419 replies to this topic

[Felio]

TygerLily, on 08 October 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

October 8th...400 more threads created complaining about MM meanwhile there are hard barricades between certain players due to game mode exclusion thus making the matchmaker less effective.

I am not sure, but I imagine there is already a wealth of other ideas here in the forums on improving match quality, some of them already tested in other games.

I think we are reasonable in expecting a better solution. This took something important away for nominal benefit. They can do better.

What I think it comes down to is that what they use to calculate Elo needs to become more sophisticated, and perhaps it needs to be adjusted temporarily on a per-match basis using other factors. Like, piloting a Locust should subtract 200 or so

[jackal40]

Fut, on 08 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

Listening to the people, but ignoring the 1433 people who voted in favour of the change.
All this does is reinforce the idea that if you complain hard enough, you'll get your way.

Wow, you don't get it. The yes vote was by people who don't care what game mode they play in. The no vote was by people who do care what game mode they play. Then add in those who were heavy financial supporters (Founders, Phoenix, Clan I and Clan II) who stated they would leave the game if this stayed.

[Alienized]

now it stime to discuss to put the specialized skirmishers to a qeue where they fight nothing else but other specialized skirmishers.
im tired of facing those mechs with mine that are built to fight everywhere on everymap which means i cant stand a chance in a skirmish against them.
my performance will drop and i will propably just quit the battle if i have one of these crybabies that only play skirmish.
let those that have nothing unchecked and are willing to adapt and play with tactical loadouts rather than stupid one-mode-fittings.

this way everyone can play against others of his mindset and doesnt have to care about skirmishers that will roflpwn against those that doesnt drive a full skirmish-abortion.

[Thorqemada]

Well, its a lesson to be learrned that polls only reach the pople that screen the Forums and the surprised peasants will cry foul afterward.

But imho its a good progress that PGI actively handles the situation and will be able to use the lessons in the future to improve "polling".



PS: I play any mode...

[YUyahoo]

Even though I play all three game types and would prefer better matchmaking I am glad PGI is going back to the old system. Two major points PGI should take from this:
1) people greatly value choice
2) Conquest mode desperately needs re-tooling
Thanks for listneing PGI!

[Destructicus]

RG Notch, on 08 October 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

So you're saying people shouldn't have voted how they felt? PGI sanctioned the poll no?

I'm saying that I don't think a decision should be reversed because the people who disagreed cried louder

Edited by Destructicus, 08 October 2014 - 11:54 AM.

[Voivode]

Kain Thul, on 08 October 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

I always wanted teh shortest wait times possible so I always left all 3 modes open.

It is tempting to select only conquest since my win ratio is so much better there (or just assault and conquest leaving out skirmish and my terrible .97 W/L ratio in it) but I never did because I don't feel like going 30 seconds or more between pops.

I do Assault / Conquest, my wait times are generally not that bad unless I'm dropping in an assault at a moment when assaults are like 45% of the mechs.

[TygerLily]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

Good this is the way it needs to be. There are better ways of creating a balanced match making system. That original poll has such a small sample size it should have never been valid.

The original poll had 1,546 participants. That's an adequate sample size for 99% confidence for a population of 300,000,000 with a +- 3.5% variation...

Spoiler

If I'm reading correctly:

[Jeb]

Voivode, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

I love conquest for the fact that the cap points count JUST enough to force people to move. Skirmish is too immobile for me to enjoy. What skirmish needs is orbiting assault ships for each team. If the enemy team stand still too long, your team's orbiting ship blasts them. If your team stands still too long, the enemy's orbiting ship blasts you. THAT would make Skirmish worth playing!

the reason I hate conquest is that the rewards are just as good or better for playing it as a skirmish, and when I lose a conquest game cause my team doesn't bother capping, I get angry... when I am angry I am not having fun, and that is when I uncheck conquest from my game type, and can play and have fun again...

I don't mind losing conquest if my team tried to play it as a conquest map... but I see red when I lose cause they don't even bother while the other team is off capping.

[Sorbic]

Well that sucks. I would have liked for them to have ran with it long enough to get some solid numbers. Plus it would have been nice if they could have increased the wait time that MM spent trying to find the map you want and see how that worked out. I think at least some of the whiny little gits would have been ok with getting their preferred map 2/3'rds of the time. I mean I understand frustration with only getting your mode 1/3rd of the time but the over blown responses and people throwing tantrums...

Edited by Sorbic, 08 October 2014 - 11:40 AM.

[EvilCow]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

I just feel it's disgusting that the people who didn't like the way the vote turned out are able to reverse the decision just because they cried loudest.

Totally defeats the purpose of a voting system.

It has been reversed because too close to 50-50 and they want a clear winner for such changes not because the reason you stated.

You could at least read what you quoted.

[wicm]

Thank you Thank you PGI . I think ill go Buy some mech cash to realy thank them, help them pay for this mess.

[Squally160]

Fut, on 08 October 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

Listening to the people, but ignoring the 1433 people who voted in favour of the change.
All this does is reinforce the idea that if you complain hard enough, you'll get your way.

Yeah man! Those 1339 other people are worthless!

Thanks bro.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Destructicus, on 08 October 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:

I'm saying that I don't think a decision should be revered because the people who disagreed cried louder

So no matter how slight the yes was you would have told the nos to go piss up a rope?

They were looking for a certain % and didnt get it.

[Belorion]

For the love of all that is holy...

I guess that will teachem to listen to the community.

[Destructicus]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

So no matter how slight the yes was you would have told the nos to go piss up a rope?

They were looking for a certain % and didnt get it.

Well didn't they just tell the people who said yes to piss up a rope?

[Willard Phule]

....if only there were a Test Server where this kind of stuff could be tried out, to get the community's opinion.......

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

TygerLily, on 08 October 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

The original poll had 1,546 participants. That's an adequate sample size for 99% confidence for a population of 300,000,000 with a +- 3.5% variation...

Spoiler

If I'm reading correctly:

That looks like a population of 5k and 7500 to me (if you read it by column then row like most charts)

[Jeb]

AlexEss, on 08 October 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

Well i guess i do agree in way with Russ. It was way to close andi am not holding this against PGI. It was worth a shot.


But as i said...The next person who complains abut long wait times or uneven matches... You had your chance here.

I disagree... this wasn't the right fix for uneven matches... honestly they gave it a try which is good... It didn't seem to have the effect they hoped for, or upset a lot more people then expected, so they are reverting... now they need to look at it from other angles and see if they can come up with something else to try.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Belorion, on 08 October 2014 - 11:41 AM, said:

For the love of all that is holy...

I guess that will teachem to listen to the community.

I thought it would teach them to listen to the majority not the minority