481 replies to this topic

[Squally160]

Kjudoon, on 27 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

Yes, that's the case ignoring some sociological factors that matter. The point is that still for the pleasure of a few hundred people, thousands of people are having bad games. This is selfish. One bad apple spoils the whole barrel and you want to make sure the bad apple is protected.

IF that one match, which you obviously view as insignificant (which begs the question how many matches a week do YOU play I'm down to maybe 6-12 a week when I used to play 50-75 when the time and interest was there) was say the only night of the week that person is able to play, and they only get 8 matches in a night, this is 12.5% of all matches to them, assuming that they aren't stomped by any other group of 8+ often tied in to the '12man stomp'.

If this continues to happen week after week, what do you think they're going to do? Do that math.

It's about perception, and if they perceve to always get stomped by large groups when they're in a small group, they will alter their gaming experience to something they DO enjoy. If it cannot be found in MWO, they leave. This is the fact of the matter. If you don't care about the player population shrinking, by all means play this entitlement game and make sure to text L2P noob at them with a ggclose after embarrassing them 12-0. I'm sure it will help grow the population and the reputation for MWO of being a fun, inclusive community just like League of Legends has .

That's another game I wouldn't touch with a 10 meter cattleprod.

So are you saying any time there is a 12-0 in the solo q 12 people quit the game for a week?

Because that is the point you are making, everytime there is a 12-0, 12 people quit.

[CyberDerp]

Man......Sure sounds like a whining. Not really sure the solution to that. But we need to find one.

[Kjudoon]

Mystere, on 27 September 2014 - 08:48 PM, said:

The opt-in provisions of your 3-queue solution are the sticking points. They have the potential to starve the large-group queue.

The best that could probably be hoped for is to implement some prioritization scheme in the group queue in which the MM tries to put 12-mans with other 12-mans or, failing that within a reasonable amount of time, form a 12-man group using the largest group possible with fillers. But, Elo and 3/3/3/3 will really have to be loosened a lot for this to work. The MM is really currently hampered both by too many rules and by a small player base.

In fact, the group queue may already have that in place. In which case, the small player base is the issue.

The only other option for Opt In is to force people in, and I can guarantee you, that will drive people out of the game faster than anything. If I was playing solo, and I got forced into another queue after opting out, I'd quit match on the spot. Repeated forcings, and I'd be gone from any game that did that to me. If, for instance DCUO started forcing me in PvP matches because the waits were taking too long, I'd be suicide and be gone. I have every PvP option in that game blocked for a reason.

But then again, it sounds like PGI is building the CW to be the solution to the 8-12man team. We'll see if it's true. No Elo, 3/3/3/3 or anything like that getting in the way. Just pick your 4 mechs of each weight class and go. But as I said before, I'll believe it's the cure the instant I see it's the cure.

[Kjudoon]

Squally160, on 27 September 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

So are you saying any time there is a 12-0 in the solo q 12 people quit the game for a week?

Because that is the point you are making, everytime there is a 12-0, 12 people quit.

Okay, you're trying to play games with falsified conclusions I never said. Since you're going to be putting statements in my mouth I never made, I'm done with this.

You want status quo and nothing less will satisfy. No reason to even bother here anymore.

Edited by Kjudoon, 27 September 2014 - 09:03 PM.

[CyberDerp]

There might be many things in your mouth. But statements seems to be the least of them.

[Mystere]

Kjudoon, on 27 September 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

IF that one match, which you obviously view as insignificant (which begs the question how many matches a week do YOU play I'm down to maybe 6-12 a week when I used to play 50-75 when the time and interest was there) was say the only night of the week that person is able to play, and they only get 8 matches in a night, this is 12.5% of all matches to them, assuming that they aren't stomped by any other group of 8+ often tied in to the '12man stomp'.

This time I'll be blunt. Someone who quits for being stomped in 1 out of 8 games has bigger issues in life.

Kjudoon, on 27 September 2014 - 08:58 PM, said:

The only other option for Opt In is to force people in, and I can guarantee you, that will drive people out of the game faster than anything. If I was playing solo, and I got forced into another queue after opting out, I'd quit match on the spot. Repeated forcings, and I'd be gone from any game that did that to me. If, for instance DCUO started forcing me in PvP matches because the waits were taking too long, I'd be suicide and be gone. I have every PvP option in that game blocked for a reason.

Hence my suggested prioritization scheme.

Also, note that solo players are only opt in. They should never be forced into the group queue.

[mmstahlman]

I am thinking the incoming warfare will drive most competitive players to that queue and dropping with these players in the solo/group queue will be far less often. Maybe you should find a group and take part of the bigger game. If you want a "drop - shoot - win/lose - repeat" style game (where you are playing alone all the time) maybe mechwarrior online isn't the game you are looking for.

The other problems you seem to have... like rage quitting after one loss because people who may or may not know each other rolled you... well lets just say you should probably get that under check.

Edited by mmstahlman, 27 September 2014 - 09:33 PM.

[Squally160]

Kjudoon, on 27 September 2014 - 09:02 PM, said:

Okay, you're trying to play games with falsified conclusions I never said. Since you're going to be putting statements in my mouth I never made, I'm done with this.

You want status quo and nothing less will satisfy. No reason to even bother here anymore.

When yo uare on a team that is about to stomp another team, be it in any q, what do you do?

Do you quit, to give the other team a fair chance, or do you play the game that was given to you?

If you quit, Good man! youre sticking to your morals! If you play it, well, you are part of this perceived stomping problem then too.

[VixNix]

Of the 8 friends that played this game together (not ever at the same time) only three play still and two of these are MAYBE one night a week for an hour or so...

WHY?
THEY DON'T HAVE FUN.

I think this is the same reason OP started this thread.

A few suggestions for improvement have been made...
A few people seem to want nothing to change...

What does PGI want?

[Squally160]

VixNix, on 28 September 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

Of the 8 friends that played this game together (not ever at the same time) only three play still and two of these are MAYBE one night a week for an hour or so...

WHY?
THEY DON'T HAVE FUN.

I think this is the same reason OP started this thread.

A few suggestions for improvement have been made...
A few people seem to want nothing to change...

What does PGI want?

"Heres this change that will ruin the big group q"

"We would still like to play though! we dont agre with that change"

"AHHHHH! They just want to keep things the same! they wont let us do what we want *whine whine whine*"

So yeah. Everyones solution is basically: 12 mans/big groups cant play anymore, but little groups can.

and your response to why we dont want that is because you think "we want nothing to change."

thats a real special kind of short bus logic.

[Kodyn]

I know the OP was predicting a lot of "try harder" posts, but...to be fair, that really is the gist of it.

For example, I've been playing for maybe...3 months, max. I was absolutely terrible for the first month, probably longer. Couldn't aim, couldn't drive a mech without hitting everything from walls to my allies, got rolled badly every match. Within a few days I realized I needed help. Now I'm very, very asocial, but I knew that was not going to work for me in a game like this, so I immediately sought out a large, active group that I could learn from and drop with. Now I can say, after a short stint with the Aces Wild, I'm still only a mediocre player at best, but leaps and bounds above where I was. Also, I can find groups of any size, right within the unit, or drop solo if that's my preference.

My point is this...I knew I was bad at this game, so I sought out better players to help me overcome the learning curve. You will not get better by playing weak, disorganized teams. In this game, unless you plan to spend tons of cash, you're going to need to grind some, and even if you do spend cash, you still need to grind to actually get better at piloting. If you cannot, or will not actually improve your skill, you will not enjoy this game, nor go very far with it. It's simply not designed for the casual player, unless they want to at least put some effort into it. Unless you and your friends are just not very good at this sort of game, or have no interest in getting better, I refuse to believe that had you continued to keep getting rolled by better players, practicing in solo queue, even joined a Clan/Unit, you would not get better. You really would improve if you wanted to and tried.

My elo is crap for solo, so when I play in groups with fellow Aces, I feel like even more of a noob than I am, but I learn more every time. Spectate your allies when you lose, at least til you do improve, it can teach you a great deal. I was not intending this post to sound harsh, but I'm coming from nearly 10 years of EVE online experience, and compared to that, this game and community are like Candyland filled with teletubbies, so I really don't think it's that difficult to find people to work with and teach you, nor for you to just practice a bit and deal with the curve.

[Haipyng]

Mickey Knoxx, on 27 September 2014 - 08:55 PM, said:

You are making the assumption that your idea will work, but ignore the fact that it already hasn't. And then suggest that an upcoming feature will not fix it, but it is what 90% of the players in the game have been waiting to play..

Weellll,, I really don't to tell you boss.

The issues with 4 mans in the solo queue and stomps were not as bad as joining multiple small PUG groups matched against larger groups. Far less than half of those 4 man groups turned into stomps. As it is now most of the current arrangement turns into a stomp.

With the suggested arrangement you are not matching a 4 man against a possible large pool of newbies. You are hopefully matching mostly somewhat experienced 4 mans with singles as fillers with the similar handicap of not being on the same comms and getting more granular with the handicap.

There is obviously an issue here. I personally brought 5 people into MWO as casual players. Three no longer play after the group queue change as a direct result of the number of stomps. Two play mostly as singles and one night a week we bang away at the group queue with depressing results just because we are big MW fans.

One side of this argument likes the status quo, leaving the issue in place with the result of alienating a subset of the player base and slowing the games growth. All because it may erode the group queue. That seems like it is self fulfilling.

The other favors doing something to create a middle ground, so that hopefully more players that want to get good enough to step up to the large queue have that option and more importantly having the opportunity, without having the love of the game stomped out of them before they get there.

This isn't advocating a return to the old system. It's giving players a choice. Let singles and small groups into the big queue if they want it.

Someone once said that, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results". That applies two fold here:

• Ignoring that there is an issue and doing nothing about it except maintaining the status quo.
  
• Casuals and small groups playing stomp after stomp expecting different results.

The only result of that first part will be only a shrinking subset of players (some don't enjoy low quality no challenge matches) as a direct result of the people in the second part not being insane (mostly).

Edited by Haipyng, 28 September 2014 - 06:29 AM.

[Haipyng]

Squally160, on 28 September 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

"Heres this change that will ruin the big group q"

So something is broken for a decent portion of players and we should do nothing as opposed to trying something to fix it? Because we know that this will absolutely break the large group queue?

Squally160, on 28 September 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

"We would still like to play though! we dont agre with that change"

"AHHHHH! They just want to keep things the same! they wont let us do what we want *whine whine whine*"

So yeah. Everyones solution is basically: 12 mans/big groups cant play anymore, but little groups can.

and your response to why we dont want that is because you think "we want nothing to change."

thats a real special kind of short bus logic.

...and then you descend into mockery and insults. That doesn't advance your point at all.

[Haipyng]

Mystere, on 27 September 2014 - 09:15 PM, said:

This time I'll be blunt. Someone who quits for being stomped in 1 out of 8 games has bigger issues in life.

How about being stomped in 7 out of 8 games as are what many in small groups are saying? I'm stubborn, but I understand why they give it up and only play solo or drop the game entirely.

[Thorn Hallis]

Haipyng, on 28 September 2014 - 06:18 AM, said:

The issues with 4 mans in the solo queue and stomps were not as bad as joining multiple small PUG groups matched against larger groups. Far less than half of those 4 man groups turned into stomps. As it is now most of the current arrangement turns into a stomp.

How do you wanna know that? Can't remember PGI ever released relevant statistics on that certain topic.

[jackal40]

Squally160, on 27 September 2014 - 07:57 PM, said:

Again though, you are basing this off each player only facing a 12 man once, and their entire night is ruined?

Should we all stop playing if we get a 12-0 loss? Or should you try again.

So what is a reasonable number of stomps to you? 2, 3 ,4. How many times should a small group of casual players put up with getting stomped?

As I posted yesterday, out of 11 matches we played as a 4 man group - 5 were a 12-3 or worse stomp and we had only 2 victories and 1 tie. A couple of the defeats were pretty close, but most were not fun.

As far as we are concerned, the group queue as it is now is not worth the effort. It needs to be changed.

[Squally160]

jackal40, on 28 September 2014 - 06:46 AM, said:

So what is a reasonable number of stomps to you? 2, 3 ,4. How many times should a small group of casual players put up with getting stomped?

As I posted yesterday, out of 11 matches we played as a 4 man group - 5 were a 12-3 or worse stomp and we had only 2 victories and 1 tie. A couple of the defeats were pretty close, but most were not fun.

As far as we are concerned, the group queue as it is now is not worth the effort. It needs to be changed.

Its funny, because ive seen ONE "big team" this weekend, the rest have been 4 mans. Yet, youre still getting stomps?

CLEARLY ITS THE BIG TEAMS! RAGE!!!!!!

also, ive dropped probably, 75-100 times this weekend. all but about 5 in the group q, in 4 mans.

[jackal40]

Squally160, on 28 September 2014 - 07:09 AM, said:

Its funny, because ive seen ONE "big team" this weekend, the rest have been 4 mans. Yet, youre still getting stomps?

CLEARLY ITS THE BIG TEAMS! RAGE!!!!!!

also, ive dropped probably, 75-100 times this weekend. all but about 5 in the group q, in 4 mans.

I don't see where I said it was Big Teams, if fact I didn't even state the number of factions involved on either side.

As I have the screen shots of those 11 matches I could list that for you. Would that help you to understand the underlying problem with the group queue is the way matchmaker puts the match together?

I'll reiterate for you: "As far as we are concerned, the group queue as it is now is not worth the effort. It needs to be changed." I would recommend that each team have a near equal chance of winning - let the players determine the winner NOT the matchmaker.

Edited by jackal40, 28 September 2014 - 07:19 AM.

[Squally160]

jackal40, on 28 September 2014 - 07:14 AM, said:

I don't see where I said it was Big Teams, if fact I didn't even state the number of factions involved on either side.

As I have the screen shots of those 11 matches I could list that for you. Would that help you to understand the underlying problem with the group queue is the way matchmaker put the match together?

I'll reiterate for you: "As far as we are concerned, the group queue as it is now is not worth the effort. It needs to be changed." I would recommend that each team have a near equal chance of winning - let the players determine the winner NOT the matchmaker.

This whole thread is about small groups being stomped by big teams. Would you be done with the solo q if the same stomps happened there?

*editing for your edit*

I am pretty sure the players are determining the outcome.
Some folks are dropping casually, others as comp teams (even if its just a lance).

Perhaps they have the exact same elo, the comp team should win more often, because they are trying to be comp. the casual team wont win as much because they are just playing casually.

The MM cant determine who is trying that night, and who is plastered.
it just says "your elo is this, you should play at that elo level"

It doesnt care what mood you are in that night, it just goes off numbers, not attitudes.

Edited by Squally160, 28 September 2014 - 07:23 AM.

[Mystere]

Haipyng, on 28 September 2014 - 06:18 AM, said:

The issues with 4 mans in the solo queue and stomps were not as bad as joining multiple small PUG groups matched against larger groups. Far less than half of those 4 man groups turned into stomps.

You have got to be kidding.

Haipyng, on 28 September 2014 - 06:32 AM, said:

How about being stomped in 7 out of 8 games as are what many in small groups are saying? I'm stubborn, but I understand why they give it up and only play solo or drop the game entirely.

And now I think you really are. smh.

The solo queue must be kept solo. Player disquiet there has been mostly quelled.

As for the group queue, a possible solution is what I already stated in this thread.