. I'm pointing out you can be social and competitive.

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

This means that there is little to no victory possible among the social gamer who doesn't spend their time doing map analysis, coordinated coms where only 1-2 people are talking and everyone else is only calling targets in a battle strategy with minmaxed drop decks.

Being interested in winning doesn't suddenly drain all the fun out of something. Winning IS fun. Unless you're saying you enjoy losing.

What you seem to want is to play carelessly and loosely. You're basically saying something to the tune of 'I want to run into a horde of people with a shotgun in a tactical squad game, and still do well'. You can't have that in a game designed to encourage team tactics.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Kjudoon, on 23 September 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

So you're telling me you succeed in a competitive style of play without:

playing meta loadouts
drop calling
don't focus fire
run gameplans
drop decks
or just chatter away throughout the entire match occasionally calling targets?

Wow, then your elo should be so high and your skills so great, I never see you there because when I'm in groups that do this, we lose the majority of the time.

So no, I don't see a successful 'casual competitive' play that doesn't do that list I mentioned.



Yep. I do want it fixed, the problem is, unless you find a way to deal with high skill and low skill players grouping together by forcibly segregating them, you can't fix the problem. Players who should not be facing one another mixing where they ought not because they grouped up.

TLDR

Teamwork in the Team Que is OP

Nerf teamwork

[-Natural Selection-]

Why don't all you people chill out, and see if CW battles come out in the next few months. Then these BIG groups who are trying to get their act right for that will not be in the "casual" group que and trying to take territories.

Ohhhh, but then the "casuals" will be bent because they cant compete with the more organized groups in those battles..

[Lan]

Solution: Russ is talking about a voting matchmaker system, where we can indicate our preference for maps or gamemodes but where the MM will look first att ELO matchups.

Add two tickboxes, "Casual" or "Competetive" to indicate your desire to be dropped with players of our mindset.

This will not guarentee that you will be dropped with casuals but at least it may give you more of a chance then now and it plays right in with Russ vision of voting. Get the councils approval and promote this idea if you like it. If it already has been suggested, count this as another vote in favor

Remarius, on 23 September 2014 - 10:48 AM, said:

Our company got rolled by a Swedish training team on Saturday so lessons...

1) Lan and his Swedes are scary
2) If you go in and do it properly you can succeed.

Haha! Thanks Remarius, I didn't think we were that rough on you?

My current solution to get new players into the game and play casual is teaming up on coms. That makes the world of difference. This Saturday I did a 12h stream, inviting new players to join us on VOIP and learn the ropes. After warning them several times that playing in a group with me and my instructors would put them in group queue and in a severely more challenging mode then solo queue. We dropped together a dozen times, increasing in size until we had a peak with 8 players in total (after that we lost a few to the dinnerbell but kept rolling). 1 was a returning player, 4 was total beginners. They listened to good advice, stayed on their instructors shoulder and targeted called enemies.

We're casuals in my mind but coms and size counts. These were FPS gamers by heart so basic skills were there.

Edited by Lan, 23 September 2014 - 11:37 PM.

[ApolloKaras]

Lan, on 23 September 2014 - 11:30 PM, said:

Solution: Russ is talking about a voting matchmaker system, where we can indicate our preference for maps or gamemodes but where the MM will look first att ELO matchups.

Add two tickboxes, "Casual" or "Competetive" to indicate your desire to be dropped with players of our mindset.

This will not guarentee that you will be dropped with casuals but at least it may give you more of a chance then now and it plays right in with Russ vision of voting. Get the councils approval and promote this idea if you like it. If it already has been suggested, count this as another vote in favor

There would have to be quite a few things that you would need to take into account. What constitutes Competitive what constitutes casual? I know where I am we would be clicking the Comp drop all the time. However what if your group wants to grind say new mechs for instance, what do you check? I would still say drop Comp. Even though the mechs may not be effective the pilots still are.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Saxie, on 23 September 2014 - 11:50 PM, said:

There would have to be quite a few things that you would need to take into account. What constitutes Competitive what constitutes casual? I know where I am we would be clicking the Comp drop all the time. However what if your group wants to grind say new mechs for instance, what do you check? I would still say drop Comp. Even though the mechs may not be effective the pilots still are.

Not to mention to ease of abuse here...

[Lan]

Saxie, on 23 September 2014 - 11:50 PM, said:

There would have to be quite a few things that you would need to take into account. What constitutes Competitive what constitutes casual? I know where I am we would be clicking the Comp drop all the time. However what if your group wants to grind say new mechs for instance, what do you check? I would still say drop Comp. Even though the mechs may not be effective the pilots still are.

Sure, it's up to each individuals judgement but eventually people would learn which climate best suit them. In many other games we have hardcore as a option, indicating your desire for harder opponents would benefit most. Competitive teams are looking for a challenge, not a PUG stomp really. So this coin has two sides and neither really wants to mix.

And sure, there's more people then those two sides but those are the two main mindsets I believe?

[Edustaja]

As I see it the casual groups would benefit from PVE content.

[Lily from animove]

Cathy, on 23 September 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

I feel like I've been kicked in the font.
However I doubt very much that this will be adopted, because,

2, The people that want to group in numbers between 4-10 will find match maker fail time after time as most the smaller groups opt in for Pug play, and complain.

3, The soloists will complain about being farmed by the well organised groups dropping in smaller numbers.

But random newbies will just not enter the group queue ever, and so propbably more and more (lesser skilled) people stop playing in the group queue.

And soloists complain always, there are still lots of stomps in solo queue. But tryint to drop with a unexpirienced buddy in a groupqueue is just not working for them.

and why can single players not drop in the "group queue" to enter some more competition?

[PhoenixFire55]

Soooo ....

Somebody is playing for lulz with no intend to work on their skill, their builds and bother about teamwork. They get constantly outplayed by people who do work on their skill, their mechs and use teamwork.

Can anyone please explain to me where is the problem? Because I see none.

This is a competitive game by nature. You are either competitive yourself, or you are casual. If you are casual prepare to get rolled often. Plus, if you are casual as you claim why you even bring this "can't drop with friends" topic? You can't group up with any number of friends between 2 and 10? Or you are waiting for a match for like 2 hours like 12-mans used to?

If you are playing for fun then get fun from the process regardless of winning/losing. And if you can only get fun when winning then you aren't one bit casual.

[VixNix]

Iskareot, on 23 September 2014 - 09:34 PM, said:

The best part about this is now people and yourself SEE WHAT solo players vs mini groups felt like when a team of 4 vs 1 in the game felt like.

SOOOO tell ya what... make a que for all premade 4 mans... and you can have your game. ---- But do not think we need to go back to the 4 man premade vs a solo player ever works because it was unfair before and it is unfair now.

At least now.. you see the difference.

I do NOT want 4 mans in solo queue.
I would not mind 2 mans in it but that's just my opinion.
I DO want a place where my small group of friends who play once in a great while can come in and have fun.

Can we have a queue for lance v lance?
How would that work average ELO?

Would it be that difficult to put in a check box for competitive vs casual?

[VixNix]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 September 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

or...reality?

People pushed for the bigger group queues. People pushed for pure solos queues.

Problem is, to add a "small group" queue we dilute the player pool to the point that we return to unacceptably long drop waits.

Maybe it's time to realize it no that the "world is against you" or such, and that PGI followed the telemetry they had, and unfortunately, necessity dictated one group get the shaft. If "small group" was the majority, trust me that it would not be the odd man out. Because that is bad for business.

Reality?

Very few people come to these caustic forums to do any suggestions so when you say "people" its the few that dare the trolls and usually leave with stumps of chewed off limbs... it is NOT the population, its the few.

Personally I dont care if the 12 man groups have to wait half an hour or more for a match, I don't want to play in that group, especially with new, newer and/or newish people who just want to have fun.

Look at other strictly PVP games, CSS, TF2 etc... you can go to any server you want and that allows you to play any style game you want, the people who run the servers set the limits and its your choice to go to a "noob" server to learn to play and or learn the map...

PGI gives us choice of game type, which is a joke, because people get the biggest reward for kills not for playing the game...
PGI gives us solo or group, and I prefer solo as 19 out of 20 group drops = loss for me...
PGI allows you to pay for private match, never done it cant comment on it

[-Natural Selection-]

PhoenixFire55, on 24 September 2014 - 01:50 AM, said:

Soooo ....

Somebody is playing for lulz with no intend to work on their skill, their builds and bother about teamwork. They get constantly outplayed by people who do work on their skill, their mechs and use teamwork.

Can anyone please explain to me where is the problem? Because I see none.

This is a competitive game by nature. You are either competitive yourself, or you are casual. If you are casual prepare to get rolled often. Plus, if you are casual as you claim why you even bring this "can't drop with friends" topic? You can't group up with any number of friends between 2 and 10? Or you are waiting for a match for like 2 hours like 12-mans used to?

If you are playing for fun then get fun from the process regardless of winning/losing. And if you can only get fun when winning then you aren't one bit casual.

Slow clap commence.....

[The Wakelord]

JohnnyWayne, on 23 September 2014 - 08:47 AM, said:

I drop with 2 more good players and a random number of casual firends (2-3) regularly. We even wipe our ass with large groups. None the less I flame them for being a large group.

I don't really get why we have to drop against these.

The inbetweens work fine, except when you have completely green players you want to show the game.

The thing is YOU have to take command and lead your friends. Because matchmaker expects you to if you are good.

So you are suggesting that I become a real hard-ass Mr Serious to my casual playing friends and start bossing them around? Yeah, sounds like fun.

Phaeric Cyrh, on 23 September 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

I think they should put the 2 player group back into the "solo" que. I notice when dropping with just 1 other of my unit that we mostly feel like a 5th wheel when paired up with larger groups, and being out of the loop of their voice communications, and since they are mostly on VOIP there is almost no text chat as in the PUG games.

As a 2 man you have little hope of swaying the battle and I don't see how 2 man groups would be unfair to solo players. Even when dropping with 3 I notice a significant improvement of battle effectiveness over a 2 man drop.

I agree 100%. I often play in solo games, but my partner likes to join in a couple times a week. When we play in solo PUGs, we have a good game/survive may 2/3rds of the time. When we become a duo, we have a good game maybe 1/4 of the time. Mostly it is rolls or insta-kill because the group cue is l33t meta or well co-ordinated.

Not so fun on the recieving end, especially when the group cue times are so very much longer than the PUG times (which I assume means the ELO-based MM is getting desperate)

General Merk, on 23 September 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

There's a few things you can do to mitigate this, drop in a Lance sized group or smaller so there are more places to fit you in the group queue. Secondly drop around US prime time rather than late at night or in the EU TZ, there always seem to be more casual lances and groups around during US time.

That's very silly logic. "You Australians must play at 3AM-5AM if you want to have the chance to enjoy the game with your casual friends.

Piney, on 23 September 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:

One of the big problems with playing in a small group alongside a larger group is the large group will not communicate with the small group most of the time. The small group isn't on the team's TS and gets ignored / used as cannon fodder.

The small group is left to determine the game flow on their own and hope for the best.

So, you guys in large groups - let the small groups in on your plans and work with them. They just might be very helpful in winning the match.

Agree 100% Worse than PUGs in that sense, as the majority of the team is presumably on teamspeak or something, so we just have to assume they know what they are doing and try to guess (like a PUG), while they do their own thing (like a team).