144 replies to this topic

[warner2]

I remember the days of no MM, 4-man teams with no MM, and on top of that the whole synch-dropping thing.

Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

Cause like I said I want to face any and every player in this game. The Match maker pretty much does not allow that. heck On any given night there can be 12 of my friends in game and I just about never drop with them in PUG.

As to teh OP he is my hero cause he spoke his mind and to hell with what anyone thinks. I can respect that. Is that a problem for you Warner?

Basically, I just don't believe MM is having much of an effect on middle of the road players. On the solo queue the range of players in one game is pretty massive and you will literally see objectively some of the best players in the game alongside some terrible players. On the group queue the MM is juggling so many variables (such as group size, 3/3/3/3) that the Elo range apparently is even larger (the MM is trying to piece together a 12 in a 3/3/3/3 from all of the odd shaped groups queueing up). In CW there is no MM. I don't see how MM affects the average player in all honesty.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

I'd just like to see an attempt to use a system that is actually designed for group versus group matchmaking. Elo's system was designed for one-on-one games specifically. Using it in a format like this causes.... issues.

Quickdraw Crobat, on 26 May 2015 - 09:47 PM, said:

Elo (it's only one capital because it's named after the man who created it- his last name was Elo) is a system that basically uses whether or not you won or lost a match against someone with a comparable Elo rating to determine whether or not you should be rated higher. It was originally designed for one-on-one competitive gaming, which means that any attempt to use it in a team game environment (such as this), especially one where you don't typically have the same team every single time you play (such as this) is kludgy at best.

The basic concept of Elo is as follows:

When you go up against an opponent, the system predicts that you will win (your Elo rating is higher than your opponent) or lose (your Elo rating is lower than your opponent). If you do as the system predicts, it assumes that your rating is accurate and you do not undergo a change in rating (or you undergo a small change in Elo rating). If you do not do as it predicts, then your rating drops (if you lost to someone with a lower rating) or rises (if you won against someone with a higher rating). This is intended to continue until you are breaking even overall- a roughly 1:1 win-loss ratio against people with a similar rating to yourself.

MWO has a number of serious breakdown points for the system that make it imperfect.

First of all, luck is a significant part of this game. The Elo system was conceived for chess, where the only luck at levels of play where ranking matters is 'does this opponent know the strategy I'm using?' Since there is considerably more luck in this game than that, the system breaks down a little.

Second of all, you are on a team. This means that your skill and the skill of your individual opponent are very much not the only factors of skill involved in a win or a loss- there are 22 other players in the match at the same time, and you're all interacting and cross-interfering in that competition of skill.

Thirdly, the Elo system as applied in this game doesn't match only players within a narrow tolerance against each other. Using a very wide-tolerance 'Elo bucket' (and one that gets wider if it cannot find enough players in the right Elo bracket), the game system assembles two teams with relatively close Elo totals. That means that you could have a team of six people at the top of your Elo bracket and the other six at the bottom. This could, theoretically, be a very big skill gap. The Elo ratings are not available for perusal nor does anyone outside PGI actually know where the ends of the brackets are, so it's impossible to say for certain.

Fourth, when the Elo system for this game rates you, it gives you four different ratings- one for each weight class of 'mech you can pilot. This means that if you are used to, for instance, close-combat high-tonnage assaults and then you buy a brand new Stalker that you kit out for long-range combat, you're dropping against the same grade of people as you do in your close-combat assaults, regardless of the fact that you're not driving a 'mech you've got efficiencies in, it's not put together to function like the other assaults you're used to piloting, and it's set up for a completely different method of function.

Fifth, the Elo system does not discriminate your rating solo from your rating in a group. This means that if you have a high rating within your bracket and your group members have a high rating within the same bracket, you can expect to have much of the rest of your team consist of low-bracket players. You can also expect that you might get bumped up into the next bracket up to fill an 'Elo hole' and wind up dropping alongside people theoretically much better than you against a whole team composed of people who are theoretically better than you. This also means that if you drop exclusively in a group for a while and thanks to coordination your team does well, when you go back to solo you could wind up facing people in a higher bracket than you're used to dropping against solo, which can screw you up royally, as their behaviors may well be entirely different, regardless of whether or not they are actually better players.

Finally, the Elo system cannot in any way account for the fact that the majority of those who drop in groups are members of mercenary or loyalist outfits or clan groups and are often expected by said groups to be competent on a competitive level, even if the 'mechs they're dropping in right now are 'nonserious' builds that aren't competitive-style.

.......

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The way groups are formed against each other does need a tweak, but we shouldn't get rid of matchmaker, unless you are asking for a Lobby system to form matches.


And if Elo scores remain, I'd at least want them to have separate sets of scores for Solo and Group queue, if we cannot have a score for each mech variant.

[Shredhead]

Aphoticus, on 29 May 2015 - 09:55 AM, said:

Aside from Ping, Low FPS, and HSR.

A couple of things come to mind.

How does a bad player get good without someone better to fight?

It's not like they don't have to fight better players now. It's just that their enemies aren't usually Level 100 if they're at like level 20, their enemies are more likely in a range of 5-40. If you fight too hard enemies you are not able to improve because you have to take little steps on the way up. If you face enemies that are too hard you can't even figure out which steps you have to take to defeat them, because it's too much at once.

Quote

How does a good player get better without a good player to fight?

Exactly.

Quote

Does a good player start to lose their edge fighting bad players?

Yes this does happen. It happened to me before and it frustrated me to no end.

Quote

Is it always just the player that makes the difference?

No, but he's the main factor.

Quote

Is there something to say for the first 25 games, 40 hours - arbutrary number/time difference?

More like the first 500 games, and even after that it can be rough for some people.

Quote

How does one honestly, thoughtfully, and without bias answer these questions from a programmatic perspective, I might add?

One can only try.

Quote

And, it dawned on me, while re-reading this, I kept using player, singular (shrug).

Doesn't matter, I think I understood.

[FupDup]

I found a logic contradiction. Here is your first sentence:

SilentWolff, on 29 May 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

That's right, I said it. This is a PvP game after all. You play to win and test your skill against your enemy, so why are we hand holding the bads that complain they can't compete?

Now let's look at a later sentence:

SilentWolff, on 29 May 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

...
Why should I have to be in a group of 6 or more to compete because the MM thinks I should be able carry the whole team while leveling a non elited, non meta mech?
...

So you complain about people having their hands held, then you complain about the MM wanting you to carry. If you practiced what you preached, you really wouldn't have any right to complain about having to carry. You would have to git gud and deal with it. Carry harder. You want Darwinism instead of a MatchMaker? This is exactly what it looks like.


Also, do keep in mind that removing the MM would more likely than not INCREASE the number of "bads" on your team, because they have the largest population of any demographic. Thus, you're more likely to encounter them if the game just picks the first random players that are available.

Edited by FupDup, 29 May 2015 - 10:14 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

I do not know if the best player against a new player in a trial mech is really all that great a distance.

If I scaled the disparity between 20 being the best and 0 being the worse, sure, utter unknowing new players dropping for the first time in a mech with only the thought, "I wonder if WASD are the movement keys, and the first mouse button is the fire button," being 0-1, and the best being 19-20; I would venture to say that most players... The Majority, are between 8-14 (typical D20 Bell Curve).

Which means for most of the players in this game, there is a mean of 6 levels of distance.

And as the bell curve reaches these extreme ends, you have a hand-full of players that equate to these levels.

I postulate that it is not the individual so much as the team dynamic that plays the heavier role, and that is the reason for the match maker, as randomness might reach these mediums less often resulting in huge margins of disparity more often.

"The experience of the many outweigh the tears of the few" - Russism.

Edited by Aphoticus, 29 May 2015 - 10:28 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

warner2, on 29 May 2015 - 10:02 AM, said:

I remember the days of no MM, 4-man teams with no MM, and on top of that the whole synch-dropping thing.


Basically, I just don't believe MM is having much of an effect on middle of the road players. On the solo queue the range of players in one game is pretty massive and you will literally see objectively some of the best players in the game alongside some terrible players. On the group queue the MM is juggling so many variables (such as group size, 3/3/3/3) that the Elo range apparently is even larger (the MM is trying to piece together a 12 in a 3/3/3/3 from all of the odd shaped groups queueing up). In CW there is no MM. I don't see how MM affects the average player in all honesty.

I'm there in the middle of the pack. maybe a bit below it. I don't even drop with any of my fellow Lawmen when I PUG. So no, we don't see the elite and boot players. MM does a pretty good job separating those players out of my game.

In CW I see just how "good" I really am, and it tells me I need a lot of work.

[Apnu]

Mikros04, on 29 May 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

Good ideas in this thread, who doesn't enjoy stroking their fragile little epeen by blowing up noobs in stock mechs eh? If we stroke enough possibly these participation trophy babies will stop playing altogether. Who needs new players anyways, this game will live forever!

Double plus good on the sarcasm. New players and money to make server rent is OP.

[Gyrok]

SilentWolff, on 29 May 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

That's right, I said it. This is a PvP game after all. You play to win and test your skill against your enemy, so why are we hand holding the bads that complain they can't compete?
I can see a separate queue for the first 25 games for your cadet bonus, but after that, the big boy pants need to be put on.
For me, the biggest issue is you actually punish the higher ELO players.
Why should I have to wait 10 minutes in the group queue to get a game?
Why should I have to be in a group of 6 or more to compete because the MM thinks I should be able carry the whole team while leveling a non elited, non meta mech?
Why does the MM pit groups of 2 and 3 high ELO players against 8, 10 or 12 man comp teams? And how is getting rolled by those group of comp teams any different than a new player getting rolled by veteran players?

So yeah, the MM needs to go.
/rant off

LOL!!! MM?

Wait...were they serious about there actually being a MM?

It was my impression that everybody was put into a queue where the server took a random amount of time between 3-10 minutes to put the most lopsided possible groups together in the hopes of trolling the playerbase...

[Joseph Mallan]

Mikros04, on 29 May 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

Good ideas in this thread, who doesn't enjoy stroking their fragile little epeen by blowing up noobs in stock mechs eh? If we stroke enough possibly these participation trophy babies will stop playing altogether. Who needs new players anyways, this game will live forever!

We need new players not folks who cannot understand that they will not always win.

[WonderSparks]

Well, "a matchmaker has no place in a game like this" might be a bit of a stretch.
The current matchmaker, however, in all its wisdom, could use a redraw. Nine times out of ten (while I was still able to play live games) I recall the matches being pretty much one-sided, often in favor of my opposition but sometimes in favor of my own team.

Now, I cannot speak for everyone, but there are certainly those of us who do not like being on either side of that fence. It is just not fun or a challenge. (Not that I always want a challenge, usually just the fun factor)
And as it is, the matchmaker kind of has a hard time providing a decently level playing field. (I know what some will say: "'kind of'? Are you for real?" Just bear with me) This is something that would most likely benefit from a change.

Just how to make it work? Beats me. I am not skilled in that area. Just so long as, one day, we can actually enjoy our experiences.

Roadkill, on 29 May 2015 - 09:52 AM, said:

...I'm consistently amazed by people who can't seem to remember what it was like back then.

Some of us might not have been around long enough to remember that. It is kind of like asking someone my age what life was like back in the '60's.

[Apnu]

I get caught in Elo hell, usually when driving a mech I'm really good at and there aren't enough players in my Elo bracket to even out the teams. So I wind up on a team where I'm trying to carry the assault lance with a Wolverine.

The MM, needs work, this is true. But the game is suffering from population decline it seems and that's going to make it harder for the MM to make a match and start a game. It also doesn't help that the public queue servers require 3/3/3/3 match making and since 35-35% of the game's population preferrers heavy mechs, that requirement affects MM, Elo, and time to find a game.

My point is, this issue is part of a confluence of events affecting the game.

[ztac]

Troll? The matchmaker in the game is awful and thus you have bad games. If you want to drive away even more people then fine they can go ahead and do what you suggest!

[Gut]

I don't understand how pushing everyone to the middle is good for anyone. Allow the high tier players to play each other, and the low tier players to play each other. That's what MM needs to do. Whatever the top 24 elo in the queue are every 3 minutes, they're matched together. Go down the list from there.

[Apnu]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 May 2015 - 10:37 AM, said:

We need new players not folks who cannot understand that they will not always win.

I think he was being sarcastic, at least that's how I read it. His comment is pretty over the top, if he's dead serious, then I'm a little scared for the future. Because that much myopic obtuseness will doom the planet.

[Gut]

Sry for double post but can't edit in mobile apparently, also separate queue by chassis.

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

FupDup, on 29 May 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

I found a logic contradiction. Here is your first sentence:




Now let's look at a later sentence:

So you complain about people having their hands held, then you complain about the MM wanting you to carry. If you practiced what you preached, you really wouldn't have any right to complain about having to carry. You would have to git gud and deal with it. Carry harder. You want Darwinism instead of a MatchMaker? This is exactly what it looks like.


Also, do keep in mind that removing the MM would more likely than not INCREASE the number of "bads" on your team, because they have the largest population of any demographic. Thus, you're more likely to encounter them if the game just picks the first random players that are available.

I see no contradiction. We all love mechs and if a competitive player plays enough meta practicing with his team-mates stomping you can rely on mm to retaliate when taking out that brand new medium mech to solo queue. I see three reasons.

1) Mixed elo with group and solo, these two are two different worlds. It is not natural elo rise rise considering solo queue.

2) Bad game balance and double basics. Seriously, double basics should be removed from the game for two reasons; TTK decrease and putting new mechs on more equal ground. Quirks make this even worse.

3) Being used to organised team play. Pugs are definitely not organised most of the time and do not understand the importance of positioning.

There was some talk reverting the MM for public queue back to groups of four and tbh I'm all for it. It expands the pool greatly and will result in better match quality. Drop the choice of mode and it gets even better.

[Deathlike]

SilentWolff, on 29 May 2015 - 08:58 AM, said:

That's right, I said it. This is a PvP game after all. You play to win and test your skill against your enemy, so why are we hand holding the bads that complain they can't compete?
I can see a separate queue for the first 25 games for your cadet bonus, but after that, the big boy pants need to be put on.
For me, the biggest issue is you actually punish the higher ELO players.
Why should I have to wait 10 minutes in the group queue to get a game?
Why should I have to be in a group of 6 or more to compete because the MM thinks I should be able carry the whole team while leveling a non elited, non meta mech?
Why does the MM pit groups of 2 and 3 high ELO players against 8, 10 or 12 man comp teams? And how is getting rolled by those group of comp teams any different than a new player getting rolled by veteran players?

So yeah, the MM needs to go.
/rant off

I feel you bro, but I would normally just dispute some of your points because there are some problems with them... and that's just a PITA. I'd rather just suggest an alternative solution...


In other games, there is a "casual queue" and a "serious business" queue.

The casual queue should have groups of 6 (or maybe 4) or less. This is the queue where newbies are to train/learn or for elite players to derp with some crazy build and not be trying to roll people here (not that they won't try to).

Elo is still calculated, BUT NOT USED for matchmaking. It's there for "reward adjustments", primarily in the form of C-bill rewards adjustments. If you seen often there with a high Elo, it would "dock your pay". Also, this mode will be tracked on higher Elo players if they are dropping there often (probably a 3:1 ratio of serious-to-casual queue usage - the ratio can be adjusted as necessary).

Probably the only necessary adjustment is forcing weight class matching (some form of 3/3/3/3), but that's it.

The "serious business" queue has premades of all sizes (including solo), and is "no holds barred". A C-bill reward is built in (+50k or +15% of gained C-bills or something like that). You can futz around between running Steiner lances or all squirrels (although there may need to be some restrictions I guess, but go figure as to what they are) and there should be a "underdog bonus" calculated by the players Elo if a team that is decidedly "worse" than the opposing team and provided with say a +15% C-bill bonus or scaled to the "difficulty" of the opfor. Good teams roll quickly anyways, but you gotta give the "worse off team" a reason to keep playing.


The separation of competitive/good players and new players is required. As the new player population goes through a revolving door in this game, we need some form of separation... whether by matchmaker or by queue types, it has to be done. Otherwise, we're allowing to scare people out of this game... let alone CW.

[AccessTime]

I agree, but I also don't believe the game as described would be commercially viable. But if I could make any battletech game and didn't need to worry about profit, that's how I'd run it too. But the reality is that, you cannot have a game that supports only the interests of the top players b'cos there will be no middle or bottom players to profit off. The main problem with modern games is this is almost always an exponential curve. What I mean is, you might have 100 top-level players, 1000 mid-level players, and 10,000 bottom-level players.

[Burktross]

Roadkill, on 29 May 2015 - 09:52 AM, said:

Which will be immediately followed by half the player base after they get ROFLstomped continuously for a couple of days.

The matchmaker isn't perfect, but it's vastly better than the free-for-all we had before it existed. I'm consistently amazed by people who can't seem to remember what it was like back then.

QFT.
I'm sorry that you have to carry us Steering Wheel Underhive Participation Trophy crowds, OP.
I agree that the matchmaker is not perfect, but outright removing it is not the way to go. CS:GO has a decently well balanced approach to ranking and MM, if you'd like to look it up.

FupDup, on 29 May 2015 - 10:13 AM, said:

I found a logic contradiction. Here is your first sentence:




Now let's look at a later sentence:

So you complain about people having their hands held, then you complain about the MM wanting you to carry. If you practiced what you preached, you really wouldn't have any right to complain about having to carry. You would have to git gud and deal with it. Carry harder. You want Darwinism instead of a MatchMaker? This is exactly what it looks like.


Also, do keep in mind that removing the MM would more likely than not INCREASE the number of "bads" on your team, because they have the largest population of any demographic. Thus, you're more likely to encounter them if the game just picks the first random players that are available.

Also QFT.