251 replies to this topic

[Malcolm Vordermark]

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

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

I don't think showing an extremely close match despite a weight difference really proves the point you want it to.

[BigFatGator]

I'd take any random mode and number of players (4v4, 8v8, 12v12), and any map if all the player were roughly at the same level of skill (or lack thereof) as I am. I really don't care about the map, mode, or anything else as long as skill is balanced. I can adapt to the rest of it.

[ThrashInc]

Rouken, on 20 February 2015 - 07:12 PM, said:

I don't think showing an extremely close match despite a weight difference really proves the point you want it to.

One match of numerous ones of the evening, once they realized we weren't DDCs, they all ran DDCs. That was Forest Colony, Splatcat through tunnel too strong.

[Kristov Kerensky]

tortuousGoddess, on 20 February 2015 - 03:57 PM, said:

You think speed tweak and double basics are meaningless? Wow, does that ever explain a lot about your terrible opinions. I know you come on here just to cry and whine about your unrealistic expectations, but seriously, give it a rest and go home.

Have you actually Mastered more than 1 chassis, or even 1? You don't know what the base stats that are being affected by those skill ups are do you? I bet you love getting that Convergence skill up too! Hundreds of drops to Master a chassis, huh? I've got quite a few Mechs Mastered, and even when I had to get Basics AND Elites in 3 variants it never took me hundreds of drops to get them Mastered, do you play or are you really that bad?

Speed tweak is nice, but really all I want is the extra module slot so I can have Radar Derp and Seismic at the same time, unless I'm doing support, then I want Radar Derp and Adv Target Delay. Seriously, I only Master them for the extra module, because when you actually LOOK at the numbers and the percentages being given, they aren't that impressive. I can jump in a Trail version of a chassis I actually own and take it out and do pretty much as well as I do in my Mastered one, but then again, I also don't spend hundreds of drops getting a chassis Mastered either, that might explain the difference there.

Elo doesn't work for teams composed of individuals, never has. They could just go back to the pre-Elo system for a while, see how it works out, I don't think we'd really notice a lot of difference. I see top tier players who I know have a much better Elo than I have dropping with me/against me in the solo que, along with NEWBIES IN TRIAL MECHS! And Russ says Elo is working, the average is only a small difference off? Excuse me, WHAT? No, Elo is NOT working, AT ALL, if I am ever getting dropped with a newbie in a Trial Mech, much less if I see one of the top tier players in that same drop. If I'm in a Mech with a wlr of 2 and I see a newbie in a Trial Mech, Elo is not only NOT working, it's having a godsbedamned MELTDOWN, because there's no way in hell we should be in the same drop together, and I see that all too damn often, we ALL do, we've been seeing it since the Elo system was introduced.

Russ needs to stop giving us choices, IF he actually wants this game to go on to be an e-sport. He needs to revamp the entire solo drop system, the group system and the CW system so that the truely competative players are NOT being forced to deal with the underhive and vice versa unless they WANT it. Unlike you tortousGoddess, I've played at the top levels of competative online gaming, been a part of top teams and run them, and the way MWO is going, it ain't got a shot in hell of being an e-sport. Hell, it ain't got a shot at being Steam viable until they stop jacking around with damage/heat/quirks and get the HSR system working properly FIRST, THEN you balance the rest, not this halfassed monkeying around that's been going on since they got HSR started. AFTER you get the game play working nicely, THEN you figure out how to get the pubbies playing and the pro's playing so that pubbies can learn the game and the pro's can master it, and they can mix it up with each other so pro's can scout for talent and the pubbies can see the REAL potential in the game.

But hey, what the hell would I know right? Not like I ever created a league or ran a top team in an online venue before right? Oh, hey, I did both. What did you do again tortousGoddess? Oh, yeah, take a few hundred drops to master a chassis...

[Pahrias]

im all for more choice let us pick the maps and modes we want to play on. id be fine with waiting longer for a match.

[Joshua Rael]

I think if you allow people to choose their maps, and go back to 8v8 in solo you will probably have a more balanced match anyway. People will stay away from maps that don't work with their build or piloting style, thus making the match more competitive IMO. I am curious as to how they arrive at this ELO difference. Is it difference in total ELO between the teams, or individual?
I have been in some lopsided matches with half or more of one team doing less than 100 dmg. Everyone has bad matches, I include myself in this, but it seems an awfully extreme coincidence for better than half of a team to have a bad match in the same match. Which leads me to wondering if they are using people of higher ELO to balance people of a lower ELO in the same match.

[Lightfoot]

Players don't have to choose the Map they just have to be told what map it is before the Mechlab is over. This would encourage the use of variant Mechs and of course players would want to be able to switch between at least two saved configs.

That should keep the ELO pool about the same, but give them tactical Map knowledge that is the same as picking the Map. It would add great gameplay depth to MWO and you would no longer need to make short range weapons so OP and long range so nerfed. Because players would have Tactical battle info to choose the correct load-out for the map. That's true MechWarrior.

[Molossian Dog]

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

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

Since when can we choose maps?


To the topic at hand:

Just deactivate ELO. I will gladly accept being roflstomped now and then if I can get away from the sick "Oh I won 5 times in a row, now I am going to get punished" experience.

That PGI actually still believes in ELO and further believes it makes for a fun gaming experience just points out how little they play their own game. Here is the reality:

The active ELO public queue doesn´t produce fun games with a higher frequency than the deactivated ELO in CW.

So just scrap the whole bloody thing is my choice.


If you absolutely require some match maker shennanigans make it choose players that roughly have the same numbers of games on their account and call it a day.
(Yes Alt accounts can screw with that system. Just like with the current one. So what?)

Edited by Molossian Dog, 20 February 2015 - 08:16 PM.

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Please don't take away my ability to exclude Assault from my play options. Worst play mode ever.



Not really, but it is pretty bad/pointless. Conquest does a better job of objective based combat (not great, but better than Assault), and Skirmish is all the deathmatch I need.

[Tarl Cabot]

• Quicker matches/no selection process
  
• Show map to allow pick of mech from specific weight class (orion - so only other heavies, etc to keep with the Elo score) from drop deck.
  
• Definitely start new players at a lower starting Elo number.
  
• 
  
• Faction/global chat that is accessible from every screen, allowing people who do want to form groups, either for group queue or CW queue. A lobby that only allows players who they drop with on their team, not who they are dropping against, that is saved for private matches (already available - premium time is needed for each leader).
  
• 
  
• *****
  
• Question though, how is the Elo primed for each match? Is it based on the first player selected, then their Elo in their mech's weight class? An average Elo number selected then people are pulled? Known is how the group Elo is calculated at the start of the match to determine the likely winner/loser.

[Jakob Knight]

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 07:48 PM, said:

Russ needs to stop giving us choices, IF he actually wants this game to go on to be an e-sport. He needs to revamp the entire solo drop system, the group system and the CW system so that the truely competative players are NOT being forced to deal with the underhive and vice versa unless they WANT it. Unlike you tortousGoddess, I've played at the top levels of competative online gaming, been a part of top teams and run them, and the way MWO is going, it ain't got a shot in hell of being an e-sport.

Good. This game should never become an E-Sport outside of any Solaris game mode that might be introduced for that purpose. Trying to make the Public queue an E-Sport is why the game is only a shadow of what it was supposed to be when it was first introduced, and MWO is not and never was supposed to be a sport.

And CW is already as you describe. No new player has to deal with the level of experienced, organized Units of players running free-range forces found there unless they choose to do so by entering CW. Since the new player knows this mode is the 'hard mode', any that enter have already decided to do so, and it's on -them- to step up their game. If they don't want to, well....the Public queue is still there. I suppose an alternative would be to make the 'Solaris' sports mode a third game mode with the same 'if you enter here, you understand you will be facing sports players' implied consent that CW's 'if you enter here, you understand you will be facing the most organized and challenging players' has.

Of course, I may also have misunderstood you, and you could have been asking for the devs to put in a system to exclude some players based on other player's perception of their worth to their own viewpoint of the game. If so, you may want to consider what you would think if you were banned from CW because you were too concentrated on Competitive play and not on Objective Warfare in the opinion of some players. The blade swings both ways.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Meh. I don't particularly miss the lobbies of "old skool" because it simply took longer to find those better games. So I kinda like the random matchmaker.

However, I do believe Elo needs to be set at 0 for starting players and have a hardlock on it so that way players never see those that are significantly better/worse than them. My first drop on a new account recently had Proton on the opposite team. A new player should never be in a match like that.

And I'd like to see ratings like MRBC: A+, A, A-, B+... etcetera on our stats pages so we know what Elo range we're in.

[Ratpoison]

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 07:48 PM, said:

-snip-

What happened to this being about about your awful proposed old style lobby solution? Oh right, you were too busy going on yet ANOTHER tangent rant like you always do about how terrible everything is and whining about a minor exaggeration I made that wasn't even relevant to the point.

You really are pathetic.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Jakob Knight, on 20 February 2015 - 09:24 PM, said:

Good. This game should never become an E-Sport outside of any Solaris game mode that might be introduced for that purpose. Trying to make the Public queue an E-Sport is why the game is only a shadow of what it was supposed to be when it was first introduced, and MWO is not and never was supposed to be a sport.

And CW is already as you describe. No new player has to deal with the level of experienced, organized Units of players running free-range forces found there unless they choose to do so by entering CW. Since the new player knows this mode is the 'hard mode', any that enter have already decided to do so, and it's on -them- to step up their game. If they don't want to, well....the Public queue is still there. I suppose an alternative would be to make the 'Solaris' sports mode a third game mode with the same 'if you enter here, you understand you will be facing sports players' implied consent that CW's 'if you enter here, you understand you will be facing the most organized and challenging players' has.

Of course, I may also have misunderstood you, and you could have been asking for the devs to put in a system to exclude some players based on other player's perception of their worth to their own viewpoint of the game. If so, you may want to consider what you would think if you were banned from CW because you were too concentrated on Competitive play and not on Objective Warfare in the opinion of some players. The blade swings both ways.

No Jakob, CW isn't what I described, it's an unfinished game mode that gives no warning to new players that they are not about to play another round on River City. I've seen too many newbies in CW with their Trial Mechs who are totally unprepared for what happens.

There needs to be a warning before you enter CW, that's part of the problem. And the solo/group ques are pubbie land, competitive teams are mostly in CW, it's an objective game mode which is best for competitive teams to train with. Nothing wrong with casual players jumping into CW, they just need to know what they are getting into, and right now, the game doesn't tell them.

tortuousGoddess, on 20 February 2015 - 10:01 PM, said:

What happened to this being about about your awful proposed old style lobby solution? Oh right, you were too busy going on yet ANOTHER tangent rant like you always do about how terrible everything is and whining about a minor exaggeration I made that wasn't even relevant to the point.

You really are pathetic.

Hey, here's an idea, why don't YOU give some sort of feedback about the question that was asked instead of constantly making attacks and calling people names!

I've actually given feedback on this subject, whether you liked it or not, I've at least followed the forum rules and addressed the subject of the thread. You have a habit from what I've seen of your posts so far of just calling people names and being mean, nasty and rude, you don't actually address the subject of the threads you respond in.

So, since you don't agree with my ideas, what are YOUR ideas to fix this broken system? Or do you think it's not broken? Why?

Come on, lets hear it lady, anything in that head but the same bile, here's your chance to prove it.

Edited by Kristov Kerensky, 20 February 2015 - 10:21 PM.

[Ratpoison]

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 10:19 PM, said:

-snip-

That's pretty rich from the guy who chose to come after me with all sorts of accusations for denouncing your precious dated private lobby only multiplayer. I already did give my opinions on the question at hand, but as usual you chose to ignore them in favor of something you could yell walls of text about.

Of course what I'd REALLY like that would also help the matchmaking problem is a return to 8v8, but I don't see that happening because bigger numbers impress potential new players and newbies.

[ThrashInc]

Honestly I think "average" Elo is a terrible system in the first place but this might be exacerbated by the change to 12v12.

[Weeny Machine]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 20 February 2015 - 09:49 PM, said:

Meh. I don't particularly miss the lobbies of "old skool" because it simply took longer to find those better games. So I kinda like the random matchmaker.

However, I do believe Elo needs to be set at 0 for starting players and have a hardlock on it so that way players never see those that are significantly better/worse than them. My first drop on a new account recently had Proton on the opposite team. A new player should never be in a match like that.

And I'd like to see ratings like MRBC: A+, A, A-, B+... etcetera on our stats pages so we know what Elo range we're in.

Ok, but those ratings shouldn't be visible to others. Else you would label them.
Another problem with that is with players who also like to fool around (like me) with builds etc. My rating is certainly lower than it should be. Simply because I am in for the fun and not necessarily competetiveness (only)

[Ace Selin]

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

THIS I WANT..... ill play all modes, all maps for competitive fun games.

[ThrashInc]

It can't be competitive or fun when the matchmaker itself pairs you with people of different skill levels expecting you to carry or be carried.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Bush Hopper, on 21 February 2015 - 12:36 AM, said:

Ok, but those ratings shouldn't be visible to others. Else you would label them.
Another problem with that is with players who also like to fool around (like me) with builds etc. My rating is certainly lower than it should be. Simply because I am in for the fun and not necessarily competetiveness (only)

This is the first PvP game I've played where you couldn't see others stats. I doubt it'd be the issue people already claim it would be.