174 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

I have to say the more I think about this the less I like it, I want to play the bloody game not faff about loosing time voting for a game mode, and possibly ending up for hours in a mode of play and later on a map I dislike.

The current mode i'm quite happy to take the good with the bad, to find myself in a long range map, with a brawler, you take the rough with the smooth.

Soon as I start ending up in the same mode for hours or the same map for hours because some winkie with his meta mates in their lurmboats on alpine, the less i'm likely to play and spend.


Seriously why waste hours on crap like this which makes the game worse, than do what you should be doing, and going all out with the jungle map and the inter faction planetry war map these two items are the only ones worth a damn right now, seriosly get a grip, there isn't IPG to blame any more for dumb ideas

[MuzMuzMuz]

I'm simply curious about the "Starting Bias" set to 1 for each game mode?

surely this should be set to "0"

Otherwise, even if all 24 players want to play the same game mode I.E. only Conquest, there is still a bias of

Skirmish 1
Assault 1
Conquest 1(+24 votes)

cumulative bias
Skirmish 1 (+0)
Assult 2 (+1)
Conquest 27 (+2)


a 27 sided dice ~ 7.5% they play a mode nobody voted for (if it rolls 1 or 2) ?

[Mitsuragi]

Jabbershark, on 07 October 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

[color=#959494] I just want to pick my mode and my map... is this too much to ask. If you are scared a particular map or game mode would not be selected then my advise is take a serious look at why no one likes the map or game mode. Somethings are such a pain in the ass with this game sometimes.[/color]

Dear Jabbershark,

If every player faced no adversity in this game then there would be only 1 mech, 1 weapon, 1 map, and 1 play mode. If players made all the decisions as to their game play then the game wouldn't challenge anyone because every player would make their mech the 'best' mech, make their favorite weapon the 'best' weapon, only play maps that had no adverse conditions (such as visibility or heat), and only play Skirmish.

How much fun is a game that doesn't challenge you? How often do you play Tic-Tac-Toe? How often do you play marbles? How often do you play Pong or any other online game that's boring? I'll bet it's not all that often. You need to have a variety of experiences to compare and contrast them. If you have that one map you really hate *cough* river city night *cough* think about how much more you enjoy playing on canyon or forest colony. It's good to have a wide range of experience to base your judgement on. I feel this enhances the game; not detracts from it.

Regards,
Mitsuragi

Edited by Mitsuragi, 07 October 2014 - 10:08 AM.

[Mitsuragi]

Cathy, on 07 October 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

Seriously why waste hours on crap like this which makes the game worse, than do what you should be doing, and going all out with the jungle map and the inter faction planetry war map these two items are the only ones worth a damn right now, seriosly get a grip, there isn't IPG to blame any more for dumb ideas

Dear Cathy,

I admire your fortitude and understanding when you receive a poor matchup for your mech/playstyle and hope you'll expand that understanding to initiatives PGI pitches to improve the game. The player base voted for this idea (admittedly low voter turn out, like always) and now PGI wants our friendly, honest feedback. The question is, if you receive better matches in skill and tonnage are you willing to sacrifice which game mode you play in? Now, it's not a total sacrifice since PGI is suggesting a limited voting system, but it's a sacrifice none-the-less. Thankfully it's not a totalitarian as Halo's voting system where you're presented a single choice you can down vote and then must accept the next.

Regards,
Mitsurgai

Edited by Mitsuragi, 07 October 2014 - 10:03 AM.

[Hannibal Chow]

Great, less choice. This is going to be a huge Charlie Foxtrot.

Let the flaming and trolling commence!

[Mitsuragi]

Jaz 249, on 07 October 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

Great, less choice. This is going to be a huge Charlie Foxtrot.

Let the flaming and trolling commence!

Dear Jaz249,

TROLL TROLL TROLL!!! FLAME FLAME FLAME!!! Troll flame troll?

Nah, but for realz, yo... expand on your thought. How would we have less choice? What could we do to safeguard choice even if the vote system is implemented? Gimme us your ideas!

Regards,
Mitsuragi

Edited by Mitsuragi, 07 October 2014 - 10:18 AM.

[Hoax415]

Sure are a lot of whiny idiots in this thread.

Stomps are the #1 complaint every day all day.

PGI says: Look the #1 reason there are stomps is unequal elo games, the playerbase is small but what really adds to bad games is 3/3/3/3 + game mode selections.

3/3/3/3 is there for a reason even though it sucks, PGI and in theory the playerbase that remembers pre-3/3/3/3 would prefer less balanced games compared to 100% assault mech teams we had before.

So Russ ran a poll on the forums asking if we'd be ok with attacking the other big problem MM has, which is it can't match people in their best possible match unless the weight classes fit AND the game mode selections fit.

The poll was much smaller than the mech polls, so clearly it needed to be hyped somehow more to the playerbase. But the outcome was not even close with 80% saying better matches > game mode hard selections which is enough that if we can ever draw a conclusion from the forums we could on this issue.

Now if people want to beg Russ to introduce the system only in the group queue... Fine. The group queue is the one that has much bigger elo problems than solo queue for obvious reasons. I see no problem with that.

If people want a promise from Russ that he'll run a vote after a month with the new system asking if people want to keep it along with publishing data on if the elo gap has closed on average...

I'm 100% all for that and I think both of those requests are quite reasonable.

But instead this thread is why nobody should listen to forums. Just a bunch of ******* crying at the top of their lungs over nothing. Claiming they have the majority's interests at heart.

Bullshit.

The majority have all 3 game modes checked and don't give a ****. They want:

Quick matches > Even matches > Game mode.

That's the massive majority of the playerbase who are all too busy playing to worry about these forums.

I could even prove it.

What if people who select only one game mode took a 10% cbill hit? Selecting two game modes is -5%.

How many of the people who just want to play the damn game are going to lose rewards because they care about game mode? Answer. Not very many. Certainly almost none of the huge majority of low MC spenders who make up the majority of the playerbase.

This system is far kinder to most players who don't like X or Y game mode.

Yes some of you forum warriors with 100+ mechs threatening to quit every match that isn't what you want are the super special forum poster only exception. You don't speak for the majority of anything.

Edited by Hoax415, 07 October 2014 - 10:29 AM.

[Hannibal Chow]

lols, i just mean that its basicaly going to be skirmish and very little else.

I like the other two game modes, but very few others do it would seem, if Russ wants us to use the assault and conquest modes more just put them on rotation and get rid of choice entirely, I'd be ok with that.

[Mitsuragi]

Jaz 249, on 07 October 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

lols, i just mean that its basicaly going to be skirmish and very little else.

I like the other two game modes, but very few others do it would seem, if Russ wants us to use the assault and conquest modes more just put them on rotation and get rid of choice entirely, I'd be ok with that.

Dear Jaz249,

We're on the same side. I'm one of those elusive "select all" players myself. Do you think there's a way we can support rotation and voting? What if the game presented 2 options at random and players had to pick one?

Regards,
Mitsuragi

[Hannibal Chow]

My guess is any action Russ takes will be complained about - haters gonna hate.

[Wolf Clearwater]

Interesting. The map one really worries me the most. We have precious few maps as it is, but the idea of it being cut down to an "ideal" 2-3 is a little disheartening. I know every hates Mordor, I personally despise River City Night the most, but the idea of Caustic almost never coming around again is a little sad. On the plus side, would make getting newly implemented maps much more likely.

[Mitsuragi]

Hoax415, on 07 October 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:

What if people who select only one game mode took a 10% cbill hit? Selecting two game modes is -5%.

Dear Hoax415,

I think you're on to something here! What if instead of penalizing people we incentivize them? What if you receive +10% cbills for 2 game modes and +20% for all three? I wonder how what the results of that would be? A cbill for your thoughts?

Regards,
Mitsuragi

[martian]

If the PGI thinks that they can force me to play a game mode that I dislike ... well, they are wrong!

Guess what is going to happen when the game will put me in a game mode "I" haven't selected?

[Hannibal Chow]

And thats my main concern, how many folk will shut down / quit matches?

I might just remind you all that doing that is against the Toc and is a reportable offence - just sayin'

[Mitsuragi]

martian, on 07 October 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

Guess what is going to happen when the game will put me in a game mode "I" haven't selected?

Dear martian,

I'm sorry to see you feel this way. I can understand how it feels like MWO is just another game you play on your computer, but I encourage you to see that it's really a team game. You're playing with and against live human beings who have opinions just as strong as yours. In that spirit I ask you this; if your real-life friends wanted to play volleyball but your favorite sport is football, would you turn them down? That's what we're asking here. "Hey, I know you like X, but for the other 23 people in this game would you play Y?" I hope we can understand one another.

Regards,
Mitsuragi

[jozkhan]

So why is it that just about everyone that maybe doesnt read the forums, definitely didnt see the poll and that has never heard of this new 'feature' comes down pretty much against the whole idea?

It's such an obvious step backwards that anyone can see it. Sure the match maker has problems, it's broken in fact but this is no way to address it.

All you are going to achieve by taking away the ability to actually select the game mode/s you want to play (after having made the option available for some time now) is to alienate even further the existing player base and in fact a percentage of players will be lost here as it is a very annoying feature (say you make a light for conquest only play but you cant actually get into a conquest game).

This is a real step backwards and if player numbers are an issue then this is a dangerous move as you are doubling down on a risky movement that way actually worsen the situation.

[Mitsuragi]

Mystere, on 07 October 2014 - 10:37 AM, said:

I'd rather have forced game mode rotations.

Dear Mystere,

I definitely agree that variety is the spice of life. How do you think we can safeguard player choice while keeping all the game modes viable? Do you think that forced rotation, like maps currently are, is the only solution or do you think there are other systems that could work as well?

Regards,
Mitsuragi

[Mystere]

Jaz 249, on 07 October 2014 - 10:39 AM, said:

And thats my main concern, how many folk will shut down / quit matches?

I might just remind you all that doing that is against the Toc and is a reportable offence - just sayin'

And that is the point. How many sympathetic players will even bother to report instead of just going to the forums and also complain about this new voting system? I guess we're about to find out sooner rather than later.

Sometimes, wisdom can be found hiding within the apparent madness.

[Sandtiger]

Bront, on 07 October 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

I'm well aware of that. The vote still was 80/20 for those that did vote, and that's why we're getting this.

Truly spoken! I wish they had a way in game that you could vote for upcoming changes. Some sort of alert system would be nice.

"Would you like to see fixed JJ on the Clan Timber Wolf..." Etc...

I know its a pipe dream. But it would be nice. =]

[Hoax415]

Mitsuragi, on 07 October 2014 - 10:34 AM, said:

Dear Hoax415,

I think you're on to something here! What if instead of penalizing people we incentivize them? What if you receive +10% cbills for 2 game modes and +20% for all three? I wonder how what the results of that would be? A cbill for your thoughts?

Regards,
Mitsuragi

Because PGI has set the grind at the rate they set it to for business reasons. They believe that this paulconomy is what is best for the game. Why would they give +10% cbills to almost everyone in the game?

Most players play all 3 game modes as is. They care more about fast good games than game modes. They aren't causing extra strain on the MM system.

Sure it'd be great to just get more cbills but that makes a lot less sense to PGI. Also its more instructive as a thought exercise. Its trying to put a value on a penalty by substituting it with another penalty.