481 replies to this topic

[Valore]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

When the player base drops out because they only cater to the rest of you then what?

So the casuals don't want to play with us, and want to stick us into queue limbo where you don't get any games. And when we ask why we should accept this, they say its because if we don't, we'll end up in a dead game, where....

We don't get any games.

I'm seeing this as lose-lose here

[VixNix]

Valore, on 24 September 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

So the casuals don't want to play with us, and want to stick us into queue limbo where you don't get any games. And when we ask why we should accept this, they say its because if we don't, we'll end up in a dead game, where....

We don't get any games.

I'm seeing this as lose-lose here

Really?

I don't want to stick you anywhere, I just want to have fun.

But when I want to play with my friends "YOU" apparently want us to play against you, what to boost your ego?

What's your suggestion to fix this?

Edited by VixNix, 24 September 2014 - 07:39 AM.

[Andross Deverow]

Valore, on 24 September 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

So the casuals don't want to play with us, and want to stick us into queue limbo where you don't get any games. And when we ask why we should accept this, they say its because if we don't, we'll end up in a dead game, where....

We don't get any games.

I'm seeing this as lose-lose here

There needs to be a balance. Selfishness on both sides will not solve anything. Casuals spend money just like the rest of us in game. There has to be a solution, if the casuals quit playing and move on what then? Do you think that will shorten the group queue limbo any? No it will have the opposite effect as the player base will have shrank. We need a solution to a growing problem and Russ needs to weigh in on this concern.

Regards

[girl on fire]

The PUG que isn't dead. So currently it's dead for competitive players because this game has very little appeal versus other competitive PVP games (like LoL or Counter-Strike or Starcraft). Mechwarrior (as far as I can tell) seems to have always been about having a narrative and telling a story that you get to participate in rather than large scale online player battles.. And yes, I know they existed and that there were leagues, but clearly that isn't/wasn't the primary draw. I'm fairly certain most people would have been much happier with a Mechwarrior 5 rather than MWO.

MWO is an impersonal experience lacking any and all immersion, it's a sleek utilitarian deathmatch match maker and not much else... which would be okay, I guess, if MWO were properly set up to be a competitive game and had more people willing to be competitive, which it doesn't. So stop trying to make it happen, it's just not that game. So maybe you comp "whiners" (I find it especially ironic that people who characterize PUGs as whiners are incapable of seeing how asininely hypocritical they are being) should stop trying to shoehorn your preferred style into the way MOST PEOPLE seem to prefer to play.

Bottom line: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Sorry.

[Valore]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

Really?

I don't want to stick you anywhere, I just want to have fun.

But when I want to play with my friends "YOU" apparently want us to play against you, what to boost your ego?

What's your suggestion to fix this?

You should man up and get better, then the games wouldn't be so one sided. And please don't pretend that every match is against 10 - 12 man groups. That's a massive exaggeration. Take up my challenge if you disagree.

Andross Deverow, on 24 September 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

There needs to be a balance. Selfishness on both sides will not solve anything. Casuals spend money just like the rest of us in game. There has to be a solution, if the casuals quit playing and move on what then? Do you think that will shorten the group queue limbo any? No it will have the opposite effect as the player base will have shrank. We need a solution to a growing problem and Russ needs to weigh in on this concern.

Regards

He already has, earlier in the thread.


The biggest problem is that the casual players don't realise there's no 'casual benchmark'. What's 'casual' to one person is not to another.

Is casual a group of friends just playing together having fun?

What if those friends are professional gamers? Are they now 'serious' players?

What about if they're drunk and not co-ordinating and messing around? Do they then revert to being casual?

They're asking for something with no forethought, with plenty of the selfishness you mentioned. That's why they've been met mostly with scorn and derision.

They make claims like 'oh, we get rolled all the time by big groups', when little to no evidence points to that.

I've thrown down the challenge just a page ago:

Valore, on 24 September 2014 - 06:39 AM, said:

There's a massive fallacy here.

Small groups claim they're being destroyed by big groups all the time.

Yet dropping as a big group, I'd say only one out of 10 matches, we face another big group.


Both sides can't be telling the truth.

I'm more than happy to take up the following challenge from anyone who claims they only face big groups:

1. Play games in groups.

2. Take post-game screenshots. These must be validated as recent by you posting the word 'CHALLENGE' in chat before taking the screenshot.

3. Post all the screenshots here of all the big bad groups trashing you.

I'm willing to bet if I do this, I'll come up with more screenshots of me facing random mashup groups, than you will facing 12 man groups.

There. Challenge on the table. Anyone who still insists otherwise that there are millions of big organised groups ruining the group queue, go ahead. Take it up.

I notice a very conspicuous lack of takers.

Edited by Valore, 24 September 2014 - 07:45 AM.

[Squally160]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

I'm not lazy.

I don't want people to hold back.

I want to be able to queue with friends and have fun.

I'm asking for "us" to have a place to play so you can stop bitching about "us".

Why is you feel entitled to have everything your way?

You didn't build this, you don't own it...

I didn't ask to be on your team.

You are asking for your own place to play.
its in puglandia, AKA solo.
otherwise, you are in teh group que.
Do you somehow think if there is some magical "small group" que competitive teams wont show up there?

"Well guys, theres only 3 of us on, we cant go play in the small group que, thats for "casuals" only!"
yeah no, we will go play, and we will roll you there as you steer your way around.

Its not that big groups are rolling you, oh no.
its that you are just getting rolled by teamwork

big group or small group, teamwork is OP.

We have dropped in groups of 3 or 4, with other groups of 3 or 4, and decimated 12 mans, basically as a single lance.

Do you really want to give us the option to WILLINGLY CHOOSE TO DO THAT constantly?
because after all of this wining, it would be the only place I que in.

[VixNix]

Valore, on 24 September 2014 - 07:44 AM, said:

You should man up and get better, then the games wouldn't be so one sided. And please don't pretend that every match is against 10 - 12 man groups. That's a massive exaggeration. Take up my challenge if you disagree.

...stuff...

do you offer ideas to fix the situation... nope.

have others, yes, might not be great ideas but its better than "Hey every NEW player and all you that only play a few hours a week, MAN UP so this l33t dood can prove he's better than you!"

and your challenge is a joke, been lots of those already

Squally160, on 24 September 2014 - 07:50 AM, said:

You are asking for your own place to play.
its in puglandia, AKA solo.
otherwise, you are in teh group que.
Do you somehow think if there is some magical "small group" que competitive teams wont show up there?

"Well guys, theres only 3 of us on, we cant go play in the small group que, thats for "casuals" only!"
yeah no, we will go play, and we will roll you there as you steer your way around.

Its not that big groups are rolling you, oh no.
its that you are just getting rolled by teamwork

big group or small group, teamwork is OP.

We have dropped in groups of 3 or 4, with other groups of 3 or 4, and decimated 12 mans, basically as a single lance.

Do you really want to give us the option to WILLINGLY CHOOSE TO DO THAT constantly?
because after all of this wining, it would be the only place I que in.

lol

see OP, I told you in the second post...

[UnsafePilot]

I still think the simplest solution is to allow pairs to drop in the PUG queue. I just can't imagine that two people coordinating would ruin pug play that much.

Maybe limit it to one pair per team so it keeps it's mostly coordination free play style.

[Valore]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

and your challenge is a joke, been lots of those already

Where?

And suddenly, its such a massive effort to take screenshots of games you're going to be playing anyway.

Laughable.

Here, I'll do you a favour.

http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0054.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0055.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0056.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0057.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0062.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0063.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0064.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0065.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0067.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0068.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0069.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0070.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0071.jpg
http://s3.postimg.or...en_Shot0072.jpg

How many enemy 12 mans do you see there?

Millions upon millions eh. Yeah we're absolutely EVERYWHERE. Lol.

Edited by Valore, 24 September 2014 - 08:06 AM.

[Hoax415]

TLBFestus, on 24 September 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

this is the biggest issue facing PGI at this point.

it creates a "barrier" to new players. Sure there are lots of solo players out there, but I'm thinking that there is an equally large number of casual players that just want to group up and play together and just have fun.

Andross Deverow, on 24 September 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

New player comes in game with a friend that invited them to try it out..... New guy and his friend get roflstomped multiple times by an organized team of 10-12 players...... New guy says "jeez, this game isnt for me", goes plays something else and takes his wallet with him.

Brand new players having no fun unless they play solo is a huge problem. I would agree that it is a top5 for MWO. Player retention is a #1 importance in any online game. This thread is not about brand new players. It should be but VixNix and others who are blaming "large groups" for their "casual but not solo" playstyle not being rewarded are not advocating for new players they are advocating for themselves.

I'm all for fixing the new player problem even at the expense of having to hear rabid solo-only people *****. I think we do need a special exemption to solo queue so that new players can be mentored by someone who is introducing them to the game without being forced into group queue.

I'm all for that and I'd like to see thread(s) about that or even that player council come up with an idea that people find palatable to allow new players to learn under someone's wing without upsetting the solo queue playerbase too badly.

That said this is what this particular thread is about:

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

When the player base drops out because they only cater to the rest of you then what?

Quote

But when I want to play with my friends "YOU" apparently want us to play against you, what to boost your ego?

VixNix, represents this impossible to satisfy position well.

1) We don't have the players to create a third queue.

2) We aren't going to let small groups back into solo queue. Solo queue is working reasonably well for everyone involved and whatever isn't working well is seen as RNG not other players screwing them over.

Now in theory some tweaks can be made to what Matchmaker tries to do in the group queue:

-elo buckets for instance is an idea often floated.

-MM could be set to try to avoid matching a team made of 4 groups with one made of 1 or 2 groups.

-The entire system of how team elo is derived could be looked at. I'm sure people like VixNix would support a large elo multiplier for 8-12 man groups to try to keep them away from lower elo players for instance.

But here is the cold harsh reality. Most people are fine with the group queue and any realistic change is going to increase the time it takes to find a match and also in PGI's eyes increase the elo difference between teams the way they are currently calculating it.

I'm not sure he's really thought it out but basically to have things more his way he's willing to add waiting time to everyone who plays in group queue because he can't handle losing.

Then its important to remember: You can't always get what you want.

Players can't self identify as "not really trying hard enough to be in the group queue, but not willing to solo queue" and then get some kind of special casual player treatment, its not feasible I'm sorry. The system can't identify those players itself either especially if they only play "casually" some of the time.

Edited by Hoax415, 24 September 2014 - 08:16 AM.

[Mawai]

I can see your frustration with the matches you are being given.

However, I don't see any way to distinguish a casual group from a competitive or serious group. A casual group can vary from as coordinated as a pug where they are just chatting over team speak to organized and calling targets to fully coordinated and moving and firing as a unit. That changes their effectiveness by a huge amount ... but I can see NO way for the matchmaker to tell what kind of group you are in ... it would need to be psychic. It would also need to be able to determine when you change your mind from being casual to being organized.

If you drop in competitive groups all the time then your grouped Elo (if they have separate values for solo and group) should reflect that style of play. If you drop in casual groups then the Elo should also reflect that. However, if you mix up your group types then your Elo will go up and down and the matchmaker has NO way to tell which kind of group you are currently in.

Ideally, the matchmaker should try to match large groups against large groups, medium to medium and small to small ... that might help some of the issue ... but you will still get a large competitive group running into large casual groups and stomping them.

small = 2 to 4
medium = 5 to 8
large = 8 to 10, 12

But depending on what groups are available in the queue ... the matchmaker won't be able to come up with the ideal answer.

[DasSibby]

I think this will be solved by the implementation of ONE THING.

VOIP.

That's the advantage that 12 man groups have. Instant coordination. If VOIP is implemented, I guarantee that the match quality will go up and the game will become more competitive.

(Think about it. Lights actually being able to scout/communicate... Traps being set... Wow. So looking forward to that.)

[Valore]

DasSibby, on 24 September 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

I think this will be solved by the implementation of ONE THING.

VOIP.

That's the advantage that 12 man groups have. Instant coordination. If VOIP is implemented, I guarantee that the match quality will go up and the game will become more competitive.

(Think about it. Lights actually being able to scout/communicate... Traps being set... Wow. So looking forward to that.)

It won't solve the complaining if people don't want to improve.

As a group, I often drop in an 8 man. Often, we play quite conservatively, and will tell people not to rush in. You'll be amazed how often the reply is 'F you, we'll do what we want cowards'.

Not saying everyone's an idiot like that, but there are plenty. VOIP will only solve certain issues, and only if people are receptive. Otherwise its a moot point.

[Jon Gotham]

Hmm Valore, I appreciate the idea of your challenge but despise the tone behind it. but if I do drop as group this week I'll do as requested.. It could be though that you and your buddies are in a certain elo range that don't produce the group finds, that might be something to bear in mind.
One night last week for example, we dropped as a 5 and then a 6. Our first three games back to back were vs 12 mans. Their tactics consisted of alternate arty/airstrikes on cooldown from start of contact to last mech. they maxed out TBRs and DWs with heavy UAC build and gauss/ppc builds+insane amounts of cbill spammage.
Our group was a "bring what you enjoy" affair which didn't do so well. The next three games after that were I beleieve an 8 man, a 9 man and a 10 man. After that we split up into a couple of smaller groups which seemed to alleviate the issue.

In my eyes the issue is there is no longer a middle ground option for people that don't want to take the meta/comp route to playing. It's either solo or go as big and as meta as you can.
My suggestion would be something like:
Wherever 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.
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.

Solo players whined about uber powerful 4 mans stomping entire teams, spoling their gameplay experience (a thing which I never witnessed in over 2k games......)
Now those same 4 mans have to face 12 men, or 8,9,10. The force mutiplier of this is worse than a pure 4 man vs pugs.
So rather than a "get better at game noob" style of response from players, which by the way is inappropriate....because the points made by some have either been willfully dismissed/ignored or have been genuinely missed or misunderstood. when CW comes around, I'l be meta'd up with the rest and competitive as hell-but for now when I drop with friends, to shoot a few robots and laugh over TS I want to be able to do just that.
As it stands, I feel I can't take half my mechs as I know they don't stand up optimally vs comp team play. I feel like a drain on my team if I don't take an ecm mech...MWO has shifted from being fun, to DRAINING.

[Lorgarn]

Hoax415, on 23 September 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

Appreciate your honesty, but you can solve these problems quite easily if you tried. I don't mind if you don't try to solve them but I mind if you complain about the results of your own inaction. The units are only for people on voice who have 20 hours a week to commit to the game is BS. Also I've never had an issue writing down people's name from the endgame screen and adding them after. But yes, being able to add people from the endgame screen would be a great QoL change.

Oh yes. Quite easy. I could just quit my job to play on US prime times where matches are more equal as someone suggested. I could even play more then. Perhaps I could just quite one or two of my other recreational interests so I can simply play 20 to 30 hours a week. That way I could join with a clan and could cope with playing every evening and doing training lessons.
Sooooo easy...
Bascially you admit the same thing as I have said many times before: If you are a causal players (means you have a job an other interests and just cant sink THAT much time into this game) you are just a moving target. An non of you cares because we can just drop out and snuff it, because its free to play and some other causal movint practice target will come anlonge, and you simly dont care when and why that one will drop out of frustration.

[Livewyr]

What exactly would you have them do?

Pro queue and scrub casual queue? What would stop the "Pro queue" from hopping into the casual queue for trollish hilarity?

That will not work.
---------------------------------------------------

About the only thing I can think of would be a Lobby system within the game, so you can organize group drops in private lobbies, to fight people of similar inclination. (Issue is, as that is easy to stack for farming, it would remain reward-less.)

---------------------------------------------------

Elo (in theory) is supposed to prevent you from fighting the "better" players...however due to the numerous (player demanded) restrictions in the Matchmaker (3x4, Weight matching, Game mode selection) the MM can not always find a way to put the better players always against better players.

I relish fights when on both sides I see HoL/BS/SJRx/SteelJag/etc... because those are going to be good fights.. Sadly, that is not always the case, or even mostly..because their are few "better" players and many casual players.

[Hoax415]

Lorgarn, on 24 September 2014 - 08:23 AM, said:

Oh yes. Quite easy. I could just quit my job to play on US prime times where matches are more equal as someone suggested. I could even play more then. Perhaps I could just quite one or two of my other recreational interests so I can simply play 20 to 30 hours a week. That way I could join with a clan and could cope with playing every evening and doing training lessons.
Sooooo easy...
Bascially you admit the same thing as I have said many times before: If you are a causal players (means you have a job an other interests and just cant sink THAT much time into this game) you are just a moving target. An non of you cares because we can just drop out and snuff it, because its free to play and some other causal movint practice target will come anlonge, and you simly dont care when and why that one will drop out of frustration.

Yawn.

You can't be anything but a moving target unless you are living the NEET life and in a unit which means you're required to attend mandatory practice 5 days a week for 3 hours a day.

Got it.

That's not at all a total cop out strawman argument at all. Every assumption you make there about other players and player units is 100% factual. Every single person you see using voice playing with others had dedicated their life to MWO above friends, family, social interaction and other hobbies. Yup yup you have it all so well figured out. /s

If you only have fun when you are winning but you can't pull your head out of your ass long enough to test your own preconceptions of what the people beating you are doing differently. You know what, its no loss if you leave. You won't take help from any other player and the game can't somehow measure what a giant crybaby scrub you are through the internet and somehow compensate for you.

I'm dead serious when I say this. Multiplayer games may not be for you.

Edited by Hoax415, 24 September 2014 - 08:33 AM.

[Squally160]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

lol

see OP, I told you in the second post...

Hey, you want to come in here and remove the ability for groups of all sizes to play, then I am goign to do my best to remove your ability to have fun.

What you guys propose is creating a q for small groups.
thats a fine and dandy idea, until you realize large groups need those smalls to make 12v12 games.

me and 8 friends are one, we need a 3 man to make 12, you want to remove those 3 mans and put them elsewhere. Now, we cant drop as 9. or 8. or 10.

we can drop as:
5, 6,7, or 12.
and hope and pray an equivalent group is available for us to be paired up with, and that there is a magical combination of players to make up the opposing 12 players.

You dont seem to understand, by removing yourselves from the q, you severely limit us.

So yeah, you get stomped every now and then. It happens to everyone. I dont win every game I play.
EvE Devs said it best:
HTFU.

[Valore]

kamiko kross, on 24 September 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

Hmm Valore, I appreciate the idea of your challenge but despise the tone behind it. but if I do drop as group this week I'll do as requested.. It could be though that you and your buddies are in a certain elo range that don't produce the group finds, that might be something to bear in mind.

I'm pretty sure that's inaccurate. Why would the MM do something like hide big groups from each other? Furthermore, I'm pretty sure Elo doesn't really play a big part in group MM.

kamiko kross, on 24 September 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

One night last week for example, we dropped as a 5 and then a 6. Our first three games back to back were vs 12 mans. Their tactics consisted of alternate arty/airstrikes on cooldown from start of contact to last mech. they maxed out TBRs and DWs with heavy UAC build and gauss/ppc builds+insane amounts of cbill spammage.
Our group was a "bring what you enjoy" affair which didn't do so well. The next three games after that were I beleieve an 8 man, a 9 man and a 10 man. After that we split up into a couple of smaller groups which seemed to alleviate the issue.

That sounds EXACTLY like bad luck, or you dropped just as a unit was having a training session. But to hear what some people on this forum claim, every game they play is against organised opposition. This is simply not the case, and the way they keep repeating this nonsense is a farce.

kamiko kross, on 24 September 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

Now those same 4 mans have to face 12 men, or 8,9,10. The force mutiplier of this is worse than a pure 4 man vs pugs.
So rather than a "get better at game noob" style of response from players, which by the way is inappropriate....because the points made by some have either been willfully dismissed/ignored or have been genuinely missed or misunderstood. when CW comes around, I'l be meta'd up with the rest and competitive as hell-but for now when I drop with friends, to shoot a few robots and laugh over TS I want to be able to do just that.
As it stands, I feel I can't take half my mechs as I know they don't stand up optimally vs comp team play. I feel like a drain on my team if I don't take an ecm mech...MWO has shifted from being fun, to DRAINING.

We're all in the same boat with the mechs. Some just don't work. Hopefully the quirk pass PGI is doing will address that. Its not something messing with the group queue is gonna fix.

Bottom line is most of us don't care who we face, we just want the queue to be quick. That's about it.

[VixNix]

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

100 times this...

and when you try to contribute, your words get twisted around...