481 replies to this topic

[Squally160]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

So we are back to I can't drop with my friends?

At least we agree on something. Imma pass on that idea as well.

[TLBFestus]

Squally160, on 24 September 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

My biggest isue is people coming here and MOANING about us big groups (or comp teams in general) when they want to casually play and not get teamed up againt us. It isnt our fault, we didnt ask to be matched up against you either.

Big news...they don't want to be queued up with you either, but they don't have a choice currently. Your inane, lamearse comments about those players not being worth your time etc., are what led to my response in the first place.

Now, you demonstrate some level of understanding of the problem, but you don't retract your idiotic comments from the previous post.

Regardless, I'm sure you don't care, won't listen, and can't be bothered. Me either, at least as far as caring about your opinion.

[Sadist Cain]

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

There's a massive fallacy here.

Right...

Quote

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

yes...

Quote

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

Eh...

Quote

Both sides can't be telling the truth.

Dafuq??

So you're doubting the "claim" that small groups get destroyed by big groups; to back up that doubt you state that dropping in a big group only 1 in 10 matches are against another big group.

Sooooo, that means 9 out of 10 of your theory matches are against smaller groups?

How on earth is this reinforcing your point?

Big bold underlined text doesn't validate your point more!

The argument of "My big group rarely faces other big groups means there's no problem with big groups rolling smaller ones"

Lets take your 1-10 games against other large groups and apply that to the large group you face...

So two groups who have had collectively had 18-20 games spent rolling small groups before they meet?

And you expect people to satisfy your completely backwards logic by posting pointless screenshots to further argue for the point of this thread where in backwards land you're using as an argument against???

Valore, on 23 September 2014 - 05:42 PM, said:

People want to talk about how QQ and sads they are about

'Let's stare at the spinny game search wheel thingie for 10 minutes, then NOT find a match!' Then play that for an hour!

Adjusted that for you because you seem to be the one still "QQ'ing" (wherever that childish meme came from...) about having to wait a long time for your very niche 12 man groups.

Ultimately from a TS lounge with 8+ other players against a scrabbling of 2 & 4 man groups cobbled together to fight you you're trying to say to the vast majority of these players whom too make up the vast majority of the playerbase "omg u know no teamwork l2p newbs"
Now it's never good having to wait longer for a game but what can you possibly expect when you're trying to play as a whole organized team in a f2p public environment?
Don't you want to be matched against other large organized teams with the same level of play? no? because it takes too long??? Well that's tough then... obviously you're only thinking about yourself and getting your games asap regardless of others quality of play or the game as a whole.

There sure as hell isn't ANY infrastructure outside of the chatbox for coordinating between small groups so just expecting them to "man up" and match against a much larger organised group of players from the same clan is an extremely poorly executed thought process...


Lastly (now this is a right gem)

Valore, on 23 September 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

Oh trust me, I fully said it in a derisive tone. But the fact that you chose to focus on the sarcasm/derision, rather than realise the point behind it had full merit reflects more on you than anything else.

Now that's just plain big headed, arrogance and plain outright obnoxiousness
As much as it pained me to give the site a hit, I had to find this from your wonderful clans code of conduct after that...

Quote

You will uphold the spirit of our code of conduct in all your gaming pursuits. This spirit is founded on a sense of decency, fair play, friendship and respect of all gamers.

You will respect everyone’s level of skill and commitment and recognize that not everyone has the same levels of skill, nor should it be expected.

You will behave in a respectful manner toward all people in all our communications mediums including but not limited to OMC forums, voice communications and in game.

You will not be abusive, threatening or insulting toward other member or members of Oceanic Merc Corp, or members of the broader gaming community.

After all that complete hypocrisy you really have no leg to stand on...

Personally I can't find any reason to give any weight to any of your arguments or counter arguments based upon your vile attitude towards other people and utter dis contempt shown towards who do not play like you.

No way in hell anything should be balanced to those kind of opinions.

Edited by Sadist Cain, 24 September 2014 - 02:43 PM.

[VixNix]

Squally160, on 24 September 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

At least we agree on something. Imma pass on that idea as well.

Not acceptable
if i can't get them to play i'll be stuck in solo queue, if i continue to play

[L A V A]

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.

My last experience was 2 out of 14.

Result was something like 2 losses, 2 kinda close games and the rest facefolls.

We need an 8 man queue.

RHOD, MRBC and I believe the MWO ladder leagues all cater to 8 vs 8 because of the lack of teams who can run 12 man teams.

The competitive teams need to be separated from everyone else and that means adding an 8v8 queue.

[Squally160]

TLBFestus, on 24 September 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

Big news...they don't want to be queued up with you either, but they don't have a choice currently. Your inane, lamearse comments about those players not being worth your time etc., are what led to my response in the first place.

Now, you demonstrate some level of understanding of the problem, but you don't retract your idiotic comments from the previous post.

Regardless, I'm sure you don't care, won't listen, and can't be bothered. Me either, at least as far as caring about your opinion.

I have no reason to retract anything I said. I will refrain from attacking anyone further, but im not going to go edit my post or anything like that.

As ive stated, I dont want to play with casuals as much as they dont want to play with us as well.
It is a terrible situation that doesnt have a real solution with the playerbase the way it is.

I dont want to ruin your fun, i fully understand the desire to log on, drop a few stompy robot games for no point other than to blap stuff. I do it too.

I also dont want to be the reason new players leave the game, id rather they come and play with groups like us. If not, thats fine too.

But, there isnt a reasonable solution that wont piss of some playerbase. Be it the small groups, solos, or big groups.

Like I said, I feel bad for new players, and if any of them speak up when I am around, ill invite them to comms to come get some help. or find people to drop with.

I just dont want to go back to 2 hour q's where we are forced to find 12 to be able to even q up at all.

[Valore]

So all we've established after 10 pages of chest beating and teeth gnashing is:

1. Some want to pretend that there are billions of 'big groups' out there lurking waiting to trash them, and this is why we should screw around with the group queue, when its been proven for a fact this is patently nonsense, and there aren't in fact that many big groups. So let's stop propagating this untruth.

2. They suggest things like having a 'casual' queue, without even considering the actual process behind it, like how the hell something like casual is supposed to be categorised.

The fact of the matter is, this is how the group queue works.

Once you decide 'Oh, I want to use teamwork', there's no turning back. There's no 'hey, I want to only use X teamwork, if you use more, I don't want to play with you.'

To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.


As I mentioned, let people opt into what they want to play. If you choose to cancel out options, you get put at the back of the queue, with people leaving all their options open always at the front.

Edited by Valore, 24 September 2014 - 05:10 PM.

[Void Angel]

I would like to see the "solo" queue allow groups again - it can be frustrating to play as a small group right now. I remember my first drop in the new queue with a single buddy: The other team was a bunch of people I'd never seen before, while my team? Let's just say one of them was named after a sub-atomic particle, and the match was brutally short. I really think that allowing a single 4-man (or maybe two smaller teams totalling up to 5,) on a team would be worth the extra problems with the matchmaker. The current system hasn't seemed to curb the "every match is a stomp," urban legend threads, anyway.

I should forestall the obvious ad hominem attacks by saying up front that I don't really have this problem. My small group teammates and the times I play are conducive to good matches for me; we have good tactical doctrine and work well with the rest of our team, even if they don't do what we think they need to be doing. Still, it would be nice to grab a buddy or three and not have to deal with the entire enemy team possibly being from the same unit. I'd like to be able to select which queue to drop in for small-sized groups.

That being said...
Ranting in big letters is counterproductive. It's the typesetting equivalent of a tantrum, and it harms whatever point you're trying to make. See also: Ethos. Namecalling in an attempt to poison the well is also counterproductive, as well as asinine and rude. Frankly, the epithet "try-hard" is just an announcement that the user has some growing up to do - effort is a part of life, and often directly correlates to returns. Common courtesy also requires that we all try to do our best when we play a team competition game where other people depend on us.

Edited by Void Angel, 24 September 2014 - 05:29 PM.

[xJohnWolf]

No. no. no. MM is functioning beautifully and as intended. How often are you actually having this situation happen. I'm fairly certain (based on my own experience and others) that you are exaggerating when you say "always".

[VixNix]

Valore, on 24 September 2014 - 05:09 PM, said:

So all we've established after 10 pages of chest beating and teeth gnashing is:

1. Some want to pretend that there are billions of 'big groups' out there lurking waiting to trash them, and this is why we should screw around with the group queue, when its been proven for a fact this is patently nonsense, and there aren't in fact that many big groups. So let's stop propagating this untruth.

2. They suggest things like having a 'casual' queue, without even considering the actual process behind it, like how the hell something like casual is supposed to be categorised.

The fact of the matter is, this is how the group queue works.

Once you decide 'Oh, I want to use teamwork', there's no turning back. There's no 'hey, I want to only use X teamwork, if you use more, I don't want to play with you.'

To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.


As I mentioned, let people opt into what they want to play. If you choose to cancel out options, you get put at the back of the queue, with people leaving all their options open always at the front.

1. proven how?
did PGI publish numbers somewhere?

2. you have made no suggestions other than leave it alone

3. it's only a fact because it hasn't changed yet

4. never mind, you wont listen anyway...

(edit spelling)

Edited by VixNix, 24 September 2014 - 06:57 PM.

[Valore]

VixNix, on 24 September 2014 - 06:57 PM, said:

1. proven how?

I've posted screenshots for games I've played on a regular basis. You can see for yourself, only one or two of them are against big groups.

So unless you want to claim the matchmaker is biased and is only bullying you and your friends, there's the proof.

Since you conveniently don't want to take up the challenge I posted, you're not in any position to pretend what you're saying is fact.

The solution I've put up is people who want to 'opt out' by for example saying they don't PREFER competitive play, get put at the back of the queue. People who select 'We will play anyone and anything' will get first choice.

It'll satisfy you, because if, as you claim, there are TONS of people who don't like playing against competitive players, you guys should not have long wait queues.

If it ends up that you were in fact wrong, then you'll be stuck in queue limbo, which is what you wanted for us anyway, so you shouldnt have any issues being on that end of the stick.

Edited by Valore, 24 September 2014 - 07:07 PM.

[TLBFestus]

Squally160, on 24 September 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

I have no reason to retract anything I said. I will refrain from attacking anyone further, but im not going to go edit my post or anything like that.

As ive stated, I dont want to play with casuals as much as they dont want to play with us as well.
It is a terrible situation that doesnt have a real solution with the playerbase the way it is.

I dont want to ruin your fun, i fully understand the desire to log on, drop a few stompy robot games for no point other than to blap stuff. I do it too.

I also dont want to be the reason new players leave the game, id rather they come and play with groups like us. If not, thats fine too.

But, there isnt a reasonable solution that wont piss of some playerbase. Be it the small groups, solos, or big groups.

Like I said, I feel bad for new players, and if any of them speak up when I am around, ill invite them to comms to come get some help. or find people to drop with.

I just dont want to go back to 2 hour q's where we are forced to find 12 to be able to even q up at all.

Yet you insult them as "unworthy" of your time and a waste of space. Quit talking out your arse. The whole topic was someone lamenting that there isn't a workable solution to this problem yet, and in your first couple of posts you dumped all over them.

I won't bother to re-quote those posts and give them any further legitimacy. You were being an arse. Even in your latest post, the closest you've gotten to being conciliatory, you still don't recognize that they have a legitimate complaint. Instead you insist on your willingness to help them adopt your preferred method of playing the game, and ignore that their issues are valid.

Anyhow, I'm done reprimanding you, it's a waste of time.

[Squally160]

TLBFestus, on 24 September 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

Yet you insult them as "unworthy" of your time and a waste of space. Quit talking out your arse. The whole topic was someone lamenting that there isn't a workable solution to this problem yet, and in your first couple of posts you dumped all over them.

I won't bother to re-quote those posts and give them any further legitimacy. You were being an arse. Even in your latest post, the closest you've gotten to being conciliatory, you still don't recognize that they have a legitimate complaint. Instead you insist on your willingness to help them adopt your preferred method of playing the game, and ignore that their issues are valid.

Anyhow, I'm done reprimanding you, it's a waste of time.

Glad to hear.

and hey, I am an arse, its all good, embrace it.
Thanks though for coming in and making sure everyone knew that. I am glad we took the time to sort out something that was pretty clear to begin with.

[Johnny Reb]

Question. Since when did group ever become "casual"!

Edited by Johnny Reb, 24 September 2014 - 08:14 PM.

[Squally160]

Johnny Reb, on 24 September 2014 - 08:10 PM, said:

Question. Since when group ever become "casual"!

It never was, but they want it to be.

[-Natural Selection-]

As I said before. When faction/territory battles are in play, I do not think you have to worry about large groups in the random group que as much..

[Squally160]

Mickey Knoxx, on 24 September 2014 - 08:13 PM, said:

As I said before. When faction/territory battles are in play, I do not think you have to worry about large groups in the random group que as much..

QFT.

[Sandpit]

Nobody likes to consider their option

Private matches, get a group of casuals together and go to town.

What you're asking for is an "easier" environment to play a PvP game in. The words "casual" and "competitive" are irrelevant. It's a PvP game in which you play against other players. There's no "difficulty setting".

Now with that said, opening the training grounds to more than just single players would help "casual" players practice and learn the game. This would let new players get more acclimated before jumping into the actual game. it would also allow players who are trying to introduce friends/family to the game as well. let them stomp around, learn how to pilot a bit, THEN let them go to town.

In a PvP game, there is no "casual" or "competitive" distinction. You're pitted against human skill which varies every single game. Think about that for a second. There is no difficulty to change, now what COULD help is dropping all new players to the bottom of the Elo scale and letting them play their way up until they find their normalcy in Elo. That would alleviate and mitigate most of the issues I see players having concerns about.

Short of starting an entirely new queue (which realistically just isn't feasible logistically in the eyes of most)

How would you fix the issue?

[Ghogiel]

Sadist Cain, on 24 September 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Right...



yes...


Eh...


Dafuq??

So you're doubting the "claim" that small groups get destroyed by big groups; to back up that doubt you state that dropping in a big group only 1 in 10 matches are against another big group.

Sooooo, that means 9 out of 10 of your theory matches are against smaller groups?

How on earth is this reinforcing your point?

iirc group size is also matched in th group queue, not finding large groups while in a large group indicates there aren't many large groups in the queue.

[Cerlin]

I drop in two mans all the time with some friends of mine and love the group queue a lot. I get both smarter teammates and better fights. I does mean my unit and I cannot always grind our new mechs but that is what solo is for. I do not want to go back to the old system. I like it as is.

Also I personally like groups smaller than six in the current system.....so it cant be that bad for small groups.