39 replies to this topic

[Rokuzachi]

Rorvik, on 15 January 2015 - 09:40 PM, said:

What is the point of playing a game where the end results is pre-determined? Why bother playing any round of MWO if the MM stacks teams so horribly that it practically guarantees a win / loss?

If this game had a real population, this matchmaker would probably work a lot better because it could have a tighter ELO spread when it constructs teams.

The way it is now is the epitome of boring. I personally learn very little from easy victories and horrible defeats. I learn the most from hard-fought wins or close defeats that put what skills I do have to the test, and these matches are very rare. You can sit back and analyze those close games and figure out how to improve. What are you going to analyze about a 12-0 from either side? Not much.

Edited by Rokuzachi, 15 January 2015 - 09:54 PM.

[CocoaJin]

Rorvik, on 15 January 2015 - 09:40 PM, said:

What is the point of playing a game where the end results is pre-determined? Why bother playing any round of MWO if the MM stacks teams so horribly that it practically guarantees a win / loss?

The end result is never pre-determined. Even if it was, the player never enters a match knowing ahead of time if they are the under/over-dog...we just need play our best game and stop looking for the scape goat for our loses.

I enter every match expecting to win, you can't ever tell me to plan on losing. Win or lose, I appreciate my success in the match and seek to learn from my mistakes. In the grand scheme of things, the MM is neither for or against me, it only provides the context for my achievements, my success and the lessons that make me better. Blaming the MM is just an excuse and means for transferring blame for a those who emotionally/psychologically can't handle losing.

Edited by CocoaJin, 15 January 2015 - 09:59 PM.

[Xmith]

Darian DelFord, on 15 January 2015 - 04:39 PM, said:

When the MM can not find a suitable match for you, it drops you into the newbie league where no one follows any simple instructions and do not know how to aim. With CW there is alot of the higher ELO folks being dropped down. No matter how hard we carry you can not carry the whole damn match.

2 matches back to back








its just one of those times where you sit back and go Hmmmmm

I have a lot of matches ending this way. I don't blame the MM. I blame myself for doing something stupid or not staying focused.

When the team looses and I end up with a score way above the rest, I sometimes believe we could have won the match if only I had played better or did something different to keep myself from getting destroyed. If I survive the match, my team wins.

MM could be working as intended. You may have to check out you game and try to figure out what you should have done differently to help the team win.

[Rorvik]

CocoaJin, on 15 January 2015 - 09:59 PM, said:

The end result is never pre-determined. Even if it was, the player never enters a match knowing ahead of time if they are the under/over-dog...we just need play our best game and stop looking for the scape goat for our loses.

Explain this then:

After losing many games in a row, one of which was a 12-0 steamroll, followed by a game where the enemy team had one DC and two of their Mechs killed themselves 2 minutes in so that it was 12 on 9 which we STILL somehow managed to lose 5-10, I decided, **** it, I'm just going to AFK until I win. Sure enough, next match, I did **** all and, lo and behold, a WIN!

Clearly, my efforts are irrelevant when it comes to the wins. This is how the MM intentionally works. Win a lot of games? It'll put you in games with players so bad that you'll lose no matter what. On a ridiculously long losing streak? It'll put in a game where going AFK still guarantees a win.

In effect, the MM is not so much "balancing ELO" as they are "forcing a 50/50 win ratio" by stacking teams.

CocoaJin, on 15 January 2015 - 09:59 PM, said:

I enter every match expecting to win, you can't ever tell me to plan on losing. Win or lose, I appreciate my success in the match and seek to learn from my mistakes.

There's nothing to be learned from a game where your teammates huddle and wait for the other team to pick them off while you are powerless do to anything. Except maybe don't even bother trying. It's just a waste of your time.

I just had a game a second ago. River City Conquest. My ENTIRE team basically got trapped in Theta within about a minute and were relentlessly bombarded by LRMs from all over the map. There literally was NOWHERE to go. ANY direction you went in there were at least 2 Mechs waiting to pick you off. Meanwhile, my team ran around in circles like headless chicken near Theta getting picked off like ducks in a barrel.

CocoaJin, on 15 January 2015 - 09:59 PM, said:

In the grand scheme of things, the MM is neither for or against me, it only provides the context for my achievements, my success and the lessons that make me better. Blaming the MM is just an excuse and means for transferring blame for a those who emotionally/psychologically can't handle losing.

The MM is there to ensure you have a 50/50 win/loss ratio, so from that perspective you are correct that it's not for or against you.

But if you think for one moment that that 12-0 steamroll you just did was thanks to your awesome skills or that 0-12 loss was your fault and you can learn something from it, you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

[Xmith]

I might agree if my W/L is at 50/50 or less but my W/L is 1.13

You fail if you think a computer program can keep you from beating the odds.

An individual can make a difference in what ever they do if they work hard enough at it.

You can believe in that 50/50 crap all you want.

[Kyrie]

Xmith, on 15 January 2015 - 11:12 PM, said:

I might agree if my W/L is at 50/50 or less but my W/L is 1.13

You fail if you think a computer program can keep you from beating the odds.

An individual can make a difference in what ever they do if they work hard enough at it.

You can believe in that 50/50 crap all you want.

Keep up that W/L, and find yourself in a weirder ELO bracket shortly. ;-)

[CocoaJin]

You guys actually approach the match as if it's all about you...what are the rest of us, automatons, puppets with no soul who just get in the way?

You really think the MM sets up matches for you and only you to lose? If the MM was purposely putting you with crappy players to lose, then that means it's putting you with people who odds are have lost more than they have won, so odds are the last march they lost and the MM should technically be trying to out them on a winning team...you'd really have think you were much more important than you are. In fact, if the MM was doing this, it would mean you must have been the player the MM was banking on to carry to team, and you failed...so the MM must have thought(like yourselves) that you were better than you really were.

The MM doesn't choose a winning and losing team to match together...it throws together a bunch of ELOs that best match up strictly by the numbers out of the available queue. It then makes a determination after the match up(because it's rare it can get a totally even match) which team is most likely to win, and then uses the actual results to adjust ELOs after the fact. It's not explicitly attempting to maintain a 50/50 win-loss record...statics and natural law just says that in the long run most people on the bell curve should sit some where around 50/50. Not because of the MM, but as a result of how the MM matched and the affect of natural variables inherent in pitting a group of people against each other.

Let's it get straight, numbers, variables, statistics, the very fiber of the universe doesn't give a flying Highlander about ya'll wins and loses. The people who think they have any importance in the matter is ya'll entitled little man children who cant handle losing.

You do your best each match and based on your performance taken collectively with the effort of every other player and the results of the match is based on that. Do your job, make your best contribution, your odds of winning is improved or hindered based on that...but nothing is set or predetermined. Winners make their own luck, it doesn't mean you win every time, but your odds of winning is affected by your effort and personal successes each battle...and that's how your ELO increases is rewarded in the long run.

[JackkyChan]

DivideBY1 said (Yeah, I was wondering what was up.. last night I got dropped into like 7 consecutive wins. Just roflstompings. Today, I'm like 0/12 , it's like a total role reversal. )


Welcome to PGI's version of balance=ELO HELLLLL

Edited by JackkyChan, 16 January 2015 - 12:22 PM.

[mogs01gt]

Darian DelFord, on 15 January 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b9efb38f0e7e170
For those matches.
No one expects a brawler S which goes 83 KPH, if you need more firepower drop it to a 375XL
Just one of the builds I use.

IMO I have a major issue with your built or rather SRMs. You are boating too many SRMs. You're simply relying on your team to use PP damage to destroy the components you are revealing with your armor stripping build. You are doing massive alpha's but have zero killing power unless you are facing checking your enemy. With an that XL, that is a bit of a problem.


Your build would work awesome in a group but in PUG'ing, boating SRMs dont work too often.

[terrycloth]

I have noticed on non-rofl stomps (12-2 or 12-3 or so) that a lot of the winning team has stripped armor but no one secured the kill. It's something lights are good at if they haven't gotten themselves killed by then.

[Darian DelFord]

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

You guys actually approach the match as if it's all about you...what are the rest of us, automatons, puppets with no soul who just get in the way?

You really think the MM sets up matches for you and only you to lose? If the MM was purposely putting you with crappy players to lose, then that means it's putting you with people who odds are have lost more than they have won, so odds are the last march they lost and the MM should technically be trying to out them on a winning team...you'd really have think you were much more important than you are. In fact, if the MM was doing this, it would mean you must have been the player the MM was banking on to carry to team, and you failed...so the MM must have thought(like yourselves) that you were better than you really were.

Correct me if I am wrong but that is exactly what the MM does. It knows ahead of time the odds that one side will lose or not. if you actually win that match your ELO is adjusted even more. At least that was my understanding the last time we had a discussion about it.

mogs01gt, on 16 January 2015 - 01:11 PM, said:

IMO I have a major issue with your built or rather SRMs. You are boating too many SRMs. You're simply relying on your team to use PP damage to destroy the components you are revealing with your armor stripping build. You are doing massive alpha's but have zero killing power unless you are facing checking your enemy. With an that XL, that is a bit of a problem.


Your build would work awesome in a group but in PUG'ing, boating SRMs dont work too often.

I do not rely on my team for anything. There have been times I have gotten 1k damage in this thing and no kills. There are others I have done 300 and gotten 7 kills. You really can not control your Kill count. Thats like saying a 6 ML Jenner F in its hayday sucks if it got 1k damage and did no kills.

The purpose of my build and play style is to not have face time because of the XL. I shoot and calculate my options before I commit to a face off. If I can take them I will, if I can not then I reposition and do what needs to be done,. Boating SRM's work whether your in a group or not, hence the reason you see so many of them, TW's Oxides, Cents so forth and so on.

[Chuck Jager]

matchmaker does not put you against same skilled it is an average of individual ELO (from what I understand). Unfortunately some mechs and builds will not carry a match. I love IS mediums, but for a long time I could not PUG in those with out a really bad experience. If I jumped into a med range DD heavy all was good. IS brawl builds are many times pure frustration because the game may be +or- 3-5 by the time you ever enter brawling range. I have just learned to take it for what it is and change my tactics and builds by what is given to me.

NOTE - I played another game recently with no MM or separate solo group que, as bad as this game may appear to be I was glad to switch back.

[Deathlike]

Darian DelFord, on 15 January 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b9efb38f0e7e170

For those matches.

No one expects a brawler S which goes 83 KPH, if you need more firepower drop it to a 375XL

Just one of the builds I use.

That build could seriously be better than what it is.

BLR-1S

If you're not using Endo (and it's not a Stalker), then you're kinda building it wrong.

if you don't want the extra medlasers to attract attention, you can convert them directly into DHS or ammo.

Edited by Deathlike, 16 January 2015 - 05:36 PM.

[CocoaJin]

The MM has an idea which team should win(for the purpose of rewarding ELO at the end of the match), but that's after it throws the two teams together. It does not pre-determine the match results...it builds the teams and then crunches the numbers for the predicted outcome.

It doesn't seek to make steam rolls to balance out anyone's ELO or win/lose. The balancing of win/lose is a natural outcome of a statistically significant number of matches...at least for the majority of players on the bell curve, of course there will always be anamolies that fall toward the outside the curve.

This means there is little wrong and even less that can be done to improve MM outcomes without an increased population. The only thing that's wrong here is the attitude of those who can't handle a loss or series of losses without creating some boogie man to transfer their angst to in some desperate attempt to protect their psyche.

Edited by CocoaJin, 16 January 2015 - 08:17 PM.

[Mazikar]

Is it just me or do you always first look to see if your name is on one of the posted screen shots first.... dreading someone made famous one of your worst matches ever? It has not happened to me yet... well... because I almost always win... yeah that's it, that's the ticket.

Edited by Lotharian, 16 January 2015 - 07:59 PM.

[Zoid]

As is well-known, it is not the pros who decide a game, it is the noobs. Specifically which team's noobs get killed first. It's extremely difficult to come back after a lance gets themselves killed stupidly. Or, as often is the case, the rest of the team leaves the assault lance to fight the enemy 12-4 and they get crushed without getting a kill. Even if you're significantly better, skill can only do so much against overwhelming force in this game.


So basically, if your noobs don't do what noobs do before the other team's noobs do what noobs do, you win. If not, you lose.

[Rorvik]

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

You guys actually approach the match as if it's all about you...what are the rest of us, automatons, puppets with no soul who just get in the way?

Well, when y'all decide the best tactic in Forest Colony is to wait by the mouth of the cave at B4 and await encirclement and inevitable destruction, yeah, kind of...

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

You really think the MM sets up matches for you and only you to lose?

No, of course not. There's a reason why the people on my team are on my team and not the other team.

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

If the MM was purposely putting you with crappy players to lose, then that means it's putting you with people who odds are have lost more than they have won, so odds are the last march they lost and the MM should technically be trying to out them on a winning team...you'd really have think you were much more important than you are.

I think that was the opposite of what I was saying. When you eventually get into a steamroll team, or a steamrolled team, there's little you can do to make a difference, win or lose. It's really the close games where your contribution matters. But as others have pointed out, there don't seem to be too many of those games.

Think of the MMs operation like a pendulum swing. It goes wildly from one extreme to another. In theory, it should settle down in the middle, which are the games where your skill level is roughly that of everyone else and the games are usually "close".

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

The MM doesn't choose a winning and losing team to match together...it throws together a bunch of ELOs that best match up strictly by the numbers out of the available queue. It then makes a determination after the match up(because it's rare it can get a totally even match) which team is most likely to win, and then uses the actual results to adjust ELOs after the fact. It's not explicitly attempting to maintain a 50/50 win-loss record...

Sure it is. And I maintain it's doing that pretty much in the way you described, except after you've gone on a long losing streak it'll put you in a stacked team that practically guarantees a win (or vice versa if you've been winning a lot).

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

statics and natural law just says that in the long run most people on the bell curve should sit some where around 50/50. Not because of the MM, but as a result of how the MM matched and the affect of natural variables inherent in pitting a group of people against each other.

This is a contradictory statement. "Laws of statistics state you should get a 50/50 w/l, not because of the MM, but because how the MM matches you up with other players."

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

Let's it get straight, numbers, variables, statistics, the very fiber of the universe doesn't give a flying Highlander about ya'll wins and loses. The people who think they have any importance in the matter is ya'll entitled little man children who cant handle losing.

We're not talking about the universe, we're talking about an algorithm in a PvP video game.

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

You do your best each match and based on your performance taken collectively with the effort of every other player and the results of the match is based on that.

So far as we've been told, it's based on your w/l and not much else.

CocoaJin, on 16 January 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

Do your job, make your best contribution, your odds of winning is improved or hindered based on that...but nothing is set or predetermined. Winners make their own luck, it doesn't mean you win every time, but your odds of winning is affected by your effort and personal successes each battle...and that's how your ELO increases is rewarded in the long run.

Then please feel free to account for the OPs 12-0 loss despite putting in a seemingly Herculean effort to win.

[Weeny Machine]

Those posts crack me up. Take this example:
I was in a team which consisted nearly only of people who are in units and the other team had just a few. I thought "Aah, this looks good!". To make is short: we were destroyed. All those "elites" played Rambo and died badly - then they were yelling on the chat and call other names

Edited by Bush Hopper, 17 January 2015 - 12:56 AM.

[David Sumner]

@Rokuzachi. I'd believe that if it didn't get worse during tournaments when more people are playing.

[CocoaJin]

David Sumner, on 17 January 2015 - 04:26 AM, said:

@Rokuzachi. I'd believe that if it didn't get worse during tournaments when more people are playing.

This one of those variables the ELO, and therefor the MM, can't account for...player motivations in match. ELO and the MM can't crunch numbers for the willingness of players to game and exploit the tournament for its rewards, or the basic reward system for its rewards of C-bills and XP over the presumed primary goal of winning.

The MM assumes that those players matched have the ultimate goal of winning,because the ELO is only a measurement of win/lose. So if a player is experimenting, running a new build, exploiting rewards, distracted by a phone call, etc, etc, it all screws up the presumed relevance of the ELO as it's used for that specific match. ELO has no absolute meaning, it's a statistical abstraction that carries an assumption of performance, not a guarantee.

Edited by CocoaJin, 17 January 2015 - 07:31 AM.