972 replies to this topic

[Kharax]

Soo well But:

The new map is very nice but when is the next one comming then?

Maybe chrismas? and after that is the next map comming again 9 months later because every one is working on a new mech pack?

[jackal404]

Wintersdark, on 08 October 2014 - 05:09 AM, said:

Nowhere did Russ say the purpose of this was to reduce stomps.

People need to understand that stomps will always happen, no matter what, because that is the nature of the game and this sort of combat.

The stated goal was to reduce the Elo variance per match, so you'd be going I to matches with a closer to 50-50 chance to win.

Really? I read the statement from the original post to mean just that ["Please let us know with your vote if you would give up the ability to guarantee your game mode for having a higher chance of getting in a competitive match." (http://mwomercs.com/...23#entry3749623)]

And the evident reported thus far indicate that this has not increased the chance for getting a competitive match.

[PhoenixNMGLB]

I voted no.

Not because I don't want to improve the match maker but because people should be able to choose what kinds of matches they play without having to resort to private matches.

For the record I actually like all the game modes.

[Haakon Magnusson]

Gyrok, on 08 October 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:

Honestly, we dropped 20 matches last night WITH ONLY SKIRMISH CHECKED, and we dropped 19 matches on conquest/assault, 1 skirmish.</p>

Guess that should tell you that at your Elo range not that many are willing to play skirmish and you end up in games that majority likes.In previous system after some waiting time (I'd imagine your wait times have gone down now, though you propably will deny it) MM expanded search and was then able to find some poor lower Elo guys to fill in your game to enjoy your company. Steamrolls were propably even more "the norm" then

[Sprouticus]

Gyrok, on 08 October 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:

Honestly, we dropped 20 matches last night WITH ONLY SKIRMISH CHECKED, and we dropped 19 matches on conquest/assault, 1 skirmish.

That skirmish match was about 15 in and as we started positioning somebody took a screenshot that there were no caps they were so excited to be in skirmish.

Not only that, we lost 19 of 20 last night, MM is borked for ELOs high enough to be the "best match" for sjr/lords all the time.

Gyrok, have you considered that perhaps your Elo was artifically high due to always dropping in Skirmish? Im not saying that is the case, I dont know. But if you lost 19/20 and were dropping against Lords and SJr all night as you indicated, theen one of a few issues is occuring

1) The MM is borked and putting you against much higher Elo groups. Possible, especially if the group population was low last night. However Russ has indicated that the Elo difference in group was reduced tremendously.
2) Your pilots have high individual Elo' but you work relatively poorly as a group against top teams who also have high individual elo
3) there is some mechanism of Assault or conquest that your team/players do poorly on vs skirmish so you end up doing pooly in those game modes.


#1 is obviously the only one of those 3 which impacts this discussion. If #1 was the case though, then perhaps you guys are an edge case due to lords and SJr being at the top end of the Elo curve. Maybe you guys were lower in Elo, but the only team close to them so you ended up fighting them all night.

#3 is unlikely but also possible I suppose. If that is the case then this is an argument for you guys playing other game modes, both to get better and to flatten out your Elo to actual levels.

#2 is most likely IMO. Those guys work REALLY well as a team AND they have great pilots. It is a deadly combo. The quersiton of course is...would you have faced them the same even under the old system? Or would they have faced even WORSE teams, with lower Elo's?

[Bigbacon]

Monsoon, on 08 October 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:

Voted Yes.

Seriously, suck it up and learn to play outside your comfort zones.

THIS!!!

[Creovex]

jackal404, on 08 October 2014 - 04:38 AM, said:

Russ, what happened to the stated reason for the original poll - to reduce the stomps? I haven't seen much in the way of comments to indicate whether this game mode change did that.

Stomps have always amused me. I have to say that in 50% of the cases I see, the Stomp is really not a Stomp perceived issue due to the lack of what is now being called a "killing blow". I encourage all to really look at the damage done by a stomped team next time before ranting and raving...

EXAMPLE:
I was on a team Sunday that Stomped another (allegedly) and the final score was 1-12. What you didn't see, and I did because my light went "Boom" (thanks to a awesome Gauss shot) was that majority of the remaining players on my team were beat to ****.

As I recall, here was the breakdown (missing some mechs from memory, sorry)

• Nova with one arm blown off at sub 50%
  
• Nova that was mostly orange and missing most of his armor
  
• Hunch that was missing both arms and sub 50%
  
• Atlas missing both arms and sub 40%
  
• Raven who was legged and ?%
  
• Timberwolf missing its whole right side
  
• Direwolf that was still intact but near cored on CT and RT
  
• and some other mechs....

The point was, it looked like a stomp and the endgame chat was ranting about it being a stomp, but the truth was it was a lack of Focused Fire. I tend to blame the lack of integrated VOIP in the solo queue for this or the narrow sided playstyle of individuals who get so obsessed with getting one kill, they never support others. This weekends challenge drove some of this bloodlust but I have a strong belief that people need to step back after those 0-12, 1-12, 2-12 games and do two things.

• Ask yourself what your team damage was
  
• Ask yourself if maybe it wasn't so as much a miss balance but rather a mis-play by your teammates (rushing center on Terra Therma and bottle-necking at the top entrance can often equate to "destined" stomp if the other team drops arty.... overall bad tactics/no tactics

[Mechteric]

I used to care about specific game modes. But then I realized the truth a few months ago: They are all the same.

I had some really great matches last night, that's proof enough for me and my vote.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 08 October 2014 - 05:24 AM.

[ColoKid]

My opinion is that ELO is broken beyond fixing and should be thrown out.

[Hallbor]

Wolf87535, on 08 October 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:

--------For the people making the complaining about conquest in slow assaults and heavies------
Conquest should be your "go to" mode!

Clearly you have not played conquest in quite a while. Lets use Alpine as an example:

On Alpine, in conquest mode - you start closer to the enemy than skirmish. Yeah, you heard right. Closer. On top of it, you know exactly where they are going (the three cap points you can't ignore in the middle of the map) You can shoot at least one of those points from where you start. There are fire lanes between them, missiles can reach almost all the way. Seriously, actually try conquest before you hate. The hardest map to get around on in conquest mode is Terra Therma - and that has the same tactic for assaults as the other modes. Stand in the center of Mt. Doom. I get the "standing in a square is boring". You should however, never be standing in that square for long. Unlike skirmish, where one team usually huddles in a single area.

I apologize if this sounds harsher than I intend.

There has already been some hinting at the game modes being tweaked (like shorter cap times). So the modes can have the possibility of changing.

There are some flaws to all the modes

In the matches I usually get:
1. Conquest is shorter, bloodier, and done faster than any other mode.
This usually means reduced rewards
(less reward for kills and assists because the resources are supposed to fill the gap is what I assume)
Conquest rarely has someone running and hiding for Gods know what reason (it happens, if the resource counter is close)

2. Skirmish usually has someone trying to save their KDR (or Gods know wtf they are doing) and the opposing team hunts them for 5 minutes

3. Assault is where you have to pry the last remaining mechs from behind a small turret screen

In the end, please don't be the whiny douchebag who dumps the match because they didn't get the mode they want. Thank you. (if you are a qq'ing whiny douche, please get offended now)

looool, your last "little" sentence made me laugh, thanks.
And very well reasoned the rest as well. I know i had matches like that way too often it felt like

Edited by Hallbor, 08 October 2014 - 05:26 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

It was hard to decide which way to go with this, and group play from what little I've seen does need tightening up, and this new method would help achieve this.

Against this, it forces even solo pug player to enter game modes that people can't stand, which and there is no getting away from this, going to make people leave.

I personally don't like skirmish but I didn't try and remove this non thinkers option, as turrets have turned small maps like forest and city into camp maps which means the dull death match games are actually more fun, because you can move in more than one direction and not be lurmed 200 meters from your start point.

based on a blanket option of both grouped and solo play I chose mode, even though it doesn't effect me, because I think that its healthy for the size of the community as a whole, though it does cause problems in group play.

An ideal situation would be to have the tighter elo controls in group play, or in pugs that have groups and being able to sellect the mode of play you want solo, but I'm not the one writing the code..and it feels like my suggestion would cause more headaches

Edited by Cathy, 08 October 2014 - 05:28 AM.

[Worm Seraphin]

Like real life political elections, we try to vote for the lesser of two evils.
I play games to get away from this crap.
My choice is to trash the matchmaker entirely and go free private matches only, like a real game.

Edited by Worm Seraphin, 08 October 2014 - 05:33 AM.

[Sprouticus]

Barfing Gopher, on 08 October 2014 - 05:11 AM, said:

Here's an angle that should be considered. If you force a player into a game mode they don't like/play normally do you think they will A) Play their best and be a productive part of the team! or B ) Wander around aimlessly, complain because they are not having fun and suicide/discon. I'm seeing a lot of B, very little A. A vote to change something this major should require at least 75% of the player base to vote "yes." Having it pass on slightly more than 50% means you are making almost half of your players/customers angry. I voted "NO," not because I particularly hate any game mode, I play them all at times, but I play them when I want to. Almost everything in this game from what map, mech, and build I'm allowed to have is dictated to me already, this makes it less fun to me, and apparently many others as well. In short, maybe you can force people into modes they don't like, but they can just as easily quit the match until they get the mode they DO want.

so basically you want it your way or the highway. Sounds like the attitude of a child to me. Sorry if that sounds harsh, I am not meaning to be a jerk, but really, it sounds like something my 7 YO would say.

[Savage Wolf]

An argument against the "in war, you don't know what's comming" crowd or the "learn to play all modes and balance builds" crowd...

First of, usually half of war is preperation and knowing what is going to happen next. That's why we have recon and intelligence so that we are better prepared than the enemy. So no, in war you are not always totally surprised with what comes next. It's a possiblity, but usually you do know something useful.

And generally, the type of gameplay where you build for every occasion has been tried in many other games and the effect is always the same. The meta tightens and variaty becomes less scarce. Options that are not useful in all situations are never used. You see the same builds over and over again. Also the gameplay becomes more the same despite maps, missions and game modes, because your build is a master of nothing and fights like it and so does the enemy.

The more you are allowed to know before a battle the more tools and options see use, because then when fringe cases do occur then you can actually take that module or that weapon that will now be of good use. This way you see much more diversity in builds and are then surprised in this way. So instead of forcing us to master all modes and build for every occasion I say lets prepare and learn to deal with all builds because that will be how you become a master of diversity!

ColoKid, on 08 October 2014 - 05:24 AM, said:

My opinion is that ELO is broken beyond fixing and should be thrown out.

And be replaced by what? Pure randomness?

[Patzer]

I voted yes, the nemessy is ok by me.

[Baehrserker]

While I find it interestin to see chnges in the game selection System I would like to see more Manpower into variants of what we have already as fondation of the coming things.

Different Starting Points different capping Point Locations to let us see more of the maps.....I really had to go into Training grounds to have a look at many nicly made spots of all maps....

I thing switching between just combinations of gamemode and Map is too static

add to that 4 to 5 Point layouts (Starting capping, turrets etc.) you could boost the amount of unique games that are fun for many of us a huge way.

I don´t say that there will be always fair combinations but the game will move

[HUNTERS MOON]

No no...please take away more choice. You could speed the game up by just telling us how each match went so we don't have to be bothers with playing. That would make life easier for you.

Now let us pick our mech AFTER we know the map. So I stop dropping into hot maps with hot mechs etc.

[Patzer]

Clarification the new way is ok by me...I just got up and need coffee.

[HUNTERS MOON]

Work on more choice not less. Next time don't tell us its raining on our heads when you are miturating on them.

[Jetfire]

I like the voting idea and I had good matches last night in a 4 man in the group queue. I like the approach just as I like the idea for map selection.

However I do support the idea of maybe a hard selection as optional, but say include a CBill bonus multiplier not to use it.