972 replies to this topic

[SkyHammyr]

You guys make it sound like there's actually more than one game mode.
LoLoLoLoLoL

[Felio]

There is critical data missing. How often is the MM correct in its guess of the outcome when there is a 250-point difference versus a 180-point difference? Ideally, we would see a line graph showing the curve.

Also important would be a second graph comparing the kill deficit with the Elo deficit.

[Mawai]

Yoseful Mallad, on 08 October 2014 - 06:46 AM, said:

if it passes, there is an easy fix for those that don't want to be trapped in a conquest game with Direwolves or those trapped in a skirmish game with unoptimized light mechs. Once the votes are cast and the system picks a game mode, we need to be able to "then" be able to pick our mechs. Of we were allowed to pick our mechs "after" we know the game mode, people can bring which ever mech they feel is best suited for that game mode.

This would make it impossible for the matchmaker to create a match balanced by Elo and weight class. If the matchmaker is to balance things then it needs to know what mech you are using FIRST ... if game mode changes your decision on which mech to take then the game mode has to be known to the player before the matchmaker starts forming a match ... in other words you need a hard selection toggle as it was previously.

[Syrkres]

The issue I have with what was implemented Tuesday, is that if I am NOT leader my votes do not could.

It should be simple, just take which modes everyone in the group has selected and add them up.

DONT multiply the group leader, because he may not represent the group. The number of times people crash, any group which has run more than a half hour usually has changed leader several times.

Also I may not agree with group leader, should my vote NOT count?

You have every person and should easily be able to check their preferences to which modes they have selected, WHY multiply the leaders?

Poor implementation developers....

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 October 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

Please stop spamming these threads. The community is voting, and you have no intellectually honest way to dismiss the poll. People can reach all they want - "the poll wasn't visible, the poll was biased, the poll wasn't long enough" - but it isn't all that solid logic.

The poll is biased Rebas, please stop ignoring the facts.

Wait you cant

[Mekwarrior]

Lily from animove, on 08 October 2014 - 06:52 AM, said:

egoistic and wrong thinking.

When newer palyers constantly get stomped by others because they get matched with a too big elo gap, they may leave the game. Your logic is flawed by a heavy biased mind not seeing the entire picture of the game.

I play this game A LOT and I have never complained once about any sort of ELO miss match.

I don't want to sacrifice major choice for a small minority of players that are complaining about minor balancing issues out of all proportion that I don't even think are an issue.

Even if I got matched against a team with higher rating I would see it as a challenge and fun. I play for fun and to learn not just only to win ever game and complain and demand they change the game if I don't.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 08 October 2014 - 06:59 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

The poll is biased Rebas, please stop ignoring the facts.

Wait you cant

You've been seven of the last thirty posts. Let other people get a word in edgewise.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Rebas Kradd, on 08 October 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

You've been seven of the last thirty posts. Let other people get a word in edgewise.

Youre not a mod dont tell me what to do

If you think Im spamming report me

Interesting that posting on a forum is what you call spamming though

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 08 October 2014 - 06:59 AM.

[Larinzod]

Alternatively could we have the options selected for game mode work as they did before but with a time restriction? If match maker can locate a pairing in 3-4 minutes for the selected game mode(s) it does so. Then after the elapsed time the vote process kicks in and any game mode can be selected?

[Greenjulius]

GlycerineOxide, on 08 October 2014 - 06:36 AM, said:

I'm a veteran, a loooong time veteran, I know the game, maps, modes, Mechs, Loadouts and I sure as hell know how to drive and shoot accurately. I personally don't give two hoots about KDR and care only about doing as much damage as possible and winning, but I digress, my ELO is mid to high by my estimation and I am still continually dropped into ENTIRE lances of new players on the public queue and suffer defeat after defeat as a result, I've specced some of these guys and seriously some of them can't aim/drive and shoot worth a damn.

I DO NOT WANT TO BE DROPPED WITH THESE WASTES OF TONNAGE!

I consider myself in the same boat as you. I've been playing the game since May of 2013, and played every Mechwarrior game since MW2. I'd consider myself somewhere in the above average to high skilled range, but not elite or super competitive.

However, we need to drop with newbies whether we like it or not. We really need new players. As many as we can get. I managed to introduce my 11 year old nephew to the game, and of course, he did terrible at first. He couldn't get above 50 damage, would often accidentally shoot teammates, the whole "bad" experience. He's getting better and better, now posting 200-500 damage games, with the occasional kill. Bad players just need time and experience to be good players.

That doesn't mean good players should have to bear the burden however. I feel like no matter who is on one team or the other, new players should be spread between the two teams. It has been stated that new players have an artificially high elo, so perhaps we can start there, by giving new players a low elo, and assigning a more accurate elo after their first 30 games.

Edited by Greenjulius, 08 October 2014 - 07:03 AM.

[Bhael Fire]

My vote is YES.

If losing the ability to choose the game mode means getting better Elo matchings, then I think it should actually be removed entirely.

The game modes simply are not different enough to warrant gross Elo discrepancies.

[Haipyng]

Rather confusing Poll.

Of course we want to see "improvement in team ELO differences" but what does that mean? The solo queue goes back to being able to select game types? Only the Large group queue is affected?

The way this is worded you are going to get more yes votes than you would asking a single concise point..."do you want to be able to select your own game types".

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Larinzod, on 08 October 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

Alternatively could we have the options selected for game mode work as they did before but with a time restriction? If match maker can locate a pairing in 3-4 minutes for the selected game mode(s) it does so. Then after the elapsed time the vote process kicks in and any game mode can be selected?

Actually, we cant. They dont have the ability to roll back this implementation because everyone is working on CW.

Anyone elser wonder why ppl get mad when they shoehorn something into the game?

[C E Dwyer]

Barfing Gopher, on 08 October 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

This ^

People that vote "no" aren't trying to force anyone else to play their favorite mode, they just want a choice for their experience. People that vote "yes" are forcing everyone else to play modes they do not want.

Agreed, while I personally don't care what modes I play in arena fights, I get the feeling more people will leave if they're forced to play modes they don't like, rather than if elo grouping is a little narrower which will supposedly, give closer games

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Haipyng, on 08 October 2014 - 07:00 AM, said:

Rather confusing Poll.

Of course we want to see "improvement in team ELO differences" but what does that mean? The solo queue goes back to being able to select game types? Only the Large group queue is affected?

The way this is worded you are going to get more yes votes than you would asking a single concise point..."do you want to be able to select your own game types".

Thats because they want that answer not a real poll

[Mawai]

Summon3r, on 08 October 2014 - 06:51 AM, said:

well clearly there is a divide here, and some seriously pissed off customers on both sides of the arguement... PGI i hope you have something in mind that meets the needs of both sides somewhat.. maybe for starters try allowing people to select 2 game types and 100% exclude another game type?

i dunno but this cant be good for business

Actually, I haven't seen many people stridently supporting the YES side. The Elo matching improvements seem ephemeral at best .. Russ said that initial data shows no significant change in matching for the solo queue. On the other side, some of the NO folks are extremely bothered because there are game modes that they feel are broken or do not fit their playstyle or mechs ... that they do not enjoy playing ... and this change will have a significant impact on them.

One EASY statistic that PGI could provide ... give data on the fraction of the player base selecting game modes and what game modes are selected both before and after this change.

The folks who typically selected all 3 modes are indifferent to this change and will likely vote yes. Those who play a single mode would likely say no since they have some reason for not playing the other modes. Those who play in 2 game modes out of the three are probably more likely to vote NO but it depends on the reason why they exclude the one game mode.

With that data in hand PGI would then have the overall global preferences for ALL players (not just those replying to the poll) and it would be based on hard data without ambiguous questions.

[Mekwarrior]

Less choice is never good.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 08 October 2014 - 07:03 AM.

[Ridir Semii]

fair matches are fun matches... I am tired of the pugstomps, and I am not the only one... fights involving no challenge are lame and sooooooooo many of them now end at 12-(1,2,3,) very few are good matches.

I also do not really care for matches with no objective, and before anyone says skirmish's objective is to kill all enemy players, I mean real objectives, capturing base, or resources, potentially attack and defend strongholds, etc.

[The Trumpet of Gabriel]

Played with the new system last night for quite a while. I did not have Conquest selected and only had to play it once out of roughly 20 matches. The matches I did play in the group queue were much more even. I don't think there was a stomp (for me at least) all night. So far I'm very happy with the new system and hope it stays in place.

[Tsuki Ookami vas Mugunghwa]

TB Xiomburg, on 08 October 2014 - 06:05 AM, said:

The second part of it, is that this is training for Community Warfare and not Community Welfare. In CW you will have objectives in a lot of the matches that you play. Getting use to killing them all, all the time, is not a good user experience for most with the attention beyond that of a gnat.

but we can DECIDE to do CW matches. and then we KNOW that the new "attacker/defender" mode shows up. and try to fit our mechs and tactics towards it.

that's the whole point. we CAN'T KNOW what mode comes with the new system and that bothers us