16 replies to this topic

[Mensch]

So reading from the tournament page, I see that:

"Faction Leaderboards are Ranked by Total Faction Player Victories"

(Why all the caps, PGI?)

But my real question is why, when I add the respective numbers next to the individual clans/houses, I get these numbers:

46410-Clan

39807-IS

Am I having a logic problem or does this mean that Clan is +600 wins on the challenge? If so, why haven't we taken Tuka 9+ times by now?

[BSK]

If it was only one slot you were right.

[QueenBlade]

Now divide by 12 and notice it is not a whole number. Victory points are being lost/gained somewhere in the algorithm.

[Darwins Dog]

QueenBlade, on 27 April 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

Now divide by 12 and notice it is not a whole number. Victory points are being lost/gained somewhere in the algorithm.

Maybe it's only counting those with 80+ match scores? Could also be due to disconnects.

It would be nice to see the equation for curiosity sake.

[hybrid black]

Mensch, on 27 April 2015 - 11:01 AM, said:

So reading from the tournament page, I see that:

"Faction Leaderboards are Ranked by Total Faction Player Victories"

(Why all the caps, PGI?)

But my real question is why, when I add the respective numbers next to the individual clans/houses, I get these numbers:

46410-Clan

39807-IS

Am I having a logic problem or does this mean that Clan is +600 wins on the challenge? If so, why haven't we taken Tuka 9+ times by now?

3867 wins for clans
3317 wins for IS

but how many of each win for clans is just holding what they took and not taking more of the planet?

[Commander A9]

Might be because Wolves have a high population.

Hopefully it's not because artificial wins/losses are being injected otherwise...

Edited by Commander A9, 27 April 2015 - 12:15 PM.

[ztac]

The whole victory thing is a farce anyway , it will all come down to who has the most Units on during the last day and IS are way ahead on that score.... Every match I have dropped into as a PUG with a group of PUGS just gets ROFL stomped by some IS Units or other. This in itself is bad , but add to that the exploits due to poor map making and game mechanics for CW mode , along with over Quirked meta mechs and it is just pathetic and I can see why a lot of people won't go near CW.

It is not just for UNITS and indeed judging by how many PUG people are out there I really don't think it is justified for anyone to say get in a group or don't play.

Indeed PGI should put in a solo queue , which of course the UNIT people don't want as their free kills would vanish!

Let's face it this is the real reason they say it is for groups is in the hope that a solo queue will never materialise!

I wonder how much longer PGI will listen to these people? (It is a good way to kill your own game, also any PUG queue would not have to be based on planet claim and thus could all be put together to form games in CW mode but only count towards their faction on one planet attacking and defending. This means that permissible factions can work together and a balance can be found if the Clans or IS have a larger population in that they can attack each other! If such a system were put in place the waiting time for a game would be vastly reduced!).

[Chemie]

ztac, on 27 April 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

The whole victory thing is a farce anyway , it will all come down to who has the most Units on during the last day and IS are way ahead on that score.... Every match I have dropped into as a PUG with a group of PUGS just gets ROFL stomped by some IS Units or other. This in itself is bad , but add to that the exploits due to poor map making and game mechanics for CW mode , along with over Quirked meta mechs and it is just pathetic and I can see why a lot of people won't go near CW.

It is not just for UNITS and indeed judging by how many PUG people are out there I really don't think it is justified for anyone to say get in a group or don't play.

Indeed PGI should put in a solo queue , which of course the UNIT people don't want as their free kills would vanish!

Let's face it this is the real reason they say it is for groups is in the hope that a solo queue will never materialise!

I wonder how much longer PGI will listen to these people? (It is a good way to kill your own game, also any PUG queue would not have to be based on planet claim and thus could all be put together to form games in CW mode but only count towards their faction on one planet attacking and defending. This means that permissible factions can work together and a balance can be found if the Clans or IS have a larger population in that they can attack each other! If such a system were put in place the waiting time for a game would be vastly reduced!).

Wrong. The side with the LEAST number of players in queue dictates the numbers of games.

We have seen the % oscillate between 20% and 80% over 24 hours which says the side with more organized 12-mans (and fewer pugs populating the queue) will win. IS is at disadvantage because so many pugs dilute the effect of 12-mans where as clans benefit from higher ratio of 12-mans to trial mech ratios.

[Apnu]

Mensch, on 27 April 2015 - 11:01 AM, said:

Am I having a logic problem or does this mean that Clan is +600 wins on the challenge? If so, why haven't we taken Tuka 9+ times by now?

Because the tourney rules say that whomever has 51% of the planet when it ends is the winner. Which means the thing will probably be decided in the last hour of the tourney. Everything else is just grinding match points for shinies.

[Lily from animove]

Apnu, on 27 April 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

Because the tourney rules say that whomever has 51% of the planet when it ends is the winner. Which means the thing will probably be decided in the last hour of the tourney. Everything else is just grinding match points for shinies.

and ver ylikely with the IS overhand, if they make ceasfire, the IS will get a few "autowins" on the board by ghostdrop mechanics.

[Lord0fHats]

It might be that points are not awarded for disconnected players.

[BSK]

BSK, on 27 April 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

If it was only one slot you were right.

Apparently this needs a better explanation.

Mensch, you are comparing the percentage of battle slots to the amount of battles won. Matches can have different lengths within one slot. While in 1st slot there is a 30 minute match which ends in a win for the IS; In 2nd slot there could be a 5 minute match of the Clans winning an attack, a 10 minute counter attack of the IS winning, another 5 minute match of the Clans winning an attack and a 5 minute match of the Clans winning a counter attack.
In this example the Clans have won 3 matches and the IS have won 2 matches, but according to the slots it is 50% to 50%.

Btw how did you get the rank of a Galaxy Commander when it still says Rookie above your badge of arms?

[Mensch]

BSK, on 28 April 2015 - 12:07 AM, said:

Btw how did you get the rank of a Galaxy Commander when it still says Rookie above your badge of arms?

"Rookie" denotes forum rank I believe.

[Darwins Dog]

ztac, on 27 April 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

The whole victory thing is a farce anyway , it will all come down to who has the most Units on during the last day and IS are way ahead on that score.... Every match I have dropped into as a PUG with a group of PUGS just gets ROFL stomped by some IS Units or other. This in itself is bad , but add to that the exploits due to poor map making and game mechanics for CW mode , along with over Quirked meta mechs and it is just pathetic and I can see why a lot of people won't go near CW.

It is not just for UNITS and indeed judging by how many PUG people are out there I really don't think it is justified for anyone to say get in a group or don't play.

Indeed PGI should put in a solo queue , which of course the UNIT people don't want as their free kills would vanish!

Let's face it this is the real reason they say it is for groups is in the hope that a solo queue will never materialise!

I wonder how much longer PGI will listen to these people? (It is a good way to kill your own game, also any PUG queue would not have to be based on planet claim and thus could all be put together to form games in CW mode but only count towards their faction on one planet attacking and defending. This means that permissible factions can work together and a balance can be found if the Clans or IS have a larger population in that they can attack each other! If such a system were put in place the waiting time for a game would be vastly reduced!).

This argument again? I will admit that there is a grain of truth to what you say, but it's a small one. Winning is easier when your team works together. That's why they call it teamwork. Too many people flat out refuse to follow another player's plan. It can actually be worse when you play in a unit because those people see the tag and try even harder not to follow a plan.

So you're right, teamwork is OP, and playing with a bunch of lone wolves who refuse to work together is supremely annoying, but that's not the reason why you will never see a solo queue in CW. It's a matter of population.

Not enough units can field a 12 player group, so smaller groups/solo players are necessary to fill the gaps. If you split things up, not only will the groups have a harder time finding games, but so will the solo players. Either they throw out the faction play completely, in which case you just have dropship mode in PUG queues (I'm not totally against that, but I think people will still want to fight for their faction), or you will just have to hope that there are exactly 11 other solo players from your faction on when you want to play. If there's 12 others, then you have to wait. If there's 9 then you have to wait. If there's only 7 on the other side, then you have to wait. You can make it IS vs. Clan which would probably reduce wait times, but then what are you fighting for? If you're not fighting over a planet, then it doesn't really seem to fit with the idea of CW (as least how I see it).

CW isn't (and shouldn't be) exclusively for units, though. It just requires more coordination than a regular game. The level of planning that goes on in most group games I've been in is pretty simple.
"Rally in G7"
"okay advance to H10 along the right side"
"Remember, focus on the legs"
"Focus on Direwolf bravo"
It just takes one person willing to lead and 11 willing to follow. The really good units that practice together a lot will, as I understand it, actually say less on comms, because they have practiced the plans many times before.

The ROFLstomps happen because one team is following a simple plan (like "form a firing line at D7" simple) and the other team is wandering in one at a time, everyone shooting a different target, some people backing up into others, etc. "Lone wolf" solo players don't belong in CW. One player simply cannot carry a team in that mode.

[eSeifer]

Clans fail at math

[Lily from animove]

Darwins Dog, on 28 April 2015 - 05:13 AM, said:

This argument again? I will admit that there is a grain of truth to what you say, but it's a small one. Winning is easier when your team works together. That's why they call it teamwork. Too many people flat out refuse to follow another player's plan. It can actually be worse when you play in a unit because those people see the tag and try even harder not to follow a plan.

So you're right, teamwork is OP, and playing with a bunch of lone wolves who refuse to work together is supremely annoying, but that's not the reason why you will never see a solo queue in CW. It's a matter of population.

Not enough units can field a 12 player group, so smaller groups/solo players are necessary to fill the gaps. If you split things up, not only will the groups have a harder time finding games, but so will the solo players. Either they throw out the faction play completely, in which case you just have dropship mode in PUG queues (I'm not totally against that, but I think people will still want to fight for their faction), or you will just have to hope that there are exactly 11 other solo players from your faction on when you want to play. If there's 12 others, then you have to wait. If there's 9 then you have to wait. If there's only 7 on the other side, then you have to wait. You can make it IS vs. Clan which would probably reduce wait times, but then what are you fighting for? If you're not fighting over a planet, then it doesn't really seem to fit with the idea of CW (as least how I see it).

CW isn't (and shouldn't be) exclusively for units, though. It just requires more coordination than a regular game. The level of planning that goes on in most group games I've been in is pretty simple.
"Rally in G7"
"okay advance to H10 along the right side"
"Remember, focus on the legs"
"Focus on Direwolf bravo"
It just takes one person willing to lead and 11 willing to follow. The really good units that practice together a lot will, as I understand it, actually say less on comms, because they have practiced the plans many times before.

The ROFLstomps happen because one team is following a simple plan (like "form a firing line at D7" simple) and the other team is wandering in one at a time, everyone shooting a different target, some people backing up into others, etc. "Lone wolf" solo players don't belong in CW. One player simply cannot carry a team in that mode.

this the most issue all the big fails have. people come shoot the turrets, the generator, detahball at the gate.
Command for push now is given
Half run in their dead, because the others stay out.

GG Pug fail reason No. 1

When half the firepower wents in at half the total HP, it is suenly 4x as easy to kill the incoming people. Pushes only work together

[Apnu]

Lily from animove, on 27 April 2015 - 11:01 PM, said:

and ver ylikely with the IS overhand, if they make ceasfire, the IS will get a few "autowins" on the board by ghostdrop mechanics.

Time will tell on that. I doubt PGI wants that.