155 replies to this topic

[EyesBurn]

sneeking, on 09 October 2014 - 03:52 AM, said:

why don't we just go to a perpetual battlefield where anyone can come on and fight for their cause at any time ?

Evolution of this idea wouldnt be so bad,as a matter of fact it could evolve into something great.Something like that was already in Hawken,you could choose a match and join,dont know if its still like that there,i havent played it in a long time.

But the problem here with this idea is that the PGI as a developer havent shown itself as a competent developer,it would take much bigger maps for something like that and making a totally new matchmaker or rather taking off current one and making lobbies for that, they already ***** and whine how making a new map costs them 250 000 dollars ... and they still cant make new or fix this terrible UI 2.0.Making all that changes would make their brains implode,way too much for them to handle ...

[Thorn Hallis]

Good call, PGI. That wasn't the way to go anyway.

Now after you have finished the Community warfare game mode how about you work on the reasons for the preference of Skirmish and the small percentages for light and medium 'Mechs?

[Sam Slade]

sneeking, on 09 October 2014 - 03:52 AM, said:

my yenlo wants to meet your timber wolf...

I said screenlickers... those poor saps on their cadet bonus who get stuck on super zoom and stuffed into a game they are not prepared for.

Any medium mech packing an AC20(excluding Shadowhawks*spit,hiss,spit*) gets respect.

[Darwins Dog]

Sam Slade, on 09 October 2014 - 03:46 AM, said:

SOLUTION: give everyone a single veto... it seems clear that some hate Skirmish while others hate Conquest... both of these crazed extremist groups will play Assault. Most players will play all modes because they're pretty fun... so throw a possible veto into the mix and make players choose 2 of 3 game types

From the comments I've seen there is a camp for every possible combination of game types. Some only play skirmish because it's the only "complete" mode, some never do skirmish because it has no objectives. Many tournaments use conquest, so competitive teams in those want to practice on conquest. Lots of people hate conquest because capturing points takes away from the fighting, others like it because it forces the fighting. Lots of people hate assault because of the turrets. There is no consensus in this community on anything. 70%+ of the voters in the first poll wanted a vote option. 48% in the new one didn't want it.

This is why PGI doesn't follow most community suggestions. The community is made up of thousands of players who have too many strong, reasonable, and varied opinions of how the game should work.

[Escef]

I'm glad the system's being changed from voting back to hard choice. I can't stand Skirmish. I know some people hate Assault, I know some hate Conquest. I hate Skirmish. And if I was going to be forced to play in Skirmish matches all weekend than I just wouldn't play.

[Mawai]

ThomasMarik, on 08 October 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

Yeah well the change wasn't even a couple hours old and Russ was already filling his pants and putting up polls to have the player base second guess him. The 1st one got bugged out somehow and the second poll he vowed to leave up for a week. They put out the call on the launcher and facebook to get people to come vote. The Yes vote started outstripping the no vote once the UK players woke up ans saw it. Next time I checked the poll had been closed when the Yes vote had pulled even further ahead of the No votes and Russ decided to revert the change without looking at the poll and without giving people at least a weekend to see if the initial balance gains were working.

I like the Russ is talking to us more and asking for our opinions and ideas. I don't like how he appears to be incapable of making changes to the game for fear of how a segment of the population will react. It would be one thing if it had been left up for a couple weeks and people were uncomfortable with it with no real gains match balance. That isn't what happened though. He responded to whining without letting the data come in. This bodes ill for any changes or additions moving forward.

I'm just curious ... did you even look at the poll?

http://mwomercs.com/...oting-poll-v20/

That is the link ... showing the numbers when it was closed. 1445 in favour, 1356 against. That is certainly NOT a "The Yes vote started outstripping the no vote" though maybe you believe in revisionist history?

That is almost twice the total number of people that voted in the original poll ... and a far greater fraction voted No. I believe that Niko mentioned that they were hoping for a decisive result ... that the number of folks against the system was small but vocal. However, that was not the case ... almost 1400 players said No. If the results are even remotely representative of the player population at large then you are looking at a lot of unhappy customers ... and not just a few whiners on the forums.

The final straw was that initial indications were that the change did NOT improve matchmaking in the solo queue. Russ reported that a small data set showed improvements in the group queue but not in solo. If I had to guess, a more substantial data set still showed no significant improvement in the solo group Elo matchmaking. If that is the case then there is NO justification for keeping the voting system in the solo queue forcing folks to play game modes they don't like.

Group queue may be different ... there was improved Elo matchmaking ... and it is possible that the match maker was more easily able to match large groups against each other without the game mode constraint. So it might well be worthwhile for group mode players to vote on this as a separate feature but it really made no sense to continue including it in the solo queue.

P.S. If they want players to select more game modes they should look into incentives for doing so ... rather than forcing folks to play game modes they don't like or have the wrong mech to play effectively. For example, someone suggested a 10% cbill bonus if you drop with all three game modes selected.

Edited by Mawai, 09 October 2014 - 05:22 AM.

[Mawai]

Naduk, on 08 October 2014 - 09:27 PM, said:

this exactly
the game before this MM change was almost unbearable
we got one night of how fun it can be in the group que, we know there are other teams out there looking to play that are similarly skilled as us, but no my collection of noobies are repeatedly matched up against ultra 12 man pro's like HOUSE OF LORDS and CSJ
it is of NO surprise to anyone in those games that we get creamed a 0-12 smashing with majority of our team under 150 damage

i would love to be in the same league as the competitive teams
but my unit is just too small and new , im still teaching them how to target damaged sections FFS!

the other night was the first time we have truly had a great night in MWO since the que's were split
(even the games we lost 0-12 felt like it could of gone either way until about 0-8)

the people who got this changed back just so they could grind their faces in skirmish are lower than worms
so thanks to all of them now i face 15min que times with under 3min game times

Then why don't you ask PGI to keep the feature in the group queue?

The feature made NO difference to match making in the solo queue so why should folks in solo be forced to play modes they don't like so that the group queue gets better matchmaking?

They shouldn't ... they should set up a poll asking if players who play in the group queue want this feature or not. Group and solo are two quite different elements to the customer base ... and there is no reason why the matchmaker should use identical rules in both cases. In is MUCH more difficult to balance a group match than solo ... so maybe these changes are appropriate for the group queue but no the solo queue.

[Mawai]

Darth Futuza, on 08 October 2014 - 11:53 PM, said:

They said they wanted a majority vote. 50/50 split is definitely not even close to a majority. It would be unfair not to revert it. I'm sad to see it go though.

Why are folks sad to see it go? I can only come up with two reasons ...

1) They play in the group queue only and noticed an improvement in matchmaking that they want to keep. In this case they should state this and ask PGI to gather feedback on keeping the feature in the group queue.

2) They play in the solo queue and just like the idea of forcing other folks to do things they don't like. The change did not affect matchmaker results in the solo queue. It just forced players to play game modes they don't like or had a bad mech build to play. If you play solo and like all game modes ... just check them all off ... you then have exactly the same functionality as the voting system. You will be randomly dropped into whatever game mode is selected. Reverting this change does NOT affect the folks who vote YES in the solo queue at all ... so I have NO idea what they are complaining about.

The NO folks hate certain game modes and don't want to play them. The YES folks like all game modes ... and want to play any ... they don't need a vote to do that.

[speedy mechanic]

TamerSA, on 09 October 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

Was thinking the same thing today... the only people who won today were the ones prepared to boycott and grief to be heard. And the people who were open minded and open to change do not have the same self-entitled attitude to act the same way.
And that is why the people who cry the loudest will always be the ones holding the game back.

So what do those of us that wanted longer time to test it out and liked the changes boycott the repeal? By numbers there's more of us so in theory bigger effect? Personally I'll keep playing regardless the change but if a lot of people want to boycot the repeal I'll join.

[Effectz]

How much you want to bet its the people piloting their whales crying when they get dropped into conquest.

Edited by Effectz, 09 October 2014 - 05:59 AM.

[Karl Marlow]

Mawai, on 09 October 2014 - 05:19 AM, said:

I'm just curious ... did you even look at the poll?

http://mwomercs.com/...oting-poll-v20/

That is the link ... showing the numbers when it was closed. 1445 in favour, 1356 against. That is certainly NOT a "The Yes vote started outstripping the no vote" though maybe you believe in revisionist history?

That is almost twice the total number of people that voted in the original poll ... and a far greater fraction voted No. I believe that Niko mentioned that they were hoping for a decisive result ... that the number of folks against the system was small but vocal. However, that was not the case ... almost 1400 players said No. If the results are even remotely representative of the player population at large then you are looking at a lot of unhappy customers ... and not just a few whiners on the forums.

The final straw was that initial indications were that the change did NOT improve matchmaking in the solo queue. Russ reported that a small data set showed improvements in the group queue but not in solo. If I had to guess, a more substantial data set still showed no significant improvement in the solo group Elo matchmaking. If that is the case then there is NO justification for keeping the voting system in the solo queue forcing folks to play game modes they don't like.

Group queue may be different ... there was improved Elo matchmaking ... and it is possible that the match maker was more easily able to match large groups against each other without the game mode constraint. So it might well be worthwhile for group mode players to vote on this as a separate feature but it really made no sense to continue including it in the solo queue.

P.S. If they want players to select more game modes they should look into incentives for doing so ... rather than forcing folks to play game modes they don't like or have the wrong mech to play effectively. For example, someone suggested a 10% cbill bonus if you drop with all three game modes selected.

You mean that link within which I had posted a few times? Never seen it before.

Yes I know nearly 1400 people said no they didn't like it. I also see over 1400 people said they did. Nearly 100 more people liked the improved balance and the voting was cut short before anyone could really even test the changes. If you had bothered to read the link you posted you would have seen alot of people on the fence and wanting to check things out before they voted.

When the poll was first released the Nos were outstripping the Yes votes. As the night progressed the yes votes started catching up and overtook the Nos by nearly 100 votes before the polls were closed early. So yes. The Yes vote was trending up quite well.

Edited by ThomasMarik, 09 October 2014 - 05:54 AM.

[speedy mechanic]

Effectz, on 09 October 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

How much you want to be its the people piloting their whales crying when they get dropped into conquest.

You learn to play the area denial mech not the run around and cap mech. Seriously on conquest I was in a whale so I just put my mech in a good position over watching 2 cap areas while I let way faster mechs go do the running around.

[Bacon_Warrior88]

I was hoping the threat of conquest would actually lower the overall tonnage of each side for a change. Lights have been in the single digit % for weeks.

[UndeadEdd]

Tiggo Bitties, on 09 October 2014 - 06:04 AM, said:

I was hoping the threat of conquest would actually lower the overall tonnage of each side for a change. Lights have been in the single digit % for weeks.

Yeah, becasue why should people be allowed to play the mechs THEY want? They should be FORCED to play the mechs that YOU want them to play!

[Jon Phoenix]

KodiakGW, on 08 October 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

Two words.

LOBBY
SYSTEM

Worked for NBT, War!Online.

Amen. There should even be casual and competitive options and player rankings like battle.net. The private lobbies already have the lobby infrastructure in place. It's time to make them public and ditch the match maker.

[Kjudoon]

ThomasMarik, on 09 October 2014 - 05:53 AM, said:

You mean that link within which I had posted a few times? Never seen it before.

Yes I know nearly 1400 people said no they didn't like it. I also see over 1400 people said they did. Nearly 100 more people liked the improved balance and the voting was cut short before anyone could really even test the changes. If you had bothered to read the link you posted you would have seen alot of people on the fence and wanting to check things out before they voted.

When the poll was first released the Nos were outstripping the Yes votes. As the night progressed the yes votes started catching up and overtook the Nos by nearly 100 votes before the polls were closed early. So yes. The Yes vote was trending up quite well.

As much as I am happy they reversed their decision, I have to agree with you. This poll needed to be up for a week or at least 3 days. I was fully expecting the community to rally behind the change and it would stick. I wouldn't be here as I was already 'packing my bags' so to speak, and hoping against hope they'd change their mind.

The problem is ultimately the animosity between Conquerors and Skirmishers that's a hold over from pre-skirmish days with back and forth hatred... yes hatred and abuse... regarding winning by cap. Those two camps are not going to reconcile... EVER.

Let's turn this another way, do you think that those who love their solo queue would like to have Queue Voting where they might, against their will, be dragged into the group queue to face off against the bane of their existence in this game: The dreaded premade? Imagine being the only solo with an 11man dragged in because that was 'the best match available'. How do you think this would affect the community if the solo queue was no longer the safe haven? How about the 8 man of beer warriors out there broken up into the solo queue because they needed their elos scattered there more for 'the good of the matches'?

What do you think that group would do if they were forcibly broken up? Now do that during a company practice while training for a tournament.

I dare say the rage would be far larger than this simple little Conqueror/Skirmisher spat.

And to those who are saying "you have to take the good with the bad". No. You don't. This is entertainment, not work. If you don't like a movie or an actor, you don't watch it or them. Nobody's forcing you to unless it's something outside of it that is giving you the needed biochemical boost to your happiness and relaxation because you're putting up with it. It's not an entertainment then... it's a means to what you REALLY want for entertainment or reward.

Ergo, nobody 'has' to take the 'good with the bad' here. They leave and find a better way to satisfy the entertainment itch.

Basic human nature and sociological motivations here combined with 'team sport psychology' (I'm team conquest and you on team skirmish suck the big one! Go Team!)

Edited by Kjudoon, 09 October 2014 - 06:33 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

For all those screaming that nothing has changed yet, please note that the hotfix isn't in yet..so thats why nothing has changed, try reading the notices properly next time..

its not due to happen for another 1 hour and 40 minutes..

also I found this new way has increased my match making waiting times

Edited by Cathy, 09 October 2014 - 06:34 AM.

[Hastur Azargo]

Played a couple of games after the patch, they all were skirmish and match making was still bad, with plenty of roflstomps. Elo difference isn't the problem, the way Elo is decided is. I still play with people that never toggle arm lock and never heard of defensive torso twisting. Until this is addressed, there will be no improvement in quality of matches, but then again, I understand that player skill measurement short of brain scans well never be accurate.

Also, 80+% assault+heavy queue should be a good indication of unacceptable time-to-kill in mediums and lights. Time to get a 50% HP buff running on the PTS to see the results, otherwise PPD is still gonna undermine the game.

[Ridir Semii]

I have seen several people say "solo and group" queue... I was not aware that we had any control over it, but that it was all dealt with in the back...

Again, to state things clearly for all... they should have held to their word (Like they had been doing since they left IGP) but instead they go off and do what they want to do. Why have a vote if you arent even going to give everyone a chance to wake up to it, that poll was not up for 24 hours (9PM till noon the next day is only 15 hours)

This is in no way a fair poll since the least time guaranteed was not kept to, and because they are going with the votes that were LOSING the vote... are you sure you and IGP split... oh and starting a ticket to get my W2 monies refunded

I don't care which mode I play in, I prefer objectives and the worst match style in this game doesn't have an objective, if I wanted death matches exclusively like some of the players here do, I would do what I suggest to them (GO BACK TO HALO)

[Christo Jam]

" you then have exactly the same functionality as the voting system."
NO ! Cause if you are solo gamer and you play versus a pro team (entrained for game mode assault in game mode assault for example) you have no chance (or VERY little chance) of winning. The pro teams entrained will dominate the game now. Well, ELO was a good balancing solution. PGI thank you ....

Edited by themrty, 09 October 2014 - 07:34 AM.