523 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

From Zeece's excellent Town Hall notes:

Zeece, on 25 June 2015 - 04:32 PM, said:

#East Indy - Recently you said on Twitter that you "personally" would love to see the group queue limited to 4 players in a party. Do you have a plan to implement the limit of 4 potentially in CW?

* Not at this time. 'Majority' of vocal players still want to play with large groups. Doesn't understand how its fun for stomping solos and small groups but that's how it is. BUT 6% of groups are 6- 10 ... Less than 1 % 11 - 12 93% are groups of 4 or less. Need to revaluate in the future to provide opportunities for both small and large groups

First, let's acknowledge that Russ underestimates how much hardcore fans enjoy coordinated 12-man games, as opposed to playing the matchmaking lottery where your teammates can be anything from veteran players to single dads letting their kids play while they're making macaroni & cheese. It's probably not so much about the desire to stomp small groups, it's probably more about the joy of having a competent team working together.

Even though I'm a dedicated pugger, I have played enough group matches to get why some people almost exclusively play with large groups from their own units.

Here's my question:
Do you think it's good for the longevity of MWO to keep the big groups playing with the small groups? What if groups with more than 6 members were only allowed in CW, for example. This would certainly make a lot of hardcore MWO fans ragequit and stop spending money on the game. Some of which are most likely whales who have spent hundreds of dollars. But if you're going to be real cynical about this - is it worth it to sacrifice those players, in order to make the group queue more accessible to new players?

93% of groups are 4 players or less! Less than 1% of players in the group queue are 10- or 12-man groups.

Let's face it, a lot of people have tried to introduce their friends to the game by teaming up in the group queue, and have failed miserably because matchmaker puts them up against 6-12 man groups of veterans in hyper pimped Clan mechs, roflstomping and tea-bagging them in less than 3 minutes every time. We should all acknowledge that the new player experience in the group queue is horrible.

So what's your solution? Keep the status quo? Move bigger groups to CW? Maybe create some sort of absolute barrier for the matchmaker, preventing 5-12-man groups from ever getting matched up against low Elo players?

Let's just pretend we (the players) had the ability to solve this problem, for the sake of discussion.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 26 June 2015 - 02:03 AM.

[FupDup]

In theory, I think the long-term issue is just player skill mismatching rather than premade size.

For example, let's assume that we have a 12-man with a PowerLevel of 9000 per player. Let's give that 12-man a trio of 4-mans to fight against, each of which also have a PowerLevel of 9000 per player. I would assume that the probability of either side winning would be reasonably similar.

The reason this isn't working out is because the MM currently can't really find enough people of similar skill as everybody in that 12-man, so the MM is forced to take lesser players for the red team instead. It's overloaded. Thus, we get the stomp stereotype.

[Deathlike]

I'm just going to say that if you can't PUG in big groups, this game will not recover from this exodus.

I have a suggestion in CW to "break" the team sizes down (to accommodate CW activity) in some suggestion/criticism thread, but at this point, the problem is that the PGI's NPE is just so bad, it's hard to get people up to speed reasonably on the various things in the game.

[Wintersdark]

FupDup, on 25 June 2015 - 10:42 PM, said:

In theory, I think the long-term issue is just player skill mismatching rather than premade size.

For example, let's assume that we have a 12-man with a PowerLevel of 9000 per player. Let's give that 12-man a trio of 4-mans to fight against, each of which also have a PowerLevel of 9000 per player. I would assume that the probability of either side winning would be reasonably similar.

The reason this isn't working out is because the MM currently can't really find enough people of similar skill as everybody in that 12-man, so the MM is forced to take lesser players for the red team instead. It's overloaded. Thus, we get the stomp stereotype.

No.

Karl said even at comparable skill levels, there was a dramatic, measurable increase in win rates with larger groups. To the point where he seriously was looking at applying a group size Elo modifier.

[Sarlic]

Quote

BUT 6% of groups are 6- 10 ... Less than 1 % 11

Our 'majority' competitive players screamers.

Edited by Sarlic, 25 June 2015 - 11:25 PM.

[kesmai]

You can not balance the accumulated skill of a group. Experienced and skilled players have other experienced and skilled players on their friends list with whom they team up or form a unit. reStRicting them might make them leave or play less. I am still thinking that the 12 mans and 6+ groups are a part of the game that is necessary. Who do you improve whEn the odds are completely evened out. Even if you restrict the queue to just 4 man groups there will be obvious skill differences and this discussion will start once again.

[LordNothing]

they really need to roll out leagues for the steam release. the influx of new players should make it possible (assuming they dont loose the ones they have now). you really need this wherever you encourage an esports environment. you dont put highschool football players against the nfl, otherwise you get what cw is now. games that dont test the good players and discourage the bad ones. we may not have the player base to do a dozen leagues, maybe 3 or 4, where adjacent league play is allowed.

[kesmai]

It is called solaris. We need that. Including the fact that a player on solaris is not availabe for cw. Infact the solo and group queue should be eliminated and solaris arena play should be done instead. For real warfare there would be cw. So either pLAy cw or arena with a few days to switch between those modes.

[The Mech behind you]

It's okay to PUG in 12v12 as long as the maps are big enough. But the problem is many solo maps aren't big enough for a 12v12. Thankfully, PGI started to redo those maps. We get a bigger River City soon. Next map will be Forest Colony which hopefully will get bigger, too.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 25 June 2015 - 11:22 PM, said:

No.

Karl said even at comparable skill levels, there was a dramatic, measurable increase in win rates with larger groups. To the point where he seriously was looking at applying a group size Elo modifier.

AFAIK, before Karl left... there is supposedly some modifier based on group size the alters the Elo value of the collect group (group weighing).

I doubt it was perfect or accurate, but it's there.

[Sarlic]

Deathlike, on 25 June 2015 - 11:51 PM, said:

AFAIK, before Karl left... there is supposedly some modifier based on group size the alters the Elo value of the collect group (group weighing).

I doubt it was perfect or accurate, but it's there.

I miss Karl.
Can't blame him for accepting a better offer in his career.

[H I A S]

Groups of 2-4 Players in the Soloqueue. Only allow 8 or 12men Groups and drop them against other 8 or 12men.

[C E Dwyer]

I don't think its the size of the group that's the issue with balance, I think its the miss match of skill and spread the match making system allows.

If I lost the ability to drop in 12 a side matches ( I don't count CW, because its not a real 12 a side as it has respawn, to compensate for bad play like most other PvP games, to call it hard core, while you get four chances is stupid) I'd never spend another penny on this product after July.

This is just another example of it not being the solo pug that causes problems with this games development, but the small group.

Its not fair we can't compete with pre mades, its not fair we have to co ordinate with another small group, we want the game to be built around our little coterie.

[LordNothing]

kesmai, on 25 June 2015 - 11:43 PM, said:

It is called solaris. We need that. Including the fact that a player on solaris is not availabe for cw. Infact the solo and group queue should be eliminated and solaris arena play should be done instead. For real warfare there would be cw. So either pLAy cw or arena with a few days to switch between those modes.

solaris is a game mode, not a difficulty setting.

[Ursh]

It would probably encourage me to group up more often.

I almost exclusively pug. Played in a unit for about 2 years of my MWo experience, and even then we didn't have 12 people online that much.

I prefer a more casual style of play, and it appears I'm not alone. I like 4 man groups, but not really much bigger than that, because I hate waiting on people to fiddle around in the mechlab and stuff.

Edited by Ursh, 26 June 2015 - 12:44 AM.

[Carrioncrows]

Honestly I am not a huge fan of 12 man anything.

Not because I don't like the idea of 12 mans, but what appeals to me about 12 mans is more along the lines of 3 teams of 4 fighting another 3 teams of 4.

But it's never like that nor will it be.

As such I think 12 man's simply put are a bad thing because it has sky rocketed the the time to kill. 8 mans were much more balanced and now with 24 people in a single match people are once again calling for the game / weapons to be balanced.

Personally I think 12 mans are a massive issue and the root of a lot of problems.

But I think I would really enjoy 4 mans because it is less Meta blah.

[kesmai]

ok. So now solo and group queue could be called meaningless battle mode? I'd rather see solaris with ladders and leagues to match player performance than listen to all those winers. Today they dislike the 12 mans tomorrow they wine about pps gauss Flamers a certain map or the weather.
i feAr the solution for all this is impossible.

Edited by kesmai, 26 June 2015 - 12:59 AM.

[Vellron2005]

Here's why 12-man premades should NOT ever be removed from CW and PUG group ques...

The reason is simple..

Becouse being in a large group that is organised and actually works together using some actual real-life military tactics brings amazing realism..

it makes us feel like we'r a part of something, like we's part of a team, and like there's a point to all this..

It would be even more so if taking planets in CW would mean something..

Just imagine what it must be like to be a leader of an actual unit, have command over other's actions and tactics, and actually achieving victory... knowing the assault in front of you and the ecm to your left have your back, and your LRM's have theirs..

DO NOT take that away from us...

Edited by Vellron2005, 26 June 2015 - 01:15 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Alistair Winter, on 25 June 2015 - 10:39 PM, said:

Let's face it, a lot of people have tried to introduce their friends to the game by teaming up in the group queue, and have failed miserably because matchmaker puts them up against 6-12 man groups of veterans in hyper pimped Clan mechs, roflstomping and tea-bagging them in less than 3 minutes every time. We should all acknowledge that the new player experience in the group queue is horrible.

The MM is broken plain and simple. When a competitive 12-man is matched vs bunch of casuals in 2s and 3s it just screams fail. Groups should be matched man-to-man, i.e. a 12 only matched vs 12, a 5+7 only matched vs 5+7, maybe 6+6. Now if population gets too low, then bigger groups should be matched vs smaller groups but only if players in smaller groups have higher individual Elo scores. Otherwise you get what you get now ... from about 50 matches I've played in group queue over the last weekend maybe about 3 were actually close and balanced. The rest - anything between 12:0 to 12:3. However, people should realize that the more people they have in their group, the more coordinated they are expected to be. I've seen 9-10 man groups roflstomped by 2s and 3s simply because they were doing stupid stuff. If they were playing a big group for lulz then I guess its fine, but you gotta keep in mind that a 2-3 man group playing with you expects your 9-10 man to be organized and carry, not the other way around ...

The other thing about MM and group size limits is that we've had that before and it did not solve anything. I've had matches back during (max size = 4) days when three highly skilled groups of 4 on one team were matched against some poor random sods on the other, and it happened 2-3 matches in a row on multiple occasions. Obvious MM fail putting them into same team while it could have spread them out into different teams ... Why the MM does it? There is one logical explanation, but its going to put this off topic so I'll keep it at that. Group size limits do not solve anything.

[Kilo 40]

Alistair Winter, on 25 June 2015 - 10:39 PM, said:

From Zeece's excellent Town Hall notes:
First, let's acknowledge that Russ underestimates how many hardcore fans enjoy coordinated 12-man games

first show us proof that he underestimates how many "hardcore" fans enjoy coordinated 12-man games.