972 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

55th Fox, on 07 October 2014 - 09:13 PM, said:

I dont see how giving players LESS choice over the mode they wish to play could ever be seen as an improvement. Most people only have limited time to play and dont want to waste it playing a mode they dont like. Please revert the game mode selection back to how it was.

Its pretty simple.

For many people (I don't claim minority or majority here) tight Elo matching is more important than game mode, and accepting some randomness in game modes (and thus less control) is an acceptable price to pay for better matchmaking.

Just depends on where a given player's priorities are.

[Wolf Clearwater]

Now with moar BattleTech-iness

Edited by Wolf87535, 07 October 2014 - 09:22 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Slyder, on 07 October 2014 - 09:16 PM, said:

We dont like it / want it in the group queue either. Play the game types you want to play, and we will play ours. We dont want to be forced into random game modes, because you cant be sure what to bring to a fight...and THAT IS WHAT MW IS AT ITS CORE!!!!!

Have you EVER played a battletech table top match, where you had to pick your mech and loadouts BEFORE knowing what kind of map you were going to play on? No military foce EVER has made an attack on a target without knowing SOMETHING about at the very LEAST the terrain/conditions they were going to be fighting in.

The only way the RANDOM game mode will work, is if they allow us to chose our mechs/loadouts AFTER the match is determined.

Given that ppl seem to be taking up the banner of "vote with alt f4"

which is an entirely unacceptable way TO vote or protest imo

Id say devoting CW resources to fixing this may be a good idea before more hot headed "voters" start getting themselves banned for opting iout the only way they have (although unacceptable)

[Gyrok]

ThomasMarik, on 07 October 2014 - 09:17 PM, said:

So you added a change that has improved game balance and you are now putting up a vote weather to keep it?


If people want to be assured of what mode they pay in then they can go to the Private Queues. That is always the answer for everything else. Play how you want to play. Meanwhile the public queues are supposed to reflect what the devs believe to be in the best interest of fair games.

Then make private queues give cbill rewards/XP/GXP...

If you did that, public group queue would literally die off...seriously...

NOBODY in the group queue I have seen wants this...

Edited by Gyrok, 07 October 2014 - 09:21 PM.

[Cabusha]

I'm voting yes. The one sided matches are boring (12-0, I see you!) and those good, gritty matches are too few and far between. Keep the ELO improvement.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Darth Futuza, on 07 October 2014 - 09:17 PM, said:

I like all game modes, so for me it is great.

Cant see that not everyone shares this view I take it?

[Hervedgerse]

The changes have improved the game twofold for me. First the games are usually much closer with lances evenly contributing to victory, and my clan mates are being forced to occasionally learn new strategies from other game modes. I was skeptical at first, but thanks for implementing this.

[Mordin Ashe]

I love the new changes, it improves the game a lot.
Sadly I have to vote against it. The thing is, PGI introduced many incredibly slow Mechs that simply can't do anything in some conquest scenarios, and since I sometimes play those Mechs getting dropped there in a bad spot means I will not do anything for the whole game and probably will get zerged without having a single chance to change it.
PGI, once you tighten the spread of lances dropping on a map and get rid of Alpine and other big maps OR make DWs somehow faster, I have to say no. Yes, I get the concept of a slower Mech, don't get me wrong, but the way things are now too often I am sitting at an unsolveable scenario in many cases. Unless that changes, I simply need to control where I drop as much as possible.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Darth Futuza, on 07 October 2014 - 09:18 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure I agree with Russ on this one. They wouldn't be able to get enough statistical data from a test server.

The players agreeing that moving the game back from live to beta is better than putting in a test server

wow

[Lindonius]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 09:20 PM, said:

Cant see that not everyone shares this view I take it?

49.5% of people voting in this poll do. (at the time of writing.)

[Sovery_Simple]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Given that ppl seem to be taking up the banner of "vote with alt f4"

which is an entirely unacceptable way TO vote or protest imo

Id say devoting CW resources to fixing this may be a good idea before more hot headed "voters" start getting themselves banned for opting iout the only way they have (although unacceptable)

Then PGI A: reduces their playerbase and B: pisses off that section of people in the process, leading to some nice vitrol outside of the game to drive off new and older players. It gets their point across quite nicely.

It does not, however, help PGI in any way, shape, or form.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Gyrok, on 07 October 2014 - 09:18 PM, said:

Too bad all we have seen all night was Lords and SJR, when it is not them it is 228th, all in conquest.

Would be nice to win a match this century...

There are no "good" matches in group queue, only varying degrees of stomps.

So, bugger this garbage off into the bin and leave group queue alone. We do NOT want this...

I have an idea; make a que where you dont have a choice to your play mode and one where you do. See which one gets used more over the course of a month or two then use that idea

[Karl Marlow]

Gyrok, on 07 October 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Then make private queues give cbill rewards/XP/GXP...

If you did that, public group queue would literally die off...seriously...

NOBODY in the group queue I have seen wants this...

Not true. You just quoted someone from the group queues and I very much want more even matches. More importantly I want the matches to be found faster. This change accomplishes both goals.

[Darth Futuza]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 09:20 PM, said:

Cant see that not everyone shares this view I take it?

No, I was pointing out to him that I was one of the people that like it, since he was asking who would want this change. That's all. There's no need to pretend I was implying I'm obliviously unaware of others wants.

[M E X]

Gremlinn, on 07 October 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

VOTE NO!!! Save mechwarrior.

No=you get to chose your mode of gameplay
Yes=you get a slightly closer match (only about a 50 elo closer)
...

I share your opinion !

Especially as ELO wil NEVER work for matchmaking in MWO !

The problem is that ELO is designed for single players with EQUAL equipment ... if they dont use the same BattleMech, you need a FACTOR like BATTLEVALUE of the Mech's used to modify the value !

Just read yourself at http://en.wikipedia....o_rating_system :

Quote

...
The difference in the ratings between two players serves as a predictor of the outcome of a match. Two players with equal ratings who play against each other are expected to score an equal number of wins.
...

Alone from this sentence you can see that ELO will never work, UNLESS you calculate ELO for each modified mech seperatly !
Which means that as soon as you change a single weapon, add or remove a heatsink, change distribution of armor points, ... you are no longer able to use ELO to compare the skill of the players without using a factor like BATTLEVALUE of the mech for modifiying your so called ELO

In the extreme situation of a player in a Locust playing against a Direwolf, everyone will agree that it is impossible to calculate a ELO, unless the players play a 2nd macht where the opponents use the mech of the enemy.
But even then the players using one type of a mech will loose more often than the players using the other type of mech !

Edited by M E X, 07 October 2014 - 09:26 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Lindonius, on 07 October 2014 - 09:23 PM, said:

49.5% of people voting in this poll do. (at the time of writing.)

of the minority of the ppl playing, yes

Good job arguing that the minority of players should choose how the majority play.

Whoops, on 07 October 2014 - 09:23 PM, said:

Then PGI A: reduces their playerbase and B: pisses off that section of people in the process, leading to some nice vitrol outside of the game to drive off new and older players. It gets their point across quite nicely.

It does not, however, help PGI in any way, shape, or form.

Thats what I was trying to say

[Sovery_Simple]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 07 October 2014 - 09:24 PM, said:

of the minority of the ppl playing, yes

Good job arguing that the minority of players should choose how the majority play.

The main question is: Are we (possibly) losing a segment of the playerbase for this, and is it worth it if we do?

[Elizander]

I think PGI should check the data on the following:

1) How many unique players (or group leaders) used the group queue and how many matches they played over a specific period of time. A weight of the average group size per leader might be required.
2) How many unique players that used the solo queue and how many matches they played over a specific time.
3) What modes are checked for each of these player types.
4) For monetary purposes, tag each player based on how much they pay (though this can be skewed in the group queue unless you can pull how much money a whole group paid in total).

With that simple data you can easily determine the outcome of the matchmaker and the general population. If players hate Conquest but Conquest keeps coming up, do most players not on the forums actually have Conquest or All checked? Maybe most people do check Conquest or All and just don't bother to complain here?

For comparison, I play with all modes and I don't think a change like this would even make me come to the forums to say anything for the update (positive) because there isn't much difference from before. Those who do dislike the change however will be posting here for sure. Without the actual data on what players prefer to play it'll be hard to say if this poll is accurate or is just weighted by those who are irked vs those who are not affected by the change.

Edited by Elizander, 07 October 2014 - 09:27 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Darth Futuza, on 07 October 2014 - 09:23 PM, said:

No, I was pointing out to him that I was one of the people that like it, since he was asking who would want this change. That's all. There's no need to pretend I was implying I'm obliviously unaware of others wants.

I dont like it so they should remove it

[Joanna Conners]

I vote no. I did not enjoy tonight very much. I detest dropping in gametypes I do not want to play. There is no fun in it.

I do not care if I get rolled because of ELO. It happens both ways and I can live with it. I care about playing what I want.

The sooner we go back to the old way, the better.