121 replies to this topic

[cSand]

Soy, on 23 June 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:

Eh... that was just a brief exercise for End Crescendo - he hadn't played in a couple months and wanted to 2 man group queue in a unbasic'd new mech.

I was grinding a Mist Lynx and bored out of my mind and decided to humor him. I dunno what he expected after seeing a 6 man of tryhards in min/max builds.

Btw no disrespect to that prem and group, good dudes good players, but they're same kids who got dunked on during poptarting heyday. They know.

After 4 rounds or so of that End got annoyed enough for me to say "are we done yet?"

Btw this has nothing to do at all with the discussion, but since you were on this............

Yea on our last match after we saw you two had split up, End was on their team and we got rick rolled by em


Likewise though, no disrespect. I think the only real downside to playing with those level of players is that you wait 5+ minutes for a match at that time of night... then the actual match isn't even as long as the wait for the match, lol! I shoulda brought out my SCR for those matches I guess

GG's though nonetheless, was nice playin with ya

Edited by cSand, 23 June 2015 - 04:43 PM.

[Soy]

My general rule of thumb is if I'm in a group of less than 4 people, and we're doing group queue, I'm probably alt tabbed more than 50% of any given match. That's how boring it is.

I think those particular rounds you're talking about last night I was the last guy alive all 5 times and suicided/ran OoB all but once.

The ultimate irony is of course, if I'm in a group of more than 4 people, it's most likely a steamroll and I'm alt tabbed more like 90% of the time...

[cSand]

Soy, on 23 June 2015 - 04:50 PM, said:

I think those particular rounds you're talking about last night I was the last guy alive all 5 times and suicided/ran OoB all but once.

lolyes

I was cheering you on

[Stonefalcon]

cSand, on 23 June 2015 - 03:27 PM, said:

So, I played a bunch of games with you last night Soy, both winning and losing but the one deciding factor in all those 4 or 5 matches was the comp guys in smoke jaguar or whatever they were from

... and it would've been those same meta players who whined that the poptart shake was giving them nausea. I say, "If it's giving you nausea, don't bloody use it."

[Tor6]

Poptarting did drive a number of people from the game, but it has little to to with 'people getting their asses handed to them by the meta' or some other garbage. Poptarting killed gameplay because it was -boring- to play, and boring to play against. Every match played out largely the same, and in pub-land it made gameplay frustrating because even if you knew how to counter it, there was no guarantee that your uncoordinated teammates would have the patience or build to actually work against it. Add in that there was at the time little to make JJ-less mechs competitive with ones that had them, and you had a stale uninteresting meta that persisted for a looong time.

And as others have said, once you uninstall a game because playing becomes uninteresting, it takes more than 'fixing' (while breaking jumpjets in the process) one annoying thing to bring people back. Especially when so many of the other problems with the game are still around. :/

There's also the inertia of a social group to think about. I don't know about a lot of you, but I used to play this game with a bunch of my friends. When I and a couple others quit (for a variety of reasons), ALL of them did as well because we wanted to continue all playing the same game. We went on to playing other games that we all play together, and since getting a large group of people to play one game together, let alone go back to one that left a bad taste in a bunch of people's mouths is hard, we probably won't come back. I imagine this is the case for many others.

So no, I do not think the poptarting itself drove a lot of people from the game. I think a plethora of issues (as well as age, the game has been out what? 3 years now?) have led to population decline, and stale metagame (here represented by poptarting) is only one part.

[Soy]

Stonefalcon, on 23 June 2015 - 04:59 PM, said:

... and it would've been those same meta players who whined that the poptart shake was giving them nausea. I say, "If it's giving you nausea, don't bloody use it."

No, stronk players don't whine, they carve new ****. That's the challenge to them. It's not killing a bunch of scrubs.

Stronk players may pipe up once in a while to place stronk anecdotal evidence into perspective but typically it's drowned out by the masses or distorted along the way, kinda like Telephone game w/ kids.

^ Dis phenomenon is seen played out by underhivelings that emulate meta builds or something but don't even know how to properly use it cuz they don't fully understand everting.

So ultimately I don't see meta players talking much cuz they know this stuff, they see it on forums already playing out, they might say this or that but they don't control the narrative. Besides, if they did, everyone would cry elitist favoritism etc particularly in balance, which doesn't trickle down the same way down into underhive Elo as it plays in or near top. An entirely diff question is what would happen if good players actually did dictate balance in this game beyond temporary meta builds and a eternal min/max approach.

Edited by Soy, 23 June 2015 - 05:12 PM.

[MalodorousMonkey]

I don't know that balance choices made a significant difference in population or not. There were quite a few people who got pretty mad about the poptart meta, so I guess it's possible the player population took a decent hit. But really, it's only in recent months that I've noticed a downturn in population.

What I mean by that is that I'll play pub matches back to back and get a lot of the same people in each match.

[Navy Sixes]

Soy, on 23 June 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

I find it interesting how the more the cries and loudspeakers have got what they wanted, the game itself has not gained any popularity as a result of such changes... By poptarting I mean anything, it's a placeholder. This is a philosophical thing it's obviously not all about poptarting or population; now go full context and simmer for a moment in thought.

I think this entire game is nothing more than 12 mechs smashing 12 mechs, + an ridiculously overpriced store. That is only going to hold a finite amount of players' attention for a finite amount of time. I don't know that it has anything to do with whether this has been buffed or that has been nerfed. I think the bigger problem regarding negative population growth is that this game has been propped up by a core of gamers loyal to the IP (both TT and the video games). Given MW:O's aforementioned limits, many of them have hit their peak interest and have or will be moving on. This nerf or that buff may be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but it's kind of like when you decide to quit a job: if you really like the job, it would take more than one or even a few little things to make you quit. Even if you love the franchise, with such a limited scope something else is bound to come along that you'd rather play.

At the same time, the game does nothing to bring in new players. Someone once described the "new player experience" in MW:O as "tying a porkchop around the fat kid's neck and throwing them into a pen of starving wolves." I guess there is hope that the Steam debut will bring an infusion of new faces, and it may for a while, but MW:O isn't going to have many more opportunities to make first impressions.

Most of the arguments for undoing this nerf or that buff are thinly veiled excuses to strengthen a favored style of play, or to discourage a style one finds frustrating to counter. More important for positive population growth than balance considerations is an engaging and well-planned new player experience. Without it, any new players we get through Steam will be driven away by the unshakable feeling that they are little more than grist for the veteran player's mill.

I don't mean to be a bummer; I really want this game to grow and work. I don't know how much longer it will if we don't bring in and retain new players in greater numbers than we are now.

[Stonefalcon]

Soy, on 23 June 2015 - 05:08 PM, said:

No, stronk players don't whine, they carve new ****. That's the challenge to them. It's not killing a bunch of scrubs.

Stronk players may pipe up once in a while to place stronk anecdotal evidence into perspective but typically it's drowned out by the masses or distorted along the way, kinda like Telephone game w/ kids.

^ Dis phenomenon is seen played out by underhivelings that emulate meta builds or something but don't even know how to properly use it cuz they don't fully understand everting.

So ultimately I don't see meta players talking much cuz they know this stuff, they see it on forums already playing out, they might say this or that but they don't control the narrative. Besides, if they did, everyone would cry elitist favoritism etc particularly in balance, which doesn't trickle down the same way down into underhive Elo as it plays in or near top. An entirely diff question is what would happen if good players actually did dictate balance in this game beyond temporary meta builds and a eternal min/max approach.

Are these the same "TOO Stronk" players who are using hacks to get ahead? Don't make me laugh.

[Wintersdark]

My question:

Has population declined at all? Or, are you assuming it did because you see less of the people online you used to? Or maybe because you see the same people in matches?

The former is not an indication of decreasing population, just in players moving on. The later is just an indication of Elo working with players at a higher than average level (and thus fewer to choose from for matches).

I say this because my friends list *always* has 20+ people online, even at the most obscure hours, many, many more at peak times. And I'm neither particularly social nor popular.

I ask these questions, because I keep seeing people claiming a falling population (and indeed, have seen these statements since launch) despite seeing a very wide actual spread of players at all times. Russ has shared event participation numbers a few times in the past, including more than one "we had our highest population online ever today!" announcements fairly recently. None of these things indicate a falling population, so I'm left questioning whether that is truth or simply poor methodology.

Edited by Wintersdark, 23 June 2015 - 05:36 PM.

[Soy]

Stonefalcon, on 23 June 2015 - 05:31 PM, said:

Are these the same "TOO Stronk" players who are using hacks to get ahead? Don't make me laugh.

Oh plox, stoofoo, nothing to do with anything in this convo whatsoever.

[Wintersdark]

I am, to be sure, highly dubious any major population change has correlated to any balance changes in MMO's history. For every change that Billy rages and quits about, Bobby may well start playing again, after all, and someone about to stop playing due to a balance change they don't like is going to stop playing soon anyways for some reason or other. That's not a problem, it's nor AL and natural.

[Soy]

Wintersdark, on 23 June 2015 - 05:36 PM, said:

My question:

Has population declined at all? Or, are you assuming it did because you see less of the people online you used to? Or maybe because you see the same people in matches?

The former is not an indication of decreasing population, just in players moving on. The later is just an indication of Elo working with players at a higher than average level (and thus fewer to choose from for matches).

I say this because my friends list *always* has 20+ people online, even at the most obscure hours, many, many more at peak times. And I'm neither particularly social nor popular.

I ask these questions, because I keep seeing people claiming a falling population (and indeed, have seen these statements since launch) despite seeing a very wide actual spread of players at all times. Russ has shared event participation numbers a few times in the past, including more than one "we had our highest population online ever today!" announcements fairly recently. None of these things indicate a falling population, so I'm left questioning whether that is truth or simply poor methodology.

I see the exact same people at the exact same time of day in the exact same game modes. Consistently. Didn't used to be that way. My Elo back in CB was absolute top, as informed by PGI. I saw more people then compared to now - when I've surely dropped - since all I do is solo queue half ass builds or afk in group or CW nowadays, you'd think my Elo would be pulling in more people from a larger pool.

That makes no sense if pop is up, unless their Elo is insanely good and somehow everytime I play (which is truly all times) the exact same people make weird game session scheduling as well.

If it's poor methodology, then I'd argue removing population gauge in client was poor transparency. So if you take what I just said on faith then you're taking a tweet by a guy selling a product on faith as well. I'm not selling anything. I like this game; have spent money on it. Take from this stuff what you will.

Edited by Soy, 23 June 2015 - 05:44 PM.

[WatDo]

It's just the way balancing works. Can't make all the people happy all the time.

Leave [Poptarting] as is/was, and those players are happy and stay, making those who hate it leave. Take [Poptarting] out and make [Poptarting] lovers leave and keep the other players.

Add [Whatever you want] to the mix to see what i mean. Did nerfing [Poptarting] make some people leave? Probably. Would other players quit if [Poptarting] was left alone? Also probably.

Changes have to be made, people don't always like change though. Has the population declined? I'd say so, back when I first started i always saw new names each match, now I'll see the same people multiple times a day. Maybe I just never paid attention before, I dunno. The game seems to be doing ok enough anyway, and I still enjoy it for the most part.

All i know is it's a "balancing" act to keep players coming back.

/2cents

[Wintersdark]

Soy, on 23 June 2015 - 05:43 PM, said:

I see the exact same people at the exact same time of day in the exact same game modes. Consistently. Didn't used to be that way. My Elo back in CB was absolute top, as informed by PGI. I saw more people then compared to now - when I've surely dropped - since all I do is solo queue half ass builds or afk in group or CW nowadays, you'd think my Elo would be pulling in more people from a larger pool.

That makes no sense if pop is up, unless their Elo is insanely good and somehow everytime I play (which is truly all times) the exact same people make weird game session scheduling as well.

If you see the same people every time you play, regardless of when you play, well... That's very wierd. Because it stands to reason if you play a random times, regardless of population you should see lots of different people because people can't play 24/7 and - as you yourself say - aren't going to have the same messed up schedule.

Quote

If it's poor methodology, then I'd argue removing population gauge in client was poor transparency. So if you take what I just said on faith then you're taking a tweet by a guy selling a product on faith as well. I'm not selling anything. I like this game; have spent money on it. Take from this stuff what you will.

It was poor transparency, but those two things are totally unrelated. And, his statement as to how busy a weekend event is has little bearing on selling a product, but I'm uninterested in arguing that. I'm fine with accepting the statement as being as valid - or not as valid - as your own.

---

I bring this up, because I know for a fact I'm in several widely divergent Elo ranges based on weight class. This was originally by design (I spent a couple months basically tanking my Light Elo a long time ago for an experiment), but also due to being very good at some things, and very bad at others.

I see a very, very wide range of players all the time, and I spend a lot of time looking at this. Not drawing "oh, I saw those two guys last match, it's the same people!" conclusions, mind you, but actually paying attention to all the names and more importantly the different names, not the same ones.

While a given play session will see repeats of the same players if I don't switch weight classes, that's expected behavior. otherwise, though, I see a shocking range of players all the time.


I suspect you do not have, as you think, a crap Elo. I know you're a talented player(having seen you in matches), and even if not meta-whoring it up and playing your hardest, you're going to be substantially better than average players.

See, this is where these "objective" assessments break down. There's a long range of higher-than-average Elo ratings; and thus there's a fair bit of room between the masses (average) and the very top end. Put another way, you're not top end or average. And all along that tail on the bell curve, the player counts are orders of magnetude smaller than the bulk of the Average Folks.

In short, I'm not trying to advance an agenda here, merely saying that my observations are very much different from yours. I see a small group of players when I'm in assaults, but that small group of players involves a lot more "Well Known Names". When I'm in a light? I see NONE of those people, but I do see a vast, vast array of different names.

But then, I'm an objectively bad light pilot.

[Lexx]

Do we really want poptarting again?



Sure poptarting was popular with "some" people. NHUA was popular back in the MW4 days, but that doesn't mean it was a good game mode.

I, for one, think the game is better without the kind of players that would want to "poptart" in MWO.

[Soy]

Wintersdark, on 23 June 2015 - 06:01 PM, said:

If you see the same people every time you play, regardless of when you play, well... That's very wierd. Because it stands to reason if you play a random times, regardless of population you should see lots of different people because people can't play 24/7 and - as you yourself say - aren't going to have the same messed up schedule.

It was poor transparency, but those two things are totally unrelated. And, his statement as to how busy a weekend event is has little bearing on selling a product, but I'm uninterested in arguing that. I'm fine with accepting the statement as being as valid - or not as valid - as your own.

---

I bring this up, because I know for a fact I'm in several widely divergent Elo ranges based on weight class. This was originally by design (I spent a couple months basically tanking my Light Elo a long time ago for an experiment), but also due to being very good at some things, and very bad at others.

I see a very, very wide range of players all the time, and I spend a lot of time looking at this. Not drawing "oh, I saw those two guys last match, it's the same people!" conclusions, mind you, but actually paying attention to all the names and more importantly the different names, not the same ones.

While a given play session will see repeats of the same players if I don't switch weight classes, that's expected behavior. otherwise, though, I see a shocking range of players all the time.


I suspect you do not have, as you think, a crap Elo. I know you're a talented player(having seen you in matches), and even if not meta-whoring it up and playing your hardest, you're going to be substantially better than average players.

See, this is where these "objective" assessments break down. There's a long range of higher-than-average Elo ratings; and thus there's a fair bit of room between the masses (average) and the very top end. Put another way, you're not top end or average. And all along that tail on the bell curve, the player counts are orders of magnetude smaller than the bulk of the Average Folks.

In short, I'm not trying to advance an agenda here, merely saying that my observations are very much different from yours. I see a small group of players when I'm in assaults, but that small group of players involves a lot more "Well Known Names". When I'm in a light? I see NONE of those people, but I do see a vast, vast array of different names.

But then, I'm an objectively bad light pilot.

I'm not sayin I see the exact same people at diff times of day, I'm sayin, whenever I log on it's basically predictable who I'll face at that time of day and in what game mode. Literally, predictable. Not everybody of course, good grief, but a large portion. Even solo queue, particularly if you're dropping within a minute of a round finishing. Get the same 6-10 people in every single round for like, 2 hours. Maybe somebody goes and makes a sandwich and you miss em for like, a round. Or you can wait 5 mins, drop, and get a diff pocket of players.

These sorts of trends were a lot more volatile back in the day, lot more unpredictable.

The only time back in the day when it was similar predictable drops was doing solo event tournies for leaderboards. Then it's eerie, I almost think that's specifically where PGI refines their Elo system.

[Soy]

Bit more on that last post:

When I came back I tried to to tank my heavy elo into the gutter and it's still way too high (or maybe that's the 80% queue being heavy and just ******* up after a 10+ min search), meanwhile I never even had a single Medium with Master unlocked back in the day, but now I've played my Nova so much I see other high top class players when they are dropping in solo queue constantly. Emp, SJ, 228, other Lords, etc. I also get lots of untagged people that sometimes are noteworthy. So that tells me something just from that metric analysis.

PS - this thread isn't about poptarting but it is about population, among other things like balance, what this community actually wants, etc... tarts just a frank example

PPS - lil anecdote for you guys. couple weeks ago before an NBA Finals game, i had like 30 minutes to kill and logged in and joined a group. i don't even know who the people in the group were it was basically random. and so i go, ok, i'll prolly get 2 matches, it's 8:35pm... i guarantee myself i'll see one of the top two tryhard squads out practicing right now. guess what. both matches, i see both groups back to back. that is predictable. it's indicative of a small playerbase.

Edited by Soy, 23 June 2015 - 06:17 PM.

[Koniks]

We seem to have roughly 30,000 active players and peak at about 5,000 on concurrently based on the stats they've published from events, etc. There are a lot more people who've created accounts than that.

[Wintersdark]

Or a small player base in the group queue, Soy. At your elo, even assuming your only in the "above average" category, AND playing in the group queue things are going to be like that.

They were less predictable Back In The Day because we didn't have a group queue.

Even with decent player numbers (and that's a question there - what does that even mean?) the group queue is going to be a fraction of the solo queue. Higher elo group queue an even smaller, subset of that, of course.