972 replies to this topic

[HighTest]

Sadly, I can't vote because the option I like isn't listed.

c) Keep voting in place for the group queues, but revert the solo queues back to being able to choose a distinct game mode.

The solo queues were never really the problem. But it did seem to clean up some of the group drops that I did last night. Plus with CW incoming, it makes more sense to match ELOs better for the CW group queues. And frankly, as part of the CW 'lore', who says a player should really get to decide how the conflict comes about. I don't see why solo puggers should be forced to play a gamemode that they don't want, especially when it's not affecting the outcome of CW.

Sadly, though, this option doesn't exist, so I guess I can't vote.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Mystere, on 08 October 2014 - 08:17 AM, said:

I think you missed the posts where Russ said that the large Elo variance existed in the group queue. The solo queue was just fine.

I suggest you withdraw your vote for now and start reviewing the pertinent information with regard to this issue. Once you have done that, you can always recast your vote.

Actually that quote shows the problem with the way the poll is worded

[Darkblood]

It´s not that I will refuse some mode (although some modes can be awkward depending on the Mech) but what really irks me is the amount of GRIEVING by the end of the match. You know: "base capping is lame. Congratulations on not killing any of us... qqqqqq...".

That went down a lot once the guys wanting a death match were allowed to get rid of bases altogether, now they are forced to deal with that and we are forced to hear their (not always polite) ranting.


edit: I´m just too stupid to get the wording right on the first run

Edited by Darkblood, 08 October 2014 - 08:52 AM.

[Tarzilman]

I think, there should have been a "new voting system for grp queues only", since this is were the games get hard disproportionally compared to the solo queue. Russ already told us that there's an improvement in ELO difference.

Also I'd totally ignore every ranting voice in here. I think those ppl are here for only one reason. To complain.

"Hey look! Ppl are complaining about something. PGI again f***ed up something. I don't know what exactly, but let's just go to the forums and say how stupid they are!"

[StonedDead]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 08:47 AM, said:

I was quoting directly what you said...

How am I making trouble by quoting you?

Because you were taking it out of context. trying to make it mean something to what you were saying, when it clearly had nothing to do with your point.

[wicm]

19 and 3

[Alienized]

wicm, on 08 October 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

18 drops 3 for the mode of my "choice".... I WONT play with silly bases.

what if i dont want to play with you and you are in my team? yeah i should TK you and make you rage. or just press alt+F4.
its just a gamemode wth..... play private groups if you want one kind of battle only. simple thing.
i drive almost nothing but solo. in mechs that can handle each and every single gamemode.
now people that do mechs only for certain game modes make me speechless.

[Kitty Bacon]

Has anyone thought about the CW aspect of this new MM? In CW, we get to chose what game mode we play when defending/assaulting a planet? We get to chose the map on a planet our unit has never been on before? We chose everything about a random battle that takes place over territory?

I have to vote yes. If this type of feature is in CW where the game mode is random for what battle you are doing in CW and you have to adapt to what it is, will make people better pilots. Being able to chose what game mode to do when CW launches would be... well, pointless. No objective (Conquest and assault) it would just be skirmish all the time and would make CW boring and not much fun at all. We all know the tryhards would only run Skirmish in CW if they could chose the game modes, because they hate the challenge of capping.

[WM Jeri]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

I accept how you feel and can respect it. But this is a statement that is unfair. I mean we truly felt we followed a process on this feature implementation that was asked for by the community. Ask you guys and listen. We felt that is exactly what we did.

Okay did we misunderstand? or maybe the original poll should not have been run until the better explanations were provided? Perhaps so - that is why we are running the poll again. Speak as a community now and if necessary I will roll out the feature no later than the Oct 21st patch.

You know what I give you a lot of respect for taking the brunt of all this flak Russ...I will give you maybe my statement not fair, but I give you props for responding to that. Perhaps knowing you did not have the right toolset to reach a broad audience via a forum poll could have influenced the weight and implementation of this and furthered a longer discussion.

Maybe understanding why folks dislike each game mode and prefer other would have been a better starting point in determining commonalities around the those reasons thereby allowing changes / improvements in the game mode in conjunction with the change just implemented.

Regardless all said am I disappointed with this change, and I think its fairly obvious. I posted before PGI is in an uneviable position. But I would think by now you would know your playerbase more and realize taking something away that has been in place a long time would create the dynamic your now dealing with.


Many of us in our unit have suffered more or less in silence through the trials and tribulations of the game and have never complained about the MM. At the end of the day lets leave it like this. PGI will do what it feels is best, and as a consumer I will do the same. I think you have made a visually beautiful game and in many ways the best Mech game I have played since the first Activision title in the early 90's, but it seems like from a design process we lurch from thing to thing to thing. For me this is my thing. I want to love the game, I want to support it but I really detest 2 of your gamemodes and won't play them or be forced to. To be honest prior to this I thought the game was in one of the better states, could deal with the weapon balance stuff and was waiting for CW. Now I am looking at stuff like H1Z1 a zombie MMO shooter which I did not even know existed until last night and the only reason I do now is another member like me dissatisfied was like well time to find a new game to back.

Bottom line I know your team cares about the game...its thier livlihood after all, but as a consumer I have to like what I play, this change is about less choice for me and less enjoyble gameplay with game modes I have already tried and do not like so much so I would walk away from what I spent and you know exactly how much that is probably better than me because really I did not add it up I just know its a decent amount.

Anyway have a great day Russ and seriously thanks for taking the time to just talk that does buy you points with me.

[Chrithu]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 08:47 AM, said:

I was quoting directly what you said...

How am I making trouble by quoting you?

Because you firstly took the quote out of context (but everyone can look it up on page two of this thread themselves) and secondly you read things into it that just aren't there. Again the quote you referring to was an answer to YOUR very own post about how this poll should be done in the game or launcher itself. And all that Russ did say was that this particular functionality is NOT here yet. And that he cannot draw devs away from CW to have it implemented for this poll, thus we would have to live this way (what he means is with polls happening only in the forums) for some time longer.

[Russ Bullock]

Roadbeer, on 08 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Egomane.

I saw you browsing the thread and suddenly a screengrab that is perfectly relevant to the conversation, even though it shows players engaging in an act that is against the CoC/ToS was removed.

This is information that is needed in the conversation, and IMO you made a bad call.

Although I wasn't a part of that decision to remove it. I disagree Roadbeer.

I want valid criticism on why you or your mates don't like it. A screen grab with the classic "working as intended" statement is not a valid comment.

There is nobody here on this thread that believes having everyone disconnect would be working as intended. Just stick to telling us why it doesn't work for you.

And on that subject I am pretty sure we completely understand how Buddah feels and that he does not like the feature, might not be much of a need to continue stating it. Please guys, I am not going to let this feature stay in with some 53% majority so stick to the conversation and vote.

It's looking like the feature is on the way out.

[Belorion]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

Okay did we misunderstand? or maybe the original poll should not have been run until the better explanations were provided? Perhaps so - that is why we are running the poll again. Speak as a community now and if necessary I will roll out the feature no later than the Oct 21st patch.

You understood their words perfectly, but not the intent behind their words. What they were really saying is "Listen to me." which isn't the same as "Listen to us." When the rest of "us" doesn't agree with the "Me" then it no longer works for them.

I don't envy your position on this. While I like the fact that user feedback is listened to, some user feedback shouldn't be listened to.

Personally I am fine with the broadening of the queues. I like conquest and dislike skirmish the most, but I play skirmish when there are skirmish only zelots in my group because they refuse to play anything else. I am not sure if they are so strongly aligned with skirmish because it was missing for such a long time, or they are just predisposed to skirmish and hate all other game modes. Its an interesting cognitive question.

People will also often ask for things the didn't want in the first place.

I highly recommend that you guys hire an HCI (human computer interaction) expert. Not only can they help with the UI 2.0 (still needs a lot of love) problems but they can also help with situations such as these.

Still think you guys are doing a great job (esp now the development wheels are turning again). Hang in there

[HighTest]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 08:53 AM, said:

Although I wasn't a part of that decision to remove it. I disagree Roadbeer.

I want valid criticism on why you or your mates don't like it. A screen grab with the classic "working as intended" statement is not a valid comment.

There is nobody here on this thread that believes having everyone disconnect would be working as intended. Just stick to telling us why it doesn't work for you.

And on that subject I am pretty sure we completely understand how Buddah feels and that he does not like the feature, might not be much of a need to continue saying stating it. Please guys, I am not going to let this feature stay in with some 53% majority so stick to the conversation and vote.

It's looking like the feature is on the way out.

Hi Russ,

Please take a moment to look at my comment above, and see if that would be more suitable than either of the black and white options that are currently listed.

Thanks!

[Nightmare1]

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.

It didn't change the stomps because simply altering the MM cannot fix that issue. The stomps happen in the solo queue because Pugs don't understand basic tactics. They spread out all over the map. Whichever team spreads out the most is the team that gets stomped. It's something I've seen over and over each match, and I don't believe that any amount of finangling of the MM can fix it, because there is nothing PGI can do to address the core problem: Player initiative and comprehension.

Sure, changing the elo brackets, in theory, would diversify the skills represented and make for more evenly match teams on a skill level, but the basic problem of tactics and coordination remains. Trying to command Pugs is like trying to herd cats. Until PGI introduces a real communications system for Pug matches, the ROFLStomps will remain a big part of the solo game.

For the group queue, I honestly have not seen that many ROFLStomps prior to this patch. Sure, they happen, but they typically happen because of bad command decisions. One lance places itself in a bad position and gets cut-off, or a couple groups of two decide to act like it's a Pug match and get themselves killed, reducing the overall combat capability of the team. Frankly though, I've seen some epic comebacks despite this, including one match that I was in (have the Twitch vid to prove it) where my team came back and won from a 3-8 score (Red Team's favor). It came down to a 2v1 battle with my team barely eking out the win. In short, prior to this change, most the matches I played in the group queue were pretty close, actually, with only an occasional ROFLStomp.

I have not had the opportunity to play in the group queue since the patch, but I have solo'ed as a Pug and found that there is not a noticeable change to the gameplay experience, other than I can no longer pick the game mode I desire. This results in poor matching between my Mech and the mode, which has resulted in my overall performance dropping somewhat. I would really like to see the game mode selection fixed back to the way it was, because I am no longer enjoying the matches as much as I previously did. It's frustrating to wind up in a slow Mech on a fast game mode like Conquest and get killed before you even get a chance to do anything, or wind up chasing after the team for the whole match without getting in any good shots before the enemy team cap wins. The best gameplay experiences are the ones where you can pair you expertise and Mech selection with the proper game mode, thereby maximizing your fun. Otherwise it's just a headache. Though I have enough integrity not to disco over getting the wrong game mode, I understand and sympathize with those who do.

To be frank, I enjoy Conquest and Skirmish the most and play them a lot. However, now I no longer have control over my playtime. That's frustrating and makes me want to switch over fully to Ghost Recon: Phantoms or Planetside 2 until this whole thing blows over.

[dan112476]

I was going to rant about all the problems this game has but then I began to think. Why am I even playing this mess? While thinking about that, I found this poll and could only come up with two possible conclusions:

1. PGI is rigging the poll. In which case, I am done with MWO.
2. What remains of the MWO community is completely ******* stupid (on average). In which case, I am done with MWO.

So I guess I am done. This change did nothing to balance any matches and on top of that, we were stuck with game modes we did not want to play. Good-by PGI. Good luck with your Transverstite game.

Edited by dan112476, 08 October 2014 - 09:03 AM.

[RomeoMustDie]

There is my choice?

[Coolant]

Jman5, on 07 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

How is this a debate? Do what you have to do to make Elo close.

Keep it as it currently is.

It's a debate cause not everyone wants to play a mode they don't want to. How many other games MAKE you play a game mode you don't want to play? What would be your opinion of a game that forced you to play a game mode you didn't enjoy? Would you talk it up, tell your friends about it? And, btw, I've noticed no significant change in the close-ness of games. I've also noticed that games are not decided by combat.....in a combat game!

[Kenyon Burguess]

it gets in the way of ppls min/max building and choosing the most advantageous terrain/game mode to use them, i like it.

Edited by Geist Null, 08 October 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[Mastergrunt9]

Josef Nader, on 08 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Confirmation bias paired with your team making a tactical error and getting out-manuvered. Just because the team skill is even doesn't mean it's not possible for your team to make a blunder and get caught with your pants down by a team that was in the right place at the right time.

ok... I don't mind losing, especially if it's a close match. As you mentioned, sometimes tactical errors happen... that's not what I'm refering to though. what i'm talking about is going from teammates who know how to play the game even at a basic mastery level to teammates who don't know how to manage heat, can't tell the difference between an AC and Laser, don't know the ranges on their weapons, don't fire at the enemy when they have a clear shot, and teammates who couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. this is what i have a problem with... if it's supposed to be skilled based matchmaking, then why am i being partnered with competent teammates one minute, and then monkeys the next?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tezcatli, on 08 October 2014 - 08:25 AM, said:

Like even attacking the way the poll is worded. : /

Because its worded to generate yes responses

Pretty simple actually