251 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Zeece, on 20 February 2015 - 07:51 AM, said:

Russ Asked me to Pose this Questions to the Community during last nights Townhall so that he could get honest and open feedback from y'all on it.

To give context to his question.

Do you want full choices of Mode and Maps at the Expense of Less Competitive Matches (because every choice shrinks the size of the pool of players that the Matchmaker can choose opponents from which means it will have to expand the ELO range to fill a match)

or

Do you want the most Competitive(closet ELO) Matches but at the cost that you can no longer choose maps or modes?

Reference: Current Solo Queue ELO difference 38... Current Group Queue ELO difference 183

Is the player base so small?

Kinda think THAT would need to be addressed first doncha think?

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 05:42 PM.

[mark v92]

For me picking the gamemode is enough. Dont want to devide the playerbase more with map picking. Look at cw.

maybe ditch elo balancing and replace it for better comp play?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

mark v92, on 20 February 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

For me picking the gamemode is enough. Dont want to devide the playerbase more with map picking. Look at cw.

maybe ditch elo balancing and replace it for better comp play?

I DO want map picking, because having the dropships randomly crash upon landing is ******* stupid

EVERY SINGLE landing being the following:



Followed by:



Thatd get pretty damned expensive wouldnt it?

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 05:46 PM.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Kamenjar, on 20 February 2015 - 03:35 PM, said:

Sure... And then you can get lunch while waiting for a match, or get matched up with a bunch of new players that can't hit the broad side of a barn. There are a lot of players in your or my rank, but it's hard to get them all playing at the same time. That's what the topic is pretty much about and you're not in touch with it, apparently.

Actually I would risk saying that bringing stock mode on table would decrease waiting time, as this is virtually the only mode that can really bring more players to the game.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

While I don't have the stats to back it up, I often feel like CW is about as well balanced as the public queue. Sure you know you're about to lose when a 12 man lines up against your pugs but there seems to be just as many stomps in the public queue.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 20 February 2015 - 05:46 PM, said:

Actually I would risk saying that bringing stock mode on table would decrease waiting time, as this is virtually the only mode that can really bring more players to the game.

I thought that mode was non CW?

Cause when you have even the devs calling it hardcore mode or whatever you think maybe thats not where the new players SHOULD go

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 05:48 PM.

[Sjorpha]

I wouldn't mind limiting group size to 4, 8 and 12. That should improve the matchmaker for group que considerably, since it wouldn't have to skip on ELO to piece together awkward group sizes, a team would simply be either 4-4-4, 4-8 or 12.

Ability to choose game modes I don't really care about, I like them all and I like having them random.

[Jakob Knight]

I personally believe that trying to base the game around Competitive play is the wrong way to do it.

This game is supposed to be about fighting, not sports play. It's up to the players to make it Competitive or not, not the game, and I don't see how removing player choice will do that. On top of the fact that the Public queue already does this with the 3/3/3/3 system in addition to hardpoint restrictions and ELO, there are some modes of play (Skirmish comes to mind) that were put in that some players did not and still do not want to play in, and were told at the time they were put in that they could opt out of those game modes if they wanted. Forcing them to now have to play those kind of battles raises the question of what else will be forced on the players next in the name of Competitive play. Banned mech chassis? Enforced weapons type exclusions? Player segregation so that only some players even get to play some parts of the game because the rest 'aren't good enough' for the Competitive players?

Every restriction you place on the players removes possibilities from the game, and that means the range of gameplay and challenge shrinks. The more your gameplay and challenge shrink, the fewer players of quality you will have, until all you have are players who ask for any little thing that challenges them to be removed from the game and all you see is one way to play it left.

I hope MWO never becomes that, though it seems there are always calls by some players to turn it into a sports event where everything is controlled and it's no more interesting than a football game.

[lsp]

Just get rid of ELO all together and let everyone play with one another, it's unnecessary to begin with. Why limit the matchmaking in a game with already a limited amount of people playing it.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Hey, I have an idea, we can keep the random maps thing but you gotta buy/repair the dropship after every crash.

A few instances of having to drop out 227,750,400 times (thats an estimate for a Leopard) maybe ppl will start wanting navigation computers that work

Jakob Knight, on 20 February 2015 - 05:58 PM, said:

I hope MWO never becomes that, though it seems there are always calls by some players to turn it into a sports event where everything is controlled and it's no more interesting than a football game.

The devs were trying to make it an Esport as well for a time, did that change?

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 06:01 PM.

[Dirk Le Daring]

Not bothered by not choosing a mode, as it is quite rare for me to single out any particular mode anyway, regardless of the mech I am running.

Maps, again not bothered by not choosing. But I must say, no more dark maps.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Dirk Le Daring, on 20 February 2015 - 06:10 PM, said:

Maps, again not bothered by not choosing. But I must say, no more dark maps.

Funny; if we had to replace or repair the dropships since they crash on every landing, I bet ppl would start caring

Quote

Confederate Class (TR2750 Sph DropShip 174,679,120
Fury (Upgraded Version) Aero DropShip 181,640,160
Gazelle (Upgraded Version Aero DropShip 214,477,776
Aurora Cargo Aero DropShip 217,994,400
Aurora Aero DropShip 222,314,400
Aurora Fighter Carrier Aero DropShip 222,314,400
Leopard (Upgraded Version Aero DropShip 227,750,400
Leopard CV (Upgraded Vers Aero DropShip 227,966,400
Seeker (Upgraded Version) Sph DropShip 231,036,624
Aurora Lite Vee Comp Aero DropShip 233,114,400
Broadsword Aero DropShip 275,598,720
Cargoking Sph DropShip 281,241,968
Claymore Aero DropShip 285,923,520
Merlin Sph DropShip 287,005,600
Union (Upgraded Version) Sph DropShip 289,600,080
Lung Wang Sph DropShip 292,737,536
Okinawa Sph DropShip 292,839,120
Mule-Q ? Pocket Warship Sph DropShip 296,788,128
Condor (Upgraded Version) Aero DropShip 299,081,520
Union-C Sph DropShip 302,288,000
Avenger (Upgraded Version Aero DropShip 310,271,040
Hercules Sph DropShip 321,036,240
Triumph (Upgraded Version Aero DropShip 321,948,000
Hamilcar Aero DropShip 336,880,368
Sassanid Sph DropShip 337,685,600
Rose Sph DropShip 342,474,720
Cargomaster Sph DropShip 354,375,168
Intruder (Upgraded Versio Sph DropShip 377,473,600
Nagumo Aero DropShip 378,370,800
Kuan Ti Aero DropShip 385,062,480
Overlord (Upgraded Versio Sph DropShip 395,007,872
Aurora Mixed Infantry Aero DropShip 398,354,400
Model 97 'Octopus' Sph DropShip 421,730,400
Union-X Sph DropShip 433,042,400
Excalibur (Upgraded Versi Sph DropShip 435,251,600
Vengeance (Upgraded Versi Aero DropShip 447,476,400
Overlord-C Sph DropShip 450,336,320
Fortress (Upgraded Versio Sph DropShip 456,878,800
Hannibal Aero DropShip 466,321,680
Pentagon Sph DropShip 503,255,200
Noruff Aero DropShip 505,746,000
Miraborg Sph DropShip 514,421,600
Outpost Sph DropShip 537,896,800
Achilles (Upgraded Versio Aero DropShip 554,803,200
Lion (Dragoons Variant Ve Sph DropShip 557,153,520
Arcadia Aero DropShip 565,948,800
Excalibur ? (Pocket Wars Sph DropShip 574,257,600
Carrier Aero DropShip 577,646,928
Lion Sph DropShip 579,497,520
Mercer Sph DropShip 613,071,200
Assault Triumph Aero DropShip 625,174,560
Model 96 'Elephant' Sph DropShip 656,202,400
Colossus Sph DropShip 716,030,000
Overlord A-3 Sph DropShip 790,021,120
Nekohono'o Sph DropShip 933,564,800
Conquistador Aero DropShip 1,680,732,000

Couple hundred million to a billion cbills per drop might make ppl care. It is Hard core mode, right?

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 06:25 PM.

[ThrashInc]

Jakob Knight, on 20 February 2015 - 05:58 PM, said:

On top of the fact that the Public queue already does this with the 3/3/3/3 system in addition to hardpoint restrictions and ELO,

Just remember that with Elo and no 3/3/3/3 this is what happens:

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

GundamStompyRobotChurchy, on 20 February 2015 - 06:26 PM, said:

Just remember that with Elo and no 3/3/3/3 this is what happens:

and 8 players... How many years back was that XD

[Dirk Le Daring]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 20 February 2015 - 06:24 PM, said:

Funny; if we had to replace or repair the dropships since they crash on every landing, I bet ppl would start caring



Couple hundred million to a billion cbills per drop might make ppl care. It is Hard core mode, right?

I do not understand what you are referring to. Would you please enlighten me ?

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Dirk Le Daring, on 20 February 2015 - 06:43 PM, said:

I do not understand what you are referring to. Would you please enlighten me ?

not being able to pick where you land on a map. To me that says you crash when you drop, because why else would you be landing at completely random locations any time you were going to a planet.

If thats the case, then youd have to replace or repair your dropship every tome you land.

If THAT was the case, ppl would very quickly, I think, care about map selection, given how expensive dropships are.

Hence that list a few posts up there

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 06:46 PM.

[Zordicron]

Here is my feedback:

ELO: it is OK, in that when there are MANY players online it tends to somewhat half ass work. I would suggest you make a new ELO matchmaker code that makes the window adjust based on how many players are online, vs making it react to wait time as it does now. This removes the "waiting" people hate, while effectively getting a similar result in the teams put together.

Game mode choice: Keep it. HOWEVER, IMO skirmish and assault are similar, and conquest plays so differently in pug vs group cues, that it is hard to describe. BEST SITUATION IMO, for patching this bit up-

PUT CW DROP DECK MODE INTO SOLO AND GROUP CUE. Remove skirmish mode, make assault mode NOT have a stupid base, but rather a self defending drop ship to DESTROY, not just some magic green lines square to camp in. Turrets remain also. Main objective is still destroy enemy team, however you can destroy the ship with enough teamwork or if some n00b runs off at the end of match, or the team has massively outflanked an enemy that has left it's ship undefended.

This same ship would also serve in the drop deck version of conquest, but make it invincible, destroying the drop ship is not a conquest objective.

Both of those "new" modes are 12 vs 12, deck controlled by tonnage as in CW, matchmaker tries to balance ELO of teams as it does now.

THEN:
Make the regular solo cue 8 vs 8. Rework ELO matchmaking, make the biggest emphasis on matching tonnage of teams. I agree with many others, there were less stomps in 8 vs 8, the older maps are too freegin puny most of the time for a 12 vs 12 skirmish, and in general, IMO new players will have a little better luck not getting blown to tiny bits in 5 seconds flat making a mistake because there are just fewer mechs on the field to do it to them. FURTHER, lock out the dropdeck cue until cadet bonus is completed, put the new players in solo cue in 8 vs 8. IMO, the matches will be closer, because the "extremes" of new players stacked on one team in 12 vs 12 will simply be reduced wholesale by mech count.

I am not sure if a group 8 vs 8 is needed, as I basically never participate in that cue. Those players would have to give feedback, and combine it with data of average group size etc to determine that. One thing is certain, combining a solo and group cue for any type game mode is a bad idea, AT LEAST until ALL the VOIP issues are resolved 100%. At that point, perhaps the old "4 man on each team" method we used to have would be OK.

Map choice: hell no, for reasons obvious in this thread. people tweaking loadouts to the absolute maximum for one particular map is for the most tryhard of tryhard groups. You do NOT want to invite that into any section with more casual players, new players, well anything besides the competitive group drops, and, I think anyway, CW was supposed to be their playground for that, at least that is how it has played out for the most part. So maybe allow map choice in CW or something, and see how it goes there. IMO, it will muliply the issues we have with NPE now if map choice is put in.

Thats how I see it, a dropdeck mode for pugs( I mean it would add such a new dynamic to conquest right?) 8 vs 8 to make MUCH better use of the older smaller maps, and ALSO make matchmaking simpler, while improving the NPE to boot.

It is ambitious, but then, reworking game modes and match making usually is.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Eldagore, on 20 February 2015 - 06:49 PM, said:

people tweaking loadouts to the absolute maximum for one particular map is for the most tryhard of tryhard groups.

Isnt that how the military has been doing it for literally tens of thousands of years? Is this not supposed to simulate that in some fasion?

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 20 February 2015 - 06:51 PM.

[Dirk Le Daring]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 20 February 2015 - 06:46 PM, said:

not being able to pick where you land on a map. To me that says you crash when you drop, because why else would you be landing at completely random locations any time you were going to a planet.

If thats the case, then youd have to replace or repair your dropship every tome you land.

If THAT was the case, ppl would very quickly, I think, care about map selection, given how expensive dropships are.

Hence that list a few posts up there

Cheers mate, now I get the picture.

[Kassatsu]

Grandpaw, on 20 February 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

Much rather be able to choose maps and modes myself,if I have to play matches that I hate whats the point of playing this game at all?

Because you must play on Terra Therma. Or Viridian Bog. Or (unpopular map here). It's balance man, you can't just like, pick a high heat build and only queue up for frozen city night like everyone else with an energy-heavy build will inevitably be doing, that's not fair or balanc-Oh wait, yes it is.

If that means longer queue times, I do not care. They're actually quite short as they are now regardless of your weight class. If things were actually balanced properly, matching the teams based on weight class shouldn't even matter. But they aren't, thus the weight class matching (Which has some hilarious highs and lows, particularly in the assaults, lights, mediums and heavie-oh wait that's all of them).

Edited by Kassatsu, 20 February 2015 - 07:11 PM.