13 replies to this topic

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

12v12 is very thematic, as it's company against company, but it can be very hard to feel like you're contributing when you are solo or in a small group and a couple of your randoms run off and die and your team gets rolled simply due to superior numbers.

8v8 was great fun, and each individual mechwarrior made a proportionally larger impact on a given match.

4v4 would also be super thematic (lance against lance), and would maximize the impact of individual player skiill while still retaining the team-based foundation of the MWO experience.

1v1 would be an amazing option, if only as a true test of individual talent, without the ability to blame anyone else for your own failings.

PGI already offers several game mode types, which players can check any or all of. Why not team sizes as well? Obviously a premade would have any team size lower than their current number disabled, and you'd be unable to do groups that were one short of a full team for a given size if you had that size selected (2 or 4 in 4-mans, 2-6 and 8 for 8-mans, 2-10 and 12 for 12-mans).

I could see how 1v1s might not work out from a server resources standpoint, but 4v4 and 8v8 would both be great fun.

I know that several of the people I play with would be far more active if 8v8s came back, and would play all the time if we had 4v4s.

Sure, there's the Private Match system, but for 4v4 you need 8 players, two of whom have Premium Time. 8v8 is even worse, needing 16 players to run one. Far better if PGI simply added the 4v4 and 8v8 options to the standard game queues.

Edited by Levi Porphyrogenitus, 06 August 2014 - 08:35 AM.

[Christopher Hamilton]

1v1 and 4v4 Solaris Arena Options please

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Christopher Hamilton, on 05 August 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

1v1 and 4v4 Solaris Arena Options please

Added Solaris 4v4 and Solaris 1v1 to the poll.

I'm assuming that any Solaris Arena stuff would be part of a major content patch where they drop a couple of Arena-style maps, maybe even adding a bit of hand-to-hand combat (gogo Hatchetman/Axeman/Berserker mech pack!). I'd also expect a Solaris Arena mode to have a very different reward structure.

[ExAstra]

All of them. I want 12v12, 8v8, 4v4, 1v1, 36v36, 2v2...

And more modes If the game got popular enough and had a big enough playerbase to fill all the Matchmaker queues there'd be no problem with it.

As is right now, though, you add any more options for people to choose from and people will be waiting upwards of 10 minutes for a game (in some modes/size ranks)

[VixNix]

All options should be on the table, the more options for playing the better.

Also need a Training queue, some place where new people can go to learn.

[delelion]

All. =)

Some maps may need modification for smaller groups though. That could be a simple boundary change, so you are not searching all night for that last light 'mech....

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

delelion, on 09 August 2014 - 11:24 PM, said:

All. =)

Some maps may need modification for smaller groups though. That could be a simple boundary change, so you are not searching all night for that last light 'mech....

I'm not so sure that boundary throttling would be necessary. I think it'd be better if the MM simply weighted the maps based on size, so 12v12 would have better odds of getting a huge map, 8v8 would have better odds of a large map, and 1v1 and 4v4 would have better odds of a small map.

I can't shake the feeling that, assuming there were appropriate objective-based game modes available, huge maps with 1v1 or 4v4 would have a sense of frantic paranoia that larger group sizes would lack...

[Wolfways]

12 v 10.

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 06 August 2014 - 08:41 AM, said:

Added Solaris 4v4 and Solaris 1v1 to the poll.

I'm assuming that any Solaris Arena stuff would be part of a major content patch where they drop a couple of Arena-style maps, maybe even adding a bit of hand-to-hand combat (gogo Hatchetman/Axeman/Berserker mech pack!). I'd also expect a Solaris Arena mode to have a very different reward structure.

Just put crowds around our already arena sized maps.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Wolfways, on 10 August 2014 - 06:02 PM, said:

12 v 10.


Just put crowds around our already arena sized maps.

I'm assuming that CW will have its own special rules. For instance:

Clan 12s becomes 10s, Clan 8s becomes 5s, Clan 4s becomes 3s, and Clan 1s would just be interesting.

[Wolfways]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 August 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

I'm assuming that CW will have its own special rules. For instance:

Clan 12s becomes 10s, Clan 8s becomes 5s, Clan 4s becomes 3s, and Clan 1s would just be interesting.

I never mentioned CW. You asked what match sizes people would like. I choose 12 v 10.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Wolfways, on 11 August 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

I never mentioned CW. You asked what match sizes people would like. I choose 12 v 10.

Given that C v IS will only happen, outside of a few public test weekend events, in CW or PMs, and PMs already allow 12v10, it is not within the scope of this poll to suggest 12v10 for the general MM.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear in the OP that the suggestion was for the current Instant Action MM.

[Wolfways]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 19 August 2014 - 08:37 PM, said:

Given that C v IS will only happen, outside of a few public test weekend events, in CW or PMs, and PMs already allow 12v10, it is not within the scope of this poll to suggest 12v10 for the general MM.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear in the OP that the suggestion was for the current Instant Action MM.

It is clear, but that doesn't change what i'd like to see. Feel free to ignore my comment, but i want 10 v 12 in the solo queue, and if PGI are balancing for 10 v 12 it only makes sense that all queues are 10 v 12. Otherwise the clan side would always be more powerful than the IS side.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Wolfways, on 20 August 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

It is clear, but that doesn't change what i'd like to see. Feel free to ignore my comment, but i want 10 v 12 in the solo queue, and if PGI are balancing for 10 v 12 it only makes sense that all queues are 10 v 12. Otherwise the clan side would always be more powerful than the IS side.

I assume you voted Other. I think your post explaining your preference (the one I'm quoting now will do just fine) is a great example of what the Other option is supposed to be for. Admittedly, I did edit the poll early on to add a few more options (the Solaris ones), which in retrospect maybe I should have left to Other as well.

As for 10v12 in the public queue, the nature of the public queue is that you will have mixed teams. The CW queue and PMs will be the only places, aside from rare public queue tests of MM concepts (we've only had one brief one so far, for the C v IS event). Since 10v12 only makes sense for tech-pure queues, I'm opting not to edit the poll again.

Thanks for your feedback, though. Any discussion is good discussion, so long as it doesn't devolve into meme spam and acrimony. Half the point of this thread is for people to post their own ideas about what the public queue should look like.

[Reitrix]

I'd prefer the match sized to be determined by map, with a release valve built into the MM to prefer smaller maps when the queue gets congested to allow the MM to kick off more matches faster.

Though the option for private matches to do larger drops on small maps would be possible.