144 replies to this topic

[omessiaho]

MischiefSC, on 30 May 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Then I realized that it's a horrible game design and every other PvP experience you have that could be defined as 'professional' has a matchmaker/leagues/means of splitting people by skill.

Dude nothing about this game is "professional" and adding a match maker because other games has it is just one of the examples.

MischiefSC, on 30 May 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Chess, being the obvious example.

How about any/all sports? There isn't just one big football group - it's broken up approximately by skill and you play against other teams in your skill bracket and range.

So it works for a one vs one strategy game it will work for a 12vs12 fps? I should just jump off a building, I mean birds fly so I should too. If you are good or bad the system goes out of its way to make sure you don't play with or against people of your skill. That is its intended function!

MischiefSC, on 30 May 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

Want to win more? Get better. All the time, constantly. Keep pushing yourself and doing better and you'll consistently win. Flatten out or play mediocre and you'll be lucky to hit 50%, but at least then you are not a constant dead weight to your team; you're just part of the statistical sea of mediocrity in which the exceptional swim like a dolphin and the terrible flail and drown.

Yeah dude, I'll play with the ******* Rocky theme song. I'll just improve my skills while the entire enemy team pounds my ass while my team is back at spawn drinking tea. Its actually in your best interest not to get better! If you do the MM will try to pair you up with worse and worse players to bring you back down to 50%.

Fleeb the Mad, on 30 May 2015 - 11:39 AM, said:

Also, before you decry the matchmaker invest some time into figuring out how it works. I have. This thread and most complaints are founded on utter misconception of how the system works. High Elo score players aren't made to 'carry' teams, nor does the matchmaker attempt to average team Elo scores with highs and lows. The matchmaker tries to make teams of people with similar scores, and discrepancies happen when it has to borrow people from different pools just to fill the matches.

So it doesn't do this thing except when it does. If it borrows players whats the point? You know what else matches people of similar skill, random teams! It also has the advantage of not taking ten minutes.

Edited by omessiaho, 30 May 2015 - 03:55 PM.

[Stelar 7]

Simple ethical dilemma. Does Elo help more people than it hurts? Hard to say unless someone had access to numbers. However OP is annoyed that it takes a few minutes to find a match. Any data to suggest Elo is the reason? Any data at all?


No?


Proposition rejected, insufficient data.

[Zoid]

Because you'd rather have your games decided by pure RNG? If everyone is in the same queue then you might play 100 games in a row with all terribads. At least right now I know that if I play enough games with people who don't even pull 100 damage, I'll eventually get back to where it's a good fight again.

Seriously...what do you expect is going to happen? Do you really think you'll just get dropped with awesome people every game if there's no MM? That's ridiculous.

Edited by Zoid, 30 May 2015 - 05:27 PM.

[Fleeb the Mad]

omessiaho, on 30 May 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

So it doesn't do this thing except when it does. If it borrows players whats the point? You know what else matches people of similar skill, random teams! It also has the advantage of not taking ten minutes.

Uh, no it wouldn't. That would be because it is...random. It would have the greatest possible difference between the skill level of individual players. Also if I recall correctly the matchmaker in the public queues will time out after 2 minutes, before throwing people into a match of whatever's available. CW is its own animal.

The difference is that the current matchmaker uses a progressively wider envelope when attempting to fill matches. It will always attempt to create a match closest to its parameters, which grow as the timer increases. Things go pear shaped when it times out, because it then mandates a match HAS to happen regardless if it can be properly filled by who is in the queue.

Quote

Yeah dude, I'll play with the ******* Rocky theme song. I'll just improve my skills while the entire enemy team pounds my ass while my team is back at spawn drinking tea. Its actually in your best interest not to get better! If you do the MM will try to pair you up with worse and worse players to bring you back down to 50%.

Again, the matchmaker does not do that. Ideally as your Elo increases you are generally placed with progressively better players. Since that also makes the players on the enemy team better, it makes it harder. In a large enough player pool, your score won't change the overall outcome of matches. In practice the fact that the population isn't unlimited means matches occasionally get borked by having to sacrifice skill matching to get the right mech count.

The biggest misconception is the idea that people's status quo should remain the same, whether they perform well or badly. There's no place where you get to be a rock star or target practice forever. The best thing you can do is, actually, to run a variety of mechs and builds so that you don't become wedded to one overperformer that inflates your score.

People who consistently run the meta in their best mech will eventually wind up in a place where they need it to survive. Elo scores are by class, not by chassis. If anything happens to that chassis or build they'll be in for a world of hurt until their scores level out again, or they find something else that performs just as well.

To conclude, I'd mention that MWO's system currently offers increasing difficulty and challenge to people who consistently perform well. But those who measure themselves by their damage numbers will eventually wind up in a world of frustration if they don't continue to improve as they face tougher opposition. This thread is mostly just a fairly thinly veiled argument against having constraints so that, in theory, some people could continue to reap the biggest numbers against a sea of lessers without having to continue to work at it.

I'd like to challenge the notion of how some people define 'good' in the context of numbers. A high schooler might kick ass in a T-ball game, but that doesn't make them hot **** at baseball.

[Pjwned]

If a new player gets utterly stomped repeatedly then they're not going to learn anything, and then they won't have a chance to get better so they'll just quit instead. What does this accomplish other than turning somebody away from the game completely because they weren't given a fair chance?

Also have to consider the consequences of earning even less c-bills & XP than most people when getting stomped, which means even more tedious grinding to get anywhere and of course that just makes things worse.

Then of course on the other hand there would be (even more) decent players who end up carrying an awful team, and they would likely get frustrated & bored of playing with noobs and/or scrubs and would likely result in even more players quitting.

tl;dr OP and anybody who agrees with them are short sighted and stupid.

SilentWolff, on 29 May 2015 - 09:38 AM, said:

As was mentioned in this thread, you could have a MM based on time played. That's something that actually makes sense.
But the people who say the current MM is needed and is just fine, have totally ignored the issues higher ELO players deal with. Their attitude seems to be, F them, their better than me, so they should suffer the consequences of my $hit play.

If you're so fed up with the matchmaker feel free to never play in solo queue, just go make your own group and play in group queue or even community warfare where there isn't a matchmaker at all.

Edited by Pjwned, 30 May 2015 - 06:07 PM.