35 replies to this topic

[XX Sulla XX]

I personally do not mind how it is now. I am much less worried about the size of the team I face than how good the players are on each side. But if they are going to limit it I would rather have it at 6 than 4.

[Koniks]

Deathlike, on 26 June 2015 - 10:32 AM, said:

I wish it worked like that, but it doesn't.

People that don't stick around tend to have legit reasons about PGI's NPE.

That, too. There's no support for them in-game. And little effort from other players to retain new players and help them up the learning curve. But we also don't have a concerted effort to develop the players who've stuck into good players.

There are units that actively recruit and try to provide some semblance of community. But only a fraction of those are good enough to improve players. And a fraction of that fraction bother to do it.

[Deathlike]

Mizeur, on 26 June 2015 - 11:10 AM, said:

That, too. There's no support for them in-game. And little effort from other players to retain new players and help them up the learning curve. But we also don't have a concerted effort to develop the players who've stuck into good players.

There are units that actively recruit and try to provide some semblance of community. But only a fraction of those are good enough to improve players. And a fraction of that fraction bother to do it.

It takes time and effort to convince someone to not use a certain build (only when the build is ineffective or not built properly - and I don't mean like not using LRMs) or tactic.

Only when the player is receptive to learning is when you can train them effectively.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 June 2015 - 11:16 AM.

[Lugh]

One Medic Army, on 25 June 2015 - 11:31 PM, said:

How about letting 2mans into the Pubbie queue? That fixes the "I can't bring my newbie friend into group queue to train him" issue.

Also stick 12mans in their own matchmaking vs other 12mans only, and limit the group v group queue to say 8man max?

But you just made a no man's land for 4 in a group....*sigh*

[Koniks]

Deathlike, on 26 June 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

It takes time and effort to convince someone to not use a certain build (only when the build is ineffective or not built properly - and I don't mean like not using LRMs) or tactic.

Only when the player is receptive to learning is when you can train them effectively.

Let's be honest, there are a ton of units that can't even figure out that some builds suck.

[Deathlike]

Mizeur, on 26 June 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Let's be honest, there are a ton of units that can't even figure out that some builds suck.

It's good to not be part of those right?

[Revis Volek]

XX Sulla XX, on 26 June 2015 - 11:09 AM, said:

I personally do not mind how it is now. I am much less worried about the size of the team I face than how good the players are on each side. But if they are going to limit it I would rather have it at 6 than 4.

I agree 6 would be better then 4, 4 is too small but 12 is hard to come by these days only because of how few people are playing this game.

3 months ago we couldnt run ONE 12...just too many guys. So i have a feeling if they make the GAME better this will have to get changed again in the future if they limit it too much.

But having your whole team be the same unit should not be a penalty in this game. if it is then what is the point of units at all?

[Chemie]

if you cap groups, you might as well go back to pug and groups mixed in same...no point with 4-6 limit. Two ques with team being unlimited or one queue with limits is only way it makes sense

[One Medic Army]

Lugh, on 26 June 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

But you just made a no man's land for 4 in a group....*sigh*

Um, 3-4 could still get into the normal group queue, I said 8max.

[Kristov Kerensky]

It's funny reading the responses here, after seeing the complaints about how larger groups ruin the game, some from the same folks....

This is why Russ said IF he changes the group que, 4 will be the max. Too many people whining.

[TWIAFU]

Deathlike, on 26 June 2015 - 10:56 AM, said:

It's only going to change the overall message.. "12-mans OP" to "6-mans OP", despite that no large premade is always the same (unless you're like an elite team, and even then those are few and far in between AND they still can be beaten with proper teamwork - which most players/teams usually don't accomplish in general).

Funny how they go from "groups are not fair!" to wanting to take their group out of the group queue and put it in the solo queue.

[Deathlike]

TWIAFU, on 26 June 2015 - 01:11 PM, said:

Funny how they go from "groups are not fair!" to wanting to take their group out of the group queue and put it in the solo queue.

That's a different issue though.

For soloists, trying to train a friend requires use of the group queue.

Part of that problem however is that most soloists don't "group well" with the other groups (doing their own thing), so it becomes very difficult to play in the group queue properly in the first place.

However, it doesn't mean we should be putting 2-man groups in the solo queue either. You really need 3 queue levels to honestly do it...

Solos only (casuals)
Solos+small groups (casuals and semi-hardcore), 2-4 man max
Groups of any size (hardcore), any size

The thing is though, once you have like 4 to 6 people in a group, you're mostly responsible for the success of the group (with the exception where the smaller premades do their own thing, to the team's detriment).

It's not that simple as people make it out to be, and the solutions required needs to be in steps so that people "progress" at their own pace AND recognize the level of teamplay required as things get more difficult.

Of course, there will be some that think they are exceptional in the solo queue, but do terribly in groups... because they never really develop further than what they believe is most successful (at their level of play).

Edited by Deathlike, 26 June 2015 - 01:20 PM.

[Roadkill]

Remember that we're only talking about the PUG queues, not CW.

Solo queue should remain solo only. We had a two-queue (4-man max and 12-man) before and it was terrible. The solo queue was implemented to give solo players someplace where they could escape organized groups, regardless of size.

Allowing partners into the solo queue ruins the solo queue. It makes far more sense to limit group size in the group queue to 4, because larger groups should be playing CW anyway. That's kinda the point of CW, innit?

[Kristov Kerensky]

Roadkill, on 26 June 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

Remember that we're only talking about the PUG queues, not CW.

Solo queue should remain solo only. We had a two-queue (4-man max and 12-man) before and it was terrible. The solo queue was implemented to give solo players someplace where they could escape organized groups, regardless of size.

Allowing partners into the solo queue ruins the solo queue. It makes far more sense to limit group size in the group queue to 4, because larger groups should be playing CW anyway. That's kinda the point of CW, innit?

No, that's not the point of CW, and too many people don't understand that at all. CW is supposed to be where EVERYONE plays the REAL game that is MWO, the Clan Invasion and the House conflicts. The solo/group ques we have outside of CW were supposed to be just place holders until CW was finished, then it would be CW or private matches and that's it.

That's obviously changed because PGI has discovered that the majority of the playerbase is solo players who have no interest in group play nor any desire to be part of a team of any sort. Sad really, but it is what it is and PGI has catered to the solo interest so much that there's really no turning back at this point, solo players make up far too much of the playerbase now to do anything about it.

[Triordinant]

Roadkill, on 26 June 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

Allowing partners into the solo queue ruins the solo queue. It makes far more sense to limit group size in the group queue to 4, because larger groups should be playing CW anyway. That's kinda the point of CW, innit?

Russ Bullock said the same thing 9 months ago.

[Roadkill]

Kristov Kerensky, on 26 June 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

solo players make up far too much of the playerbase now to do anything about it.

You're incorrect if you think that's only true now. It has always been true, it's just that the solo player majority has grown even larger over time.