87 replies to this topic

[Dock Steward]

Yoseful Mallad, on 13 October 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

what this game needs is "if" me and 3 friends want to get on and play, we should have an option to jump into a 12 man que where we are teamed up with 8 others and need to work as a team against 12 others... OR we should have an option to jump into a match where we can play JUST 4 vs 4. I guarantee you that if we had options to play 4 vs 4, 8 vs 8 and 12 vs 12, more games would be played and more people would have fun.

But the buckets, man. The buckets.

[That Dawg]

Squally160, on 13 October 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:

On the same line.....
It should not be my problem small groups get crushed, they should try harder, or get in bigger groups.

Or is it only fair to say that from your end?

You one of the first guys to type in "GG" when your 8 and 4 man drop crush half a dozen 2 mans?

Too tough a challenge to fight equal squads like 3 groups of four,or two 6's? You'd rather rollstomp for epeen happiness?

I agree with the OP, I will NOT drop with one other, used as filler.
Minimum four to drop or play solo.
And finding four is tough- the original 20 or that started all got disgusted, fedup and left.
So now, its up some magical ELO or matchmaker to attempt to sort groups. g'luck

[Dock Steward]

That Dawg, on 13 October 2014 - 03:05 PM, said:

You one of the first guys to type in "GG" when your 8 and 4 man drop crush half a dozen 2 mans?

Too tough a challenge to fight equal squads like 3 groups of four,or two 6's? You'd rather rollstomp for epeen happiness?

I agree with the OP, I will NOT drop with one other, used as filler.
Minimum four to drop or play solo.
And finding four is tough- the original 20 or that started all got disgusted, fedup and left.
So now, its up some magical ELO or matchmaker to attempt to sort groups. g'luck

Then you can't drop 9 or 10, either...

[Bishop Steiner]

DAYLEET, on 13 October 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

I doubt you enjoy playing as a large group versus smalls one. You play with large group because you want a more organized type of gameplay against greater challenges, not because you want an illusion of achievement playing easy mode.

Everybody wins.

Except, an illusion of achievement playing easy mode IS what a large number want. Same reason they fight so hard for ezmode game mechanics and crutches. Same reason we saw sync drops after sync drop on the Solo Tourney 2 weekends back. Same reason you see people chasing "sticked" Atlases and other mechs, or meticulously dissecting AFKs instead of actually fighting active threats to help the team win.

Epeen, for most people is all about the facade and veneer. Most don't mind a little easy sauce to get there.

Mind you, not saying that is necessarily what the truly Competitive Teams want (though some players on some of them seem quite willing to farm), or even the masses. But suffice ti to say, quite some number of self proclaimed High Elo players, are quite willing to pad stats, any way, any day.

[1453 R]

Fragnot, on 13 October 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

It does seem to make sense to have separate queues for different group sizes. We have 2 now right? Solo and Group? Is the problem that the community isn't large enough to support a third grouping and queue times would be too long?

I thought it would be fun to queue up with pre-made 4man lances; or even a straight 4v4 or 8v8 mode would be cool. Hopefully the community will grow enough to support more game modes like this, if that's the problem.

It's a combination of factors.

One is that you're right; the game's population isn't large enough to support multiple matchmaking buckets. It's why Piranha tried to switch gamemode selection over to a soft vote rather than a hardlock - so that everyone drew from the same matchmaking bucket in their choice of queue.

Another is that despite the large groups (and the solo droppers) being incredibly scornful of anyone dropping in a 2-4 man lance, the 12-man queue needs those small groups to fill in the gaps in the 12-man matchmaker. It's no fun for the small group guys or the casual beer-night buddy drops, and the large groups are no friggin' help with their snark and nastiness both on and off comms and their whole "Find a unit, fill out your group, and put in the training if you don't want to get chewed up, NUBZ." bullscheissen they pull in every one of these threads that comes up. Nevertheless, in order for groups of nine or twn to be able to play, groups of two or three need to be available to plug in those last few slots with. If they split off a 2-4 man queue, then the 12-man queue would consists of groups of 5-7, and 12, only, and they would scream even louder than they already do about their matchmaking times.

Piranha's in a really rotten place insofar as matchmaking goes, and is essentially left in the enviable position of simply trying to piss people off the least rather than implement a workable solution for everyone, as there is no such solution. Unfortunate, but true.

[Mystere]

Allow solo players into the group queue already.

Edited by Mystere, 13 October 2014 - 03:14 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Mystere, on 13 October 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Allow solo players into the group queue already.

I mean, really! Why can't they opt in? It would be so much easier for people who are looking to join units. Or just those who want to experience that type of play while alone.

[That Dawg]

Dock Steward, on 13 October 2014 - 03:07 PM, said:

Then you can't drop 9 or 10, either...

Problem? We can't drop with 4 assaults. Remember how the drops were a year or so ago?
Again, only PGI knows what the real server numbers are. How many actually drop with 9 or 10?

Mystere, on 13 October 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Allow solo players into the group queue already.

No. Because teams.
The last thing I'd want if I got a drop with two fours, or an 8 was four solos. Dear God no.
Its bad enough dealing with solos in pugs LOL

[Dock Steward]

That Dawg, on 13 October 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

Problem? We can't drop with 4 assaults. Remember how the drops were a year or so ago?
Again, only PGI knows what the real server numbers are. How many actually drop with 9 or 10?

My group drops with 10 frequently, and the two-man team that pairs with us never complains (at east not in game).

Nor do the three-man teams who, less often, drop with us.

We strive to have 12, more if we can, for subs, but sometimes real life gets in the way. When we can scrimmage another of our companies in the Lobby, that is our preference, but isn't always an option.

[Hillslam]

PGI should cater to the game population in order of population.

Solo - by far the largest - has been handled.

Group - hasn't been handled at all. Right now its preferentially catering to large groups just by virtue of the MM's knapsack filling algorythm, and thats exactly opposite of what PGI as a business should be doing.

2 man play is like going to the dentist right now, its the worst its been since the start of closed beta, and will kill any hope of the game ever growing its population to any siginificant degree.

Split the group queues with "Opt-in's" as your relief valve gets my vote for the best solutions.

[Dock Steward]

That Dawg, on 13 October 2014 - 03:25 PM, said:

No. Because teams.
The last thing I'd want if I got a drop with two fours, or an 8 was four solos. Dear God no.
Its bad enough dealing with solos in pugs LOL

It would be awesome for recruiting!

[Asmudius Heng]

The MM needs to have an easier time matching big and small groups against each other but the way to 3/3/3/3 setup works right now clogs the queue with people running small groups tonning up hardcore because they fear getting slammed. This breaks the matchmaker and causes all sorts of problems.

Playing against larger groups should not happen for lots of small groups too often as long as the matchmaker realises that this is more important then Elo - then take into account tonnage balance etc.

[Javin]

A bigger community will help solve this issue. Also CW will help. Most groups will be involved with CW. So mostly small groups or solos will be playing during major CW times.

[Vassago Rain]

I don't know if you guys realize this, but part of the reason the game went from abandoned to played was the removal of the old 4 manz maximum limit.

The moment PGI starts tampering with the ability to drop with all your friends is the moment people go elsewhere, and I doubt they'll come back this time.

[bar10jim]

Rebas Kradd, on 13 October 2014 - 02:32 PM, said:

Promote the game, expand the playerbase. The game was niche as it is, and the, shall we say streamlined development pipeline of PGI has left out some things and that made the game a bit stale. So there aren't a lot of groups for the matchmaker to choose from.

But that can be changed!

But the easiest way to promote the game and expand the player base is to introduce a friend and get them to play. But they want to drop with you...and into the group queue grinder they go. They don't have any fun, don't feel that they have a chance, and simply quit playing. By rigidly protecting the group queue, you hamper the development of the one thing that the group queue NEEDS - more players.

[Dock Steward]

Vassago Rain, on 13 October 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

I don't know if you guys realize this, but part of the reason the game went from abandoned to played was the removal of the old 4 manz maximum limit.

The moment PGI starts tampering with the ability to drop with all your friends is the moment people go elsewhere, and I doubt they'll come back this time.

He gets it.

[DarkonFullPower]

Private matches (last i checked) do not give you C-Bills. That alone throws the idea of "Go play private" out the window.

[Vassago Rain]

DarkonFullPower, on 13 October 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Private matches (last i checked) do not give you C-Bills. That alone throws the idea of "Go play private" out the window.

It also costs real money to play actual private matches. If you try to freeplay, you get a bunch of worthless limitations thrown at you.

Ergo, private matches are done only by the rich and/or robot addicted. Everybody else gets everybody who happens to be on into a group and farms the ghetto for c-bills.

bar10jim, on 13 October 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

But the easiest way to promote the game and expand the player base is to introduce a friend and get them to play. But they want to drop with you...and into the group queue grinder they go. They don't have any fun, don't feel that they have a chance, and simply quit playing. By rigidly protecting the group queue, you hamper the development of the one thing that the group queue NEEDS - more players.

I find this lame excuse laughable.

Over the years, I've dragged literally hundreds of scrub greens through the grinder. It's not difficult to do well, and if you drop with actual new players, you end up in what we call the steering wheel underhive.

It's a magical place where my (P)rison hawk reigns supreme, commandos roam the fields, flamer stalkers eagerly go water, and the rare atlas K species settled.

[Mystere]

That Dawg, on 13 October 2014 - 03:25 PM, said:

No. Because teams.
The last thing I'd want if I got a drop with two fours, or an 8 was four solos. Dear God no.
Its bad enough dealing with solos in pugs LOL

Chicken.

[Hoax415]

bar10jim, on 13 October 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

But the easiest way to promote the game and expand the player base is to introduce a friend and get them to play. But they want to drop with you...and into the group queue grinder they go. They don't have any fun, don't feel that they have a chance, and simply quit playing. By rigidly protecting the group queue, you hamper the development of the one thing that the group queue NEEDS - more players.

This is true but its a completely separate issue. There is a stickied thread started yesterday by Niko asking for what new players need. Go post in that. Brand new player + a friend teaching him =! all 2-mans should get to go to solo queue.

Everything else in this thread is selfishly suggesting things that the game has already tried and it was much worse.

The existing system's framework is fine. We need PGI or the player council or whoever to start looking at tweaking the existing system to get better results.

IF AND ONLY IF, the results for 2-4 man groups are really anywhere near as bad statistically over the entire player population as some claim. Which judging from the sync drop crying, they probably are not.

Examples:
-how does MM currently build teams, could it be better for smaller groups without greatly impacting wait timers?
-do smaller groups at the low end of the elo scale end up in the wrong matches for some reason, someone needs to look over the data. Do they have a tendency to be used to "bring down" the avg elo and end up being fodder as a result? Can this be tweaked?
-should 2-4 man groups have negative elo modifiers if MM is planning to put them against a team with a 8+ member group on it?
-does elo in group queue adjust too slowly?

etc. etc.

We aren't going to change the way solo and group queue work because they are working quite well and everyone gets to play with however many friends they have online and the wait times aren't bad for anyone. Every crybaby "suggestion" is asking to go back to times where the game was bleeding players because that wasn't the case.

Edited by Hoax415, 13 October 2014 - 03:54 PM.