42 replies to this topic

[JD R]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 09:09 AM, said:

My original thinking was that it has to be close to the original 80%, maybe as low as 70% with people now truly understanding what the trade off was. I am not going to keep the feature present with anything less than 70% which pretty much means the decision is already made.

Beautiful. The one time you just need to wait until it get silent you draw back. Today i had the best games since a long time in Team and Single queue.

And it feels like Heavy and Assault % drop a bit so the assault and heavy warrior online becomes less obtrusive.

Less than the half is needed to stop progress but three-fourth is needed to do it?

Edited by JD R, 08 October 2014 - 11:20 AM.

[Darian DelFord]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

Beautiful. The one time you just need to wait until it get silent you draw back. Today i had the best games since a long time in Team and Single queue.

And it feels like Heavy and Assault % drop a bit so the assault and heavy warrior online becomes less obtrusive.

Less than the half is needed to stop progress but three-fourth is needed to do it?

Exact opposite here, had some of the worse matches. And multiple games there were only 2 light mechs, me and another on the opposing side.

[Josef Nader]

Yeah, the patch hasn't even been in place for 24 hours, and most of the people shooting blood out of their lower orifices over this haven't had time to actually let the change soak in before they're rolling it back. Seriously, this whole thing has been a reactionary mess.

They should have held out for at least a week. Two is better. -THEN- hold the vote and see what people think. Right now, with all the people ragequitting matches and suiciding left and right to get what they want, there's no time for the dust to even settle before the crybabies force a negative change onto the game.

[Russ Bullock]

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

[RG Notch]

Can't all the folks who liked it like this just pick any for modes and not be bothered? It seems like some folks just want to force other people to play the way they want. This would seem to be the way that causes the least friction.

[Darian DelFord]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

Russ is right on this one, even if I was on the keeping it the new way crowd (which I am not) when you have this much angst in a change and you do not have a over whelmng majority o fsupport for that change, you need to revert it back and come at it from a different angle.

[Ph30nix]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

Beautiful. The one time you just need to wait until it get silent you draw back. Today i had the best games since a long time in Team and Single queue.

And it feels like Heavy and Assault % drop a bit so the assault and heavy warrior online becomes less obtrusive.

Less than the half is needed to stop progress but three-fourth is needed to do it?

they need to fix the game modes(conquest) before attempting to force people to play them.

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

First try getting conquest into a position that people dont mind playing it and the problem might help solve itself since more people would stop avoiding it. Id say cutting cap time required to about 1/4th what it is now (ONLY for conquest) and getting rewards to more equal other modes and it would be fine.

figure out what peoples gripes are with the different modes and see what can be done to correct them, cant please everyone of course but you dont need to. Just need to increase the player pools for each mode.

Edited by Ph30nix, 08 October 2014 - 11:35 AM.

[Piney II]

Kudos to PGI for making an effort.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

RG Notch, on 08 October 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

Can't all the folks who liked it like this just pick any for modes and not be bothered? It seems like some folks just want to force other people to play the way they want. This would seem to be the way that causes the least friction.

You seem to be misinformed.It was about getting better matches by placing everyone in one bucket and then selecting a game mode based on the player's preference. As opposed to match maker working with potentially 3 smaller pools of players with some overlap. The point being that with smaller pools lopsided matches occur more often.

The idea that it was about forcing other players to play certain game modes is silly.

[VanillaG]

RG Notch, on 08 October 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

Can't all the folks who liked it like this just pick any for modes and not be bothered? It seems like some folks just want to force other people to play the way they want. This would seem to be the way that causes the least friction.

It works both ways. A large team min/maxed for specific game mode is pulling a bunch of players that might not be min/maxed for that game mode as opponents.

I would like to see a compromise put in place where a group is limited to only ONE exclusion for the game mode. That should give the MM a little more breathing room for building competitive matches.

[Screech]

I am always impressed at the courage it takes to admit that something is working as planned and need to try something else.

What might work now is to address why people opt-out of modes. I know I would start playing conquest if they drastically reduced cap times of nodes. To people who don't like skirmish or assault what would be needed to fix it?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

Agreed

[HiProfile]

JD R, on 08 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

Beautiful. The one time you just need to wait until it get silent you draw back. Today i had the best games since a long time in Team and Single queue.

And it feels like Heavy and Assault % drop a bit so the assault and heavy warrior online becomes less obtrusive.

Less than the half is needed to stop progress but three-fourth is needed to do it?

Tell me how 2/2/4/4 games are balanced. Tell me how games where people forcibly disconnect in protest are balanced. If the decision is to A) annoy some people or piss the rest off enough they quit, how can option B create balance when the ELO pool springs a massive leak?

[Haakon Magnusson]

I used to play all modes, but now, I'm out of skirmish, conquest is enough to level new mechs.
I'll take my choice out of skirmish fukkers

Edited by Haakon Magnusson, 08 October 2014 - 11:51 AM.

[HiProfile]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

Enticing them into selecting all modes is a FAR better option than forcing people into unwanted game modes. ONLY THEN would this team-vote deal work.

[Torgun]

Haakon Magnusson, on 08 October 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

I used to play all modes, but now, I'm out of skirmish, conquest is enough to level new mechs.
I'll take my choice out of skirmish fukkers

As you should have the right to do, just as I have the right not to run the poor man's gauntlet if I don't want to.

[Haakon Magnusson]

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

Enticing them into selecting all modes is a FAR better option than forcing people into unwanted game modes. ONLY THEN would this team-vote deal work.

Well, seems this qq was mainly from skirmish peeps.. hence it is out of my game modes for good. Enjoy, I don't care

[JD R]

Russ Bullock, on 08 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

Sometimes we can leave a feature in the game even if the player base is split 50/50 on the subject. But if that feature is something that has been in the game for upwards of a year, I need a much larger majority of support than that.

We are going to have to find another way.

It look like this way another way will move to same as this.

First YEA better games!

Second NO i dont give anything up and all you do is .........

Third Ok search an other way.

Because if you open a Poll Ui2.0 or Ui1.5 you would need to do a roll back.

HiProfile, on 08 October 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

.. where people forcibly disconnect in protest are balanced.

Today i dont read any comment about this bad system ingame . A few questions yes but No " **** Mode i go xy disconnect"
The wind was gone the sails are dropping. Just wait and watch it.

[Kibble]

Probably gonna get flamed for this but maybe the players getting matched up closer to their ELOs realised they weren't as good as the group they normally drop with made them think and then when getting into solo queues found out the hard way?

Just a thought.

[Gallowglas]

I sincerely hope if you're one of those who liked the vote-for-mode method that you're selecting all modes in your own game selections. If not, well...you're really contributing to your own problems.

That said, I'm glad to no longer be forced into conquest as a unit of 10 players who explicitly unchecked that box. We saw far, far more conquest matches last night than I wanted.

Edited by Gallowglas, 08 October 2014 - 12:19 PM.