523 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

I like the idea of players being able to team up. I would have prefered if it had stayed one queue and a way to avoid synch dropping had been found. I had no problems with having large teams in the regular queue, what I had a problem with is a full lance doing a total of 100 damage against them making the match an 8 V 12.

The other problem that plagues both queues to this day and every none noob knows it is the mode selection which makes synch dropping even easier.... pathetic.

Anyway the improvement to the ELO mentioned that will be effective sounds great.

[TWIAFU]

Lugh, on 26 June 2015 - 05:16 AM, said:

My experience had been that ELO is best improved in Solo play, as my KDR and Damage numbers improve greatly there.

False.

We found out at Town Hall that ELO raises best in a group, not solo.

[Wintersdark]

CapperDeluxe, on 26 June 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

Private matches are still there for the large groups, so I don't see much of a problem with maxing to 4 in the public group queue. They can also still allow it in CW matches possibly I'd think.

Russ right out says large groups would remain in CW; that they can move to CW. He does acknowledge the issues with that, of course: That there are ceasefire windows, for example, where they'd be unable to play.

As I said earlier, Russ was quite clear that he'd like to (but isn't planning to) remove large groups from the group queue only because those large groups still have a place they can go now, whereas they didn't before.

[Johnny Z]

Its simple, yes to 12 mans, no to easy mode crutches for the 12 mans. Be it pay to win Omni mechs or by order synch drops. To put it bluntly.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 June 2015 - 06:27 AM.

[Wintersdark]

TWIAFU, on 26 June 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

False.

We found out at Town Hall that ELO raises best in a group, not solo.

Not that it DOESN'T raise solo, just that it moves faster in groups. It absolutely does change, though.

The reasons are pretty simple.

1) in the group queue, Elo's are very divergent, due to the gymnastics the MM has to perform to get matches playing at all. Thus, with teams having wider apart Elo rankings, changes to Elo scores (see the Elo formula, it's posted in the Command Chair forum if you're not aware of it) are larger per match. In the solo queue, Elo rankings within a team are much narrower.
2) Solo play tends to be a lot more random, so it takes a LOT more matches to "distill" if you will YOUR contribution from the match as a whole. You could do well, but have a couple players be totally useless and die instantly. Then it doesn't matter how well you play, you're going to lose. This isn't nearly as much a problem in the group queue, where better communication and willingness to cooperate tend to reduce the frequency of these things happening.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

I like 12 mans.

They make things challenging and interesting.

If you ever wondered how you would fare against the borg in star trek or a sith lord in star wars. You have only to face a skilled 12 man team while pugging in the CW queue.

12 mans are the final boss in this game. Final boss doesn't need nerfing.

[TWIAFU]

Wintersdark, on 26 June 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

As I said earlier, Russ was quite clear that he'd like to (but isn't planning to) remove large groups from the group queue only because those large groups still have a place they can go now, whereas they didn't before.

PGI should just separate them and get it over with.

Non-CW Group Queue;

Choose;

12 man Skirmish vs 12 man Skirmish ONLY. All small groups to make 12.
12 man Unit vs 12 man Unit ONLY. 12 all of same Unit.
Solo not allowed, this is for Groups.

Solo;
Choose;

ONLY Solo, NO Groups.
One 4man group (unit or skirmish) per side, rest solo only.

[Johnny Z]

I Zeratul I, on 26 June 2015 - 06:30 AM, said:

I like 12 mans.

They make things challenging and interesting.

If you ever wondered how you would fare against the borg in star trek or a sith lord in star wars. You have only to face a skilled 12 man team while pugging in the CW queue.

12 mans are the final boss in this game. Final boss doesn't need nerfing.

The Borge thing was my idea but its ok you can use it. LOL One of the 12 man cheerleaders actually said "resistance is futile" almost word for word on these forums before, got a great laugh from that. In game when they troll public groups I ask the troll if the 12 mans make their cheerleaders wear skirts.

Also I agree an experienced 12 man is an excellent challenge and its sad not to see them in the regular queue any more. Like I said, I would have prefered if it had remained one queue, any group size allowed.

Edited by Johnny Z, 26 June 2015 - 06:42 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Wintersdark, on 26 June 2015 - 06:28 AM, said:

Not that it DOESN'T raise solo, just that it moves faster in groups. It absolutely does change, though.

Kinda why I said it raises best in a group, not solo.

[H I A S]

Sjorpha, on 26 June 2015 - 01:33 AM, said:

Er...only allowing 8 or 12 mans is impossible because a 8 man needs a 4 man to make a complete team.

I would restrict group queue to a max of 8, so that 9-12 man groups were only possible in CW.

i mean 8vs8 or 12vs12

[L A V A]

Not sure why folks seem to view 12-mans as generally "competitive." Our gaming group puts together 12-mans for CW on specific evenings. They have been cut from 2 times a week to 1. Their composition ranges from hard-core competitive gamers to folks who are running trials. Yet, in game everyone always immediately assumes we are a competitive group.

I've played a lot in the group queue and my experience is that 12-mans (competitive or not) are slowly fading away from the game; which is probably why the numbers are so low.

My experience is that you are most likely to encounter a 12-0 whip out in the single queue, not in the group queue.

IMO, if the game was healthy you would have a lot more folks running 12-mans and they would match up in the group queue. The lack of 12-mans shows that this game has a lot bigger problems than 12 man juggernauts ruling the group queue.

Perhaps it would be more productive, as Russ seems to think it is, to concentrate on more fundamental problems than on the 12-man boggie man.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Triordinant, on 26 June 2015 - 03:41 AM, said:

What I don't get is this: if they knew that 93% of MWO players are solo players and casual groups of 4 or less, why did they spend so much time, effort and money on a game mode that caters primarily to the remaining 7%?

you nailed it bro.
The effort on the maps, are wasted.

[Mystere]

Gee. I guess this guy is winning the argument:

[Kristov Kerensky]

You guys should LISTEN to the actual Town Hall, you've got some stuff all sorts of screwed up.

For starters, solo is the vast majority of the playerbase. Of the group que, 4 or less is the vast majority of the group que, 12 mans being 1% of the group que total.

This shows a number of things, some of which Russ even touched on.

1) 12 man stomps aren't anywhere near as common as people make out
2) large units make up a totally insignificant part of the playerbase
3) there aren't enough 12 man units in group que to get 12 mans facing 12 mans in the first place, factor in the fact that 1 will have Conquest and Assault and the other ONLY has Skirmish, perfect match otherwise, so no match is possible due to the mode choice.

Russ himself would like to see the non-CW group que limited to a max of 4 players per group, but he's not going to do it AT THIS TIME, but if the needs of the GAME make it necessary, it will happen.

12 mans will NOT be excluded from CW, that's not even an option. Removing them from the non-CW group que is a possibility since they DO have CW to drop in, Cease Fires however throws an issue in, but as Russ said, private matches could be done to fill that time.

CW will see changes this fall that make it more attractive to large units and everyone else, so the current boredom with CW may well change, we'll have to wait and see. Russ went over the CW changes in some detail, they sound interesting, but as with all things PGI, I'll reserve judgement until implementation. At that point, we could very well see 12 mans removed from the non-CW group que options.

There will be NOTHING except either the current grouping options outside of CW OR they will change to a 4 player max and that's it, no 5-12 or any variations thereof, because, per Russ and as experience has shown us, any group over 4 immediately causes the whining to commence, and the volume of the whining has NO direct relationship to the actual data.
So Russ won't even consider anything else, it's not worth it.

Fact : 12 mans aren't even a single percentage of the total playerbase, and only 1% of the group playerbase.

All those saying otherwise are simply unaware of the reality, try to educate them on it, and when that fails, ignore them, as they literally do not make up enough of the total playerbase to even be a consideration.

Sad but true, this game is designed from the ground up for teams, but the vast majority play it solo. This won't change when it goes to Steam either, so don't get all hopeful on that account.

As for why CW was done when large groups are not even a fraction of the playerbase, hey, did it EVER occur to you that maybe CW isn't JUST for large groups? It was designed for EVERYONE to play, it is actually supposed to be THE game mode of MWO, what we do now in the non-CW ques was SUPPOSED to be a placeholder until CW was up and running, and it was to remain as something to do for those who wanted a break from CW. Guess you folks missed that in the past 4 years of discussions by PGI about how the game was meant to be?

CW is the Clan Invasion, rather the centerpoint of the entire MWO experience, the Clans versus the great Houses and Mercs of the Inner Sphere, straight from the BTech lore and canon. Solo, small group, large group, it is supposed to be THE thing we're here to experience.

Not this bs TDM over and over with 23 other random people for nothing but some xp and cbills that we've been stuck with for 3 years now. Do try and remember that, ok?

[Mystere]

Wintersdark, on 26 June 2015 - 01:59 AM, said:

I'd argue a viable option would be going to three queues:

1) 12 12 full group only
2) 8v8 full group only
3) solo, 2-4 man groups.

I'm more inclined to have:

• solo only (aka Rambo mode)
  
• solo and 2-4 groups (aka Wuss mode)
  
• free for all (aka Where Eagles Dare mode)

[Kristov Kerensky]

Mystere, on 26 June 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

I'm more inclined to have:

• solo only (aka Rambo mode)
  
• solo and 2-4 groups (aka Wuss mode)
  
• free for all (aka Where Eagles Dare mode)

You're close Mystere, Russ was clear, solo que, or group of 4 or less que, that's it if they remove 12 from the group que. CW won't be changed on grouping options.

[Alistair Winter]

Mystere, on 26 June 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

I'm more inclined to have:

• solo only (aka Rambo mode)
  
• solo and 2-4 groups (aka Wuss mode)
  
• free for all (aka Where Eagles Dare mode)

That would be amazeballs. Although I'm not sure about the names.

Also, I'd leave Wuss mode for groups only.

[Boris The Spider]

Midax, on 26 June 2015 - 04:55 AM, said:

The solotion to that is move the best rewards to CW. The groups with then move to were the best rewards are. If these upcoming changes to CW are fun, then you end up with a win win. A better game mode and more people in it.

From 'time to stop the insantity' thread:

Kind of goes back to what I have been saying since open-beta. The way to stop comps wrecking pubbies is to offer better rewards for higher level game play. So, what happens if they put the lance restrictions back in and add regular modes to CW so that we have 4 game modes?

• Public Queue) Solo as it is now.
  
• Lance Queue) Solo and Max 4, random maps/random game mode, slight (25% perhaps) increase in salvage.
  
• CW Classic) Any group size, random maps/random game modes, pull faction matched solos and mercs in using LFG or CW match builder. (approx 1/3 CW match rewards)
  
• CW Drop-ship) CW maps, as it is now

It's a solution that, as far as I can see addresses everyone’s concerns. Do you play solo, but find solo tedious, bereft of team-work, or too easy... hit up the lance queue for better rewards. You find the lance queue too easy, crank it up a notch, play CW Classic for even better rewards, which is also a perfect mode for those like myself who are in a large group already, want to play CW but dislike drop-ship (this would undoubtedly attract more players to CW), You would almost immediately find the better players migrating back away from the solo queue, improving the NPE.

It would reintroduce a more casual friendly grouped environment which would encourage new and current solo players to try it, tempt those back who left because grouping became too hardcore. It would increase the use of in game VOIP and the LFG tool... which feeds back to provide more players for the CW Classic LFG requirements. If you want proof of concept on this, think back to the Lance Challenge we had (before LFG existed) the NGNG and Comstar public TS servers were filled to capacity and event feedback on the forums was overwhelmingly positive.

A higher over-all grouping population allows for much better Elo matching, even if Comp teams decide to roll in the lance queue, their presence is diluted by the extra players, but why would they when they can play the same way in the CW queue and get CW rewards too!

It will also allow PGI to gauge peoples interest in the Drop-Ship Mode by comparing it to the Classic CW mode, allowing them to decide where to allocate dev resources. As in, do people like playing Drop-Ship or do they play because it is the only CW mode?

The only compromise is a slight increase of wait times, but its compromise that is shared by the entire player-base.

[Johnny Z]

Boris The Spider, on 26 June 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

From 'time to stop the insantity' thread:

Kind of goes back to what I have been saying since open-beta. The way to stop comps wrecking pubbies is to offer better rewards for higher level game play. So, what happens if they put the lance restrictions back in and add regular modes to CW so that we have 4 game modes?

• Public Queue) Solo as it is now.
  
• Lance Queue) Solo and Max 4, random maps/random game mode, slight (25% perhaps) increase in salvage.
  
• CW Classic) Any group size, random maps/random game modes, pull faction matched solos and mercs in using LFG or CW match builder. (approx 1/3 CW match rewards)
  
• CW Drop-ship) CW maps, as it is now

It's a solution that, as far as I can see addresses everyone’s concerns. Do you play solo, but find solo tedious, bereft of team-work, or too easy... hit up the lance queue for better rewards. You find the lance queue too easy, crank it up a notch, play CW Classic for even better rewards, which is also a perfect mode for those like myself who are in a large group already, want to play CW but dislike drop-ship (this would undoubtedly attract more players to CW), You would almost immediately find the better players migrating back away from the solo queue, improving the NPE.

It would reintroduce a more casual friendly grouped environment which would encourage new and current solo players to try it, tempt those back who left because grouping became too hardcore. It would increase the use of in game VOIP and the LFG tool... which feeds back to provide more players for the CW Classic LFG requirements. If you want proof of concept on this, think back to the Lance Challenge we had (before LFG existed) the NGNG and Comstar public TS servers were filled to capacity and event feedback on the forums was overwhelmingly positive.

A higher over-all grouping population allows for much better Elo matching, even if Comp teams decide to roll in the lance queue, their presence is diluted by the extra players, but why would they when they can play the same way in the CW queue and get CW rewards too!

It will also allow PGI to gauge peoples interest in the Drop-Ship Mode by comparing it to the Classic CW mode, allowing them to decide where to allocate dev resources. As in, do people like playing Drop-Ship or do they play because it is the only CW mode?

The only compromise is a slight increase of wait times, but its compromise that is shared by the entire player-base.

The LFG and chat as it is now is excellent. Not much reason to use either yet but both are easy to use and effective.

Not sure about the rest of it although one of the replies above is excellent and would be great tosee if things go that way, makes sense anyway.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Mystere, on 26 June 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

Gee. I guess this guy is winning the argument:

¨

how many MC ? insta buy