481 replies to this topic

[Valore]

kamiko kross, on 25 September 2014 - 05:35 PM, said:

You are either more laid back about the game or you are more competitively focused and win more I'd guess. Or you just don't notice it as often as others do.
Just because you don't find something off, doesn't mean it is ok. It means you don't have a problem:) Others might.

Perfectly correct answer. Which then brings up the point how people can keep saying things like:

Kjudoon, on 25 September 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

Then they split and gave the large groups what they wanted, in the process alienating and ticking off a large portion of their fan base

Large portion of the fanbase? Surely people do realise that the 4 man queues and the 12 man queues are not mutually exclusive as I've just pointed out? We're as much a part of that fanbase as you guys are.

[ApolloKaras]

Josef Koba, on 25 September 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

I'll stop QQing and L2P better.

No one is saying you are QQ'ing or L2P, the game should be enjoyable for you. Well everyone for that matter. I would expect PGI to look into it and see whats going on.

[Kjudoon]

Saxie, on 25 September 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

No one is saying you are QQ'ing or L2P, the game should be enjoyable for you. Well everyone for that matter. I would expect PGI to look into it and see whats going on.

Mostly right. Valore is saying we should stop QQing and L2P the competitive game and stop wanting a game we would enjoy because he enjoys what he's got and isn't interested in allowing other people the same privilege.

Edited by Kjudoon, 25 September 2014 - 06:04 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Valore, on 25 September 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

Perfectly correct answer. Which then brings up the point how people can keep saying things like:



Large portion of the fanbase? Surely people do realise that the 4 man queues and the 12 man queues are not mutually exclusive as I've just pointed out? We're as much a part of that fanbase as you guys are.

Reading how many people are complaining about this other than myself, yes, a large portion. I would have said majority if I knew for a fact it was over 50% but it's not just the idle fancy of a few... unlike those who are trying to harry amidships any effort to create a small group queue.

[Nemesis Duck]

Isn't the point of this thread to point out the difficultly introducing new people to the game? How it's a degraded experience from their point of view since the impression they get is it's an unwinnable situation? I too tried to introduce a friend to it and found it difficult since the playing field can be so grossly overbalanced for a newbie 2-man. And without coms, it's a killer.

I'd support 2-man drops in both queues if favourment was given to the group queue most situations, so that 2-mans mostly drop there and it's needs are the priority. Then perhaps weight ELO plus some other newbie identifier to identify loser 2-mans and favour these groups into the pug queue, butt only allow them into the highest bracket of pug matches launched. In the end, the worst you get is a challange for high ELO pug players butt also an opportunity for weaker duelists to play against a less organized enemy, without coms. The pugs should be fine as long as it's not more than 2 per group and mostly weighted to the group queue. Maybe a few decent 2-mans slip through to a pug match, what's the worst that could happen?

[Astrocanis]

Edustaja, on 25 September 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

[/size]

That is actually not true. The matchmaker inflates Elo(not an acronym) for the larger groups already. Dropping smaller groups actually gives you advantage in player skill. Maybe this needs to be evaluated a bit more. We'll know more after the game mode switches are taken off.

This is a PVP game after all, for the ultra casuals and new players PVE would offer a more relaxed atmosphere with a higher win percentage than is possible against real players.



You and your friends actually want PVE content where you can win more than 50%

Presumptive. He never said any such thing. Wow. He says "I don't like getting rolled" and you reply "You want PvE". I'm curious as to how those connections occur.

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 25 September 2014 - 06:14 PM, said:

Reading how many people are complaining about this other than myself, yes, a large portion. I would have said majority if I knew for a fact it was over 50% but it's not just the idle fancy of a few... unlike those who are trying to harry amidships any effort to create a small group queue.

Because as many have pointed out, any effort to split the queues is in effect an effort to ruin the large group queue. Mainly because we don't have the numbers for a further split.

Which would be something to consider IF every other game put small groups up against a large group.

But as many of us have pointed out, this is an untruth that many championing the small group queue keep propagating.

If people would stop spreading that lie, then maybe discussions would be more civil.

Until then, as long as this discussion stems from a false premise, discussions are unlikely to be productive or constructive.

[Astrocanis]

Valore, on 25 September 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

Because as many have pointed out, any effort to split the queues is in effect an effort to ruin the large group queue. Mainly because we don't have the numbers for a further split.

Which would be something to consider IF every other game put small groups up against a large group.

But as many of us have pointed out, this is an untruth that many championing the small group queue keep propagating.

If people would stop spreading that lie, then maybe discussions would be more civil.

Until then, as long as this discussion stems from a false premise, discussions are unlikely to be productive or constructive.

The only thing I have to say is that the group queues just got 3 players smaller. I play with my son and sometimes with a friend. Not interested in constant stomps. Just not.

I'd rather not experience it, so we don't play together. We are, however, looking for another game. Which is sad, because I've been a fan of BT since 1986.

[Edustaja]

Astrocanis, on 25 September 2014 - 06:21 PM, said:

Presumptive. He never said any such thing. Wow. He says "I don't like getting rolled" and you reply "You want PvE". I'm curious as to how those connections occur.

He was talking about running a very loose 2-4 man group, mostly with his friends that are new to the game. They want to have a casual and fun experience and shoot some mechs in the face. He probably does not want to wait for a long time for the match though.

MWO at the moment is a very core game, meaning that the playerbase of grouped play is pretty tightly knit. There are not a a huge number of these small casual groups. There are also not a huge amount of groups in general in the queue.

That means that there is probably a veteran lance or a group in either team. It might not be a large one, but the matchmaker is doing the best it can. The inexperienced casual lance will get stomped by some of the average (for this game) players. They feel they got rolled by elite players and could do nothing about it. Their experience previously was from the solo queue where they get to face their level of competition.

Now the possibilities we have are:
- remove options from the group queue to increase available matches
- increase queue times to increase available matches
- introduce something else for the small groups to do that they can do casually

I wanted to introduce the PVE aspect to get an environment going where small groups can go to have fun. Nothing against small groups or casual play, but I felt that would be an easy stepping stone to get their feet wet and have fun together at their pace. This kind of content could be then used to market the game towards the more casual crowds in the future and increase the overall player base that way.

If this sounds condescending, then I apologize.

[Astrocanis]

Edustaja, on 25 September 2014 - 06:48 PM, said:

He was talking about running a very loose 2-4 man group, mostly with his friends that are new to the game. They want to have a casual and fun experience and shoot some mechs in the face. He probably does not want to wait for a long time for the match though.

MWO at the moment is a very core game, meaning that the playerbase of grouped play is pretty tightly knit. There are not a a huge number of these small casual groups. There are also not a huge amount of groups in general in the queue.

That means that there is probably a veteran lance or a group in either team. It might not be a large one, but the matchmaker is doing the best it can. The inexperienced casual lance will get stomped by some of the average (for this game) players. They feel they got rolled by elite players and could do nothing about it. Their experience previously was from the solo queue where they get to face their level of competition.

Now the possibilities we have are:
- remove options from the group queue to increase available matches
- increase queue times to increase available matches
- introduce something else for the small groups to do that they can do casually

I wanted to introduce the PVE aspect to get an environment going where small groups can go to have fun. Nothing against small groups or casual play, but I felt that would be an easy stepping stone to get their feet wet and have fun together at their pace. This kind of content could be then used to market the game towards the more casual crowds in the future and increase the overall player base that way.

If this sounds condescending, then I apologize.

Under those circumstances, I agree. It's not a long term solution for small group drops like mine, but it gives players a chance to play with friends, even if the AI is relatively weak.

Long term, I would like to play with my son in a PvP environment in which our 2s and 3s motley ragtag bunch aren't up against 7-10 well trained players. They are there to play as well, but most to try tactics on fodder. Nobody likes being fodder.

My only solution besides "buck up, laddie, and give it all for someone else's fun" is to not group with my son. Or leave. I don't like any of the 3 possibilities and I am NOT pining for PvE. If it's there, I might play it - particularly if it is mission based. But it's not the draw that brought me here.

[Hoax415]

Are people in this thread really so clueless?

"My 2-man group runs up against 12-mans more often than XYZ"

This is most likely by design. Do you know why? Because a 2-man + 10-man = 12 men. So when MM is looking to match a 12-man versus someone it looks for a 12-man that works elo-wise. Then it looks for a 10+2 setup that works elo wise. Then 9+3, 8+4 and so on.

Can you think of why it would match 12 vs 10+2 more often than 12 vs 12?

Two reasons are obvious! 1) There are less 12 man teams than 10 man teams. 2) Two 12 mans have to have closer elo than a given 10 man plus or minus the elo picking from countless 2 mans, which considering the small population at a given time of full 12-mans is unlikely.

If this angers you or you at least wanted to confirm that this set of logic based assumptions is how MM works. This thread might have actual value.

But like the sync dropping threads this is a less than 10 guys are posting constantly to make enough noise that they can claim its a huge issue that everyone agrees needs to be acted on so the game works the way they want it to.

Edited by Hoax415, 25 September 2014 - 07:43 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Valore, on 25 September 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

Because as many have pointed out, any effort to split the queues is in effect an effort to ruin the large group queue. Mainly because we don't have the numbers for a further split.

Which would be something to consider IF every other game put small groups up against a large group.

But as many of us have pointed out, this is an untruth that many championing the small group queue keep propagating.

If people would stop spreading that lie, then maybe discussions would be more civil.

Until then, as long as this discussion stems from a false premise, discussions are unlikely to be productive or constructive.

This just further proves the point I made earlier about the "I've got mine and screw everyone else" menality that you're exhibiting.

Even PGI knows 12mans are a minority here, otherwise there would have been no need to expand the 12man queue to include smaller groups which I agree needed to be done, but not at the expense of other people's enjoyed playstyle which was the 1-4man queue.

You want to play your game. I can see no good reason why you have any reason to complain about the creation (or rather return) of a playstyle that pleases others unless you have some hidden agenda or spiteful streak. Your queue's health is not my responsibility, since if I can't find a way to enjoy the game, I just won't play leaving you with one less person who wouldn't play with you anyway. So you lost already.

Now if MM gets fixed and suddenly I don't face teams way out of my Elo because of averaging or whatever else is broken with it, I might return some day... IF the game mode is ever made fun for those of us who aren't being used for cannon fodder and told to like it.

TL:DR
You have no right to demand anyone play a game style they hate just for your own pleasure and with no consideration or concern for them. This is selfish and ultimately self defeating.

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 25 September 2014 - 07:41 PM, said:

Even PGI knows 12mans are a minority here, otherwise there would have been no need to expand the 12man queue to include smaller groups which I agree needed to be done, but not at the expense of other people's enjoyed playstyle which was the 1-4man queue.

Wait, now 12 man groups are suddenly a minority? I thought small groups were being stomped by 12 man groups ALL THE TIME, as claimed by some who want to split the group queue. How can we magically be both a minority, and yet be omnipresent?

This is the exact reason why this thread constantly descends into less than constructive argument.

Are there too many of us that you guys keep getting mangled by our Uber Superior Teamwork? Or are we a minority? Make up your minds and stop changing the facts to suit your arguments.

Edited by Valore, 25 September 2014 - 07:57 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Quote

Wait, now 12 man groups are suddenly a minority?

Always have been. There never has been a time when 12mans were a majority in MWO. When you would hold 12man practice nights like I used to do with my team, we'd have ultimately 2 opponants, poorly matched for up to 3 hours because so few 12mans were playing during NA prime time during the week. This was the case till the creation of the 5+ abomination known as Group Queue. Don't think I don't know what it was like to do competitive practice. It's why I dislike it so much and want nothing to do with it.

Quote

I thought small groups were being stomped by 12 man groups ALL THE TIME

They are the vast majority of the time. To deny that is to deny the outcry of the entire community who has an issue with this... which is fairly obvious you are.

Again, why are you bothering to comment on something that really doesn't concern you. Nobody's taking away your 12man stomp fest. Those who do not wish to be your fodder are demanding to opt out or leaving. You lose either way, and whining that they're leaving just makes you look more and more petty.

Quote

How can we magically be both a minority,

Math. When no group holds over 50%, they are all minorities. Happens all the time. The question is only the size of the minority that composes the plurality of groups here in MWO. About 6 months ago, PGI released their stats of group size in preparation for creating a solo only queue, and discovered less than 20% dropped in a group of any size, and out of those 12mans were the smallest group.

You can do your own search for that, I've not the inclination to play that game.

Quote

This is the exact reason why this thread constantly descends into less than constructive argument.

And you have provided only criticism and proclaimed 'nothing to see here. move along' the entire time which is neither a constructive or valid argument... just denial and corrupt self interest.

Quote

Are there too many of us that you guys keep getting mangled by our Uber Superior Teamwork? Or are we a minority?

Semantic hair splitting on a false equivalency. One bad apple spoils the barrel and a minority of bad actors can ruin an entire game. Ever hear of the Goons? Excellent players with the reputation of deliberately trolling games and specific people. There are a few other units here that are so good people quit matches the instant they see them. Yes, I've watched it happen, and then got killed 3 minutes later as one of the last 2 standing. Not a single mech on their side even close to killed.

But if theset's just cases of 'haw haw L2P noob" you really aren't the kind of player helping PGI or the community at large. Stick to playing in private tournaments like RHOD or MCW or whatever else, and leave the rest of us who have no interest playing on that level alone.

[Pika]

Valore, on 25 September 2014 - 07:50 PM, said:

Wait, now 12 man groups are suddenly a minority? I thought small groups were being stomped by 12 man groups ALL THE TIME, as claimed by some who want to split the group queue. How can we magically be both a minority, and yet be omnipresent?

This is the exact reason why this thread constantly descends into less than constructive argument.

Are there too many of us that you guys keep getting mangled by our Uber Superior Teamwork? Or are we a minority? Make up your minds and stop changing the facts to suit your arguments.

The 12 mans are a COLOSSAL minority and will be due to how the fact there are always going to be more individual\2\3-man groups queuing that 12 man groups. I am shocked that needs be spelt out?

In the last 4-5 weeks I have managed to bring in a decent number of people to this game, around 7-8, all of which stuck around after the Lance Challenge, but all of them told me they didn't know if they'd bother staying until then because of the _constant_ 12 man, fully mastered, modules-all-over-the-'Mech's and Airstrikes every ten second monster teams on the other side. How do you expect little newbies, who can barely afford a single 'Mech, let along the cost of customizing it or modules to stand against that?

Long and short: They don't. And that inexperience and low income will last a long, long time. Many months infact. The group queue should not be the reserve of the 12 man elites. I still propose a solo queue, a lance queue, and a group queue. I bet you'll get more people in there then. 12 mans should never fight anything other than other 12 man groups. WoT does it this way and if that means you queue for 10 mins, then you queue for 10 mins.

Edited by Pika, 25 September 2014 - 08:58 PM.

[Valore]

Kjudoon, on 25 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

About 6 months ago, PGI released their stats of group size in preparation for creating a solo only queue, and discovered less than 20% dropped in a group of any size, and out of those 12mans were the smallest group.

And it doesn't occur to you for even a second, that the reason 12 mans were the statistically smallest faction, is because:

1. You couldn't get a game, so people stopped bothering to form 12 man groups

2. People who play 12 mans, ALSO play in smaller groups?

Kjudoon, on 25 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

One bad apple spoils the barrel and a minority of bad actors can ruin an entire game. Ever hear of the Goons? Excellent players with the reputation of deliberately trolling games and specific people. There are a few other units here that are so good people quit matches the instant they see them. Yes, I've watched it happen, and then got killed 3 minutes later as one of the last 2 standing. Not a single mech on their side even close to killed.

But if theset's just cases of 'haw haw L2P noob" you really aren't the kind of player helping PGI or the community at large. Stick to playing in private tournaments like RHOD or MCW or whatever else, and leave the rest of us who have no interest playing on that level alone.

If people are quitting the game when they see tags, then your problem remains unresolved, because we drop both in 12 and 4 man queues.

Pika, on 25 September 2014 - 08:57 PM, said:

The 12 mans are a COLOSSAL minority and will be due to how the fact there are always going to be more individual\2\3-man groups queuing that 12 man groups. I am shocked that needs be spelt out?

You are both not getting my question.

I'm asking how in the world it is possible that:

1. People advocating for a split queue claim they CONSTANTLY get stomped by 12 mans

2. Yet 12 mans are a minority.

Its not possible.

Either us 12 mans are a majority, hence you smaller groups meet us all the time

OR

Us 12 mans are a minority, and most of the time you meet other small groups and lose because these smaller groups were better than your smaller groups.

If, as you're saying, we're (big groups) a minority, then you guys should be facing other small groups more than you face us. If that's the case, what are you guys complaining about?

I am NOT disputing you lose when you face bigger groups.

What I am disputing, is since bigger groups are a MINORITY, you can't be facing them MOST of the time.

Is what I'm trying to put across here confusing? Because I'm honestly astonished you're missing that simple point.

Edited by Valore, 25 September 2014 - 09:14 PM.

[Pika]

Valore, on 25 September 2014 - 09:04 PM, said:

Stuff

You know full well what the intention is but let me break it down for the sake of argument.

When people refer to "12 Man Stomps" they are referring to any game where at least 6 of the opposing team is part of the same group. It is easier to articulate that it is an unbalanced and un-fun environment for any player unless they are also in a group of at equal size and skill, by highlighting the worst case scenario. However the intent is to simply highlight that the team balance is often unpalatable, especially to rookiee pilots who simply want to play with their friends, and will most certainly remember the 12 clan mechs stomping on their neck more than the organized two lances.

Because of intentional ELO scrubbing and balancing along with the MatchMaker's hard caps on timer, the games where you are against large organized groups become more and more frequent, usually against the same teams for multiple games in a row.

The simple fact that I see this thread crop up at least 2-3 a month indicates, weather you believe it or not, that a large number of players find this a very large issue with the game.

You know all of this already however.

Edited by Pika, 25 September 2014 - 09:22 PM.

[Valore]

Pika, on 25 September 2014 - 09:17 PM, said:

When people refer to "12 Man Stomps" they are referring to any game where at least 6 of the opposing team is part of the same group. It is easier to articulate that it is an unbalanced and un-fun environment for any player unless they are also in a group of at equal size and skill, by highlighting the worst case scenario. However the intent is to simply highlight that the team balance is often unpalatable, especially to rookiee pilots who simply want to play with their friends, and will most certainly remember the 12 clan mechs stomping on their neck more than the organized two lances.

Good. That clarifies things, because I can assure you, that's NOT what a lot of people who were debating from your side of the fence were implying.

Many claims were thrown about that they (small groups) CONSTANTLY were placed in small groups, against 8 - 12 man groups.

Which, as you can agree, is not possible, if big groups are the minority by simple mathematical logic alone.

What you are then trying to highlight a need for, is a matching improvement for the group queue, to match people in terms of skill.

As several people have already pointed out, this is difficult, because how do you measure 'casual'?

An example I used earlier.

A group of friends want to play. Are they casual?

What if these friends are professional gamers? Are they competitive?

What if they feel anti-social and don't use voice comms? Are they back to being casual?

What if they're drunk and are playing joke builds?

Also, how do you factor in group size to handicap smaller groups? Big groups don't mean 100% better play/teamwork and vice versa.

There's no objection being raised to debating/looking at this issue. There is however, strong opposition to people who propose 'breaking up the queue' as a solution. It is no solution. All it will do is frustrate people who have more friends.

The matchmaker's inherent issue is that groups screw around with Elo matching.

Scaling it down, by restricting group sizes, does not address the issue at all.

Pika, on 25 September 2014 - 09:17 PM, said:

Because of intentional ELO scrubbing and balancing along with the MatchMaker's hard caps on timer, the games where you are against large organized groups become more and more frequent, usually against the same teams for multiple games in a row.

The simple fact that I see this thread crop up at least 2-3 a month indicates, weather you believe it or not, that a large number of players find this a very large issue with the game.

I dispute both of these statements.

If you meet someone constantly while walking down the street, is it fair to assume you're being stalked by him? Or is it more likely he lives on the same street as you do?

If you meet a big group constantly, its more likely that either you're facing a bad run of luck, or you're launching at the same time some groups are having training sessions.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but my view is I think that these are cases of confirmation bias more than anything else.

Like I keep telling Kjudoon, by all means let's look at the issue. But when some people are coming into the discussion from a starting point that is clearly flawed (OP is a great example), then any solution derived from it is likely to be as flawed.

Edited by Valore, 25 September 2014 - 09:42 PM.

[Kjudoon]

Okay, Valore

Obviously you want to be right rather than know truth or be constructive.

Quote

I'm asking how in the world it is possible that:

1. People advocating for a split queue claim they CONSTANTLY get stomped by 12 mans

2. Yet 12 mans are a minority.

Let's do more math and see how this happens.

Let's assume ou have ten 12mans on any given peak evening.
THey get 4 matches an hour, but using current PGI telemetry the average match in the group queue lasts about 6 minutes.
So let's double that to 8 matches an hour.
That's 80 matches competitive 12man teams can be in an hour. Lot of matches.

Now, for the sake of the example, let's assume for some bizarre reason, they do not face each other and run into teams that consist of various sizes but average 4 per group.

The pro teams are having a bad night, so let's give them a reasonable win percentage of 75%, but 90% of them are stomps. Margin of victory being 12 to 4 or better

That means in an hour, they are winning 60 matches and of those they wins 56 of them are stomps.

Since the average number of groups stomped is 4, that means 224 teams got the tar beat out of them an hour 448 total in 2 hours of prime time play.

Continue this for a week during 2 hours of prime time play that is 3136 small groups which on average would consist of 3 people making 9408 people (assuming also no repeats) who have experienced getting the tar whaled out of them in that period of time by only 120 players.

Again, this is averages and generous numbers of course, but very plausable.

Now consider at even half that, you are looking at 4704 people on average that got beat up all for the amusement of 120. I'm not saying that all of those people didn't have a good time, but hands up of anyone who enjoys being stomped. That's the math based on what I think are very fair assumptions.

And yet, you are telling on average, between 47-90 players they gotta take it in the shorts all so you can kick the crap out of them and they can't play something else because you need players to face off against your 12man.

Again. The problem is not with me, or any other player. It's with math and the fact that we are not here to be your punching bag. Find someone else who either can punch back of equal ability and time and let the 25-100 of us for each one of you go find another way to play that we enjoy.

[Kjudoon]

Quote

Like I keep telling Kjudoon, by all means let's look at the issue.

Then what solution will you accept if it does not leave the status quo and allows people to not participate in either the solo or 5+ queue? People are quitting because they do not wish to play either.