419 replies to this topic

[RG Notch]

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

And that has to do with the vote being so close how?

[TygerLily]

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

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

That's fine and I hope they pursue those options...But in the meanwhile, I like having ~50 Elo variance in both pug and group queues. I speak as a person who also played Assault and Skirmish only when when selected modes. People are acting like having to pay an occasional game of Conquest is the worst thing to ever happen to them. Get a grip!

[Sirius Drake]

Cry, Force a poll, cry some more, Force early removeing of poll, get what you want.
I guess we just learned an important lesson.

[Belorion]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

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

The majority is still saying yes dude... so now they are listing to the minority that is more vocal than the majority.

[Haakon Magnusson]

Stop enabling skirmish players.. make the choice of leaving it out...

[YUyahoo]

Mercules, on 08 October 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

What is the point in holding a poll if people won't vote but instead after forfeiting the right to influence the outcome can whine and have things changed?


Yeah, PGI probably had to do this, but where were all these people who didn't want the change during the original poll?

Honestly, I didn't even know about the original poll until I saw the blurb about this poll while I was loading the new patch yesterday. Also its tough to accurately vote on something prior to experiencing how it affects things in game. As I've said before I'm all in favor for better matchmaking and I generally play all 3 game modes but I still want to have the choice to select the modes I want to play.

[Alienized]

the next challenges should count only for conquest and assaults.

[Joe Mallad]

Like I said, maybe its time PGI just start doing what they think is right for the game. And stop asking us. It doesn't matter what we want because as soon as anyone gets what they want, the other side QQs until its changed again. And then its a back and forth situation with no one winning anything lol.

[DoctorDetroit]

There is an unhealthy amount of malignancy in this community!

Maybe Art and Democracy do not go together well.

[TygerLily]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 October 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

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

I was reading our 1500+ participants as the sample size, then seeing which population size that would adequately represent. The chart also seems divided between if you wanted 95% confidence or 99% confidence. I'm assuming we'd want 99% confidence so I chose to find 1500+ sample size in the right most columns.

IE, I was making the the point that the participation level was probably more than adequate for the population level. Though we don't know exactly what it is.

Edited by TygerLily, 08 October 2014 - 11:56 AM.

[Belorion]

I have half a mind to start being as adamant about not dropping skirmish as the skirmish people are about not dropping anything else.

[Hardin4188]

Mercules, on 08 October 2014 - 11:52 AM, said:

Yep... General Discussion. To be fair we chided PGI for not giving us a voice and not putting up something like a poll before making a major change. They listened to us and once again got blasted by us for doing what we told them to do. It's a real "Damned if you do - Damned if you don't" thing we the community have going on with PGI.

Something like this should have been voted on and then play tested for a few weeks first. At least a few days. But this came as a surprise to a lot of people, not just me.

[Alienized]

next tournament about who gets most defensive kills. (yes that really exists) defensive damage and captured points. stuff like this. tactical stuff.
PGI, you made that new map to give us something worthy to fight for. it was already there, fighting to keep a base secure. fight about resources of a map.
now do a tournament out of it. theres the chance to make it more popular.

[Sorbic]

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.

They said the vote was going to be up for a week so you can't say "looking for a certain % and didn't get it". I leaned yes but hadn't yet voted in the hopes that Russ might release some more stats after the system had ran for a little while. See if the MM for solo Q narrowed some after a decent sample size.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Belorion, on 08 October 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

The majority is still saying yes dude... so now they are listing to the minority that is more vocal than the majority.

The FORUMS ARE THE MINORITY

Russ even said as much in the beginning of that thread

Thats what I meant

[Destructicus]

RG Notch, on 08 October 2014 - 11:52 AM, said:

And that has to do with the vote being so close how?

Vote was close but it shouldn't be reversed and defeat the purpose of a vote.

Now when the next dividing issue comes around the people who didn't like it are going to scream until it's changed.

[VanillaG]

Aliisa White, on 08 October 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

the next challenges should count only for conquest and assaults.

No, the next challenge you must select ALL game modes for the match to count. That should bring out the delicious tears of rage.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Yoseful Mallad, on 08 October 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

Like I said, maybe its time PGI just start doing what they think is right for the game. And stop asking us. It doesn't matter what we want because as soon as anyone gets what they want, the other side QQs until its changed again. And then its a back and forth situation with no one winning anything lol.

They already did that for the last two years. You think that was better?

[TygerLily]

Hardin4188, on 08 October 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

What do your fancy statistics say about the second poll then? The second poll had 2801 participants and 1356 of them voted no. That's almost as much as the total voters in the original poll. I'm certain if the poll was still open it would have even more people voting in it now.

I was only responding to the guy who said "That original poll has such a small sample size it should have never been valid."

I'm sure it's also a valid sample size but regardless, if the first poll was 78% yes and the second was 51% yes...then those people who switched sides are just asking for a company to keep going back and forth at their whim.

Complaining that the first polls wasn't visible...or invalid due to sample size...then saying polls do matter suddenly when a second poll supports their position. If I were PGI, I might not listen to us either...

Edited by TygerLily, 08 October 2014 - 12:01 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Belorion, on 08 October 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

I have half a mind to start being as adamant about not dropping skirmish as the skirmish people are about not dropping anything else.

Go ahead, youll get banned for alt f4ing

problem solved