29 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

So what your saying Sulla is that ~MS~ shouldn't take their best possible 12 man that's available, but pad it out with a few scrubs that I keep meeting on pug drops that can't shoot straight, but joining Merc Star some how inflates their self worth ?


yeah.. I can see that going down well, with the top teams.

[WarHippy]

What a truly terrible suggestion. I have a bunch of words I would like to share with the OP that would undoubtedly get me banned. Seeing as I do not wish to get banned I will bottle up my feelings shortening my life span due to stress from rage induced tension spasms and sleepless nights. I hope you are happy OP you are literally sending me to an early grave with such thoughts.

[XX Sulla XX]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 May 2015 - 05:49 AM, said:

You are talking group Que and not CW right?

A PUG group should not be spotted anything. I can lose every match and not care. If we had a good match is all I care about, well that and did I pull my weight.

group Que only

KisumiKitsune, on 28 May 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

It's not just an issue of practice, but playing together. It literally can become a throttle of "All my friends are too good, so I can't drop groups with them anymore". Rather than try to give lesser skilled people a better chance against higher-skill people, I think the solution is still a tier system. Higher skill people only play higher skill people. Put release valves on it like 3/3/3/3 if needed, but every bit helps. This isn't something they could do with the current player base, as simply dropping consecutively might assure you simply by the tendency to see repeated names. Then there's the Tukkayid and previous tournaments that had participant numbers. ELO has a long way to go before worry about sectioning people based on it. I don't recall if there's even been a definitive answer given as to whether this game's calculation of pilot ELO is accurate or fair, much less trying to build combinations off it.

It's something to worry about after Steam release, as far as I'm concerned. The only reasonable answer I can see to the handling of this is to restrict people to their teirs, again like League. Maybe less, maybe more, but I should never, ever, ever drop in the same match as someone painted olive green. To get a wide enough player pool to be able to split the base, we need more people.

Then there's the question of how quickly would the Steam release give a real contribution to the "serious population" in terms of how fast people can possibly level, buy and practice in 'mechs regardless of a pilot's natural aptitude, but that's a completely different subject on the Paulconomy. Baseline is that after Steam release, it might still be half a year to a year before we really see people who come in from that client adding significant population to the upper echelons.

TL;DR - I think just about everything about ELO is FUBAR, and most comprehensive solution is impractical because population. I don't have one, but it's not this suggestion.

Thing is only a tiny tiny number of people are at the very top of the Elo range. And those are people that play with other top Elo players. Think SJR and EMP.

Wintersdark, on 28 May 2015 - 07:10 AM, said:

My response remains exactly the same. You can't punish players for getting good.

Its still a bad idea, even if it only hurts a small subset of players.

The only players really effected are those at the very very top. These are the same players asking for 4 man limit. For the rest of the mid range Elo players and low Elo players 95+% of the players it would have no effect on making groups.

Almond Brown, on 28 May 2015 - 09:49 AM, said:

Considering that each player has 4 elo's, one for each weight class (L-M-H-A) we can assume that the top players can pick any weight class in their stables and remain in a high ELO state. Whereas, a relatively new player, who just switched weight class, starting a new set of Mechs to Master, can go from a Fair/Middle (elited weight set) to a Low (starter) elo in 1 Drop and is basically starting over as far as ELO rating is concerned.

Thus any elo system will have to deal with that every Match, regardless if the same players comes right back in (except the long time players with fully kitted Mech Bays).

What truly matters on any group combination, and is easily seen in PUG play, is a willingness, from the outset of the Match, to be a participant and add your armor and guns to the "collective" fight.

We don't know our elo's but it becomes very obvious, very early on, in any PUG Match whether you have a Team, or a rabble of Rambo's without a clue. Group sizes, below the full 12 man level, down to, say the 8-man level, do not guarantee success.

Although a silly notion, I would rather fight with 11 PUG's with purpose, than 11 higher elo ranked players who all have "Rambo" complexes. But that is just me.

P.S. The MWO MM has been working pretty good of late. Decent PUG wait times and mostly decent fights. :]

Well what you describe are actions related to Elos. Better players tend to get into positions to shoot early on in the game.

Cathy, on 28 May 2015 - 09:55 AM, said:

So what your saying Sulla is that ~MS~ shouldn't take their best possible 12 man that's available, but pad it out with a few scrubs that I keep meeting on pug drops that can't shoot straight, but joining Merc Star some how inflates their self worth ?


yeah.. I can see that going down well, with the top teams.

Many players from top teams are already talking about getting limits of teams of 4. And while ~MS~ does have some good players I think you might be surprised at how many could still fit in a group if the system is setup right.

WarHippy, on 28 May 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

What a truly terrible suggestion. I have a bunch of words I would like to share with the OP that would undoubtedly get me banned. Seeing as I do not wish to get banned I will bottle up my feelings shortening my life span due to stress from rage induced tension spasms and sleepless nights. I hope you are happy OP you are literally sending me to an early grave with such thoughts.

Well that was my intenetion all along haha. But no I think you might be thinking it would be much worse than it would be. Very very very very few people in this game have really high Elos. Most are in the big bell curve hump in the middle. It would really only effect a tiny number of players trying to make groups. And it would help a very large number of players not having to face super teams they have no chance of winning against.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 28 May 2015 - 12:10 PM.

[TercieI]

Cathy, on 28 May 2015 - 09:55 AM, said:

So what your saying Sulla is that ~MS~ shouldn't take their best possible 12 man that's available, but pad it out with a few scrubs that I keep meeting on pug drops that can't shoot straight, but joining Merc Star some how inflates their self worth ?


yeah.. I can see that going down well, with the top teams.

That's actually kinda how MS does it already. They have a lot of good players and they have a lot more average players. Not every -MS- tag is a star, by a long stretch. It works quite well for them.

Of course, that's mostly CW, where Elo doesn't apply anyway.

Edited by Terciel1976, 28 May 2015 - 12:56 PM.

[Wintersdark]

XX Sulla XX, on 28 May 2015 - 12:16 PM, said:

Many players from top teams are already talking about getting limits of teams of 4. And while ~MS~ does have some good players I think you might be surprised at how many could still fit in a group if the system is setup right.

The reality here is that the majority of comp players are ultimately pretty average. Even on the top teams, most aren't incredibly good.

What makes comp players win is teamwork, pure and simple. Teamwork is vastly more influential to winning matches than personal skill or mech choice. Players who work well together, communicate well, and are well led will win matches over those who aren't, even if they're actually pretty bad at the game.

(And no, I'm not saying anyone in particular is bad here, merely emphasising that teamwork and communication is vastly more important than anything else)

Quote

Well that was my intenetion all along haha. But no I think you might be thinking it would be much worse than it would be. Very very very very few people in this game have really high Elos. Most are in the big bell curve hump in the middle. It would really only effect a tiny number of players trying to make groups. And it would help a very large number of players not having to face super teams they have no chance of winning against.

You don't get it both ways. Either it affects very few people - and thus even fewer matches, because they're grouped; or it affects more people and thus a noteworthy number of matches.

[XX Sulla XX]

Wintersdark, on 28 May 2015 - 02:26 PM, said:

The reality here is that the majority of comp players are ultimately pretty average. Even on the top teams, most aren't incredibly good.

What makes comp players win is teamwork, pure and simple. Teamwork is vastly more influential to winning matches than personal skill or mech choice. Players who work well together, communicate well, and are well led will win matches over those who aren't, even if they're actually pretty bad at the game.

(And no, I'm not saying anyone in particular is bad here, merely emphasising that teamwork and communication is vastly more important than anything else)

Yes most comp teams are really not all that good. Even the team work is not great. So as I was saying this would not effect that many people if adjusted correctly. But it would help.

[DrStober]

I can see two behaviors that might arise as a result of this system. First, ELO farming or tanking or whatever. Basically, intentionally going a losing to lower your ELO. This way you can still have the same accounts play together.

Second would be an increase in alts/throwaways. Yeah, managing the inventory might be hard, but why not start a new account just to get the newbie ELO account with the veteran player skill behind it.

Any ideas on how to combat either of these?

[XX Sulla XX]

DrStober, on 28 May 2015 - 05:34 PM, said:

I can see two behaviors that might arise as a result of this system. First, ELO farming or tanking or whatever. Basically, intentionally going a losing to lower your ELO. This way you can still have the same accounts play together.

Second would be an increase in alts/throwaways. Yeah, managing the inventory might be hard, but why not start a new account just to get the newbie ELO account with the veteran player skill behind it.

Any ideas on how to combat either of these?

I dont think you would see any of that really DR. Because for most people the game would not change at all. The only thing they would notice is less games against the top 5 teams or so in large groups. And from what I can tell most top teams are fine with this or some kind of limit to large groups of top players.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 28 May 2015 - 07:07 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ok Thanks.
No.

Good teamwork should not be hampered.

[topgun505]

Styrofoam-tier! LMAO. Awesome.

KisumiKitsune, on 27 May 2015 - 11:08 PM, said:

Meanwhile, all the LRM boats and olive green 'mechs can teamkill each other by accident in Styrofoam-tier and have nobody to blame but themselves and team mates.