377 replies to this topic

[Gelrik]

Can't we just let solos and groups of lance size and smaller check box on whether or not they want to be included for selection in the big group que? Would make it pretty simple really. Just like with servers and game modes. If you don't want to be there you don't have to. Done.

[Kjudoon]

Gelrik, on 25 August 2015 - 12:05 AM, said:

Can't we just let solos and groups of lance size and smaller check box on whether or not they want to be included for selection in the big group que? Would make it pretty simple really. Just like with servers and game modes. If you don't want to be there you don't have to. Done.

Some people have decreed from Mt. Tryhard you must service their need for easy mode. So, they say no. I say rock on. Then again, what you said is the whole 3 queue solution.

[Vlad Ward]

Gelrik, on 25 August 2015 - 12:05 AM, said:

Can't we just let solos and groups of lance size and smaller check box on whether or not they want to be included for selection in the big group que? Would make it pretty simple really. Just like with servers and game modes. If you don't want to be there you don't have to. Done.

I don't think anyone has any issues whatsoever allowing an opt-out button. It'd be too much of a pain to argue against it at this point. I don't know what the above poster is rambling on about any more.

[Yokaiko]

Kjudoon, on 25 August 2015 - 12:12 AM, said:

Some people have decreed from Mt. Tryhard you must service their need for easy mode. So, they say no. I say rock on. Then again, what you said is the whole 3 queue solution.

If we can't support two queues now what makes you think three is better.

[Deathlike]

Kjudoon, on 24 August 2015 - 09:27 PM, said:

1. It is too easy to go up in PSR. There is like only one condition in which your psr goes down and that's doing very badly on a loss. There is no way for it to go down on a victory. The Loss scale should be the inverse of a Win scale. That way it does not have a natural buoyancy that will ultimately create the same Elo hells we are used to of people bouncing off the ceiling like flies trapped in a jar and ultimately quitting the game in frustration because their losses do not take them back down fast enough to where they are balanced. This is also known in business as "The Peter Principle". Promoting someone beyond their capacity to do well and leave them stuck at a job they are incompetent at.

I feel like this perfectly exemplifies a certain few that work in Vancouver...

[Vlad Ward]

It seems this problem is even worse than initially suspected.

Seriously. Group-only queue has outlived both its usefulness and its viability. Can we please stop screwing over everyone who wants to play with their friends already?

[Johnny Z]

Vlad Ward, on 25 August 2015 - 01:06 PM, said:

It seems this problem is even worse than initially suspected.

Seriously. Group-only queue has outlived both its usefulness and its viability. Can we please stop screwing over everyone who wants to play with their friends already?

Yep two man groups in standard queue is only fair. I think two man groups have paid the price for group queue long enough.

Contrary to SOME group queue trolls its this problem that has resulted in loss of players from the group queue more than anything else I suspect.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 August 2015 - 01:16 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Johnny Z, on 25 August 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

Yep two man groups in standard queue is only fair. I think two man groups have paid the price for group queue long enough.

Contrary to the SOME group queue trolls its this problem that has resulted in loss of players from the group queue more than anything else I suspect.

Restricting groups by size is exactly what killed group queue in the first place.

In case you've forgotten, or just weren't here for it, the original group queue was 2-4 player groups or 12-mans only.

This meant anyone with 4 friends, or 6 friends, or 8 friends, or 12 friends couldn't play with them. They'd have to all split up into random small groups and sit in different teamspeak channels (or get really confused in the same one) and generally just be really frustrated whenever they tried to play together.

The 2-12 group queue was dead on arrival because so many group players quit when it was 2-4/12.

[Johnny Z]

Vlad Ward, on 25 August 2015 - 01:15 PM, said:

Restricting groups by size is exactly what killed group queue in the first place.

In case you've forgotten, or just weren't here for it, the original group queue was 2-4 player groups or 12-mans only.

This meant anyone with 4 friends, or 6 friends, or 8 friends, or 12 friends couldn't play with them. They'd have to all split up into random small groups and sit in different teamspeak channels (or get really confused in the same one) and generally just be really frustrated whenever they tried to play together.

The 2-12 group queue was dead on arrival because so many group players quit when it was 2-4/12.

Ok I already said this in this topic but I will repeat it.

- Group queue got everything they asked for, EVRYTHING. They got group sizes of ANY size. Because anything else wasnt good enough. So Mechwarrior Online bends over backwards to make a group queue for any size group.

- Then it was lack of VOIP was the problem. Players from the group queue trolled about that for months and got it.

- Two man groups got forced into the group queue to make it work. For the most part Forced, although I assume at least a few would like group queue.

So whats the problem now?

To be fair the addition of the Galaxy map and many group prefering that basically sealed the fate of group queue. Although that would have happened anyway eventually to be clear.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 August 2015 - 01:25 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Johnny Z, on 25 August 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Ok I already said this in this topic but I will repeat it.

- Group queue got everything they asked for, EVRYTHING. They got group sizes of ANY size. Because anything else wasnt good enough. So Mechwarrior Online bends over backwards to make a group queue for any size group.

- Then it was lack of VOIP was the problem. Players from the group queue trolled about that for months and got it.

- Two man groups got forced into the group queue to make it work. For the most part Forced, although I assume at least a few would like group queue.

So whats the problem now?

Wait, what?

PGI got rid of the 12-man queue because 12-man queue was empty and teams were sitting around for 30-45 minutes at a time waiting for a game that was probably going to be horribly matched to begin with. Kinda like how group queue is now, hmmmm.

VOIP was absolutely not a problem for Group queue, are you kidding me? Groups were on their own TS 99% of the time anyways. VOIP was a solo queue problem.

2-man teams have always been in the Group queue. What are you smoking? Solo queue has never, ever allowed anything other than solo players.

[Imperius]

The problem is people think they deserve to play a team game alone...

[Johnny Z]

Vlad Ward, on 25 August 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

Wait, what?

PGI got rid of the 12-man queue because 12-man queue was empty and teams were sitting around for 30-45 minutes at a time waiting for a game that was probably going to be horribly matched to begin with. Kinda like how group queue is now, hmmmm.

VOIP was absolutely not a problem for Group queue, are you kidding me? Groups were on their own TS 99% of the time anyways. VOIP was a solo queue problem.

2-man teams have always been in the Group queue. What are you smoking? Solo queue has never, ever allowed anything other than solo players.

2 man teams never wanted to be in group queue and smaller teams of any size actually.

VOIP was asked for by group queue players not standard queue players. The problem some claimed is because the various groups couldnt communicate with each other and smaller groups were left out of the loop and to even the playing field for smaller groups against larger groups.

Ya 12 man group queue was a total fail. Your point?

Also group queue was made because some large group players demanded it even going so far as to be synch dropping openly on both teams in the standard queue.

This game has been catering to that crowd with alot of rescources. Whats the big deal about denying it? To bad it was mostly a COMPLETE WASTE.

The only bright side is maybe the any group size code can be reused on Solaris or something. VOIP may become more pupular later who knows. The Galaxy map, which both large premade group players and regular players have been hoping for, could turn out toally awsome, being a beta with extremely few half done maps and no logistics at the moment.

Edited by Johnny Z, 25 August 2015 - 01:38 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Forget it. I'm backing out of this ridiculous blame game. It was a mistake to even entertain it.

The split between solo and group only queues needs to be put down.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 25 August 2015 - 01:59 PM.

[Kjudoon]

I dunno Johnny... does CoD or Counterstrike force people to be in groups before they will allow them to play in a team game mode? Or can you pug it? From the videos of those excrable games they all allow pugging it to make their teams.

[Aresye]

Johnny Z, on 25 August 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

- Group queue got everything they asked for, EVRYTHING. They got group sizes of ANY size. Because anything else wasnt good enough. So Mechwarrior Online bends over backwards to make a group queue for any size group.

Don't try and spin that crap around. The first iterations of the matchmaker was an "anything goes" queue. You could be a group of any size.

Pugs complained, so PGI created a queue that limited the maximum group size to 4 players, and created a full 12man queue.

Larger units that wanted to play with more than 4 friends complained about the lack of teams playing the 12man queue, but at the same time, PUGS were STILL complaining that having a 4man in their queue was too big of an advantage.

So PGI gave the pugs their own special, solo-only queue, along with created the new group queue we have today that accepts all team sizes except for 11.

This game wasn't designed with the intent of catering to solo-only players, so if any group has consistently been getting their way outside the scope of PGI's intended design, it's the solo players. Lo and behold solo players continue to complain that their precious queue is being overtaken by sync droppers, complain that CW (large group oriented faction warfare) should be catered to pugs, and have vehemently opposed even including 2man groups in the solo queue.

So it's less group players getting what they asked for, and more along the lines of how much BS PGI is willing to put up with to appease the whiny underhive.

[Kjudoon]

By the same token less than 10 percent play in groups larger than 4 to hearken back to the era you are cherry picking your data from.

I remember Roadbeers crusade for the 5plus groups. Even he became less than thrilled at how it was abused.

This group was not made for solos only. It also was not made for groups only. Ergo your argument is invalid. Neither condition is exclusive to the existence of the other. Both must be catered to. BUT the majority if we are going to use this as the metric runs solo and by this logic should be the focus of all primary future development.

Of course that is the same exclusionary attitude that is wrong here.

[Vlad Ward]

There's a big difference between dropping solo and being "solo only."

Many unit players drop the majority of their matches solo. Those are not people anyone should be counting as part of some "solo only mega-majority."

[Yokaiko]

Aresye Kerensky, on 25 August 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

Don't try and spin that crap around. The first iterations of the matchmaker was an "anything goes" queue. You could be a group of any size.

Pugs complained, so PGI created a queue that limited the maximum group size to 4 players, and created a full 12man queue.

Larger units that wanted to play with more than 4 friends complained about the lack of teams playing the 12man queue, but at the same time, PUGS were STILL complaining that having a 4man in their queue was too big of an advantage.

So PGI gave the pugs their own special, solo-only queue, along with created the new group queue we have today that accepts all team sizes except for 11.

This game wasn't designed with the intent of catering to solo-only players, so if any group has consistently been getting their way outside the scope of PGI's intended design, it's the solo players. Lo and behold solo players continue to complain that their precious queue is being overtaken by sync droppers, complain that CW (large group oriented faction warfare) should be catered to pugs, and have vehemently opposed even including 2man groups in the solo queue.

So it's less group players getting what they asked for, and more along the lines of how much BS PGI is willing to put up with to appease the whiny underhive.

Actually it was 8 man, twelve mech matches weren't in the game yet, so you had 2-4 and 8 period.